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 · 2008-06-23 · Agricultural Agricultural Research Service NOTICES Intent to Grant Exclusive License, 35366 E8-14055 E8-14058 Agriculture Agriculture Department See Agricultural Research Service Arts Arts and Humanit · Unknown

Unknown. Interim final rule and request for comment

38,594 words·~175 min read·/register/2008/06/23/08-1378

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-2008-06-23.xml --- 73 121 Monday, June 23, 2008 Contents Agricultural Agricultural Research Service NOTICES Intent to Grant Exclusive License, 35366 E8-14055 E8-14058 Agriculture Agriculture Department See Agricultural Research Service Arts Arts and Humanities, National Foundation See National Foundation on the Arts and the Humanities Centers Centers for Disease Control and Prevention NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities;
Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 35391-35393 E8-14152 E8-14154 Meetings: Disease, Disability, and Injury Prevention and Control Special Emphasis Panel, 35393-35394 E8-14082 E8-14088 National Center for Injury Prevention and Control; Initial Review Group, 35394-35395 E8-14077 E8-14084 E8-14158 Revisions to the Laboratory Protocol to Measure the Quantity of Nicotine Contained in Smokeless Tobacco Products Manufactured, Imported, or Packaged in the, 35395-35402 E8-14112 Coast Guard Coast Guard RULES Safety Zone:
Central Massachusetts Swim Events, 35346-35348 E8-14128 San Diego Symphony Orchestra; San Diego, CA, 35342-35344 E8-14045 Sigma Financial Fireworks, Lake Huron, Mackinac Island, MI, 35344-35346 E8-14049 Security Zone: Patapsco River, Middle Branch, Baltimore, MD, 35348-35350 E8-14130 Special Local Regulation: Thunderboat Regatta; Mission Bay, San Diego, CA, 35341-35342 E8-14047 NOTICES Area Maritime Security Advisory Committee (AMSC), Boston, MA, 35404-35405 E8-14051 Nontank Vessel Response Plan Enforcement, 35405-35406 E8-14115 Commerce Commerce Department See International Trade Administration See National Institute of Standards and Technology See National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Defense Defense Department NOTICES Meetings;
Sunshine Act, 35374-35375 08-1378 08-1379 Drug Drug Enforcement Administration NOTICES Proposed Revised Assessment of Annual Needs for the List I Chemicals: Ephedrine, Pseudoephedrine, and Phenylpropanolamine (for 2008), 35410-35412 E8-14108 Education Education Department RULES Teacher Education Assistance for College and Higher Education Grant Program and Other Federal Student Aid Programs, 35472-35507 E8-13587 NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 35375-35376 E8-14114 Inviting Applications for New Awards for Fiscal Year
(FY)2008: Technical Assistance and Dissemination to Improve Services and Results for Children with Disabilities, 35376-35385 E8-14123 Energy Energy Department See Federal Energy Regulatory Commission EPA Environmental Protection Agency PROPOSED RULES Protection of Stratospheric Ozone: Listing of Substitutes for Ozone-Depleting Substances-n-Propyl Bromide in Adhesives, etc., 35363-35365 E8-14103 NOTICES Meetings: Clean Air Scientific Advisory Committee, 35386-35387 E8-14107 Executive Executive Office of the President See Management and Budget Office Farm Farm Credit Administration PROPOSED RULES Statement on Regulatory Burden, 35361 E8-14101 FAA Federal Aviation Administration PROPOSED RULES Airworthiness Directives: Diamond Aircraft Industries GmbH Model DA 42 Airplanes, 35361-35363 E8-14078 FCC Federal Communications Commission NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 35387-35391 E8-14023 E8-14118 E8-14120 E8-14133 FDIC Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation RULES Financial Education Programs that Include the Provision of Bank Products and Services, 35337-35339 E8-14076 Federal Energy Federal Energy Regulatory Commission NOTICES Notice of Complaint: New England Conference of Public Utilities Commissioners, Inc., 35385 E8-14065 Records Governing Off-the Record Communications, 35385-35386 E8-14064 Federal Highway Federal Highway Administration NOTICES Surface Transportation Environment and Planning Cooperative Research Program (STEP), 35435-35436 E8-14135 Federal Mine Federal Mine Safety and Health Review Commission NOTICES Meetings; Sunshine Act, 35416 08-1377 Federal Reserve Federal Reserve System NOTICES Change in Bank Control Notices; Acquisition of Shares of Bank or Bank Holding Companies, 35391 E8-14085 Federal Transit Federal Transit Administration NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 35436-35437 E8-14050 Food Food and Drug Administration RULES Medical Devices; Change of Name; Technical Amendment, 35341 E8-14153 New Animal Drugs: Change of Sponsors Drug Labeler Code, 35340-35341 E8-14149 NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 35402 E8-14151 Determination of Regulatory Review Period for Purposes of Patent Extension; ERAXIS, 35402-35403 E8-14156 Health Health and Human Services Department See Centers for Disease Control and Prevention See Food and Drug Administration See National Institutes of Health NOTICES Meetings: Secretary's Advisory Committee on Human Research Protections, 35391 E8-14035 Homeland Homeland Security Department See Coast Guard See Transportation Security Administration See U.S. Customs and Border Protection Interior Interior Department See Land Management Bureau International International Trade Administration NOTICES Antidumping Duty: Corrosion-Resistant Carbon Steel Flat Products from the Republic of Korea, 35366-35368 E8-14129 Steel Concrete Reinforcing Bars from Turkey, 35368-35369 E8-14124 Wooden Bedroom Furniture from the People's Republic of China, 35369 E8-14126 Extension of Time Limit for the Preliminary Results of the New Shipper Reviews: Fresh Garlic from the People's Republic of China, 35369-35370 E8-14111 North American Free-Trade Agreement: Article 1904; NAFTA Panel Reviews; Request for Panel Review, 35370 E8-14086 Justice Justice Department See Drug Enforcement Administration NOTICES Consent Decree: Woodhams, John, 35410 E8-14056 Lodging of Settlement Agreement: Dravo Corp., 35410 E8-14041 Labor Labor Department See Occupational Safety and Health Administration Land Land Management Bureau NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 35407 E8-14121 Decisions Approving Lands for Conveyance: Alaska Native Claims Selection, 35407-35408 E8-14157 Intent to Prepare an Environmental Impact Statement: Vegetation Treatments Using Herbicides on BLM Lands in Oregon, 35408-35409 E8-14159 Proposed Reinstatement of Terminated Oil and Gas Lease, 35409-35410 E8-14096 E8-14155 Management Management and Budget Office NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 35421 E8-14142 Mine Mine Safety and Health Federal Review Commission See Federal Mine Safety and Health Review Commission National Foundation National Foundation on the Arts and the Humanities NOTICES Meetings: Humanities Panel, 35416-35417 E8-14057 National Institute National Institute of Standards and Technology NOTICES Meetings: National Conference on Weights and Measures, 35370-35371 E8-14087 NIH National Institutes of Health NOTICES Meetings: Minority Programs Review Committee, 35403-35404 E8-14139 National Institute of General Medical Sciences, 35404 E8-14138 NOAA National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration PROPOSED RULES Taking and Importing Mammals: U.S. Navy Training in the Hawaii Range Complex, 35510-35577 08-1371 NOTICES Meetings: Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council, 35371-35372 E8-14068 New England Fishery Management Council, 35372-35373 E8-14066 E8-14069 E8-14070 South Atlantic Fishery Management Council, 35373 E8-14071 Western Pacific Fishery Management Council, 35373-35374 E8-14067 National Science National Science Foundation NOTICES Meetings: Proposal Review Panel for Computing & Communications Foundations, 35417-35418 E8-14054 Nuclear Nuclear Regulatory Commission NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 35418-35419 E8-14143 E8-14144 Final Environmental Assessment; Finding of No Significant Impact: Luminant Generation Co. LLC; Comanche Peak Steam Electric Station, 35419-35421 E8-14147 Occupational Occupational Safety and Health Administration NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 35412-35415 E8-14073 E8-14074 Electrical Reliability Services, Inc. (formerly Electro-Test, Inc.); Denial of Renewal of Recognition, 35415-35416 E8-14072 Office Office of Management and Budget See Management and Budget Office Personnel Personnel Management Office PROPOSED RULES Suitability, 35358-35361 E8-13990 Testimony by OPM Employees and Production of Official Records in Legal Proceedings, 35354-35358 E8-14059 NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 35421-35423 E8-14100 E8-14110 Granting Authority to Make Appointments Under Schedules A, B, And C in the Excepted Service, 35423-35425 E8-14150 Pipeline Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration NOTICES Pipeline Safety; Requests for Special Permit, 35437-35439 E8-14117 Pipeline Safety; Workshop on Cased Pipeline Integrity Assessments, 35439-35440 E8-14119 SEC Securities and Exchange Commission PROPOSED RULES Interactive Data for Mutual Fund Risk/Return Summary, 35442-35469 E8-13356 NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 35425 E8-14079 35425-35426 E8-14080 E8-14081 Meetings; Sunshine Act, 35427 E8-14160 E8-14166 Self-Regulatory Organizations; Proposed Rule Changes: International Securities Exchange, LLC, 35427-35428 E8-14060 NASDAQ Stockmarket LLC, 35429-35430 E8-14105 The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC, 35430-35432 E8-14104 Suspension of Trading: Kafus Industries, Ltd. et al., 35432 08-1376 SBA Small Business Administration NOTICES Disaster Declaration: Indiana, 35432 E8-14092 Montana, 35433 E8-14093 Oklahoma, 35433 E8-14091 Wisconsin, 35433 E8-14094 Disaster Declarations: Georgia, 35432 E8-14109 Waiver of the Nonmanufacturer Rule for Other Aircraft Parts and Auxiliary Equipment Manufacturing: (Drones and Aircraft Launching Equipment, Product Service Codes 1550 and 1720), 35433-35434 E8-14116 State State Department NOTICES Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals, 35434-35435 E8-14132 Surface Surface Transportation Board NOTICES Quarterly Rail Cost Adjustment Factor, 35440 E8-14075 Transportation Transportation Department See Federal Aviation Administration See Federal Highway Administration See Federal Transit Administration See Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration See Surface Transportation Board NOTICES Applications for Certificates of Public Convenience and Necessity and Foreign Air Carrier Permits Filed Under Subpart B (formerly Subpart Q): Week Ending May 16, 2008, 35435 E8-14127 Transportation Transportation Security Administration NOTICES Transportation Worker Identification Credential (TWIC): Enrollment Dates for the Ports of Bridgeport, CT, etc., 35406-35407 E8-14053 Customs U.S. Customs and Border Protection RULES Technical Amendments to List of User Fee Airports: Additions Of Capital City Airport, Lansing, MI, and Kelly Field Annex, San Antonio, TX, 35339-35340 E8-14125 Veterans Veterans Affairs Department RULES Prohibition of Interment or Memorialization in National and Certain State Cemeteries Due to Capital Crimes, 35351-35353 E8-14038 NOTICES SAR Application; Correction, 35440 E8-14089 Separate Parts In This Issue Part II Securities and Exchange Commission, 35442-35469 E8-13356 Part III Education Department, 35472-35507 E8-13587 Part IV Commerce Department, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, 35510-35577 08-1371 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. 73 121 Monday, June 23, 2008 Rules and Regulations FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION 12 CFR Part 303 RIN 3064-AD28 Financial Education Programs That Include the Provision of Bank Products and Services AGENCY: Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation. ACTION: Interim final rule and request for comment. SUMMARY: The Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation
(FDIC)is amending its regulations to permit state nonmember banks to participate or assist in financial education programs conducted on school premises where, in connection with the program, deposits are received, checks are paid, or money is lent, without the need to submit a branch application to, and receive prior approval from, the FDIC. However, any state nonmember bank that desires to engage in such financial education programs must satisfy certain conditions. DATES: *Effective date:* June 23, 2008. *Comment date:* Comments on this interim final rule must be received by July 23, 2008. ADDRESSES: You may submit comments by any of the following methods: • *Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov* . Follow the instructions for submitting comments. • *Agency Web Site: http://www.FDIC.gov/regulations/laws/federal/propose.html* . • *Mail:* Robert E. Feldman, Executive Secretary, Attention: Comments/Legal ESS, Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, 550 17th Street, NW., Washington, DC 20429. • *Hand Delivered/Courier:* The guard station at the rear of the 550 17th Street Building (located on F Street), on business days between 7 a.m. and 5 p.m. • *E-mail: comments@FDIC.gov* . • *Public Inspection:* Comments may be inspected and photocopied in the FDIC Public Information Center, Room E-1002, 3502 Fairfax Drive, Arlington, VA 22226, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m. on business days. *Instructions:* Comments submitted must include “FDIC” and “RIN 3064-AD28”. Comments received will be posted generally without change to *http://www.FDIC.gov/regulations/laws/federal/propose.html* , including any personal information provided. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Donald R. Hamm, Section Chief, Risk Management and Applications Section,
(202)898-3528, Division of Supervision and Consumer Protection; or Mark L. Handzlik, Senior Attorney,
(202)898-3990, or Robert C. Fick, Counsel,
(202)898-8962, Supervision Branch, Legal Division, Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, 550 17th Street, NW., Washington, DC 20429. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 1. Background The FDIC recognizes the importance of financial education programs, particularly for those individuals who have little or no experience using bank-provided services. Such programs generally contribute to the financial stability of individuals, families, and communities. Accordingly, the FDIC supports the ongoing efforts of state nonmember banks to enhance financial literacy, and continues to encourage institutions to collaborate with others members of the community to deliver financial education. Recently, the FDIC received a number of inquiries as to whether the definition of branch includes a school or school facility where a state nonmember bank participates or assists in a financial education program for the benefit of students. Generally, through such programs, students are trained in various banking functions and personal financial management. A bank employee may serve as an advisor to the students and assist faculty in developing a financial education curriculum. In some instances, students provide limited banking services to students and faculty directly at the school, on either a part-time basis or designated school days. A bank engaged in such a program could train students in bank operations and provide general supervision over the program and the provision of banking services. These services could include opening deposit accounts at the bank for students, faculty and parents, and receiving deposits for credit to such accounts. The participating bank may also pick up and deliver to its main office or a branch any funds received by the students in connection with the program. Note that this is not intended to provide an exclusive list of permissible activities for banks involved in financial education programs. Section 18(d)(1) of the Federal Deposit Insurance Act (FDI Act) (Section 18(d)(1)) provides that no state nonmember bank shall establish or operate a new domestic branch without the prior written consent of the FDIC. 1 Section 3(o) of the FDI Act (Section 3(o)) generally defines a domestic branch to include any branch bank, branch office, branch agency, additional office or any branch place of business where deposits are received or checks paid or money lent (each a core-banking function). 2 The FDIC has determined by regulation that a messenger service that is established and operated by a state nonmember bank or its affiliate, which performs one of the core-banking functions, is a branch and requires a prior approval pursuant to these statutory provisions. 3 1 *See* 12 U.S.C. 1828(d)(1). 2 *See* 12 U.S.C. 1813(o). 3 *See* 12 CFR 303.41. If, however, the messenger service is established or operated by a non-affiliated third party, it generally does not constitute a branch for purposes of Section 18(d) and FDIC regulations. This interpretation is consistent with a plain reading of Section 18(d)(1), and with the decision in *Cades* v. *H & R Block* , where Justice Butzner, writing for the Fourth Circuit, explained that “courts apply a two-part test to decide whether a bank is operating a branch office. First, the court determines whether [the] branch is established and operated by the bank. * * *” *See* 43 F.3d 869, 814 (4th Cir. 1994), *citing Independent Bankers Ass'n of New York* v. *Marine Midland Bank* , 757 F.2d 453, 456-63 (2d Cir 1985); *Independent Bankers Ass'n of America* v. *Smith* , 534 F.2d, 921, 951-52 (DC Cir. 1976). *See also First National Bank in Plant City* v. *Dickinson* , 396 U.S. 122, 137 n. 10 (1970). Under certain conditions, a bank's participation in a financial education program conducted on school premises differs from a bank messenger service in that any core-banking function provided in connection with such program is
(i)provided at the discretion of the school;
(ii)made available on a limited basis to a discrete group of individuals and not to the general public; and
(iii)conducted and designed primarily for educational purposes. Moreover, participating in a financial education program differs from establishing a branch because, generally, with respect to such program, the facility where banking services are provided is established by the school. 2. Interim Final Rule This interim final rule exempts from the definition of branch any financial education program operated on school premises or a facility used by a school, where, in connection with the program, deposits are received, checks are paid, or money is lent, subject to certain conditions. 4 As provided in this rule, the principal purpose of the financial education program must be educational, and not designed for the purpose of profit-making. Further, any banking services provided in connection with the program must be provided at the discretion of the school. The FDIC expects that such services would be limited in nature; available only to students, parents, and faculty; and accessible on a part-time basis or designated school days. The bank must monitor the program to ensure that it is conducted in a safe and sound manner and complies with applicable law. 4 This exemption is consistent with a regulation promulgated by the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency in 2001 which exempts from the definition of branch a national bank's participation in a financial literacy program conducted on school premises. 12 CFR 7.1021. Request for Comments The FDIC requests comments on all aspects of this interim final rule. Specifically, the FDIC requests comment on whether specific controls are needed to ensure the safety and soundness of financial education programs conducted on school premises and covered by this regulation, for example, rules regarding data and physical security. The FDIC also requests comment on whether the scope of, or a bank's involvement in, any financial education programs extends beyond the activities described in this rule. Regulatory Analysis and Procedure A. Administrative Procedure Act Section 553(d) of the Administrative Procedure Act
(APA)requires the FDIC to publish a substantive rule at least 30 days before its effective date, unless, under subsection (d)(1), the rule establishes or recognizes an exemption or relieves a restriction. 5 This interim final rule establishes an exemption to the definition of branch provided in 12 CFR part 303, subpart C, which has the effect of permitting state nonmember banks to participate in certain financial education programs conducted on school premises without having to submit a branch application to, and receive prior approval from, the FDIC. Therefore, the FDIC is not required to publish this interim final rule in the **Federal Register** at least 30 days before its effective date. 5 *See* 5 U.S.C. 553(d). B. Solicitation of Comments on the Use of Plain Language Section 722 of the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act requires the federal banking agencies to use plain language in all proposed and final rules published after January 1, 2000. 6 We invite your comments on how to make this rule easier to understand. For example: 6 *See* Pub. L. 106-102, sec. 722, 113 Stat. 1338, 1471 (Nov. 12, 1999). Is the material provided in this rule well organized? If not, how could this material be better organized? Are the requirements in the interim final rule clearly stated? If not, how could the rule be more clearly stated? Does the rule contain language or jargon that is not clear? If so, which language requires clarification? C. Regulatory Flexibility Analysis The Regulatory Flexibility Act
(RFA)requires an agency that is issuing a proposed rule to prepare and make available for public comment an initial regulatory flexibility analysis that describes the impact of a proposed rule on small entities. 7 Because this rulemaking does not involve the issuance of a notice of proposed rulemaking, the requirements of the RFA for a final regulatory flexibility analysis do not apply. 8 7 *See* 5 U.S.C. 603(a). 8 *See* 5 U.S.C. 604. D. Paperwork Reduction Act The FDIC has determined that this interim final rule does not involve a collection of information pursuant to the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. 9 9 44 U.S.C. 3501 *et seq.* List of Subjects 12 CFR Part 303 Banks, banking, State nonmember banks. Authority and Issuance For the reasons set forth in the preamble, part 303 of chapter III of title 12 of the Code of Federal Regulations is amended as follows: PART 303—FILING PROCEDURES 1. The authority citation for part 303 continues to read as follows: Authority: 12 U.S.C. 378, 1813, 1815, 1817, 1818, 1823, 1819 (Seventh and Tenth), 1820, 1823, 1828, 1831a, 1831e, 1831o, 1831p-1, 1831w, 1835a, 1843(l), 3104, 3105, 3108, 3207, 15 U.S.C. 1601-1607.2. 2. In § 303.41, the introductory text of paragraph
(a)is revised to read as follows: § 303.41 Definitions.
(a)*Branch,* except as provided in § 303.46, includes any branch bank, branch office, additional office, or any branch place of business located in any State of the United States or in any territory of the United States, Puerto Rico, Guam, American Samoa, the Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands, the Virgin Islands, and the Northern Mariana Islands at which deposits are received or checks paid or money lent. A branch does not include an automated teller machine, an automated loan machine, or a remote service unit. The term branch also includes the following: 3. A new § 303.46 is added to subpart C to read as follows: § 303.46 Financial education programs that include the provision of bank products and services. No branch application or prior approval is required in order for a state nonmember bank to participate in one or more financial education programs that involve receiving deposits, paying withdrawals, or lending money if:
(a)Such service or services are provided on school premises, or a facility used by the school;
(b)Such service or services are provided at the discretion of the school;
(c)The principal purpose of each program is financial education. For example, the principal purpose of a program would be considered to be financial education if the program is designed to teach students the principles of personal financial management, banking operations, or the benefits of saving for the future, and is not designed for the purpose of profit-making; and
(d)Each program is conducted in a manner that is consistent with safe and sound banking practices and complies with applicable law. Dated at Washington, DC, the 17th day of June, 2008. By order of the Board of Directors Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation. Robert E. Feldman, Executive Secretary. [FR Doc. E8-14076 Filed 6-20-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6714-01-P DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Bureau of Customs and Border Protection 19 CFR Part 122 [CBP Dec. 08-23] List of User Fee Airports: Additions of Capital City Airport, Lansing, MI and Kelly Field Annex, San Antonio, TX AGENCY: Customs and Border Protection, Department of Homeland Security. ACTION: Final rule; technical amendments. SUMMARY: This document amends the Customs and Border Protection
(CBP)Regulations by revising the list of user fee airports to reflect the recent user fee airport designations for Capital City Airport in Lansing, Michigan, and Kelly Field Annex in San Antonio, Texas. User fee airports are those airports which, while not qualifying for designation as international or landing rights airports, have been approved by the Commissioner of CBP to receive, for a fee, the services of CBP officers for the processing of aircraft entering the United States, and the passengers and cargo of those aircraft. DATES: *Effective Date:* June 23, 2008. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Michael Captain, Office of Field Operations, 703-261-8516. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background Title 19, Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), sets forth at Part 122 regulations relating to the entry and clearance of aircraft in international commerce and the transportation of persons and cargo by aircraft in international commerce. Generally, a civil aircraft arriving from a place outside of the United States is required to land at an airport designated as an international airport. Alternatively, the pilot of a civil aircraft may request permission to land at a specific airport, and, if landing rights are granted, the civil aircraft may land at that landing rights airport. Section 236 of Public Law 98-573 (the Trade and Tariff Act of 1984), codified at 19 U.S.C. 58b, created an option for civil aircraft desiring to land at an airport other than an international airport or a landing rights airport. A civil aircraft arriving from a place outside of the United States may ask for permission to land at an airport designated by the Secretary of Homeland Security 1 as a user fee airport. 1 Sections 403(1) and 411 of the Homeland Security Act of 2002 (“the Act,” Pub. L. 107-296) transferred the United States Customs Service and its functions from the Department of the Treasury to the Department of Homeland Security; pursuant to section 1502 of the Act, the President renamed the “Customs Service” as the “Bureau of Customs and Border Protection.” Effective on March 31, 2007, DHS changed the name of “Bureau of Customs and Border Protection” to “U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP)” (See 72 FR 20131, April 23, 2007). Pursuant to 19 U.S.C. 58b, an airport may be designated as a user fee airport if the Commissioner of CBP as delegated by the Secretary of Homeland Security determines that the volume of business at the airport is insufficient to justify customs services at the airport and the governor of the state in which the airport is located approves the designation. Generally, the type of airport that would seek designation as a user fee airport would be one at which a company, such as an air courier service, has a specialized interest in regularly landing. As the volume of business anticipated at this type of airport is insufficient to justify its designation as an international or landing rights airport, the availability of customs services is not paid for out of appropriations from the general treasury of the United States. Instead, customs services are provided on a fully reimbursable basis to be paid for by the user fee airport on behalf of the recipients of the services. The fees which are to be charged at user fee airports, according to the statute, shall be paid by each person using the customs services at the airport and shall be in the amount equal to the expenses incurred by the Commissioner of CBP in providing customs services which are rendered to such person at such airport, including the salary and expenses of those employed by the Commissioner of CBP to provide the customs services. To implement this provision, generally, the airport seeking the designation as a user fee airport or that airport's authority agrees to pay a flat fee for which the users of the airport are to reimburse the airport/airport authority. The airport/airport authority agrees to set and periodically review the charges to ensure that they are in accord with the airport's expenses. The Commissioner of CBP designates airports as user fee airports pursuant to 19 U.S.C. 58b. *See* 19 CFR 122.15. If the Commissioner decides that the conditions for designation as a user fee airport are satisfied, a Memorandum of Agreement
(MOA)is executed between the Commissioner of CBP and the local responsible official signing on behalf of the state, city or municipality in which the airport is located. In this manner, user fee airports are designated on a case-by-case basis. Section 19 CFR 122.15 sets forth the grounds for withdrawal of a user fee designation and sets forth the list of designated user fee airports. Periodically, CBP updates the list of user fee airports at 19 CFR 122.15(b) to reflect those that have been currently designated by the Commissioner. This document updates that list of user fee airports by adding Capital City Airport, in Lansing, Michigan, and Kelly Field Annex, in San Antonio, Texas, to the list. On January 22, 2008, and February 8, 2008, respectively, the Commissioner signed MOA's approving the designation of user fee status for Capital City Airport and Kelly Field Annex. Inapplicability of Public Notice and Delayed Effective Date Requirements Because these amendments merely update the list of user fee airports to include airports already designated by the Commissioner of CBP in accordance with 19 U.S.C. 58b and neither impose additional burdens on, nor take away any existing rights or privileges from, the public, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), notice and public procedure are unnecessary, and for the same reasons, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), a delayed effective date is not required. The Regulatory Flexibility Act and Executive Order 12866 Because no notice of proposed rulemaking is required, the provisions of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 *et seq.* ) do not apply. These amendments do not meet the criteria for a “significant regulatory action” as specified in Executive Order 12866. Signing Authority This document is limited to technical corrections of CBP regulations. Accordingly, it is being signed under the authority of 19 CFR 0.1(b). List of Subjects in 19 CFR Part 122 Air carriers, Aircraft, Airports, Customs duties and inspection, Freight. Amendments to Regulations Part 122, Code of Federal Regulations (19 CFR part 122) is amended as set forth below: PART 122—AIR COMMERCE REGULATIONS 1. The authority citation for part 122 continues to read as follows: Authority: 5 U.S.C. 301; 19 U.S.C. 58b, 66, 1431, 1433, 1436, 1448, 1459, 1590, 1594, 1623, 1624, 1644, 1644a, 2071 note. § 122.15 [Amended] 2. The listing of user fee airports in § 122.15(b) is amended as follows: by adding, in alphabetical order, in the “Location” column “Lansing, Michigan” and by adding on the same line, in the “Name” column, “Capital City Airport”; by adding, in alphabetical order, in the “Location” column “San Antonio, Texas” and by adding on the same line, in the “Name” column “Kelly Field Annex.” Dated: June 18, 2008. Jayson P. Ahern, Acting Commissioner, U.S. Customs and Border Protection. [FR Doc. E8-14125 Filed 6-20-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9111-14-P DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration 21 CFR Parts 510, 520, and 558 New Animal Drugs; Change of Sponsor's Drug Labeler Code AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS. ACTION: Final rule; technical amendment. SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration
(FDA)is amending the animal drug regulations to reflect a change of sponsor's drug labeler code for ADM Alliance Nutrition, Inc. This action is being taken to improve the accuracy of the regulations. DATES: This rule is effective June 23, 2008. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Charise Kasser, Center for Veterinary Medicine (HFV-212), Food and Drug Administration, 7519 Standish Pl., Rockville, MD 20855, 240-276-9069, e-mail: *charise.kasser@fda.hhs.gov* . SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: ADM Alliance Nutrition, Inc., 1000 North 30th St., Quincy, IL 62305-3115, has informed FDA that it has obtained a new drug labeler code
(DLC)in 2007, which has not been reflected in the animal drug regulations. Accordingly, the regulations in 21 CFR 510.600, 520.445b, 520.2380a, 558.95, 558.128, 558.274, 558.311, 558.355, 558.485, 558.625, and 558.630 are amended to reflect this new DLC. This action is being taken to improve the accuracy of the regulations. This rule does not meet the definition of “rule” in 5 U.S.C. 804(3)(A) because it is a rule of “particular applicability.” Therefore, it is not subject to the congressional review requirements in 5 U.S.C. 801-808. List of Subjects 21 CFR Part 510 Administrative practice and procedure, Animal drugs, Labeling, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements. 21 CFR Part 520 Animal drugs. 21 CFR Part 558 Animal drugs, Animal feeds. Therefore, under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act and under authority delegated to the Commissioner of Food and Drugs and redelegated to the Center for Veterinary Medicine, 21 CFR parts 510, 520, and 558 are amended as follows: PART 510—NEW ANIMAL DRUGS 1. The authority citation for 21 CFR part 510 continues to read as follows: Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321, 331, 351, 352, 353, 360b, 371, 379e. § 510.600 [Amended] 2. In § 510.600, in the table in paragraph (c)(1), revise the entry for “ADM Alliance Nutrition, Inc.”; and in the table in paragraph (c)(2), remove the entry for “021930” and in numerical sequence add an entry for “012286” to read as follows: § 510.600 Names, addresses, and drug labeler codes of sponsors of approved applications.
(c)* * *
(1)* * * Firm name and address Drug labeler code * * * * * ADM Alliance Nutrition, Inc., 1000 North 30th St., Quincy, IL 62305-3115 012286 * * * * *
(2)* * * Drug labeler code Firm name and address * * * * * 012286 ADM Alliance Nutrition, Inc., 1000 North 30th St., Quincy, IL 62305-3115 * * * * * PART 520—ORAL DOSAGE FORM NEW ANIMAL DRUGS 3. The authority citation for 21 CFR part 520 continues to read as follows: Authority: 21 U.S.C. 360b. § 520.445b [Amended] 4. In paragraph (b)(4) of § 520.445b, remove “021930” and in its place add “012286”. § 520.2380a [Amended] 5. In paragraph (c)(3) of § 520.2380a, remove “021930” and in its place add “012286”. PART 558—NEW ANIMAL DRUGS FOR USE IN ANIMAL FEEDS 6. The authority citation for 21 CFR part 558 continues to read as follows: Authority: 21 U.S.C. 360b, 371. § 558.95 [Amended] 7. In paragraph (a)(4) of § 558.95, remove “016968, 017790, and 021930” and in its place add “012286, 016968, and 017790”. § 558.128 [Amended] 8. In § 558.128, in paragraph (b)(2), remove “021930” and in its place add “012286”; and in the tables in paragraphs (e)(1) through (e)(4), in the “Sponsor” column, remove “021930” wherever it occurs and in its place add “012286”. § 558.274 [Amended] 9. In § 558.274, in paragraph (a)(7), remove “021930” and in its place add “No. 012286”; and in the table in paragraphs (c)(1)(i) and (c)(1)(ii) in the “Sponsor” column, remove “021930” and in numerical sequence add “012286”. § 558.311 [Amended] 10. In paragraph (b)(5) of § 558.311, remove “017800 and 021930” and in its place add “012286 and 017800”. § 558.355 [Amended] 11. In paragraph (b)(13) of § 558.355, remove “021930” and in its place add “No. 012286”. § 558.485 [Amended] 12. In paragraph (b)(3) of § 558.485, remove “021930” and in numerical sequence add “012286”. § 558.625 [Amended] 13. In paragraphs (b)(10) and (b)(12) of § 558.625, remove “021930” and in its place add “No. 012286”. § 558.630 [Amended] 14. In § 558.630, in paragraph (b)(2), remove “021930” and in its place add “012286; and in paragraph (b)(5), remove “021930” and in numerical sequence add “012286”. Dated: June 9, 2008. Bernadette Dunham, Director, Center for Veterinary Medicine. [FR Doc. E8-14149 Filed 6-20-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4160-01-S DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration 21 CFR Parts 860, 862, 864, 866, 868, 872, 874, 876, 878, 880, 882, 886, 888, 890, and 892 [Docket No. FDA-2008-N-0331] Medical Devices; Change of Name; Technical Amendment AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS. ACTION: Final rule; technical amendment. SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration
(FDA)is amending its regulations to implement a nomenclature change and to ensure accuracy and clarity in the agency's regulations. DATES: This rule is effective June 23, 2008. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Paul S. Gadiock, Center for Devices and Radiological Health (HFZ-215), Food and Drug Administration, 1350 Piccard Dr., Rockville, MD 20850, 240-276-2343. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Background This document amends FDA's regulations to reflect a nomenclature change. It replaces the phrase “good manufacturing practice regulations” with the phrase “good manufacturing practice requirements of the quality system regulation” in 21 CFR parts 860, 862, 864, 866, 868, 872, 874, 876, 878, 880, 882, 886, 888, 890, and 892. Publication of this document constitutes final action on these changes under the Administrative Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. 553). FDA has determined that notice and public comment are unnecessary because these changes are nonsubstantive. II. Environmental Impact The agency has determined under 21 CFR 25.30(i) that this final rule is of a type that does not individually or cumulatively have a significant effect on the human environment. Therefore, neither an environmental assessment nor an environmental impact statement is required. III. Analysis of Impacts FDA has examined the impacts of the final rule under Executive Order 12866 and the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612), and the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Public Law 104-4). Executive Order 12866 directs agencies to assess all costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, when regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize net benefits (including potential economic, environmental, public health and safety, and other advantages; distributive impacts; and equity). The agency believes that this final rule is not a significant regulatory action under the Executive order. The Regulatory Flexibility Act requires agencies to analyze regulatory options that would minimize any significant impact of a rule on small entities. Because this rule makes only typographical and nonsubstantive changes in existing regulations and does not change in any way how devices are regulated, the agency certifies that the final rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. Section 202(a) of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 requires that agencies prepare a written statement, which includes an assessment of anticipated costs and benefits, before proposing “any rule that includes any Federal mandate that may result in the expenditure by State, local, and tribal governments, in the aggregate, or by the private sector, of $100,000,000 or more (adjusted annually for inflation) in any one year.” The current threshold after adjustment for inflation is $127 million, using the most current
(2006)Implicit Price Deflator for the Gross Domestic Product. FDA does not expect this final rule to result in any 1-year expenditure that would meet or exceed this amount. IV. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 FDA has determined that this final rule contains no collections of information. Therefore, clearance by the Office of Management and Budget under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 is not required. V. Federalism FDA has analyzed this final rule in accordance with the principles set forth in Executive Order 13132. FDA has determined that the rule does not contain policies that have substantial direct effects on the States, on the relationship between the National Government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government. Accordingly, the agency has concluded that the rule does not contain policies that have federalism implications as defined in the Executive order and, consequently, a federalism summary impact statement is not required. Therefore, under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, and under authority delegated to the Commissioner of Food and Drugs, 21 CFR parts 860, 862, 864, 866, 868, 872, 874, 876, 878, 880, 882, 886, 888, 890, and 892 are amended as follows: PARTS 860, 862, 864, 866, 868, 872, 874, 876, 878, 880, 882, 886, 888, 890, and 892—[AMENDED] 1. Parts 860, 862, 864, 866, 868, 872, 874, 876, 878, 880, 882, 886, 888, 890, and 892 are amended by removing the phrase “good manufacturing practice regulations” wherever it appears and by adding in its place the phrase “good manufacturing practice requirements of the quality system regulation”. Dated: June 13, 2008. Jeffrey Shuren, Associate Commissioner for Policy and Planning. [FR Doc. E8-14153 Filed 6-20-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4160-01-S DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Coast Guard 33 CFR Part 100 [Docket No. USCG-2008-0321] Special Local Regulation; Thunderboat Regatta; Mission Bay, San Diego, CA AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS. ACTION: Notice of enforcement of regulation. SUMMARY: The Coast Guard will enforce the Thunderboat Regatta special local regulation in Fiesta Bay of Mission Bay, San Diego from 7:30 a.m. on September 19, 2008 through 5:30 p.m. on September 21, 2008. This action is necessary to provide for the safety of the participants, crew, spectators, participating vessels, and other vessels and users of the waterway. During the enforcement period, no person or vessel may enter the special local regulation without permission of the Captain of the Port or his designated representative. DATES: The regulations in 33 CFR 100.1101 will be enforced from 7:30 a.m. on September 19, 2008 through 5:30 p.m. on September 21, 2008. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Petty Officer Kristen Beer, USCG, Waterways Management, U.S. Coast Guard Sector San Diego at
(619)278-7233. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Coast Guard will enforce the special local regulation for the Thunderboat Regatta in 33 CFR 100.1101 on September 19, 2008, from 7:30 a.m. to 5:30 p.m., September 20, 2008, from 7:30 a.m. to 5:30 p.m., and September 21, 2008, from 7:30 a.m. to 5:30 p.m. Under the provisions of 33 CFR 100.1101, a vessel may not enter the regulated area, unless it receives permission from the COTP. Spectator vessels may safely transit outside the regulated area but may not anchor, block, loiter in, or impede the transit of participants or official patrol vessels. The Coast Guard may be assisted by other Federal, State, or local law enforcement agencies in enforcing this regulation. This notice is issued under authority of 33 CFR 100.1101(a) and 5 U.S.C. 552 (a). In addition to this notice in the **Federal Register** , the Coast Guard will provide the maritime community with extensive advance notification of this enforcement period via the Local Notice to Mariners, marine information broadcasts, local radio stations and area newspapers. If the COTP or his designated representative determines that the regulated area need not be enforced for the full duration stated in this notice, he or she may use a Broadcast Notice to Mariners to grant general permission to enter the regulated area. Dated: 8 June 2008. C.V. Strangfeld, Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port San Diego. [FR Doc. E8-14047 Filed 6-20-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-15-P DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Coast Guard 33 CFR Part 165 [Docket No. USCG-2008-0399] RIN 1625-AA00 Safety Zone; San Diego Symphony Orchestra; San Diego, CA AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS. ACTION: Temporary final rule. SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is establishing a safety zone, on the navigable waters of the San Diego Bay in support of the San Diego Symphony Opera fireworks display series. This temporary safety zone is necessary to provide for the safety of the crew, spectators, 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 9 p.m. on June 14, 2008 through 10 p.m. on August 31, 2008. ADDRESSES: Documents indicated in this preamble as being available in the docket are part of docket USCG-2008-0399 and are available online at *http://www.regulations.gov* . They are also available for inspection or copying 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 U.S. Coast Guard Sector San Diego, 2710 N. Harbor Drive, San Diego, CA 92101 between 8 a.m. and 3 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this temporary rule, call Petty Officer Kristen Beer, USCG, Waterways Management, U.S. Coast Guard Sector San Diego at
(619)278-7233. If you have questions on viewing the docket, call Renee V. Wright, Program Manager, Docket Operations, telephone 202-366-9826. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Regulatory Information We did not publish a notice of proposed rulemaking
(NPRM)for this regulation. Under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), the Coast Guard finds that good cause exists for not publishing an NPRM. The logistical details of the fireworks show were not finalized nor presented to the Coast Guard in enough time to draft and publish an NPRM. As such, the event would occur before the rulemaking process was complete. Under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), the Coast Guard finds that good cause exists for making this rule effective less than 30 days after publication in the **Federal Register** . The issuance of the final approval and permitting was so recent that the rule would be made effective less than 30 days after publication. In addition, it would be contrary to the public interest not to publish this rule due to protection from inherent dangers to the crew and public that are present from a fireworks display. Background and Purpose The San Diego Symphony Orchestra and Copley Symphony Hall is sponsoring the San Diego Symphony Orchestra, which will include a fireworks presentation from a barge in the San Diego Bay. The barge will be located near the maritime navigational channel in the vicinity of North Embarcadero. The safety zone will be a 150 yard radius around the anchored firing barge. The sponsor will provide a chase boat to patrol the safety zone and inform vessels of the safety zone. This temporary safety zone is necessary to provide for the safety of the crew, spectators, and other vessels and users of the waterway. Discussion of Rule The Coast Guard is establishing a safety zone that would be effective from 9 p.m. to 10 p.m. on June 14, June 27-28, July 4-6, July 11-13, July 18-20, July 24-26, August 1-3, August 8-10, August 15-16, August 21-23, and August 29-31, 2008. The limits of the safety zone would be a 150 yard radius around the anchored firing barge located at approximately 32°42′12″ N, 117°10′01″ W. The safety zone is necessary to provide for the safety of the crews, spectators, and other vessels and users of the waterway. Persons and vessels will be prohibited from entering into, transiting through, or anchoring within this safety zone unless authorized by the Captain of the Port, or his designated representative. 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 not 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 or operators of vessels intending to transit or anchor in a portion of the San Diego Bay from 9 p.m. to 10 p.m. on June 14, June 27-28, July 4-6, July 11-13, July 18-20, July 24-26, August 1-3, August 8-10, August 15-16, August 21-23, and August 29-31, 2008. This safety zone will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities for the following reasons. This rule will be in effect for only 1 hour late in the evening when vessel traffic is low. Vessel traffic can pass safely around the safety zone. Before the effective period, the Coast Guard will publish a local notice to mariners
(LNM)and will issue broadcast notice to mariners
(BNM)alerts via marine channel 16 VHF before the safety zone is enforced. Assistance for Small Entities Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we offer to assist small entities in understanding the rule so that they can 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 Standards The National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA) (15 U.S.C. 272 note) directs agencies to use voluntary consensus standards in their regulatory activities unless the agency provides Congress, through the Office of Management and Budget, with an explanation of why using these standards would be inconsistent with applicable law or otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standards are technical standards (e.g., specifications of materials, performance, design, or operation; test methods; sampling procedures; and related management systems practices) that are developed or adopted by voluntary consensus standards bodies. This 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, Security measures, and Waterways. Words of Issuance and Regulatory Text For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard amends 33 CFR part 165 as follows: PART 165—REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED ACCES AREAS 1. The authority citation for part 165 continues to read as follows: Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1225, 1231; 46 U.S.C. Chapter 701; 50 U.S.C. 191, 195; 33 CFR 1.05-1, 6.04-1, 6.04-6, and 160.5; Pub. L. 107-295, 116 Stat. 2064; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1. 2. A new temporary § 165.T11-036 to read as follows: § 165.T11-036 Safety Zone; San Diego Symphony Orchestra; San Diego, CA.
(a)*Location* . The limits of the temporary safety zone would include a 150 radius around the anchored firing barge located at approximately 32°42′12″ N., 117°10′01″ W.
(b)*Enforcement Period* . This section will be enforced from 9 p.m. to 10 p.m. on each of the following days: June 14, June 27-28, July 4-6, July 11-13, July 18-20, July 24-26, August 1-3, August 8-10, August 15-16, August 21-23, and August 29-31, 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 officer of the Coast Guard on board Coast Guard, Coast Guard Auxiliary, and local, state, and federal law enforcement vessels who has been authorized to act on the behalf of the Captain of the Port.
(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 San Diego or his designated representative.
(2)Mariners requesting permission to transit through the safety zone may request authorization to do so from the Patrol Commander (PATCOM). The PATCOM may be contacted on VHF-FM Channel 16.
(3)All persons and vessels shall comply with the instructions of the Coast Guard Captain of the Port or his 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: June 6, 2008. D.L. LeBlanc, Commander, U.S. Coast Guard, Acting Captain of the Port San Diego. [FR Doc. E8-14045 Filed 6-20-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-15-P DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Coast Guard 33 CFR Part 165 [Docket No. USCG-2008-0491] RIN 1625-AA00 Safety Zone; Sigma Financial Fireworks, Lake Huron, Mackinac Island, MI AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS. ACTION: Temporary final rule. SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is establishing a temporary safety zone on Lake Huron, Mackinac Island, MI. This zone is intended to restrict vessels from a portion of Lake Huron during the Sigma Financial Fireworks, June 28, 2008, fireworks display. This temporary safety zone is necessary to protect spectators and vessels from the hazards associated with fireworks displays. DATES: This rule is effective from 9 p.m. to 11:59 p.m. on June 28, 2008. ADDRESSES: Documents indicated in this preamble as being available in the docket are part of docket USCG-2008-0491 and are 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 U.S. Coast Guard Sector Sault Ste. Marie, 337 Water St, Sault Ste. Marie, MI, 49783 between 8 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this temporary rule, call LCDR Christopher Friese, Prevention Dept. Chief, Sector Sault Ste. Marie, 337 Water St., Sault Ste. Marie, MI 49783; 906-635-3220. If you have questions on viewing the docket, call Renee V. Wright, Program Manager, Docket Operations, telephone 202-366-9826. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Regulatory Information We did not publish a notice of proposed rulemaking
(NPRM)for this regulation. Under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), the Coast Guard finds that good cause exists for not publishing an NPRM. The permit application was not received in time to publish an NPRM followed by a final rule before the effective date. Under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), good cause exists for making this rule effective fewer 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 This temporary safety zone is necessary to ensure the safety of vessels and spectators from hazards associated with a fireworks display. Based on accidents that have occurred in other Captain of the Port zones and the explosive hazards of fireworks, the Captain of the Port Sault Ste. Marie has determined that fireworks launches proximate to watercraft pose significant risk to public safety and property. The likely combination of large numbers of recreation vessels, congested waterways, darkness punctuated by bright flashes of light, alcohol use, and debris falling into the water could easily result in serious injuries or fatalities. Establishing a safety zone to control vessel movement around the location of the launch platform will help ensure the safety of persons and property at these events and help minimize the associated risks. Discussion of Rule A temporary safety zone is necessary to ensure the safety of spectators and vessels during the setup, loading and launching of a fireworks display in conjunction with the Sigma Financial Fireworks display. The fireworks display will occur between 9 p.m. and 11:59 p.m. on June 28, 2008. The safety zone for the fireworks will encompass all waters of Lake Huron within a 1000-foot radius from the fireworks launch site off of Mission Point, with its center in position 45°50′.40″ N, 084°36′.10″ W: [DATUM: NAD 83]. All persons and vessels shall comply with the instructions of the Coast Guard Captain of the Port or the designated on-scene representative. Entry into, transiting, or anchoring within the safety zone is prohibited unless authorized by the Captain of the Port Sector Sault Ste. Marie, or his on-scene representative. The Captain of the Port or his on-scene representative may be contacted via VHF Channel 16. 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. This determination is based on the minimal time that vessels will be restricted from the zone and the zone is an area where the Coast Guard expects insignificant adverse impact to mariners from the zones' activation. 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 vessels intending to transit or anchor in a portion of Lake Huron off Mackinac Island, Michigan, between 9 p.m. and 11:59 p.m. on June 28, 2008. This safety zone will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities for the following reasons: This rule will be in effect for fewer than three hours for one event. Vessel traffic can safely pass outside the safety zone during the event. In the event that this temporary safety zone affects shipping, commercial vessels may request permission from the Captain of the Port Sault Ste. Marie to transit through the safety zone. The Coast Guard will give notice to the public via a Broadcast to Mariners that the regulation is in effect. 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 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 would not result in such expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere in this preamble. Taking of Private Property This rule will not 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 concern an environmental risk to health or risk to safety that may disproportionately affect children. Indian Tribal Governments The Coast Guard recognizes the treaty rights of Native American Tribes. Moreover, the Coast Guard is committed to working with Tribal Governments to implement local policies and to mitigate tribal concerns. We have determined that these regulations and fishing rights protection need not be incompatible. We have also determined that 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. Nevertheless, Indian Tribes that have questions concerning the provisions of this Rule or options for compliance are encourage to contact the point of contact listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT . Energy Effects We have analyzed this rule under Executive order 13211, Actions Concerning Regulations that Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use. We have determined that it is not a “significant energy action” under that order because it is not a “significant regulatory action” under Executive Order 12866 and is not likely to have a significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use of energy. The Administrator of the office of Information and Regulatory Affairs has not designated it as a significant energy action. Therefore, it does not require a statement of Energy Effects under Executive Order 13211. Technical Standards The National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA) (15 U.S.C. 272 note) directs agencies to use voluntary consensus standards in their regulatory activities unless the agency provides Congress, through the Office of Management and Budget, with an explanation of why using these standards 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 procedure; and related management system practices) that are developed or adopted by voluntary consensus standards bodies. This rule does not use technical standards. Therefore, we did not consider the use of voluntary consensus standards. Environment We have analyzed this rule under Commandant Instruction M16475.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. This event establishes a safety zone; therefore, paragraph (34)(g) of the Instruction applies. 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, Security measures, and Waterways. For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard amends 33 CFR part 165 as follows: PART 165—REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS 1. The authority citation for part 165 continues to read as follows: Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1226, 1231; 46 U.S.C. Chapter 701; 50 U.S.C. 191, 195; 33 CFR 1.05-1, 6.04-1, 6.04-6, and 160.5; Pub. L. 107-295, 116 Stat. 2064; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1. 2. A new temporary § 165.T09-0491 is added as follows: § 165.T09-0491 Safety Zone; Sigma Financial Fireworks, Lake Huron, Mackinac Island, MI.
(a)*Location* . The following area is a temporary safety zone: All waters of Lake Huron within a 1,000-foot radius from the Fireworks launch site with its center in position 45°50′40″ N, 084°36′10″ W. [DATUM: NAD 83].
(b)*Effective period* . This regulation is effective from 9 p.m. to 11:59 p.m. on June 28, 2008.
(c)*Regulations* .
(1)In accordance with the general regulations in section 165.23 of this part, entry into, transiting, or anchoring within this safety zone is prohibited unless authorized by the Captain of the Port Sault Ste. Marie, or on-scene representative.
(2)This safety zone is closed to all vessel traffic, except as may be permitted by the Captain of the Port Sault Ste. Marie or his on-scene representative.
(3)The “on-scene representative” of the Captain of the Port is any Coast Guard commissioned, warrant or petty officer who has been designated by the Captain of the Port to act on his behalf. The on-scene representative of the Captain of the Port will be aboard either a Coast Guard or Coast Guard Auxiliary vessel.
(4)Vessel operators desiring to enter or operate within the safety zone shall contact the Captain of the Port Sault Ste. Marie or his on-scene representative to obtain permission to do so. The Captain of the Port or his on-scene representative may be contacted via VHF Channel 16. Vessel operators given permission to enter or operate in the safety zone must comply with all directions given to them by the Captain of the Port Sault Ste. Marie or his on-scene representative. Dated: June 11, 2008. M.J. Huebschman, Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Sault Ste. Marie. [FR Doc. E8-14049 Filed 6-20-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-15-P DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Coast Guard 33 CFR Part 165 [Docket No. USCG-2008-0421] RIN 1625-AA00 Safety Zone: Central Massachusetts Swim Events AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS. ACTION: Temporary final rule. SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is establishing safety zones for four swimming events in the Captain of the Port Boston zone. This rule is intended to restrict vessels from portions of water during events that pose a hazard to public safety. The safety zone is necessary to protect participants and vessels from the hazards associated with a swim event. DATES: This rule is effective for various events from June 15, 2008 through July 12, 2008. ADDRESSES: Documents indicated in this preamble as being available in the docket are part of docket USCG-2008-0421 and are available online at *http://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 U.S. Coast Guard, Sector Boston, 427 Commercial Street, Boston, MA 02019 between 7 a.m. and 3 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this temporary rule, call Chief Petty Officer Eldridge McFadden at 617-223-3000. If you have questions on viewing the docket, call Renee V. Wright, Program Manager, Docket Operations, telephone 202-366-9826. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Regulatory Information The Coast Guard is issuing this temporary final rule without prior notice and opportunity to comment pursuant to authority under section 4(a) of the Administrative Procedure Act
(APA)(5 U.S.C. 553(b)). This provision authorizes an agency to issue a rule without prior notice and opportunity to comment when the agency for good cause finds that those procedures are “impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public interest.” Under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), the Coast Guard finds that good cause exists for not publishing a notice of proposed rulemaking
(NPRM)with respect to this rule. The logistics with respect to the events were not provided to the Coast Guard with sufficient time to draft and publish an NPRM, making publication of a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking for this temporary regulations impractical and contrary to the public interest. In addition, the swim events are scheduled to occur on June 15, June 29, July 11 and July 12, 2008, and any delay in the regulation's effective date would be contrary to the public interest since the safety zones are needed to protect swimmers and the maritime public from the dangers associated with vessels transiting portions of Boston Harbor and Cohasset Harbor during the swim events. For the same reasons, under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), the Coast Guard finds that good cause exists for making this rule effective less than 30 days after publication in the **Federal Register** . Background and Purpose Temporary safety zones are necessary to ensure the safety of vessels and spectators from the hazards associated with swim events. Swimming events pose significant risks to public safety and property because of the combination of numerous swimmers, high-speed vessels, and potentially congested waterways. Discussion of Rule The safety zones established are necessary to ensure the safety of vessels and people during events in the Captain of the Port Boston area of responsibility, which may pose a hazard to the public. The safety zones described in subparagraph
(a)for this regulation will be enforced only immediately before and during the event. The Captain of the Port Boston will inform the public by all appropriate means including Broadcast Notice to Mariners, Local Notice to Mariners, and on-scene Coast Guard or Coast Guard Auxiliary units. Regulatory Analyses We developed this rule after considering numerous statutes and executive orders related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our analyses based on 13 of these statutes or executive orders. Regulatory Planning and Review 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. The Coast Guard's implementation of these safety zones will be of short duration and designed to minimize the impact on navigable waters. These safety zones will only be enforced immediately before and during the time the swimmers are in the water. Furthermore, these safety zones have been designed to allow vessels to transit unrestricted to portions of the waterway not affected by the safety zone. The Coast Guard expects insignificant adverse impact to mariners from the activation of this safety zone. 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 would affect the following entities, some of which might be small entities: The owners or operators of vessels intending to transit or anchor in the areas designated as safety zones in subparagraphs
(a)during the date and time the safety zones are being enforced. These safety zones would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities for the following reasons: The safety zones in this rule would be in effect for short periods, and vessels may pass outside the zone with the permission of the Captain of the Port. Assistance for Small Entities Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we offer to assist small entities in understanding the rule so that they can 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 Standards The National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA) (15 U.S.C. 272 note) directs agencies to use voluntary consensus standards in their regulatory activities unless the agency provides Congress, through the Office of Management and Budget, with an explanation of why using these standards would be inconsistent with applicable law or otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standards are technical standards (e.g., specifications of materials, performance, design, or operation; test methods; sampling procedures; and related management systems practices) that are developed or adopted by voluntary consensus standards bodies. This 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 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), 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 checklist 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, Security measures, and 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, 3306, 3703; 50 U.S.C. 191, 195; 33 CFR 1.05-1, 6.04-1, 6.04-6, and 160.5; Pub. L. 107-295, 116 Stat. 2064; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1. 2. Add temporary § 165.T01-0421 to read as follows: § 165.T-01-0421 Safety Zones: Central Massachusetts Swim Events.
(a)Location. The following swim events include safety zones as described herein:
(1)Cohasset Triathlon, Sandy Beach, Cohasset, MA
(i)All waters in the vicinity of Cohasset Harbor, from surface to bottom, within a 200-yard radius around Sandy Beach.
(ii)*Effective Date* . This rule will be effective from 7:30 a.m. through 9 a.m. on June 29, 2008.
(2)Swim Across America, Boston, MA to Boston Light, MA
(i)All waters of Boston Harbor, from surface to bottom, within a 100-yard radius around the swimmers swimming from Rowes Wharf to Boston Light.
(ii)*Effective Date* . This rule will be effective from 7 a.m. through 3 p.m. on July 11, 2008.
(3)Swim Across America, Nantasket Beach, Hull, MA
(i)All waters of Nantasket Beach, from surface to bottom, within a 100-yard radius around Nantasket Beach.
(ii)*Effective Date* . This rule will be effective from 9 a.m. through 11 a.m. on July 12, 2008.
(4)Charles River One Mile Swim, Charles River, Boston, MA
(i)All waters of Charles River, from surface to bottom, between the Longfellow Bridge and the Harvard bridge.
(ii)*Effective Date* . This rule will be effective from 7:45 a.m. through 9:15 a.m. on June 15, 2008.
(b)Definition. As used in this section, designated representative means any Coast Guard commissioned, warrant, or petty officer, or any federal, state, or local law enforcement officer authorized to enforce this regulation on behalf of the Coast Guard Captain of the Port (COTP).
(c)Regulations.
(1)In accordance with the general regulations in section 165.23 of this part, entry into or remaining in the safety zones described in paragraph
(a)of this section is prohibited unless authorized by the COTP Boston, or the COTP's designated representative.
(2)Persons desiring to transit within the safety zones established in this section may contact the COTP at telephone number 617-223-3008 or via on-scene patrol personnel on VHF channel 16 to seek permission to do so. If permission is granted, all persons and vessels must comply with the instructions of the COTP or his or her designated representative. Dated: June 12, 2008. Gail P. Kulisch, Captain, U. S. Coast Guard Captain of the Port, Boston. [FR Doc. E8-14128 Filed 6-20-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-15-P DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Coast Guard 33 CFR Part 165 [Docket No. USCG-2008-0272] RIN 1625-AA87 Security Zone; Patapsco River, Middle Branch, Baltimore, MD AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS. ACTION: Temporary final rule. SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is establishing a temporary security zone on certain waters of the Patapsco River, Middle Branch, in Baltimore Harbor, Baltimore, Maryland, during the USS STERETT Commissioning ceremony. The security zone is necessary to provide for the security of the USS STERETT and the safety of life of event participants, spectators and mariners on U.S. navigable waters during the event. Entry into the zone is prohibited unless authorized by the Captain of the Port or a designated representative. DATES: This rule is effective from 4 p.m. through 11 p.m. on August 9, 2008. ADDRESSES: Documents mentioned in this preamble as being available in the docket, are part of docket USCG-2008-0272 and are available online at *http://www.regulations.gov* . This material is 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, U.S. Coast Guard Sector Baltimore, 2401 Hawkins Point Road, Building 70, Waterways Management Division, Baltimore, Maryland 21226-1791 between 8 a.m. and 3 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this temporary rule, call Mr. Ronald Houck, at Coast Guard Sector Baltimore, Waterways Management Division, at telephone number
(410)576-2674 or
(410)576-2693. If you have questions on viewing the docket, call Renee V. Wright, Program Manager, Docket Operations, telephone 202-366-9826. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Regulatory Information On April 23, 2008, we published a notice of proposed rulemaking
(NPRM)entitled “Security Zone; Patapsco River, Middle Branch, Baltimore, MD” in the **Federal Register** (73 FR 21883). We received no letters commenting on the proposed rule. No public meeting was requested, and none was held. Background and Purpose The ongoing hostilities in Afghanistan and Iraq have made it prudent for U.S. ports and waterways to be on a higher state of alert because the al Qaeda organization and other similar organizations have declared an ongoing intention to conduct armed attacks on U.S. interests worldwide. Due to increased awareness that future terrorist attacks are possible the Coast Guard, as lead federal agency for maritime homeland security, has determined that the Coast Guard Captain of the Port must have the means to be aware of, deter, detect, intercept, and respond to asymmetric threats, acts of aggression, and attacks by terrorists on the American homeland while still maintaining our freedoms and sustaining the flow of commerce. This security zone is part of a comprehensive port security regime designed to safeguard human life, vessels, and waterfront facilities against sabotage or terrorist attacks. The Captain of the Port Baltimore is establishing a security zone to address the aforementioned security concerns and to take steps to prevent the catastrophic impact that a terrorist attack against the USS STERETT and a large number of participants at the South Locust Point Marine Terminal, and the surrounding waterfront areas and communities, in Baltimore, Maryland. The security zone is necessary to safeguard life and property on the navigable waters immediately before, during, and after the scheduled event. This zone will help the Coast Guard prevent vessels or persons from bypassing the security measures established on shore for the ceremony and engaging in waterborne terrorist actions during the highly-publicized event. Discussion of Comments and Changes The Coast Guard received no comments in response to the NPRM. No public meeting was requested and none was held. Other than two technical changes—revising the temporary section number (from § 165.T08-0272 to § 165.T05-0272) so that it reflects security zone in the Coast Guard's Fifth District, and revising the word “rule” to “section” in the effective period paragraph—we have made no changes from the proposed rule. Regulatory Analyses We developed this rule after considering numerous statutes and executive orders related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our analyses based on 13 of these statutes or executive orders. Regulatory Planning and Review 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. There is little vessel traffic associated with recreational boating and commercial fishing in the area during the effective period. 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 affects the following entities, some of which might be small entities: The owners or operators of vessels intending to transit or anchor in a portion of the Patapsco River, Middle Branch, from 4 p.m. through 11 p.m. on August 9, 2008. Smaller vessels not constrained by their draft, which are more likely to be small entities, may transit around the security zone. The duration of the security zone will be limited to seven hours. Because the zone is of limited size and duration, it is expected that there will be minimal disruption to the maritime community. Before the effective period, we will issue maritime advisories widely available to users of the river. Assistance for Small Entities Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), in the NPRM 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 Standards The National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA) (15 U.S.C. 272 note) directs agencies to use voluntary consensus standards in their regulatory activities unless the agency provides Congress, through the Office of Management and Budget, with an explanation of why using these standards would be inconsistent with applicable law or otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standards are technical standards (e.g., specifications of materials, performance, design, or operation; test methods; sampling procedures; and related management systems practices) that are developed or adopted by voluntary consensus standards bodies. This 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 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), 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. This rule establishes a security zone. A final environmental analysis checklist and a final categorical exclusion determination will be available in the docket where indicated under ADDRESSES . List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165 Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation (water), Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Security measures, Waterways. For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard amends 33 CFR part 165 as follows: PART 165—REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS 1. The authority citation for part 165 continues to read as follows: Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1226, 1231; 46 U.S.C. Chapter 701; 50 U.S.C. 191, 195; 33 CFR 1.05-1, 6.04-1, 6.04-6, and 160.5; Pub. L. 107-295, 116 Stat. 2064; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1. 2. Add § 165.T05-0272 to read as follows: § 165.T05-0272 Security Zone; Patapsco River, Middle Branch, Baltimore, MD.
(a)*Location* . The following area is a security zone: All waters of the Patapsco River, Middle Branch, from surface to bottom, encompassed by lines connecting the following points, beginning at 39°15′40″ N, 076°35′23″ W, thence to 39°15′24″ N, 076°35′18″ W, thence to 39°15′25″ N, 076°35′54″ W, thence to 39°15′43″ N, 076°35′58″ W, located approximately 1,600 yards east of the Hanover Street (SR-2) Bridge. These coordinates are based upon North American Datum 1983.
(b)*Definitions* . As used in this section, for purposes of enforcing the security zone identified in paragraph
(a)of this section, *designated representative* means on-scene Coast Guard patrol personnel, including Coast Guard coxswains, petty officers and other officers operating Coast Guard vessels, and federal, state, and local officers designated by the Captain of the Port Baltimore.
(c)*Regulations* .
(1)All persons are required to comply with the general regulations governing security zones found in § 165.33 of this part.
(2)Entry into or remaining in the security zone described in paragraph
(a)of this section is prohibited unless authorized by the Coast Guard Captain of the Port Baltimore, Maryland or his or her designated representative.
(3)Persons desiring to transit the area of the security zone may contact the Captain of the Port Baltimore at telephone number 410-576-2674 or on marine band radio VHF-FM channel 16 (156.8 MHz) to seek permission to transit the area. On-scene Coast Guard patrol personnel operating Coast Guard vessels may be contacted on marine band radio VHF-FM channel 16 (156.8 MHz) to seek permission to transit the area. Upon being hailed by a U.S. Coast Guard vessel by siren, radio, flashing light, or other means, the operator of a vessel shall proceed as directed. If permission is granted, all persons and vessels must comply with the instructions of the Captain of the Port Baltimore or his or her designated representative.
(d)*Effective period* . This section is effective from 4 p.m. through 11 p.m. on August 9, 2008. Dated: June 12, 2008. Brian D. Kelley, Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port, Baltimore, Maryland. [FR Doc. E8-14130 Filed 6-20-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-15-P DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS 38 CFR Parts 38 and 39 RIN 2900-AM86 Prohibition of Interment or Memorialization in National Cemeteries and Certain State Cemeteries Due to Commission of Capital Crimes AGENCY: Department of Veterans Affairs. ACTION: Final rule. SUMMARY: This final rule amends the Department of Veterans Affairs
(VA)regulations to implement section 662 of the National Defense Authorization Act of 2006 (Pub. L. 109-163). Section 662 of the Act prohibits interment and memorialization in a national or State veterans cemetery of certain persons who have been convicted of a Federal or State capital crime and whose conviction is final, unless such a person's sentence was commuted by the President or the Governor of a State. The final rule implements statutory provisions to ensure that the remains of certain persons who have committed Federal or State capital crimes are not interred or memorialized in a national or State veterans cemetery. DATES: *Effective Date:* June 23, 2008. *Applicability Date:* Pursuant to the provisions of Public Law 109-163, the National Defense Authorization Act of 2006, the provisions to this regulation shall apply to interment or memorialization occurring on or after January 6, 2006. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Steve Muro, National Cemetery Administration, Department of Veterans Affairs, 810 Vermont Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20420. Telephone:
(202)461-6249 (this is not a toll-free number). SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The provisions of 38 U.S.C. 2411 prohibit, under specified circumstances, interment or memorialization in VA national cemeteries of certain persons who are convicted of, or are found to have committed, Federal or State capital crimes. Under 38 U.S.C. 2408(d), this prohibition also applies to interment or memorialization in a State veterans cemetery that received a grant from VA on or after November 21, 1997. This final rule implements provisions of the National Defense Authorization Act of 2006, and prohibits interment or memoralization in a VA national cemetery or an affected State veterans cemetery of any person who is convicted of a Federal capital crime and whose conviction is final, unless the sentence was commuted by the President. This final rule also prohibits interment or memoralization in a VA national cemetery or an affected State veterans cemetery of any person who has been convicted of a State capital crime and whose conviction is final, unless the sentence was commuted by the Governor of a State. We note that regulations governing the VA State Cemetery Grants Program, which appear in part 39 of title 38 of the CFR, previously contained language making eligibility for a VA State Cemetery Grant subject to compliance with the capital crimes prohibitions codified in 38 U.S.C. 2408 and 2411. 67 FR 62,642 (Oct. 8, 2002). These regulations were inadvertently deleted when VA's State Cemetery Grant Regulations were amended in 2004. 69 FR 16,344 (Mar. 29, 2004). The provisions that were inadvertently deleted are being updated to reflect the recent amendments to 38 U.S.C. 2411 and are being reinserted into part 39 of title 38 of the CFR. Additionally, this final rule will revise the definitions of Federal capital crime and State capital crime in § 38.600 and clarify in § 38.617 what procedures the Under Secretary for Memorial Affairs, or his or her designee, will employ as a good faith effort to determine if a person described in 2411(b) is ineligible for interment in a national cemetery as required under Public Law 109-163. Following passage of the law, VA provided updated guidance to all personnel responsible for processing requests for interment or memorialization that incorporated the revised definitions of Federal and State capital crimes. Section 662(d)(1) of Public Law 109-163 directed VA to issue regulations to ensure that a person is not interred in any cemetery in the National Cemetery System unless a good faith effort has been made to determine whether the person is ineligible by reason of being a person described in 38 U.S.C. 2411(b). Current VA regulations in 38 CFR 38.617(a) prohibit the interment or memorialization of persons found ineligible under the standards and procedures set forth in 38 CFR 38.617 and 38.618. Section 38.617(e) provides that, if VA has not previously received notice from the relevant authorities (the United States Attorney General or an appropriate State official) that a person was convicted of a capital crime, but there is reason to believe the person may have been so convicted, VA will initiate an inquiry to the relevant authorities and will defer its decision until it has received the information needed to determine whether the person is ineligible for burial. Section 38.618 states that, if VA has reason to believe that a person committed a capital crime but avoided conviction by reason of unavailability for trial due to death or flight to avoid prosecution, VA will initiate an inquiry to the relevant authorities for information on that matter. Further, § 38.618 prescribes procedures VA will follow in order to determine, based on information received from the relevant authorities, whether an individual is ineligible for burial due to the commission of a capital crime, and provides that VA will make its determination only after completion of the prescribed inquiry and applicable procedures under that regulation. Following enactment of Public Law 109-163, VA reviewed all administrative procedures used to establish interment eligibility and determined the existing procedures are sufficient to ensure that a good-faith effort is made to ensure that individuals otherwise prohibited are not interred in national cemeteries. Accordingly, we are not revising the procedures currently required by VA regulations. However, to make clear that VA will continue to apply those procedures in accordance with the “good faith” standard imposed by section 662(d)(1) of Public Law 109-163, VA is revising § 38.617(a) to incorporate the “good faith” standard to govern VA's duties under §§ 38.617 and 38.618. This final rule is necessary to incorporate statutory provisions into VA regulations. Administrative Procedure Act Changes made by this final rule reflect implementation of changes in statutory requirements. For the reasons explained above, in response to the rulemaking requirement in section 662(d)(1) of Public Law 109-163, VA is making no substantive changes to its current regulations, but is adding reference to the “good faith” standard imposed by the statute. Accordingly, this rule is exempt from the notice-and-comment and delayed-effective-date requirements of 5 U.S.C. 553. Paperwork Reduction Act This document contains no provisions constituting a collection of information under the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 *et seq.* ). Provisions currently in 38 CFR 38.617 and 38.618 providing for requests to Federal and State officials for information concerning capital crimes will apply to fewer than 10 persons annually and therefore do not constitute a collection of information under 5 CFR 1320.3(c). Executive Order 12866 Executive Order 12866 directs agencies to assess all costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, when regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize net benefits (including potential economic, environmental, public health and safety, and other advantages; distributive impacts; and equity). The Executive Order classifies a “significant regulatory action,” requiring review by the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB)unless OMB waives such review, as any regulatory action that is likely to result in a rule that may:
(1)Have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more or adversely affect in a material way the economy, a sector of the economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the environment, public health or safety, or State, local, or tribal governments or communities;
(2)Create a serious inconsistency or otherwise interfere with an action taken or planned by another agency;
(3)Materially alter the budgetary impact of entitlements, grants, user fees, or loan programs or the rights and obligations of recipients thereof; or
(4)Raise novel legal or policy issues arising out of legal mandates, the President's priorities, or the principles set forth in the Executive Order. The economic, interagency, budgetary, legal, and policy implications of this final rule have been examined and it has been determined not to be a significant regulatory action under the Executive Order because it is unlikely to result in a rule that may raise novel legal or policy issues arising out of legal mandates, the President's priorities, or the principles set forth in the Executive Order, or otherwise meet the criteria listed above. Regulatory Flexibility Act The initial and final regulatory flexibility analysis requirements of sections 603 and 604 of the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601-612, are not applicable to this rule because a notice of proposed rulemaking is not required for this rule. Even so, the Secretary of Veterans Affairs hereby certifies that this final rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities as they are defined in the Regulatory Flexibility Act. This final rule would not affect any small entities. Only individual VA beneficiaries would be directly affected. Therefore, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 605(b), this final rule is also exempt from the regulatory flexibility analysis requirements of sections 603 and 604. Unfunded Mandates The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 requires, at 2 U.S.C. 1532, that agencies prepare an assessment of anticipated costs and benefits before issuing any rule that may result in an expenditure by State, local, or tribal governments, in the aggregate, or by the private sector, of $100 million or more (adjusted annually for inflation) in any one year. This final rule would have no such effect on State, local, and tribal governments, or on the private sector. Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Program The Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance program numbers and titles for this final rule are 64.201, National Cemeteries; and 64.202, Procurement of Headstones and Markers and/or Presidential Memorial Certificates, and 64.203, State Cemetery Grants. List of Subjects in 38 CFR Parts 38 and 39 Administrative practice and procedure, Cemeteries, Claims, Crimes, Criminal offenses, Veterans, Grant Programs—veterans. Approved: June 16, 2008. Gordon H. Mansfield, Deputy Secretary of Veterans Affairs. For the reasons set out in the preamble, 38 CFR parts 38 and 39 are amended to read as follows: PART 38—NATIONAL CEMETERIES OF THE DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS 1. The authority citation for part 38 continues to read as follows: Authority: 38 U.S.C. 107, 501, 512, chapter 24, 7105, and as noted in specific sections. 2. In § 38.600(b), revise the definitions of “Federal capital crime” and “State capital crime” to read as follows: § 38.600 Definitions.
(b)* * * *Federal capital crime* means an offense under Federal law for which a sentence of imprisonment for life or the death penalty may be imposed. *State capital crime* means, under State law, the willful, deliberate, or premeditated unlawful killing of another human being for which a sentence of imprisonment for life or the death penalty may be imposed. 3. Section 38.617 is amended by revising paragraphs (a), (e)(1)(i), and (e)(1)(ii) to read as follows: § 38.617 Prohibition of interment or memorialization of persons who have been convicted of Federal or State capital crimes.
(a)*Persons Prohibited.* The interment in a national cemetery under control of the National Cemetery Administration of the remains of any person, or memorialization in such a cemetery of such person, shall not take place absent a good faith effort by the affected cemetery director, or the Under Secretary for Memorial Affairs, or his or her designee, to determine whether such person is barred from receipt of such benefits because the individual for whom interment or memoralization is sought is:
(1)A person identified to the Secretary of Veterans Affairs by the United States Attorney General, prior to approval of interment or memorialization, as an individual who has been convicted of a Federal capital crime, and whose conviction is final, other than a person whose sentence was commuted by the President.
(2)A person identified to the Secretary of Veterans Affairs by an appropriate State official, prior to approval of interment or memorialization, as an individual who has been convicted of a State capital crime, and whose conviction is final, other than a person whose sentence was commuted by the Governor of a State.
(3)A person found under procedures specified in § 38.618 to have committed a Federal or State capital crime but avoided conviction of such crime by reason of unavailability for trial due to death or flight to avoid prosecution.
(1)* * *
(i)The United States Attorney General, in the case of a Federal capital crime, requesting notification of whether the deceased has been convicted of a Federal capital crime; or
(ii)An appropriate State official, in the case of a State capital crime, requesting notification of whether the deceased has been convicted of a State capital crime. PART 39—STATE CEMETERY GRANTS 4. The authority citation for part 39 continues to read as follows: Authority: 38 U.S.C. 101, 501, 2408. 5. In § 39.5, a new paragraph
(d)is added immediately following the authority citation at the end of paragraph
(c)to read as follows: § 39.5 General requirements for a grant.
(d)Any grant under this part made on or after November 21, 1997, is made on the condition that after the date of receipt of the grant the State receiving the grant, subject to requirements for receipt of notice in 38 U.S.C. 2408 and 2411, will prohibit in the cemetery for which the grant is furnished the interment of the remains of or the memorialization of any person:
(1)Who has been convicted of a Federal capital crime, as defined in § 38.600(b) of this chapter, and whose conviction is final, other than a person whose sentence was commuted by the President;
(2)Who has been convicted of a State capital crime, as defined in § 38.600(b) of this chapter, and whose conviction is final, other than a person whose sentence was commuted by the Governor of a State.
(3)Who has been found by an appropriate State official, under procedures to be established by the State, to have committed a Federal or State capital crime, as defined in § 38.600(b) of this chapter, but to have not been convicted of such crime by reason of unavailability for trial due to death or flight to avoid prosecution. (Authority: 38 U.S.C. 501, 2408, 2411). 6. In § 39.6, paragraph
(1)and the authority citation at the end of the section are revised to read as follows: § 39.6 Preapplication requirements.
(c)* * *
(1)Any cemetery established, expanded, or improved through a grant will be used exclusively for the interment or memorialization of eligible persons, as set forth in §§ 39.2(h) and 39.5(a), whose interment or memorialization is not contrary to the conditions of the grant (see §§ 39.5(d) and 38 U.S.C. 2408 and 2411). (Authority: 38 U.S.C. 501, 2408, 2411). [FR Doc. E8-14038 Filed 6-20-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8320-01-P 73 121 Monday, June 23, 2008 Proposed Rules OFFICE OF PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT 5 CFR PART 295 RIN 3206-AL22 Testimony by OPM Employees and Production of Official Records in Legal Proceedings AGENCY: U.S. Office of Personnel Management (OPM). ACTION: Proposed rule. SUMMARY: The U.S. Office of Personnel Management seeks public comment on a proposed rule that would set forth procedures that requesters would have to follow when making demands or requests to an OPM employee to produce official records or provide testimony relating to official information, in connection with a legal proceeding in which OPM is not a party. As proposed, this rule would establish procedures to respond to such demands and requests in an orderly and consistent manner. The proposed rule, among other benefits, will promote uniformity in decisions, protect confidential information, provide guidance to requesters, and reduce the potential for both inappropriate disclosures of official information and wasteful allocation of agency resources. DATES: Comments must be received on or before August 22, 2008. ADDRESSES: Send comments to R. Alan Miller, Associate General Counsel, U.S. Office of Personnel Management, Room 7353, 1900 E Street, NW., Washington, DC 20415 or by electronic mail at *Richard.Miller@opm.gov.* For e-mail messages, the subject line should include the following reference: Proposed Rule on Testimony by OPM Employees and Production of Official Records in Legal Proceedings. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: R. Alan Miller, 202-606-1700. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background The U.S. Office of Personnel Management
(OPM)occasionally receives subpoenas and requests for OPM employees to provide evidence in litigation in which OPM is not a party. Often these subpoenas and requests are for OPM records that are not available to the public under the Freedom of Information Act. Also, OPM sometimes receives subpoenas and requests for OPM employees to appear as witnesses in litigation in conjunction with a request for nonpublic records. Requesters have sought information, for example, on retirement records, pay issues, and other program matters, under OPM jurisdiction. Responding to such demands and requests can result in a significant disruption to OPM employees' work schedules. The result is that employees may be diverted from performing their official duties in order to respond to requests from parties in litigation. In order to address this problem, many agencies over the years have issued regulations that are similar to this proposed regulation, governing the circumstances and manner in which an employee may respond to demands for testimony or for the production of documents. Such a regulation was sustained by the United States Supreme Court in *United States ex rel. Touhy* v. *Ragen,* 340 U.S. 462 (1951). In *Touhy,* the Supreme Court held that a U.S. Department of Justice
(DOJ)official, acting on order of the Attorney General, could not be held in contempt for declining to produce records in response to a subpoena. The employee's refusal was based upon a DOJ regulation that prohibited disclosure of agency files, documents, records, or information without the express approval of the Attorney General. The Court sustained the validity of the DOJ regulations, reasoning that it was appropriate for the Attorney General to prescribe regulations not inconsistent with law for the custody, use and preservation of records, papers, and property pertaining to the Department of Justice. Briefly summarized, the proposed rule would prohibit disclosure of nonpublic official records or testimony by OPM employees unless there is compliance with the OPM rule. The proposed rule identifies the factors that OPM will consider in making determinations in response to such requests and what information requesters must provide. The proposed rule also addresses when the request should be submitted, the time period for review, potential fees, and any restrictions that may be placed on the disclosure of records or the appearance of an OPM employee as a witness if a request is granted. The proposed charges for witnesses are the same as those provided by the Federal courts and the fees related to production of records are the same as those charged under FOIA. The proposed charges for time spent by an employee to prepare for testimony and for certification of records by OPM are authorized under 31 U.S.C. 9701, which permits an agency to charge for services or things of value that are provided by the agency. The proposed rule applies to a broad range of matters in legal proceedings in which OPM is not a named party. It also applies to former and current OPM employees as well as OPM consultants and advisers. Former employees are prohibited from testifying about specific matters for which they had responsibility during their active employment unless permitted to testify as provided in the proposed rule. They would not be barred from appearing to testify about general matters unconnected with the specific matters for which they had responsibility. The proposed regulation will ensure a more efficient use of OPM resources, minimize the possibility of involving OPM in issues unrelated to its responsibilities, promote uniformity in responding to such requests and subpoenas, prevent improper attempts to obtain testimony from OPM personnel as to issues of law, prevent improper attempts to use OPM personnel as expert witnesses against other Federal agencies, and maintain the impartiality of OPM in matters among private litigants. It also would serve OPM's interest in protecting sensitive, confidential, and privilege information and records that are generated in response to the requirements in the personnel laws and regulations. The proposed OPM rule is internal, and is essentially procedural, not substantive. It would neither create a right to obtain official records or the testimony of an OPM employee nor create any additional right or privilege not already available to OPM to deny any demand or request therefor. However, failure to comply with the procedures in the proposed rule would be a basis for denying a demand or request submitted to OPM. Administrative Procedure Act This proposed rulemaking is in compliance with the Administrative Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. 553) and allows for a 60-day comment period. Interested persons are invited to submit written comments to OPM on this proposed regulation, to be received on or before August 22, 2008. OPM will review all comments received and consider any modifications to this proposal which appear warranted. Regulatory Flexibility Act For purposes of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. chapter 6), the proposed rule, if adopted, will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. The proposed rule addresses only the procedures to be followed in the production or disclosure of OPM materials and information in litigation where OPM is not a party. Accordingly, OPM has determined that a Regulatory Flexibility Analysis is not required. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act For purposes of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. chapter 25, subchapter II), the proposed rule would not significantly or uniquely affect small governments and would not result in increased expenditures by State, local, and tribal governments, in the aggregate, or by the private sector, of $100 million or more (as adjusted for inflation). Executive Order 12866 In issuing this proposed regulation, OPM has adhered to the regulatory philosophy and the applicable principles of regulation as set forth in section 1 of Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review. This proposed rule has not been reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget under that Executive Order since it is not a significant regulatory action within the meaning of the Executive Order. Executive Order 12988 As Director of OPM, I have reviewed this proposed regulation in light of section 3 of Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform, and certify that it meets the applicable standards provided therein. Paperwork Reduction Act The Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. chapter 35) does not apply because this proposed regulation does not contain information collection requirements that require approval by the Office of Management and Budget. OPM expects the collection of information that is called for by the proposed regulation would involve fewer than ten persons each year. List of Subjects in 5 CFR Part 295 Administrative practice and procedures, Conflict of Interests, Courts, Government employees, Records, Subpoenas, Testimony. U.S. Office of Personnel Management. Linda M. Springer, Director. Accordingly, for the reasons set forth in the preamble, the U.S. Office of Personnel Management proposes to add a new part 295 to 5 CFR to read as follows: PART 295—TESTIMONY BY OPM EMPLOYEES AND PRODUCTION OF OFFICIAL RECORDS IN LEGAL PROCEEDINGS Subpart A—General Provisions Sec. 295.101 Scope and purpose. 295.102 Applicability. 295.103 Definitions. Subpart B—Requests for Testimony and Production of Documents 295.201 General prohibition 295.202 Factors OPM will consider. 295.203 Filing requirements for demands or requests for documents or testimony. 295.204 Service of subpoenas or requests. 295.205 Processing demands or requests. 295.206 Final determination. 295.207 Restrictions that apply to testimony 295.208 Restrictions that apply to released records. 295.209 Procedure when a decision is not made prior to the time a response is required. 295.210 Procedure in the event of an adverse ruling. Subpart C—Schedule of Fees 295.301 Fees. Subpart D—Penalties 295.401 Penalties. Authority: 5 U.S.C. App. (Sec. 1103, Civil Service Reform Act of 1978). Subpart A—General Provisions § 295.101 Scope and purpose.
(a)This part sets forth policies and procedures you must follow when you submit a demand or request to an employee of the U.S. Office of Personnel Management
(OPM)to produce official records and information, or provide testimony relating to official information, in connection with a legal proceeding. You must comply with these requirements when you request the release or disclosure of official records and information.
(b)OPM intends these provisions to:
(1)Promote economy and efficiency in its programs and operations;
(2)Minimize the possibility of involving OPM in controversial issues not related to our functions;
(3)Prevent the misuse of OPM employees as involuntary expert witnesses for private interests or as inappropriate expert witnesses as to the state of the law;
(4)Maintain OPM's impartiality among private litigants where neither OPM nor any other Federal entity is a named party; and
(5)Protect sensitive, confidential information and the deliberative processes of OPM.
(c)In providing for these requirements, OPM does not waive the sovereign immunity of the United States.
(d)This part provides guidance for the internal operations of OPM. It does not create any right or benefits, substantive or procedural, that a party may rely upon in any legal proceeding against the United States. § 295.102 Applicability. This part applies to demands and requests to employees of OPM in legal proceedings in which OPM is not a named party, for factual or expert testimony relating to official information or for production of official records or information. However, it does not apply to:
(a)Demands upon or requests for a current OPM employee to testify as to facts or events that are unrelated to his or her official duties or that are unrelated to the functions of OPM;
(b)Demands upon or requests for a former OPM employee to testify as to matters in which the former employee was not directly or materially involved while at OPM;
(c)Requests for the release of records under the Freedom of Information Act, 5 U.S.C. 552, or the Privacy Act, 5 U.S.C. 552(a); and
(d)Congressional or Government Accountability Office
(GAO)demands and requests for testimony or records. § 295.103 Definitions. *Demand* means a subpoena, or an order or other command of a court or other competent authority, for the production, disclosure, or release of records or for the appearance and testimony of an OPM employee that is issued in a legal proceeding. *General Counsel* means the General Counsel of OPM or a person to whom the General Counsel has delegated authority under this part. *Legal proceeding* means any matter before a court of law, administrative board or tribunal, commission, administrative law judge, hearing officer, or other body that conducts a legal or administrative proceeding. Legal proceeding includes all phases of litigation. *OPM* means the U.S. Office of Personnel Management. *OPM employee* or *employee* means:
(1)Any current or former officer or employee of OPM;
(2)Any other individual hired through contractual agreement by or on behalf of the OPM or who has performed or is performing services under such an agreement for OPM; and
(3)Any individual who served or is serving in any consulting or advisory capacity to OPM, whether formal or informal.
(4)Provided, that this definition does not include persons who are no longer employed by OPM and who are retained or hired as expert witnesses or who agree to testify about general matters available to the public, or matters with which they had no specific involvement or responsibility during their employment with OPM. *Records* or *official records and information* mean:
(1)All documents and materials which are OPM agency records under the Freedom of Information Act, 5 U.S.C. 552;
(2)All other documents and materials contained in OPM files; and
(3)All other information or materials acquired by an OPM employee in the performance of his or her official duties or because of his or her official status. *Request* means any informal requests, by whatever method, for the production of records and information or for testimony which has not been ordered by a court or other competent authority. *Testimony* means any written or oral statements, including depositions, answers to interrogatories, affidavits, declarations, recorded interviews, and statements made by an individual in connection with a legal proceeding. Subpart B—Requests for Testimony and Production of Documents § 295.201 General prohibition. No employee may produce official records and information or provide any testimony relating to official information in response to a demand or request without the prior, written approval of the General Counsel. § 295.202 Factors OPM will consider. The General Counsel, in his or her sole discretion, may grant an employee permission to testify on matters relating to official information, or produce official records and information, in response to an appropriate demand or request. Among the relevant factors that the General Counsel may consider in making this decision are whether:
(a)The purposes of this part are met;
(b)Allowing such testimony or production of records would be necessary to prevent a miscarriage of justice;
(c)OPM has an interest in the decision that may be rendered in the legal proceeding;
(d)Allowing such testimony or production of records would assist or hinder OPM in performing its statutory duties or use OPM resources in a way that will interfere with the ability of OPM employees to do their regular work;
(e)Allowing such testimony or production of records would be in the best interest of OPM or the United States;
(f)The records or testimony can be obtained from other sources;
(g)The demand or request is unduly burdensome or otherwise inappropriate under the applicable rules of discovery or the rules of procedure governing the case or matter in which the demand or request arose;
(h)Disclosure would violate a statute, Executive order or regulation;
(i)Disclosure would reveal confidential, sensitive, or privileged information, trade secrets or similar, confidential commercial or financial information, or would otherwise be inappropriate for release;
(j)Disclosure would impede or interfere with an ongoing law enforcement investigation or proceedings, or compromise constitutional rights;
(k)Disclosure would result in OPM appearing to favor one private litigant over another private litigant;
(l)Disclosure relates to documents that were produced by another agency;
(m)A substantial Government interest is implicated;
(n)The demand or request is within the authority of the party making it;
(o)The demand improperly seeks to compel an OPM employee to serve as an expert witness for a private interest;
(p)The demand improperly seeks to compel an OPM employee to testify as to a matter of law;
(q)The demand or request is sufficiently specific to be answered. § 295.203 Filing requirements for demands or requests for documents or testimony. You must comply with the following requirements whenever you issue demands or requests to an OPM employee for official records and information or testimony.
(a)Your request must be in writing and must be submitted to the General Counsel. If you serve a subpoena on OPM or an OPM employee before submitting a written request and receiving a final determination, OPM will oppose the subpoena on grounds that your request was not submitted in accordance with this subpart.
(b)Your written request must contain the following information:
(1)The caption of the legal proceeding, docket number, and name and address of the court or other authority involved.
(2)A copy of the complaint or equivalent document setting forth the assertions in the case and any other pleading or document necessary to show relevance;
(3)A list of categories of records sought, a detailed description of how the information sought is relevant to the issues in the legal proceeding, and a specific description of the substance of the testimony or records sought;
(4)A statement as to how the need for the information outweighs the need to maintain any confidentiality of the information and outweighs the burden on OPM to produce the records or provide testimony;
(5)A statement indicating that the information sought is not available from another source, from other persons or entities, or from the testimony of someone other than an OPM employee, such as a retained expert;
(6)If testimony is requested, the intended use of the testimony, a general summary of the desired testimony, and a showing that no document could be provided and used in lieu of testimony;
(7)A description of all prior decisions, orders, or pending motions in the case that bear upon the relevance of the requested records or testimony;
(8)The name, address, and telephone number of counsel to each party in the case; and
(9)An estimate of the amount of time that the requester and other parties will require with each OPM employee for time spent by the employee to prepare for testimony, in travel, and for attendance in the legal proceeding.
(c)The Office of Personnel Management reserves the right to require additional information to complete your request where appropriate.
(d)Your request should be submitted at least 45 days before the date that records or testimony is required. Requests submitted in less than 45 days before records or testimony is required must be accompanied by a written explanation stating the reasons for the late request and the reasons for expedited processing.
(e)Failure to cooperate in good faith to enable the General Counsel to make an informed decision may serve as the basis for a determination not to comply with your request. § 295.204 Service of subpoenas or request. Subpoenas or requests for official records or information or testimony must be served on the General Counsel, U.S. Office of Personnel Management, 1900 E Street, NW., Washington, DC 20415. § 295.205 Processing demands or requests.
(a)After service of a demand or request to testify, the General Counsel will review the demand or request and, in accordance with the provisions of this subpart, determine whether, or under what conditions, to authorize the employee to testify on matters relating to official information and/or produce official records and information.
(b)OPM will process requests in the order in which they are received. Absent exigent or unusual circumstances, OPM will respond within 45 days from the date that we receive it. The time for response will depend upon the scope of the request.
(c)The General Counsel may grant a waiver of any procedure described by this subpart where a waiver is considered necessary to promote a significant interest of OPM or the United States or for other good cause. § 295.206 Final determination. The General Counsel makes the final determination on demands and requests to employees for production of official records and information or testimony. All final determinations are within the sole discretion of the General Counsel. The General Counsel will notify the requester and the court or other authority of the final determination, the reasons for the grant or denial of the demand or request, and any conditions that the General Counsel may impose on the release of records or information, or on the testimony of an OPM employee. § 295.207 Restrictions that apply to testimony.
(a)The General Counsel may impose conditions or restrictions on the testimony of OPM employees including, for example, limiting the areas of testimony or requiring the requester and other parties to the legal proceeding to agree that the transcript of the testimony will be kept under seal or will only be used or made available in the particular legal proceeding for which testimony was requested. The General Counsel may also require a copy of the transcript of testimony at the requester's expense.
(b)OPM may offer the employee's written declaration in lieu of testimony.
(c)If authorized to testify pursuant to this part, an employee may testify as to facts within his or her personal knowledge, but, unless specifically authorized to do so by the General Counsel, the employee shall not:
(1)Disclose confidential or privileged information;
(2)Testify as to facts when the General Counsel determines such testimony would not be in the best interest of OPM or the United States; or
(3)For a current OPM employee, testify as an expert or opinion witness with regard to any matter arising out of the employee's official duties or the functions of OPM unless testimony is being given on behalf of the United States. § 295.208 Restrictions that apply to released records.
(a)The General Counsel may impose conditions or restrictions on the release of official records and information, including the requirement that parties to the proceeding obtain a protective order or execute a confidentiality agreement to limit access and any further disclosure. The terms of the protective order or of a confidentiality agreement must be acceptable to the General Counsel. In cases where protective orders or confidentiality agreements have already been executed, OPM may condition the release of official records and information on an amendment to the existing protective order or confidentiality agreement.
(b)If the General Counsel so determines, original OPM records may be presented for examination in response to a demand or request, but they are not to be presented as evidence or otherwise used in a manner by which they could lose their identity as official OPM records, and they are not to be marked or altered. In lieu of the original records, certified copies will be presented for evidentiary purposes (see 28 U.S.C. 1733). § 295.209 Procedure when a decision is not made prior to the time a response is required. If a response to a demand or request is required before the General Counsel can make the determination referred to in Sec. 295.206, the General Counsel will provide the court or other competent authority with a copy of this part, inform the court or other competent authority that the demand or request is being reviewed, and seek a stay of the demand or request pending a final determination. § 295.210 Procedure in the event of an adverse ruling. If the court or other competent authority fails to stay the demand, the employee upon whom the demand is made will appear at the stated time and place, produce a copy of this part, state that the employee has been advised by counsel not to provide the requested testimony or produce documents, and respectfully decline to comply with the demand, citing *United States ex rel. Touhy* v. *Ragen* , 340 U.S. 462 (1951). A written response may be offered to a request, or to a demand, if permitted by the court or other competent authority. Subpart C—Schedule of Fees § 295.301 Fees.
(a)Generally. The General Counsel may condition the production of records or appearance for testimony upon advance payment of a reasonable estimate of the costs to OPM.
(b)Fees for records. Fees for producing records will include fees for searching, reviewing, and duplicating records, costs of attorney time spent in reviewing the demand or request, and expenses generated by materials and equipment used to search for, produce, and copy the responsive information. Costs for employee time will be calculated on the basis of the hourly pay of the employee (including all pay, allowance, and benefits). Fees for duplication will be the same as those charged by OPM in its Freedom of Information Act regulations at 5 CFR part 294.
(c)Witness fees. Fees for attendance by a witness will include fees, expenses, and allowances prescribed by the court's rules. If no such fees are prescribed, witness fees will be determined based upon the rule of the Federal district court closest to the location where the witness will appear. Such fees will include cost of time spent by the witness to prepare for testimony, in travel, and for attendance in the legal proceeding.
(d)Payment of fees. You must pay witness fees for current OPM employees and any records certification fees by submitting to the General Counsel a check or money order for the appropriate amount made payable to the Treasury of the United States. In the case of testimony by former OPM employees, you must pay applicable fees directly to the former employee in accordance with 28 U.S.C. 1821 or other applicable statutes.
(e)Certification (authentication) of copies of records. The U.S. Office of Personnel Management may certify that records are true copies in order to facilitate their use as evidence. If you seek certification, you must request certified copies from OPM at least 45 days before the date they will be needed. The request should be sent to the General Counsel. You will be charged a certification fee of $15.00 for each document certified.
(f)Waiver or reduction of fees. The General Counsel, in his or her sole discretion, may, upon a showing of reasonable cause, waive or reduce any fees in connection with the testimony, production, or certification of records.
(g)De minimis fees. Fees will not be assessed if the total charge would be $10.00 or less. Subpart D—Penalties § 295.401 Penalties.
(a)An employee who discloses official records or information or gives testimony relating to official information, except as expressly authorized by OPM or as ordered by a Federal court after OPM has had the opportunity to be heard, may face the penalties provided in 18 U.S.C. 641 and other applicable laws. Additionally, former OPM employees are subject to the restrictions and penalties of 18 U.S.C. 207 and 216.
(b)A current OPM employee who testifies or produces official records and information in violation of this part may be subject to disciplinary action. [FR Doc. E8-14059 Filed 6-20-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6325-48-P OFFICE OF PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT 5 CFR Part 731 RIN 3206-AL38 Suitability AGENCY: Office of Personnel Management. ACTION: Proposed rule. SUMMARY: This proposed rule is one of a number of initiatives the U.S. Office of Personnel Management
(OPM)has undertaken to simplify and streamline the system of Federal Government investigative and adjudicative processes to make them more efficient and as equitable as possible. A key objective of these initiatives is to limit duplication of efforts by applying reciprocity where appropriate to those processes. This proposed rule would establish the requirements for applying reciprocity to Federal employment suitability determinations and investigations. DATES: Comments must be received on or before August 22, 2008. ADDRESSES: Send or deliver written comments to Ana A. Mazzi, Deputy Associate Director for Workforce Relations and Accountability Policy, U.S. Office of Personnel Management, Room 7H28, 1900 E Street, NW., Washington, DC 20415; by FAX at
(202)606-2613; or by e-mail at *CWRAP@opm.gov* . 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: Authorities Under statutory authorities, 5 U.S.C. 1302, 3301, and 7301; Executive Order 10577, 3 CFR, 1945-1958 Comp., p. 218, as amended; 5 CFR, parts 1, 2 and 5; and related authorities, OPM is assigned the responsibility for ensuring that employees in the competitive service and members of the career Senior Executive Service (and such other employees as may be designated by the President) are suitable for Federal employment. OPM's regulations at 5 CFR part 731 describe the policies and procedures for ensuring these responsibilities are met, including the delegation of suitability authority to departments and agencies. Thus, any proposed changes to these regulations apply only to persons who are in, or in the process of moving into, the competitive service or career Senior Executive Service. Reciprocity of Background Investigations Under OPM's current regulations at 5 CFR 731.104, a new background investigation to determine suitability of a current Federal employee in a covered position (e.g., competitive service or career SES position) is not required, except when there has been a change in the employee's public trust risk level or there is a need for reinvestigation under law, rule, or regulation. Specifically, no new investigation is required when a person has been promoted, demoted, reassigned, converted from career-conditional to career tenure, or appointed or converted to an appointment if the person has been serving continuously with the department or agency for at least 1 year in one or more positions subject to investigation. An investigation is also not required when a person is transferred from another department or agency, provided the person has served continuously for at least 1 year in a position subject to investigation. While the current regulation does not require a new investigation in these circumstances, departments and agencies may choose to conduct an investigation and determine a person's suitability where it is not required. Additional suitability investigations not required by law, rule, or regulation are unnecessary and contribute to inefficiencies in the Federal Government's hiring process. Therefore, OPM is proposing to amend 5 CFR 731.104 to prohibit additional or duplicative investigations on a person, with some limited exceptions. Under the changes contemplated, the operative rule would be that, in any case where the person previously was investigated at a level that meets or exceeds that required for the new position, was determined suitable under 5 CFR 731 or fit based on character or conduct criteria equivalent to the suitability factors of 5 CFR 731.202, and meets continuous service requirements described in the regulations, reciprocity would be required. The proposed changes would require the application of reciprocity of investigations in many cases where a person is appointed or converted to a covered position, or transfers to a covered position, after serving in another covered position. It also would require reciprocity in many cases where a person moves to a covered position from a position in the excepted service that is not a covered position under this part, or from a position as a Federal Government contract employee. In cases where an investigation of the level described had been conducted, the gaining department or agency could not, with the narrow exceptions discussed below, conduct a new investigation on that person. A new investigation is required, however, if the reciprocity requirements described above are not met. Other circumstances when an investigation might be required occur when a department or agency obtains new information during the hiring process when a person is transferred to a covered position from another department or agency, or appointed to a covered position from Federal Government contractor employment. In those cases where the new information calls into question the person's suitability under section 731.202, an investigation would be required. New information might be obtained, for example, from a newly-executed Declaration for Federal Employment, Optional Form 306. Criteria based on character or conduct that are equivalent to the suitability factors under 5 CFR 731.202 would include the disqualification factors provided at 5 CFR 302.203 or similar authority regarding excepted service employees, the additional credentialing standards provided in OPM's January 18, 2008, memorandum entitled, “Interim Credentialing Standards for Issuing Personal Identity Verification Cards Under HSPD-12,” and subsequent iterations of these factors or standards issued by OPM from time to time. Investigation Requirements for Position Risk Level Changes OPM proposes to remove from section 731.104, “Appointments subject to investigation,” personnel actions, such as promotion, demotion and reassignments, that are not appointments. Concurrently, proposed modifications to section 731.106 would identify the investigative requirements when an employee experiences a change to higher position risk level due to promotion, demotion, or reassignment (actions that were previously described in section 731.104). In such cases, any required investigative upgrade would be initiated within 14 calendar days after an action such as a promotion is final. Section 731.106 also would be modified to reflect the relationship of position risk determinations under this part with position sensitivity determinations under 5 CFR part 732 when identifying the appropriate level of investigation needed for a particular position. As stated in section 731.106, guidance is provided in OPM issuances for agencies to use in exercising their delegated suitability authority under the regulations. Finally, a new paragraph
(d)would be added to section 731.104 to provide that the investigation and reinvestigation requirements for public trust positions under section 731.106 are unaffected. Reciprocity of Suitability Determinations Under 5 CFR part 731, subpart B, departments and agencies are authorized to make determinations about whether a person is suitable for Federal employment. The regulation, however, does not address circumstances when a person has already been determined suitable by OPM or an agency. Like redundant investigations, unnecessary or duplicative suitability determinations contribute to inefficiencies in the Federal Government's hiring process. Therefore, consistent with our efforts to eliminate additional and duplicative investigations, OPM is proposing to amend 5 CFR 731.202 to eliminate authority to make a new suitability determination, with some exceptions, on a person already found suitable or fit for employment based on character or conduct. The general rule would be that if a new investigation for a person is not required under 5 CFR 731.104 or 5 CFR 731.106, as modified, an agency would not be able to make a new suitability determination for a person who has already been the subject of such a determination, with limited exceptions. An example of when reinvestigation might be required, and thus when a new suitability determination could be made, occurs when the person is promoted to a position with a higher risk level. Another example of when a new suitability determination would be required occurs when there is information in a person's investigative record on file that shows he or she engaged in conduct that is incompatible with the core duties of the relevant covered position to which the person is applying or transferring. The information may not have established a basis to determine the person was unsuitable for the former position but would be an appropriate basis for an agency to make a new suitability determination. For example, the new position in question may be in law enforcement where conduct of a criminal nature is incompatible with core duties of the new position. In such a circumstance, even though the person had previously been determined suitable for a non-law enforcement position, the proposed reciprocity rules would not apply and the department or agency would make a new suitability determination based on the existing investigative record. When an investigation and new suitability determination are required, the person also could be subject to a suitability action if the agency or OPM were to find him or her unsuitable. This could occur when an appointment to a covered position requiring an investigation involves a person transferring from a covered position with another agency, transferring from a non-covered excepted service position, or being appointed following service to the Federal Government as an employee of a Federal contractor. In each case, the person may meet the definition of an “applicant” or “appointee” as defined at 5 CFR 731.101 and thus potentially subject to a suitability action. A suitability action could be taken only if the agency or OPM followed the procedures of this part and found that person unsuitable. These circumstances are described in the proposed changes to this part at section 731.104(a)(2), (3), and (4). None of the proposed changes to this part would affect OPM's discretion to exercise its independent authority as it deems appropriate to make suitability determinations or take suitability actions. Reporting of Suitability Determinations In order for departments and agencies to decide whether a new investigation or suitability determination is required for a person or whether the proposed reciprocity policy applies, a repository for suitability information is needed. The Clearance Verification System
(CVS)was developed by OPM and is currently maintained by OPM to provide information about investigations and security clearances for individuals. OPM is expanding the scope of CVS to include information about suitability determinations. To ensure that CVS contains the necessary information to support reciprocity of suitability determinations in the Federal Government, OPM is proposing at 5 CFR 731.206 that departments and agencies report to OPM the level and result of each investigation conducted, the suitability determination made, and any suitability action taken for any person for whom a suitability determination is required. The reporting requirements would be described in OPM issuances. Regulatory Flexibility Act I certify that this regulation will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities because the regulations pertain only to Federal employees and agencies. E.O. 12866, Regulatory Review This proposed rule has been reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Order 12866. E.O. 13132 This regulation will not have substantial direct effects on the States, on the relationship between the National Government and the States, or on distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government. Therefore, in accordance with Executive Order 13132, it is determined that this rule does not have sufficient federalism implications to warrant preparation of a Federalism Assessment. E.O. 12988—Civil Justice Reform This regulation meets the applicable standard set forth in sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of Executive Order 12988. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 This rule will not result in the expenditure by State, local and tribal governments, in the aggregate, or by the private sector, of $100,000,000 or more in any one year, and it will not significantly or uniquely affect small governments. Therefore, no actions were deemed necessary under the provisions of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995. Congressional Review Act This action pertains to agency management, personnel and organization and does not substantially affect the rights of obligations of non-agency parties and, accordingly, is not a “rule” as that term is used by the Congressional Review Act (Subtitle E of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (SBREFA)). Therefore, the reporting requirement of 5 U.S.C. 801 does not apply. List of Subjects in 5 CFR Part 731 Administrative practices and procedures, Government employees. U.S. Office of Personnel Management. Linda M. Springer, Director. Accordingly, OPM proposes to amend part 731, title 5, Code of Federal Regulations, as follows: PART 731—SUITABILITY Subpart A—Scope 1. The authority citation for part 731 continues to read as follows: 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. 2. In § 731.104, revise paragraphs
(a)introductory text and (a)(1) through
(4)and (b)(2) and add paragraphs
(d)and
(e)to read as follows: § 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. However, except as provided in paragraph (b)(2), an appointment will not be subject to investigation when the person being appointed has undergone a background investigation and the appointment involves:
(1)Appointment or conversion 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 covered positions subject to investigation and has received a favorably adjudicated background investigation;
(2)Transfer to a covered position, provided the person has been serving continuously for at least 1 year in a covered position subject to investigation and has received a favorably adjudicated background investigation;
(3)Transfer or appointment from an excepted service position that is not a covered position to a covered position, provided the person has been serving continuously for at least 1 year in a position where the person has been determined fit for appointment based on criteria equivalent to the factors provided at 5 CFR 731.202; or
(4)Appointment to a covered position from a position as an employee working as a Federal Government contract employee, provided the person has been serving continuously for at least 1 year in a job where a Federal agency determined the contract employee was fit to perform work on the contract based on criteria equivalent to the factors provided at 5 CFR 731.202.
(b)* * *
(2)An appointment to a covered position also will be subject to investigation when:
(i)The covered position requires a higher level of investigation than previously conducted for the person being appointed; or
(ii)An agency obtains new information in connection with the person's appointment that calls into question the person's suitability under § 731.202;
(d)Investigation and reinvestigation requirements under § 731.106 for public trust positions are not affected by this section.
(e)For purposes of this section, “criteria equivalent to the factors provided at 5 CFR 731.202” are criteria that provide adequate assurance that the person to be appointed, converted to an appointment, or transferred is suitable to be employed in a covered position, as determined by OPM, in issuances under this regulation. A decision by OPM, or by an agency applying guidance from OPM, that a prior fitness determination was not based on criteria equivalent to the factors provided at 5 CFR 731.202, and that a new investigation or adjudication is necessary is not subject to review under section 731.501 of this part. 3. In § 731.106, revise paragraphs (c)(2) and
(e)to read as follows: § 731.106 Designation of public trust positions and investigative requirements.
(c)* * *
(1)* * *
(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. Procedures for determining investigative requirements for all positions based upon risk and sensitivity will be published in OPM issuances, as described in §§ 731.102(c) and 732.201(b).
(e)*Risk level changes* . If an employee experiences a change to a higher position risk level due to promotion, demotion, or reassignment, or the risk level of the employee's position is changed to a higher level, the employee 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 promotion, demotion, reassignment or new designation of risk level is final. Subpart B—Suitability Determinations 4. In § 731.202, add a new paragraph
(d)to read as follows: § 731.202 Criteria.
(d)*Reciprocity* . An agency cannot make a new determination under this section for a person who has already been determined suitable or fit based on character or conduct unless a new investigation is required under § 731.104 or § 731.106, or no new investigation is required but the investigative record on file for the person shows conduct that is incompatible with the core duties of the relevant covered position. 5. Add a new § 731.206 to read as follows: § 731.206 Reporting requirements. Agencies must report to OPM the level and result of each background investigation, suitability determination, and suitability action taken under this part, as required in OPM issuances. [FR Doc. E8-13990 Filed 6-20-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6325-39-P FARM CREDIT ADMINISTRATION 12 CFR Chapter VI RIN 3052-AC39 Statement on Regulatory Burden AGENCY: Farm Credit Administration. ACTION: Notice of intent; request for comment. SUMMARY: The Farm Credit Administration (FCA, our, or we) is issuing a notice of regulatory review and request for comment. The FCA will review its regulations to consider whether existing regulations are inefficient or burdensome. The FCA is seeking public comment on the appropriateness of the requirements it imposes on the Farm Credit System (System). We ask for comments on our regulations that may duplicate other requirements, are ineffective, or impose burdens that are greater than the benefits received. We are taking this action to improve the regulatory framework within which System institutions operate. DATES: Please send your comments to the FCA by August 22, 2008. ADDRESSES: We offer a variety of methods for you to submit your comments. For accuracy and efficiency reasons, commenters are encouraged to submit comments by e-mail or through the FCA's Web site or the Federal eRulemaking Web site. As faxes are difficult for us to process and achieve compliance with section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act, please consider another means to submit your comment if possible. Regardless of the method you use, please do not submit your comment multiple times via different methods. You may submit comments by any of the following methods: • *E-mail:* Send us an e-mail at *reg-comm@fca.gov* . • *FCA Web Site: http://www.fca.gov* . Select “Public Commenters,” then “Public Comments,” and follow the directions for “Submitting a Comment.” • *Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov* . Follow the instructions for submitting comments. • *Mail:* Gary K. Van Meter, Deputy Director, Office of Regulatory Policy, Farm Credit Administration, 1501 Farm Credit Drive, McLean, VA 22102-5090. • *Fax:*
(703)883-4477. Posting and processing of faxes may be delayed. Please consider another means to comment, if possible. You may review copies of comments we receive at our office in McLean, Virginia, or from our Web site at *http://www.fca.gov* . Once you are in the Web site, select “Public Commenters,” then “Public Comments,” and follow the directions for “Reading Submitted Public Comments.” We will show your comments as submitted, but for technical reasons we may omit items such as logos and special characters. Identifying information that you provide, such as phone numbers and addresses, will be publicly available. However, we will attempt to remove e-mail addresses to help reduce Internet spam. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jacqui Melvin, Policy Analyst, Office of Regulatory Policy, Farm Credit Administration, McLean, VA 22102-5090,
(703)883-4268, TTY
(703)883-4434, or Mary Alice Donner, Senior Attorney, Office of General Counsel, Farm Credit Administration, McLean, VA 22102-5090,
(703)883-4020, TTY
(703)883-4020. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Objective The objective of this notice is to continue our comprehensive review of regulations governing the System and to eliminate, consistent with law, safety, and soundness, all regulations that are unnecessary, unduly burdensome or costly, or not based on the law. We are requesting public comment to identify FCA regulations that: • May duplicate other requirements; • Are ineffective; or • Impose burdens that are greater than the benefits received. To accomplish our objective, we are targeting particular regulations for a more focused and in-depth review. II. Background The FCA is the independent Federal agency in the executive branch of the Government responsible for examining and regulating System institutions. As a Government-sponsored enterprise, the System primarily provides loans to farmers, ranchers, aquatic producers and harvesters, agricultural cooperatives, and rural utilities. III. Regulations Under Review The regulations of FCA that are subject to regulatory review described in this notice are codified in title 12, chapter VI, of the Code of Federal Regulations. In our previous notices, we asked the public to comment on all of our regulations, and we were able to accomplish our objective of reducing regulatory burden. In this notice, we would like the public to comment specifically on these targeted regulations:
(1)Part 607—Assessment and Apportionment of Administrative Expenses;
(2)Part 614—Loan Policies and Operations;
(3)Part 616—Leasing;
(4)Part 617—Borrower Rights;
(5)Part 618—General Provisions; and
(6)Part 626—Nondiscrimination in Lending. IV. Requesting Comments Your comments are appreciated and will assist us in our continuing efforts to identify and reduce regulatory burden on System institutions. We will also continue our efforts to maintain and adopt regulations and policies that are necessary to implement the Farm Credit Act of 1971, as amended, and ensure the safety and soundness of the System. These actions will enable the System to better serve America's farmers, ranchers, aquatic producers and harvesters, agricultural cooperatives, and rural utilities in changing agricultural credit markets. Dated: June 17, 2008. Roland E. Smith, Secretary, Farm Credit Administration Board. [FR Doc. E8-14101 Filed 6-20-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6705-01-P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 39 [Docket No. FAA-2008-0685; Directorate Identifier 2008-CE-037-AD] RIN 2120-AA64 Airworthiness Directives; Diamond Aircraft Industries GmbH Model DA 42 Airplanes AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of Transportation (DOT). ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM). SUMMARY: We propose to adopt a new airworthiness directive
(AD)for the products listed above. This proposed AD results from mandatory continuing airworthiness information
(MCAI)originated by an aviation authority of another country to identify and correct an unsafe condition on an aviation product. The MCAI describes the unsafe condition as: The original designed bellcrank for the aileron control system in the wing needed to be installed with slightly bent rod ends during production of the aircraft to avoid friction and possible chafing. In addition to being a nonpreferable production practice, this creates the risk of replacement parts being installed during subsequent in-service maintenance without being bent or not being bent correctly. This condition, if not detected and corrected, could lead to chafing damage of the aileron control system and consequent loss of control of the aircraft. The proposed AD would require actions that are intended to address the unsafe condition described in the MCAI. DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by July 23, 2008. ADDRESSES: You may send comments by any of the following methods: • *Federal eRulemaking Portal:* Go to *http://www.regulations.gov* . Follow the instructions for submitting comments. • *Fax:*
(202)493-2251. • *Mail:* U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590. • *Hand Delivery:* U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. Examining the AD Docket You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at *http://www.regulations.gov* ; or in person at the Docket Management Facility between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket contains this proposed AD, the regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and other information. The street address for the Docket Office (telephone
(800)647-5527) is in the ADDRESSES section. Comments will be available in the AD docket shortly after receipt. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sarjapur Nagarajan, Aerospace Engineer, FAA, Small Airplane Directorate, 901 Locust, Room 301, Kansas City, Missouri 64106; telephone:
(816)329-4145; fax:
(816)329-4090. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Comments Invited We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or arguments about this proposed AD. Send your comments to an address listed under the ADDRESSES section. Include “Docket No. FAA-2008-0685; Directorate Identifier 2008-CE-037-AD” at the beginning of your comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory, economic, environmental, and energy aspects of this proposed AD. We will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend this proposed AD because of those comments. We will post all comments we receive, without change, to *http://www.regulations.gov* , including any personal information you provide. We will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact we receive about this proposed AD. Discussion The European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), which is the Technical Agent for the Member States of the European Community, has issued AD No. 2008-0086, dated May 13, 2008 (referred to after this as “the MCAI”), to correct an unsafe condition for the specified products. The MCAI states: The original designed bellcrank for the aileron control system in the wing needed to be installed with slightly bent rod ends during production of the aircraft to avoid friction and possible chafing. In addition to being a nonpreferable production practice, this creates the risk of replacement parts being installed during subsequent in-service maintenance without being bent or not being bent correctly. This condition, if not detected and corrected, could lead to chafing damage of the aileron control system and consequent loss of control of the aircraft. Diamond Aircraft Industries GmbH has now developed a new aileron bellcrank that allows for additional angular movement of the push rod, thereby eliminating the chafing risk without using bent rod ends. For the reasons described above, this EASA Airworthiness Directive
(AD)requires the replacement of the aileron bellcrank with an improved part and the replacement of any bent rod ends P/N DAI-9027-00-01. In addition, this AD prohibits the reinstallation of P/N DA4-2717-50-00 aileron bellcranks and bent rod ends P/N DAI-9027-00-01 as replacement in the future. Relevant Service Information Diamond Aircraft Industries GmbH has issued Mandatory Service Bulletin No. MSB-42-043/1, dated April 3, 2008; Diamond Aircraft Industries GmbH Work Instruction WI-MSB-42-043, dated February 4, 2008; and Diamond Aircraft Industries GmbH Drawing Number D60-2717-00-00, dated January 24, 2008. The actions described in this service information are intended to correct the unsafe condition identified in the MCAI. FAA's Determination and Requirements of the Proposed AD This product has been approved by the aviation authority of another country, and is approved for operation in the United States. Pursuant to our bilateral agreement with this State of Design Authority, they have notified us of the unsafe condition described in the MCAI and service information referenced above. We are proposing this AD because we evaluated all information and determined the unsafe condition exists and is likely to exist or develop on other products of the same type design. Differences Between This Proposed AD and the MCAI or Service Information We have reviewed the MCAI and related service information and, in general, agree with their substance. But we might have found it necessary to use different words from those in the MCAI to ensure the AD is clear for U.S. operators and is enforceable. In making these changes, we do not intend to differ substantively from the information provided in the MCAI and related service information. We might also have proposed different actions in this AD from those in the MCAI in order to follow FAA policies. Any such differences are highlighted in a NOTE within the proposed AD. Costs of Compliance We estimate that this proposed AD will affect 156 products of U.S. registry. We also estimate that it would take about 3 work-hours per product to comply with the basic requirements of this proposed AD. The average labor rate is $80 per work-hour (no labor cost; 3 work-hours warranty given by manufacturer). Required parts would cost $0 (warranty credit given by manufacturer) per product. Where the service information lists required parts costs that are covered under warranty, we have assumed that there will be no charge for these costs. As we do not control warranty coverage for affected parties, some parties may incur costs higher than estimated here. Based on these figures, we estimate the cost of the proposed AD on U.S. operators to be $0, or $0 per product. Authority for This Rulemaking Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, section 106, describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. “Subtitle VII: Aviation Programs,” describes in more detail the scope of the Agency's authority. We are issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in “Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701: General requirements.” Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing regulations for practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator finds necessary for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within the scope of that authority because it addresses an unsafe condition that is likely to exist or develop on products identified in this rulemaking action. Regulatory Findings We determined that this proposed AD would not have federalism implications under Executive Order 13132. This proposed AD 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. For the reasons discussed above, I certify this proposed regulation: 1. Is not a “significant regulatory action” under Executive Order 12866; 2. Is not a “significant rule” under the DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and 3. Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act. We prepared a regulatory evaluation of the estimated costs to comply with this proposed AD and placed it in the AD docket. List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39 Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Safety. The Proposed Amendment Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the Administrator, the FAA proposes to amend 14 CFR part 39 as follows: PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES 1. The authority citation for part 39 continues to read as follows: Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701. § 39.13 [Amended] 2. The FAA amends § 39.13 by adding the following new AD: **Diamond Aircraft Industries GmbH:** Docket No. FAA-2008-0685; Directorate Identifier 2008-CE-037-AD. Comments Due Date
(a)We must receive comments by July 23, 2008. Affected ADs
(b)None. Applicability
(c)This AD applies to Model DA 42 airplanes, all serial numbers, with aileron bellcranks part number (P/N) DA4-2717-50-00 installed, certificated in any category. Subject
(d)Air Transport Association of America
(ATA)Code 27: Flight Controls. Reason
(e)The mandatory continuing airworthiness information
(MCAI)states: The original designed bellcrank for the aileron control system in the wing needed to be installed with slightly bent rod ends during production of the aircraft to avoid friction and possible chafing. In addition to being a nonpreferable production practice, this creates the risk of replacement parts being installed during subsequent in-service maintenance without being bent or not being bent correctly. This condition, if not detected and corrected, could lead to chafing damage of the aileron control system and consequent loss of control of the aircraft. Diamond Aircraft Industries GmbH has now developed a new aileron bellcrank that allows for additional angular movement of the push rod, thereby eliminating the chafing risk without using bent rod ends. For the reasons described above, this EASA Airworthiness Directive
(AD)requires the replacement of the aileron bellcrank with an improved part and the replacement of any bent rod ends P/N DAI-9027-00-01. In addition, this AD prohibits the reinstallation of P/N DA4-2717-50-00 aileron bellcranks and bent rod ends P/N DAI-9027-00-01 as replacement in the future. Actions and Compliance
(f)Unless already done, do the following actions:
(1)Within the next 200 hours time-in-service
(TIS)after the effective date of this AD, replace the aileron bellcrank, P/N DA4-2717-50-00, with the improved design aileron bellcrank, P/N DA4-2717-50-00_01, and replace any bent rod ends, P/N DAI-9027-00-01, with straight rod ends, P/N DAI-9027-00-01, following Mandatory Service Bulletin No. MSB-42-043/1, dated April 3, 2008; Diamond Aircraft Industries GmbH Work Instruction WI-MSB-42-043, dated February 4, 2008; and Diamond Aircraft Industries GmbH Drawing Number D60-2717-00-00, dated January 24, 2008.
(2)As of the effective date of this AD, do not install any aileron bellcrank, P/N DA4-2717-50-00, or bent rod ends, P/N DAI-9027-00-01. FAA AD Differences Note: This AD differs from the MCAI and/or service information as follows: No differences. Other FAA AD Provisions
(g)The following provisions also apply to this AD:
(1)*Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs):* The Manager, Standards Office, FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. Send information to ATTN: Sarjapur Nagarajan, Aerospace Engineer, FAA, Small Airplane Directorate, 901 Locust, Room 301, Kansas City, Missouri 64106; telephone:
(816)329-4145; fax:
(816)329-4090. Before using any approved AMOC on any airplane to which the AMOC applies, notify your appropriate principal inspector
(PI)in the FAA Flight Standards District Office (FSDO), or lacking a PI, your local FSDO.
(2)*Airworthy Product:* For any requirement in this AD to obtain corrective actions from a manufacturer or other source, use these actions if they are FAA-approved. Corrective actions are considered FAA-approved if they are approved by the State of Design Authority (or their delegated agent). You are required to assure the product is airworthy before it is returned to service.
(3)*Reporting Requirements:* For any reporting requirement in this AD, under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB)has approved the information collection requirements and has assigned OMB Control Number 2120-0056. Related Information
(h)Refer to MCAI European Aviation Safety Agency
(EASA)AD No. 2008-0086, dated May 13, 2008; Diamond Aircraft Industries GmbH Mandatory Service Bulletin No. MSB-42-043/1, dated April 3, 2008; Diamond Aircraft Industries GmbH Work Instruction WI-MSB-42-043, dated February 4, 2008; and Diamond Aircraft Industries GmbH Drawing Number D60-2717-00-00, dated January 24, 2008, for related information. Issued in Kansas City, Missouri, on June 17, 2008. David R. Showers, Acting Manager, Small Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. [FR Doc. E8-14078 Filed 6-20-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910-13-P ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 82 [EPA-HQ-OAR-2002-0064; FRL-8683-6] RIN 2060-AK26 Protection of Stratospheric Ozone: Listing of Substitutes for Ozone-Depleting Substances—n-Propyl Bromide in Adhesives, Coatings, and Aerosols; Notice of Data Availability AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Notice of data availability and request for comment period. SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA)is making available to the public information related to a May 30, 2007 proposed rule under the Significant New Alternatives Policy
(SNAP)program under section 612 of the Clean Air Act. The SNAP program reviews alternatives to Class I and Class II ozone-depleting substances and finds acceptable the use of alternatives that reduce the overall risk to public health and the environment. EPA proposed to list n-propyl bromide
(nPB)as unacceptable for use as a substitute for chlorofluorocarbon (CFC)-113, methyl chloroform, and hydrochlorofluorocarbon (HCFC)-141b in the adhesive and aerosol solvent end uses; and acceptable subject to use conditions (limited to coatings at facilities that, as of May 30, 2007, had provided EPA with information demonstrating their ability to maintain acceptable workplace exposures) as a substitute for methyl chloroform, CFC-113, and HCFC-141b in the coatings end use. The Agency has received additional information regarding the exposure levels of n-propyl bromide found in the workplace due to use of aerosols containing n-propyl bromide, as well as information on industry practices from aerosol suppliers and from a survey of a significant number of end users. The Agency is requesting comment on these materials. We plan to consider this information, and any comments received during the comment period on this notice of data availability, in determining what future action to take on our May 2007 proposal regarding the use of n-propyl bromide in aerosols. DATES: Comments must be received on or before August 22, 2008. ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2002-0064, by one of the following methods: • *http://www.regulations.gov* . Follow the on-line instructions for submitting comments. • *E-mail: A-And-R-Docket@epa.gov* . • *Mail:* Air and Radiation Docket, Environmental Protection Agency, Mail code 6102T, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460, Attention Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2002-0064. • *Hand Delivery:* EPA Docket Center, (EPA/DC) EPA West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, DC, Attention Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2002-0064. Such deliveries are only accepted during the Docket's normal hours of operation, and special arrangements should be made for deliveries of boxed information. *Instructions:* Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2002-0064. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in the public docket without change and may be made available online at *http://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 information that you consider to be CBI or otherwise protected through *http://www.regulations.gov* or e-mail. The *http://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 *http://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. For additional instructions on submitting comments, go to section I. of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this document. *Docket:* All documents in the docket are listed in the *http://www.regulations.gov* index. Although listed in the index, some information is not publicly available, i.e., CBI or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted material, is not placed on the Internet and will be publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically in *http://www.regulations.gov* or in hard copy at the Air and Radiation Docket, EPA/DC, EPA West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, DC. The Public Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the Public Reading Room is
(202)566-1744, and the telephone number for the Air and Radiation Docket is
(202)566-1742. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Margaret Sheppard, Stratospheric Protection Division, Office of Atmospheric Programs, Mail Code 6205J, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460; telephone number
(202)343-9163; fax number
(202)343-2362; e-mail address: *sheppard.margaret@epa.gov* . Notices and rulemakings under the SNAP program are available on EPA's Stratospheric Ozone World Wide Web site at *http://www.epa.gov/ozone/snap/regs* . SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Table of Contents I. What should I consider as I prepare my comments for EPA? II. What is this action? III. On what information is EPA requesting comment? IV. Where can I get the data and comments being made available for comment? V. Why is EPA requesting comment on these data and comments? VI. What is EPA not taking comment on? VII. What supporting documentation do I need to include in my comments? I. What Should I Consider as I Prepare My Comments for EPA? A. Submitting Confidential Business Information
(CBI)Do not submit this information to EPA through *www.regulations.gov* or e-mail. Clearly mark the part or all of the information that you claim to be CBI. For CBI information in a disk or CD-ROM that you mail to EPA, mark the outside of the disk or CD-ROM as CBI and then identify electronically within the disk or CD-ROM the specific information that is claimed as CBI. In addition to one complete version of the comment that includes information claimed as CBI, a copy of the comment that does not contain the information claimed as CBI must be submitted for inclusion in the public docket. Information so marked will not be disclosed except in accordance with procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2. Send or deliver information identified as CBI only by delivery service to the following address: Margaret Sheppard, U.S. EPA, 1310 L Street, NW., Room 1029, Washington DC 20005, Attention Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2002-0064. B. Tips for Preparing Your Comments When submitting comments, remember to: • Identify the rulemaking by docket number and other identifying information (subject heading, **Federal Register**
(FR)date, and page number). • Follow directions—The agency may ask you to respond to specific questions or organize comments by referencing a Code of Federal Regulations
(CFR)part or section number. • Explain why you agree or disagree; suggest alternatives and substitute language for your requested changes. • Describe any assumptions and provide any technical information and/or data that you used. • If you estimate potential costs or burdens, explain how you arrived at your estimate in sufficient detail to allow for it to be reproduced. • Provide specific examples to illustrate your concerns, and suggest alternatives. • Explain your views as clearly as possible, avoiding the use of profanity or personal threats. • Make sure to submit your comments by the comment period deadline identified. C. How Can I Get Copies of Related Information? The specific public comments and data on which EPA is taking comment are available in Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2002-0064 (continuation of Air Docket A-91-42). The physical address for EPA's docket is discussed above in the ADDRESSES section of this action. These documents and other information concerning EPA's May 30, 2007 proposed rulemaking are available electronically through *http://www.regulations.gov,* as discussed above in the ADDRESSES section of this action. If you have any questions about CBI or the procedures for claiming CBI, please consult the person identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. II. What Is This Action? We are requesting comment on additional information received during and after the public comment period concerning industry practices and workplace exposure levels of n-propyl bromide when it is used as an aerosol solvent. The May 30, 2007 proposed rule, 72 FR 30168, proposed to list the chemical n-propyl bromide as an unacceptable substitute for methyl chloroform (1,1,1-trichloroethane), CFC-113 (1,1,2-trifluoro-1,2,2-trichloroethane), and HCFC-141b (1,1-dichloro-1-fluoroethane) when used in aerosol solvents. EPA proposed that nPB in this end use poses unacceptable risks to human health when compared with other substitutes that are available. In addition, EPA took comment on alternate options that would find nPB acceptable subject to use conditions in aerosol solvents. In response to the May, 2007 proposal, EPA received public comments, which have been made available to the public through docket EPA-HQ-OAR-2002-0064. Most of these comments concerned the Agency's proposal to find nPB unacceptable in aerosols. 1 In the proposal, we stated: “EPA's greatest concern with nPB-based aerosols is that users of nPB as an aerosol solvent cannot reliably maintain exposures at sufficiently low levels to ensure that workers are protected. This finding is based on measured exposure data and model estimations indicating the likelihood of elevated concentrations associated with nPB-based aerosols given typical ventilation conditions.” (72 FR 30188) 1 Comments were also received on the other two aspects of that proposal which concerned nPB as a substitute for methyl chloroform, CFC-113, and HCFC-141b in the adhesives and coatings end uses. III. On What Information Is EPA Requesting Comment? EPA is requesting comment on the public comments and data in the following documents in: Docket EPA-HQ-OAR-2002-0064: • July 30, 2007 Comments submitted by D. Douglas Fratz, Vice President, Scientific and Technical Affairs, and Andrew R. Hackman, Manager, State Affairs Programs, Consumer Specialty Products Association
(CSPA)and attachments—docket items EPA-HQ-OAR-2002-0064-0319 and EPA-HQ-OAR-2002-0064-0319.1. • November 16, 2007 Supplemental Comments submitted by D. Douglas Fratz, Vice President, Scientific & Technical Affairs and Andrew Hackman, Manager, State Affairs Programs, CSPA and attachments—docket items EPA-HQ-OAR-2002-0064-0327, EPA-HQ-OAR-2002-0064-0327.1, and EPA-HQ-OAR-2002-0064-0327.2. • E-mail exchanges between M. Sheppard, EPA, and A. Hackman, CSPA—docket items EPA-HQ-OAR-2002-0064-0340, EPA-HQ-OAR-2002-0064-0341, EPA-HQ-OAR-2002-0064-0342, and EPA-HQ-OAR-2002-0064-0344. IV. Where Can I Get the Data and Comments Being Made Available for Comment? All of the data on which we are seeking comment can be obtained through docket EPA-HQ-OAR-2002-0064 at *http://www.regulations.gov* . You also can find this information in hard copy through EPA's Air and Radiation Docket in the Public Reading Room at the address given in the ADDRESSES section above. V. Why Is EPA Requesting Comment on These Data and Comments? We are soliciting comment on this new information to ensure that we use the best information available when we determine how to proceed on our May 2007 proposal, in which we proposed to list nPB as unacceptable in the aerosol solvent end use. The information which we are seeking comment on will be considered by EPA in determining how to proceed on our proposal and because it substantially expands data for this end use beyond the information the Agency had available at the time we issued the proposed rule, the Agency is now providing the public with an opportunity to comment on the quality, accuracy and representativeness of the information. We will consider this information, along with other data and public comments also available in the public docket, to move forward with a final rulemaking concerning nPB in the aerosol solvent end use. VI. What Is EPA Not Taking Comment On? EPA is not taking additional comment on exposure data or industry practices in end uses of adhesives and coatings. EPA is only taking on comment in the end use of aerosol solvents. Furthermore, we are only accepting comments on the quality, accuracy, and representativeness of the information and comments described in this action. VII. What Supporting Documentation Do I Need To Include in My Comments? Please provide any information or data supporting your comments, particularly information on exposure levels, the amount of nPB usage, and ventilation levels when nPB is used as an aerosol solvent. Dated: June 4, 2008. Brian McLean, Director, Office of Atmospheric Programs, Office of Air and Radiation. [FR Doc. E8-14103 Filed 6-20-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P 73 121 Monday, June 23, 2008 Notices DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Agricultural Research Service Notice of Intent To Grant Exclusive License AGENCY: Agricultural Research Service, USDA. ACTION: Notice of intent. SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service, intends to grant to Enhanced Technologies, Inc. of Greenville, Mississippi an exclusive license to U.S. Patent No. 6,325,215, “Method and Apparatus for Separating Elastomeric Particulates and Fibers from a Pulverized Mixture”, issued on December 4, 2001. DATES: Comments must be received within thirty
(30)days of the date of publication of this Notice in the **Federal Register** . ADDRESSES: Send comments to: USDA, ARS, Office of Technology Transfer, 5601 Sunnyside Avenue, Rm. 4-1174, Beltsville, Maryland 20705-5131. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: June Blalock of the Office of Technology Transfer at the Beltsville address given above; telephone: 301-504-5989. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Federal Government's patent rights in this invention are assigned to the United States of America, as represented by the Secretary of Agriculture. It is in the public interest to so license this invention as Enhanced Technologies, Inc. of Greenville, Mississippi has submitted a complete and sufficient application for a license. The prospective exclusive license will be royalty-bearing and will comply with the terms and conditions of 35 U.S.C. 209 and 37 CFR 404.7. The prospective exclusive license may be granted unless, within thirty
(30)days from the date of this published Notice, the Agricultural Research Service receives written evidence and argument, which establishes that the grant of the license would not be consistent with the requirements of 35 U.S.C. 209 and 37 CFR 404.7. Richard J. Brenner, Assistant Administrator. [FR Doc. E8-14055 Filed 6-20-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410-03-P DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Agricultural Research Service Notice of Intent To Grant Exclusive License AGENCY: Agricultural Research Service, USDA. ACTION: Notice of intent. SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service, intends to grant to Global Protein Products of Winslow, Maine, an exclusive license to U.S. Patent Application Serial No. 11/728,700, “Decolorization/Deodorization of Corn Zein Products”, filed on March 27, 2007. DATES: Comments must be received within thirty
(30)days of the date of publication of this Notice in the **Federal Register** . ADDRESSES: Send comments to: USDA, ARS, Office of Technology Transfer, 5601 Sunnyside Avenue, Rm. 4-1174, Beltsville, Maryland 20705-5131. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: June Blalock of the Office of Technology Transfer at the Beltsville address given above; telephone: 301-504-5989. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Federal Government's patent rights in this invention are assigned to the United States of America, as represented by the Secretary of Agriculture. It is in the public interest to so license this invention as Global Protein Products of Winslow, Maine has submitted a complete and sufficient application for a license. The prospective exclusive license will be royalty-bearing and will comply with the terms and conditions of 35 U.S.C. 209 and 37 CFR 404.7. The prospective exclusive license may be granted unless, within thirty
(30)days from the date of this published Notice, the Agricultural Research Service receives written evidence and argument, which establishes that the grant of the license would not be consistent with the requirements of 35 U.S.C. 209 and 37 CFR 404.7. Richard J. Brenner, Assistant Administrator. [FR Doc. E8-14058 Filed 6-20-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410-03-P DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration (A-580-816) Certain Corrosion-Resistant Carbon Steel Flat Products from the Republic of Korea: Notice of Final Results of Antidumping Duty New Shipper Review AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce. SUMMARY: On January 23, 2008, the Department of Commerce (the Department) published the preliminary results of the new shipper review of the antidumping duty order on certain corrosion-resistant carbon steel products
(CORE)from the Republic of Korea (Korea). This review covers Haewon MSC Co. Ltd. (Haewon). Based on our analysis of comments received 1 concerning our preliminary results, we have made certain changes to these final results in the section listed as *Changes Since the Preliminary Results* . The final results are listed in the section *Final Results of Review* below. 1 Case briefs and rebuttal briefs were submitted by the following domestic interested parties and respondent: On February 22, 2008, United States Steel Corporation (US Steel), and Nucor Corporation (Nucor) (collectively, the petitioners) filed case briefs (respectively, US Steel's Case Brief, and Nucor's Case Brief). On February 29, 2008, US Steel, and Nucor filed rebuttal briefs (respectively, US Steel's Rebuttal Brief, and Nucor's Rebuttal Brief). On February 22, 2008, Haewon MSC Co. Ltd. (Haewon) filed a case brief (Haewon's Case Brief). On February 29, 2008, respondent filed a rebuttal brief (Haewon's Rebuttal Brief). EFFECTIVE DATE: June 23, 2008. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Victoria Cho or George McMahon, AD/CVD Operations, Office 3, Import Administration, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20230; telephone at
(202)482-5075, or
(202)482-1167, respectively. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background On January 23, 2008, the Department published the preliminary results of the new shipper review of the antidumping duty order on CORE from Korea. *See Certain Corrosion-Resistant Carbon Steel Flat Products from the Republic of Korea: Notice of Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty New Shipper Review* , 73 FR 3925 (January 23, 2008) (Preliminary Results). Scope of the Order This order covers flat-rolled carbon steel products, of rectangular shape, either clad, plated, or coated with corrosion-resistant metals such as zinc, aluminum, or zinc-, aluminum-, nickel- or iron-based alloys, whether or not corrugated or painted, varnished or coated with plastics or other nonmetallic substances in addition to the metallic coating, in coils (whether or not in successively superimposed layers) and of a width of 0.5 inch or greater, or in straight lengths which, if of a thickness less than 4.75 millimeters, are of a width of 0.5 inch or greater and which measures at least 10 times the thickness or if of a thickness of 4.75 millimeters or more are of a width which exceeds 150 millimeters and measures at least twice the thickness, as currently classifiable in the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS) under item numbers 7210.30.0030, 7210.30.0060, 7210.41.0000, 7210.49.0030, 7210.49.0090, 7210.49.0091, 7210.49.0095, 7210.61.0000, 7210.69.0000, 7210.70.6030, 7210.70.6060, 7210.70.6090, 7210.90.1000, 7210.90.6000, 7210.90.9000, 7212.20.0000, 7212.30.1030, 7212.30.1090, 7212.30.3000, 7212.30.5000, 7212.40.1000, 7212.40.5000, 7212.50.0000, 7212.60.0000, 7215.90.1000, 7215.90.3000, 7215.90.5000, 7217.20.1500, 7217.30.1530, 7217.30.1560, 7217.90.1000, 7217.90.5030, 7217.90.5060, and 7217.90.5090. Included in the order are flat-rolled products of non-rectangular cross-section where such cross-section is achieved subsequent to the rolling process including products which have been beveled or rounded at the edges ( *i.e.* , products which have been “worked after rolling”). Excluded from this order are flat-rolled steel products either plated or coated with tin, lead, chromium, chromium oxides, both tin and lead (“terne plate”), or both chromium and chromium oxides (“tin-free steel”), whether or not painted, varnished or coated with plastics or other nonmetallic substances in addition to the metallic coating. Also excluded from this order are clad products in straight lengths of 0.1875 inch or more in composite thickness and of a width which exceeds 150 millimeters and measures at least twice the thickness. Also excluded from this order are certain clad stainless flat-rolled products, which are three-layered corrosion-resistant carbon steel flat-rolled products less than 4.75 millimeters in composite thickness that consist of a carbon steel flat-rolled product clad on both sides with stainless steel in a 20%-60%-20% ratio. These HTSUS item numbers are provided for convenience and customs purposes. The written descriptions remain dispositive. Bona Fide Analysis In the *Preliminary Results* , we found that Haewon's reported U.S. sale was a *bona fide* sale, as required by 19 CFR 351.214(b)(2)(iv)(c) based on the totality of facts on the record. *See* Memorandum from George McMahon and Victoria Cho, Case Analysts, to Melissa Skinner, Office Director, in the file entitled, “Corrosion-Resistant Carbon Steel Flat Products from Korea: Antidumping New Shipper Review of Haewon MSC Co., Ltd.: Bona Fide Analysis Memorandum,” (Bona Fide Memo), dated January 15, 2008, on file in the Central Records Unit for Import Administration (CRU), room 1117, of the main Department of Commerce building. For the Final Results, we continue to find that Haewon's sale was a *bona fide* commercial transaction. *See* Haewon's Final Results Calculation Memo. Analysis of Comments Received All issues raised in the case and rebuttal briefs by parties to this review are addressed in the April 14, 2008, “Issues and Decisions for the Final Results of the New Shipper Review of the Antidumping Duty Order on Certain Corrosion-Resistant Carbon Steel Flat Products from the Republic of Korea” (Decision Memorandum), which is hereby adopted by this notice. Attached to this notice as an appendix is a list of the issues which parties have raised and to which we have responded in the Decision Memorandum. Parties can find a complete discussion of all issues raised in this review and the corresponding recommendations in this public memorandum, which is on file in the CRU. In addition, a complete version of the Decision Memorandum can be accessed directly on the Web at http://www.ia.ita.doc.gov/frn. The paper copy and electronic version of the Decision Memorandum are identical in content. Changes Since the Preliminary Results Based on our analysis of the comments received, we have made changes in the calculations for the final dumping margin. The Department has reconsidered its position from the preliminary results with respect to Haewon's toll produced CORE that was preliminarily excluded from the company's home market sales database. The facts in this case indicate that in the back-to-back transactions, Haewon purchased cold-rolled coil from Company A 2 , galvanized the coil into CORE, and then sold the CORE back to Company A. In both transactions, title passed, first from Company A to Haewon for the cold-rolled coil, and then from Haewon to Company A for the CORE. Based upon these facts, we determine that Haewon transferred ownership in the CORE to Company A for consideration. Accordingly, we find that these sales constitute sales of foreign like product that should be included in Haewon's home market database and included in the dumping margin calculation for these final results. 2 Due to the proprietary nature of this discussion, see the accompanying Issues and Decision Memorandum at Comment 7 and the Final Results Calculation Memorandum. In addition, we have revised Haewon's SG&A calculation for these final results to include certain expenses. Due to the proprietary nature of this issue, *see* Comment 9 of the accompanying Issues and Decision Memorandum and the “Final Results Calculation Memorandum.” For purposes of these final results, we disregarded below cost sales of a given product and used the remaining sales as the basis for determining NV, in accordance with section 773(b)(1) of the Act. Furthermore, we used constructed value
(CV)when making comparisons for Haewon's normal value to export price. *See* sections 773(a)(4) and 773(e)(2)(B)(ii) of the Act. For further details, *see* the “Final Results Calculation Memorandum.” Final Results of Review We find that the following dumping margin exists for the period August 1, 2006, through April 10, 2007: 3 3 Note that the Department extended the POR until April 10, 2007 in order to include HMSC's U.S. sale, which entered on this particular date. *See* Department's letter to Haewon, dated May 23, 2007. Exporter/manufacturer: Weighted-average margin percentage: Haewon MSC Co. Ltd. 0.00 percent Assessment Rates The Department shall determine, and U.S. Customs and Border Protection
(CBP)shall assess, antidumping duties on all appropriate entries. For subject merchandise produced and exported by Haewon, we will instruct CBP to liquidate entries at the rate indicated above. The Department intends to issue appropriate assessment instructions directly to CBP 15 days after publication of these final results of this new shipper review. The Department clarified its “automatic assessment” regulation on May 6, 2003. *See Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Proceedings: Assessment of Antidumping Duties* , 68 FR 23954 (May 6, 2003). This clarification will apply to entries of subject merchandise during the period of review produced by the respondent for which it did not know its merchandise was destined for the United States. In such instances, we will instruct CBP to liquidate unreviewed entries at the all others rate if there is no rate for the intermediate company(ies) involved in the transaction. For a full discussion of this clarification, *see Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Proceedings: Assessment of Antidumping Duties* , 68 FR 23954 (May 6, 2003). Cash Deposit Rates The following antidumping duty deposits will be required on all shipments of CORE from Korea entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption, effective on or after the publication date of this new shipper review, as provided by section 751(a)(2)(C) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act):
(1)for subject merchandise produced and exported by Haewon, the cash deposit rate will be the rate listed above (except no cash deposit will be required if a company's weighted-average margin is *de minimis, i.e.* , less than 0.5 percent);
(2)for previously reviewed or investigated companies not listed above, the cash deposit rate will continue to be the company-specific rate published for the most recent period;
(3)if the exporter is not a firm covered in this review, a previous review, or the less-than-fair-value
(LTFV)investigation, but the manufacturer is, the cash deposit rate will be the rate established for the most recent period for the manufacturer of the merchandise; and
(4)the cash deposit rate for all other manufacturers or exporters will continue to be 17.70 percent, the all others rate established in the LTFV investigation. Notification to Importers This notice serves as a final reminder to importers of their responsibility under 19 CFR 351.402(f)(2) to file a certificate regarding the reimbursement of antidumping duties prior to liquidation of the relevant entries during this review period. Failure to comply with this requirement could result in the Secretary's presumption that reimbursement of antidumping duties occurred and the subsequent assessment of doubled antidumping duties. Notification Regarding APOs This notice also serves as a reminder to parties subject to administrative protective orders
(APOs)of their responsibility concerning the return or destruction of proprietary information disclosed under APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305, which continues to govern business proprietary information in this segment of the proceeding. Timely written notification of the return/destruction of APO materials or conversion to judicial protective order is hereby requested. Failure to comply with the regulations and terms of an APO is a violation which is subject to sanction. We are issuing and publishing these results of review in accordance with sections 751(a)(2)(B) and 777(i)(1) of the Act. Dated: June 13, 2008. David M. Spooner, Assistant Secretary for Import Administration. APPENDIX I List of Comments in the Accompanying Issues and Decision Memorandum *Comment 1:* Circumvention of the New Shipper Review *Comment 2:* Arm's-Length Transaction Between Parties *Comment 3:* Haewon's Future Sales *Comment 4:* Quantity and Value of Haewon's Sale to the United States *Comment 5:* Timely Filing of the New Shipper Review *Comment 6:* COP/CV Data for an Inappropriate Period COP Issues *Comment 7:* Revision of Haewon's G&A and Interest Expense Ratios to Account for Tolling *Comment 8:* Whether to Recalculate Interest Expenses *Comment 9:* Revised SG&A Expenses from Verification [FR Doc.E8-14129 Filed 6-20-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-S DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration (A-489-807) Certain Steel Concrete Reinforcing Bars from Turkey; Notice of Extension of Time Limits for Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. EFFECTIVE DATE: June 23, 2008. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Irina Itkin, AD/CVD Operations, Office 2, Import Administration, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20230; telephone
(202)482-0656. Background The Department of Commerce (the Department) published an antidumping duty order on certain steel concrete reinforcing bars (rebar) from Turkey on April 17, 1997. *See Antidumping Duty Order: Certain Steel Concrete Reinforcing Bars From Turkey* , 62 FR 18748 (April 17, 1997). On May 30, 2007, the Department published a notice of initiation of an administrative review of the order on rebar from Turkey for the period April 1, 2006, through March 31, 2007. *See Initiation of Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Administrative Reviews and Request for Revocation in Part* , 72 FR 29968 (May 30, 2007). The review covers four producers/exporters of the subject merchandise to the United States: Ekinciler Demir ve Celik Sanayi A.S./Ekinciler Dis Ticaret A.S., Habas Sinai ve Tibbi Gazlar Istihsal Endustrisi A.S., Izmir Demir Celik Sanayi A.S, and Nursan Celik Sanayi ve Haddecilik, A.S./Nursan Dis Ticaret A.S. On May 5, 2008, the Department published the preliminary results of the administrative review of the antidumping duty order on rebar from Turkey. *See Certain Steel Concrete Reinforcing Bars from Turkey; Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review and Notice of Intent to Revoke in Part* , 73 FR 24535 (May 5, 2008). The final results are currently due no later than September 2, 2008. Extension of the Time Limit for Final Results of Administrative Review Section 751(a)(3)(A) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, (the Act) requires the Department to issue the final results in an administrative review within 120 days of the publication date of the preliminary results. However, if it is not practicable to complete the review within this time period, section 751(a)(3)(A) of the Act allows the Department to extend the time limit for the final results to a maximum of 180 days after the date on which the preliminary results are published. The Department has determined that completion of the final results of this review within the original time period is not practicable because the Department requires additional time to complete analysis of several complex issues, including certain cost issues for one respondent and a revocation request for another respondent. Therefore, the Department is fully extending the time limit for completion of the final results of the administrative review. The final results are now due no later than November 3, 2008, the next business day after 180 days from publication of the preliminary results. This notice is issued and published in accordance with sections 751(a)(3)(A) and 777(i)(1) of the Act. Dated: June 17, 2008. Stephen J. Claeys, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import Administration. [FR Doc. E8-14124 Filed 6-20-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-S DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration A-570-890 Wooden Bedroom Furniture from the People's Republic of China: Extension of Time Limits for the Final Results of the Antidumping Duty Administrative Review and New Shipper Reviews AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. EFFECTIVE DATE: June 23, 2008. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Paul Stolz, AD/CVD Operations, Office 8, Import Administration, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20230; telephone:
(202)482-4474. Background The Department of Commerce (“the Department”) published an antidumping duty order on wooden bedroom furniture (“WBF”) from the People's Republic of China (“PRC”) on January 4, 2005. *See Notice of Amended Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value and Antidumping Duty Order: Wooden Bedroom Furniture From the People's Republic of China* , 70 FR 329 (January 4, 2005). On March 7, 2007, the Department published in the **Federal Register** a notice of the initiation of the antidumping duty administrative review and new shipper reviews of WBF from the PRC for the period January 1, 2006, through December 31, 2006. *See Initiation of Administrative Review of Antidumping Duty Order on Wooden Bedroom Furniture from the People's Republic of China* , 72 FR 10159 (March 7, 2007) and *Wooden Bedroom Furniture from the People's Republic of China: Initiation of New Shipper Reviews* , 72 FR 10158 (March 7, 2007) (“ *Initiation of Third Annual New Shipper Reviews* ”). On February 13, 2008, the Department published in the **Federal Register** the preliminary results of the second administrative review and the new shipper reviews. *See Wooden Bedroom Furniture from the People's Republic of China: Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, Preliminary Results of New Shipper Reviews and Notice of Partial Rescission* , 73 FR 8273 (February 13, 2008). The final results of the administrative and new shipper reviews are currently due no later than June 12, 2008. Extension of Time Limit of Final Results. Section 751(a)(3)(A) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (“the Act”), requires the Department to issue final results within 120 days after the date on which the preliminary results are published. However, if it is not practicable to complete the review within this time period, section 751(a)(3)(A) of the Act allows the Department to extend the time period to a maximum of 180 days. Completion of the final results of these reviews within the 120-day period is not practicable because the Department conducted verification in the administrative review after publication of the preliminary results, and, therefore, needs additional time to complete verification reports, provide an opportunity for, and analyze, comments by interested parties on the preliminary results and verification reports, and analyze information gathered at verification. Because it is not practicable to complete these reviews within the time specified under the Act, we are fully extending the time period for issuing the final results of the administrative and new shipper reviews in accordance with section 751(a)(3)(A) of the Act. Therefore, the final results are due no later than August 11, 2008, which is 180 days from publication of the preliminary results. This notice is published pursuant to sections 751(a) and 777(i) of the Act. Dated: June 9, 2008. Stephen J. Claeys, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import Administration. [FR Doc. E8-14126 Filed 6-20-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-S DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration A-570-831 Fresh Garlic from the People's Republic of China: Extension of Time Limit for the Preliminary Results of the New Shipper Reviews AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. EFFECTIVE DATE: June 23, 2008. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Scott Lindsay, AD/CVD Operations, Office 6, Import Administration, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20230; telephone:
(202)482-0780. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background On January 2, 2008, the Department published a notice of initiation of new shipper reviews of fresh garlic from the PRC covering Anqiu Haoshun Trade Co., Ltd., Ningjin Ruifeng Foodstuff Co., Ltd., and Zhengzhou Yuanli Trading Co., Ltd. for the period November 1, 2006, through October 31, 2007. *See Fresh Garlic from the People(s Republic of China: Initiation of New Shipper Reviews* , 73 FR 161 (January 2, 2008). The preliminary results of these new shipper reviews are currently due no later than June 18, 2008. Statutory Time Limits Section 751(a)(2)(B)(iv) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the “Act”), provides that the Department will issue the preliminary results of a new shipper review of an antidumping duty order within 180 days after the day on which the review was initiated. *See* also 19 CFR 351.214(i)(1). The Act further provides that the Department may extend that 180-day period to 300 days if it determines that the case is extraordinarily complicated. *See* 19 CFR 351.214 (i)(2). Extension of Time Limit of Preliminary Results The Department determines that these new shipper reviews involve extraordinarily complicated methodological issues such as potential affiliation issues, the examination of importer information, and the evaluation of the *bona fide* nature of each company’s sales. Therefore, in accordance with section 751(a)(2)(B)(iv) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.214(i)(2), the Department is extending the time limit for these preliminary results by 120 days, until no later than October 16, 2008. The final results continue to be due 90 days after the date of the issuance of the preliminary results, unless extended. We are issuing and publishing this notice in accordance with sections 751(a)(2)(B)(iv) and 777(i) of the Act. Dated: June 13, 2008. Stephen J. Claeys, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import Administration. [FR Doc. E8-14111 Filed 6-20-04; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-S DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration North American Free-Trade Agreement, Article 1904 NAFTA Panel Reviews; Request for Panel Review AGENCY: NAFTA Secretariat, United States Section, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. ACTION: Notice of first request for panel review. SUMMARY: On June 6, 2008, Ivaco Rolling Mills 2004 L.P. and Sivaco Ontario, a division of Sivaco Wire Group 2004 L.P. (collectively, “Ivaco”) filed a First Request for Panel Review with the United States Section of the NAFTA Secretariat pursuant to Article 1904 of the North American Free Trade Agreement. Panel review was requested of the Final Results of the 2005-2006 Antidumping Duty Administrative Review made by the International Trade Administration, respecting Carbon and Certain Alloy Steel Wire Rod from Canada. The determination was published in the **Federal Register** (73 FR 7710) on May 12, 2008. The NAFTA Secretariat has assigned Case Number USA-CDA-2008-1904-02 to this request. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Valerie Dees, United States Secretary, NAFTA Secretariat, Suite 2061, 14th and Constitution Avenue, Washington, DC 20230,
(202)482-5438. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Chapter 19 of the North American Free-Trade Agreement (“Agreement”) establishes a mechanism to replace domestic judicial review of final determinations in antidumping and countervailing duty cases involving imports from a NAFTA country with review by independent binational panels. When a Request for Panel Review is filed, a panel is established to act in place of national courts to review expeditiously the final determination to determine whether it conforms with the antidumping or countervailing duty law of the country that made the determination. Under Article 1904 of the Agreement, which came into force on January 1, 1994, the Government of the United States, the Government of Canada and the Government of Mexico established *Rules of Procedure for Article 1904 Binational Panel Reviews* (“Rules”). These Rules were published in the **Federal Register** on February 23, 1994 (59 FR 8686). A first Request for Panel Review was filed with the United States section of the NAFTA Secretariat, pursuant to Article 1904 of the Agreement, on June 6, 2008, requesting panel review of the determination and order described above. The Rules provide that:
(a)A Party or interested person may challenge the final determination in whole or in part by filing a Complaint in accordance with Rule 39 within 30 days after the filing of the first Request for Panel Review (the deadline for filing a Complaint is July 7, 2008);
(b)A Party, investigating authority or interested person that does not file a Complaint but that intends to appear in support of any reviewable portion of the final determination may participate in the panel review by filing a Notice of Appearance in accordance with Rule 40 within 45 days after the filing of the first Request for Panel Review (the deadline for filing a Notice of Appearance is July 21, 2008); and
(c)The panel review shall be limited to the allegations of error of fact or law, including the jurisdiction of the investigating authority, that are set out in the Complaints filed in the panel review and the procedural and substantive defenses raised in the panel review. Dated: June 17, 2008. Valerie Dees, United States Secretary, NAFTA Secretariat. [FR Doc. E8-14086 Filed 6-20-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-GT-P DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Institute of Standards and Technology National Conference on Weights and Measures 93rd Annual Meeting AGENCY: National Institute of Standards and Technology, Commerce. ACTION: Notice. SUMMARY: The Annual Meeting of the 93rd National Conference on Weights and Measures
(NCWM)will be held July 13 to 17, 2008. Publication of this notice on the NCWM's behalf is a public service; NIST does not endorse, approve, or recommend any of the proposals contained in this notice or in the NCWM publications listed. The meetings are open to the public but registration is required. DATES: July 13-17, 2008. *Meeting Location:* Sheraton Burlington Hotel, Burlington, Vermont. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Carol Hockert, Chief, National Institute of Standards and Technology, Weights and Measures Division, Mailstop 2600, Gaithersburg, MD 20899-2600, or by telephone
(301)975-5507, Fax:
(301)975-8091, or e-mail: *carol.hockert@nist.gov.* Please see NCWM Publication 16 at *http://www.ncwm.net,* which contains meeting agendas, registration forms and hotel information. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The NCWM is an organization of state, county and city weights and measures officials, business and industry representatives, Federal Agencies and other members of the public that come together to, among other things, develop recommendations for standards and test procedures related to weights and measures technology, administration and enforcement. Pursuant to (15 U.S.C. 272(b)(6)), the Weights and Measures Division of the National Institute of Standards and Technology
(NIST)supports the NCWM as one of the forums it uses to solicit comments and recommendations on revising or updating a variety of publications related to legal metrology. NIST promotes uniformity among the states in their laws, regulations, test methods and equipment that are used in regulating the weighing and measuring devices, packaging and labeling and other activities in trade and commerce. Publication of this notice on the NCWM's behalf is a public service; NIST does not endorse, approve, or recommend any of the proposals contained in this notice or in the NCWM publications listed. The meetings are open to the public but registration is required. The following are descriptions of some of the items that will be considered for adoption at the meeting. Comments will be taken on these and other issues during public hearings on July 14, 2008. The Committees will meet after the hearings to finalize the proposals for possible adoption at voting sessions on July 16 and 17, 2008. The Committees may withdraw or carryover items that need additional development. The Specifications and Tolerances Committee will consider proposed amendments to NIST Handbook 44, “Specifications, Tolerances, and other Technical Requirements for Weighing and Measuring Devices.” Those items address weighing and measuring devices used in commercial measurement applications, that is, devices that are normally used to buy from or sell to the general public or used for determining the quantity of product sold among businesses. Issues on the agenda of the NCWM Laws and Regulations Committee relate to proposals to amend NIST Handbook 130, “Uniform Laws and Regulations in the area of legal metrology, method of sale of commodities regulations and engine fuel labeling.” This notice only contains information about significant items on the NCWM agenda so many others are not presented. NCWM Specifications and Tolerances Committee *The following items are proposals to amend NIST Handbook 44:* General Code *Item 310-1.* G.S.8. Provisions for Sealing Adjustable Components on Weighing and Measuring Devices: This proposal includes language that clarifies the means that can be used to prohibit devices from facilitating fraud as it applies to the electronically programmed and coded components of weighing or measuring devices. The intent of this proposal is to reduce electronic manipulation or alteration that results in consumers being overcharged for the products or services that they purchase. Examples of fraud issues in the past few years have involved:
(1)Users altering, manipulating, or interfering with metrological software interfaced or installed in equipment; and
(2)users gaining access to the calibration features of scales because the device was not set up in accordance with the manufacturer's instructions. The Committee is proposing to update the requirements for security seals and other access limitations to the accuracy and other metrological adjustments on weighing and measuring equipment. Scales Code *Item 320-2.* Weight Units and Tare Determinations: This item will require scales to determine net weights with accurate mathematical calculations that take into account the value of the increments displayed at different capacities on devices with single or multiple weighing ranges. Liquid-Measuring Devices *Item 330-1.* Temperature Compensation for Liquid-Measuring Devices: This proposal describes the design specifications, test procedures, and user responsibilities on retail liquid measuring devices that may be equipped with an automatic means to allow the delivery of fuel with its volume adjusted to a specific reference temperature. NCWM Laws and Regulations Committee *The following voting items are proposals to amend the Engine Fuel Law and Regulation and the Method of Sale of Commodities Regulation in NIST Handbook 130:* *Items 223-1 and 237-1.* Revisions to the Uniform Engine Fuels, Petroleum Products and Automotive Lubricants Law and Regulation: These proposals include amendments that will update the laws and regulations to reflect the increased use of alternative fuels. They include new provisions for full disclosure of product information to consumers and allow state authorities to inspect records and grant waivers of fuel specifications in the event of a natural disaster or other emergency. *Item 250-1.* The Method of Sale of Fresh Fruits and Vegetables: This proposal contains suggested methods of sale ( *e.g.* , weight, dry measure, or count) for a wide variety of fruit and vegetables offered for sale in retail stores, farmers markets, and at roadside stands. The intent of the recommendation is to provide consumers with information on the net quantity of contents in packages and to facilitate value comparison. Dated: June 16, 2008. Richard F. Kayser, Chief Scientist. [FR Doc. E8-14087 Filed 6-20-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-13-P DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration RIN: 0648-XI55 Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council; Public Meetings AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce. ACTION: Notice of public meetings. SUMMARY: The Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council to convene its Ad Hoc Grouper Individual Fishing Quota
(IFQ)Advisory Panel (AHGIFQAP) via conference call. DATES: The conference call will be held July 16, 2008, at 1:30 p.m. EDT. ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held via conference call and listening stations will be available. For specific locations see SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION . *Council address* : Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council, 2203 North Lois Avenue, Suite 1100, Tampa, FL 33607. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Assane Diagne, Economist, Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council; telephone:
(813)348-1630. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The conference call will begin at 1:30 p.m. EDT and conclude no later than 5 p.m. EDT. Listening stations are available at the following locations: The Gulf Council office (see ADDRESSES ), and the National Marine Fisheries Service
(NMFS)offices as follows: Panama City, FL, 3500 Delwood Beach Road, Panama City, FL 32408; contact: Janice Hamm, telephone: (850)-234-6541. The AHGIFQAP will hold a conference call to discuss the public hearing draft for Amendment 29 to the Reef Fish Fishery Management Plan. Reef Fish Amendment 29 proposes to rationalize effort and reduce overcapacity in the commercial grouper and tilefish fisheries in order to achieve and maintain optimum yield (OY). Effort management approaches considered in this amendment include permit endorsements and the implementation of an Individual Fishing Quota
(IFQ)program. Although other non-emergency issues not on the agenda may come before the AHGIFQAP for discussion, in accordance with the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (Magnuson-Stevens Act), those issues may not be the subject of formal action during the meeting. Actions will be restricted to the issue specifically identified in the agenda and any issues arising after publication of this notice that require emergency action under Section 305(c) of the Magnuson-Stevens Act, provided the public has been notified of the Council's intent to take action to address the emergency. Special Accommodations The listening stations are physically accessible to people with disabilities. Requests for sign language interpretation or other auxiliary aids should be directed to Tina O'Hern at the Council (see ADDRESSES ) at least 5 working days prior to the meeting. Dated: June 18, 2008. Tracey L. Thompson, Acting Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service. [FR Doc. E8-14068 Filed 6-20-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-22-S DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration RIN: 0648-XI53 New England Fishery Management Council; Public Meeting AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce. ACTION: Notice of a public meeting. SUMMARY: The New England Fishery Management Council (Council) is scheduling a public meeting of its Scallop Committee, in July, 2008, to consider actions affecting New England fisheries in the exclusive economic zone (EEZ). Recommendations from this group will be brought to the full Council for formal consideration and action, if appropriate. DATES: This meeting will be held on Tuesday, July 8, 2008, at 9:30 a.m. ADDRESSES: This meeting will be held at the Hilton Garden Inn, One Thurber Street, Warwick, RI 02886; telephone:
(401)734-9600; fax:
(401)734-9700 *Council address* : New England Fishery Management Council, 50 Water Street, Mill 2, Newburyport, MA 01950. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Paul J. Howard, Executive Director, New England Fishery Management Council; telephone:
(978)465-0492. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The committee will review public scoping comments on Amendment 15 and begin development of alternatives. The scoping issues included: implementation of annual catch limits (ACLs); measures to rationalize the limited access scallop fishery; revision of the overfishing definition; modifications to specific aspects of the general category limited entry program implemented by Amendment 11; measures to address essential fish habitat
(EFH)closed areas in the Scallop Fishery Management Plan
(FMP)if the EFH Omnibus Amendment is delayed; alternatives to improve the research set-aside program and modifying the start date of the scallop fishing year. Other issues may also be discussed based on input from scoping. The committee will also review Section 7 Endangered Species Act Consultation for the Scallop FMP (Biological Opinion) and discuss potential management implications. The committee may discuss other topics at their discretion. Although non-emergency issues not contained in this agenda may come before this group for discussion, those issues may not be the subject of formal action during this meeting. Action will be restricted to those issues specifically identified in this notice and any issues arising after publication of this notice that require emergency action under section 305(c) of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act, provided the public has been notified of the Council's intent to take final action to address the emergency. Special Accommodations This meeting is physically accessible to people with disabilities. Requests for sign language interpretation or other auxiliary aids should be directed to Paul J. Howard, Executive Director, at
(978)465-0492, at least 5 days prior to the meeting date. Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 *et seq.* Dated: June 18, 2008. Tracey L. Thompson, Acting Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service. [FR Doc. E8-14066 Filed 6-20-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-22-S DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration RIN: 0648-XI56 New England Fishery Management Council; Public Meeting AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce. ACTION: Notice of a public meeting. SUMMARY: The New England Fishery Management Council (Council) is scheduling a public meeting of its Scientific and Statistical Committee on July 10, 2008 to consider actions affecting New England fisheries in the exclusive economic zone (EEZ). Recommendations from this group will be brought to the full Council for formal consideration and action, if appropriate. DATES: This meeting will be held on Thursday, July 10, 2008, at 8:30 a.m. ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at the Gulf of Maine Research Institute, 350 Commercial Street, Portland, ME 04101; telephone:
(207)772-2321; fax:
(207)772-6855. *Council address* : New England Fishery Management Council, 50 Water Street, Mill 2, Newburyport, MA 01950. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Paul J. Howard, Executive Director, New England Fishery Management Council; telephone:
(978)465-0492. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In addition to electing a Chairman and Vice Chairman, the Science and Statistical Committee
(SSC)will:
(1)review and develop comments on the NMFS proposed rule that addresses requirements for annual catch limits and accountability measures;
(2)as part of Amendment 16 to the Council's Northeast Multispecies (Groundfish) Fishery Management Plan, review a proposed process for setting northeast multispecies overfishing levels, acceptable biological catch and annual catch limits;
(3)review Groundfish Plan Development Team guidance for evaluating uncertainty when setting annual catch limits, and; 4) review analytic techniques for estimating the economic impacts of groundfish management actions. Although non-emergency issues not contained in this agenda may come before this group for discussion, those issues may not be the subject of formal action during this meeting. Action will be restricted to those issues specifically listed in this notice and any issues arising after publication of this notice that require emergency action under section 305(c) of the Magnuson-Stevens Act, provided the public has been notified of the Council's intent to take final action to address the emergency. Special Accommodations This meeting is physically accessible to people with disabilities. Requests for sign language interpretation or other auxiliary aids should be directed to Paul J. Howard, Executive Director, at
(978)465-0492, at least 5 days prior to the meeting date. Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 *et seq.* Dated: June 18, 2008. Tracey L. Thompson, Acting Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service. [FR Doc. E8-14069 Filed 6-20-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-22-S DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration RIN: 0648-XI57 New England Fishery Management Council; Public Meeting AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce. ACTION: Notice of a public meeting. SUMMARY: The New England Fishery Management Council (Council) is scheduling a public meeting of its Habitat/MPA/Ecosystem Committee, in July, 2008, to consider actions affecting New England fisheries in the exclusive economic zone (EEZ). Recommendations from this group will be brought to the full Council for formal consideration and action, if appropriate. DATES: This meeting will be held on Thursday, July 10, 2008, at 9:30 a.m. ADDRESSES: This meeting will be held at the Holiday Inn, 30 Hampshire Street, Mansfield, MA 02048; telephone:
(508)339-2200; fax:
(508)339-1040. *Council address* : New England Fishery Management Council, 50 Water Street, Mill 2, Newburyport, MA 01950. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Paul J. Howard, Executive Director, New England Fishery Management Council; telephone:
(978)465-0492. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Committee will review the Vulnerability Assessment being developed by the Habitat Plan Development Team to assist the Council in determining appropriate measures (if any) for minimizing the adverse impacts of fishing on essential fish habitat to the extent practicable in the Omnibus Habitat Amendment 2. The Committee may also consider other topics at their discretion. Although non-emergency issues not contained in this agenda may come before this group for discussion, those issues may not be the subject of formal action during this meeting. Action will be restricted to those issues specifically listed in this notice and any issues arising after publication of this notice that require emergency action under section 305(c) of the Magnuson-Stevens Act, provided the public has been notified of the Council's intent to take final action to address the emergency. Special Accommodations This meeting is physically accessible to people with disabilities. Requests for sign language interpretation or other auxiliary aids should be directed to Paul J. Howard, Executive Director, at
(978)465-0492, at least 5 days prior to the meeting date. Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 *et seq.* Dated: June 18, 2008. Tracey L. Thompson, Acting Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service. [FR Doc. E8-14070 Filed 6-20-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-22-S DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration RIN: 0648-XI59 Fisheries of the South Atlantic; South Atlantic Fishery Management Council; Public Meeting AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce. ACTION: Notice of a public meeting. SUMMARY: The South Atlantic Fishery Management Council (Council) will hold a meeting of its Allocation Committee in North Charleston, SC. DATES: The meeting will take place July 8-9, 2008. See SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION for specific dates and times. ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at Southern Wesleyan University, Classroom 6, 4055 Faber Place Drive, Suite 301, North Charleston, SC 29406. *Council address* : South Atlantic Fishery Management Council, 4055 Faber Place Drive, Suite 201, North Charleston, SC 29405. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kim Iverson, Public Information Officer; telephone:
(843)571-4366 or toll free
(866)SAFMC-10; fax:
(843)769-4520; email: *kim.iverson@safmc.net* . SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Allocation Committee meeting will take place from 8:30 a.m. - 5 p.m. on July 8, 2008, and from 8 a.m. - 12 noon on July 9, 2008. The Committee will identify allocation alternatives for species addressed in Amendment 17 to the Snapper Grouper Fishery Management Plan, currently under development by the Council. Amendment 17 establishes Annual Catch Limits and Accountability Measures for 10 species in the snapper grouper management unit currently undergoing overfishing. The allocation alternatives will be presented to the Council's Snapper Grouper Committee for consideration during the Council meeting week, September 15-19, 2008, in Charleston, SC. Although non-emergency issues not contained in this agenda may come before this group for discussion, those issues may not be the subject of formal action during this meeting. Action will be restricted to those issues specifically identified in this notice and any issues arising after publication of this notice that require emergency action under section 305(c) of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act, provided the public has been notified of the Council's intent to take final action to address the emergency. Special Accommodations This meeting is physically accessible to people with disabilities. Requests for auxiliary aids should be directed to the Council office (see ADDRESSES ) 3 days prior to the meetings. Note: The times and sequence specified in this agenda are subject to change. Dated: June 18, 2008. Tracey L. Thompson, Acting Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service. [FR Doc. E8-14071 Filed 6-20-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-22-S DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration RIN: 0648-XI54 Western Pacific Fishery Management Council; Public Meeting AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce. ACTION: Notice of a public meeting. SUMMARY: This notice advises the public that the Western Pacific Fishery Management Council (Council) will convene a meeting of the Mariana Archipelago Plan Team in Mangilao, Guam. DATES: The Mariana Archipelago Plan Team meeting will be held Tuesday July 8, 2008 through Thursday July 10, 2008. For specific dates, times, and agenda items for the meeting, see SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION . ADDRESSES: The meeting of the Mariana Archipelago Plan Team will be held at the Guam Department of Agriculture Conference Room, 192 Dairy Road, Mangilao, Guam 96923. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kitty M. Simonds, Executive Director; telephone:
(808)522-8220. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The date, time and agenda for the Mariana Archipelago Plan Team meeting are as follows: Tuesday, July 8, 2008, 9 a.m. - 5 p.m. 1. Introductions 2. Approval of Draft Agenda 3. Plan Team Organizational Structure 4. Report of the March 2008 Plan Team Meeting 5. Bottomfish Annual Report Module a. Guam b. CNMI Wednesday, July 9, 2008, 9 a.m. - 5 p.m. 6. Bottomfish Annual Report Module (continued) a. Guam b. CNMI 7. Coral Reef Ecosystem Annual Report Module a. Guam b. CNMI Thursday, July 10, 2008, 9 a.m. - 5 p.m. 8. Coral Reef Ecosystem Annual Report Module (continued) a. Guam b. CNMI 9. Update on Coral Reef Fishing Local Action Strategy a. Guam b. CNMI 10. Other Business The order in which agenda items are addressed may change. Public comment periods will be provided throughout each day's agenda. The Plan Team will meet as late as necessary to complete scheduled business. Although non-emergency issues not contained in this agenda may come before this group for discussion, those issues may not be the subject of formal action during this meeting. Action will be restricted to those issues specifically identified in this notice and any issues arising after publication of this notice that require emergency action under section 305(c) of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act, provided the public has been notified of the Council's intent to take final action to address the emergency. Special Accommodations This meeting is physically accessible to people with disabilities. Requests for sign language interpretation or other auxiliary aids should be directed to Kitty M. Simonds,
(808)522-8220 (voice) or
(808)522-8226 (fax), at least 5 days prior to the meeting date. Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 *et seq.* Dated: June 18, 2008. Tracey L. Thompson, Acting Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service. [FR Doc. E8-14067 Filed 6-20-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-22-S DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE Office of the Secretary Reserve Forces Policy Board
(RFPB)Meetings AGENCY: Department of Defense; Office of the Secretary of Defense Reserve Forces Policy Board. ACTION: Notice of Advisory Committee Meeting. SUMMARY: Pursuant to the Federal Advisory Committee Act of 1972 (5 U.S.C., Appendix, as amended), the Sunshine in the Government Act of 1976 (5 U.S.C. 552b, as amended), and 41 CFR 102-3.150, the Department of Defense announces the following meetings of the Reserve Forces Policy Board (RFPB). DATES: July 29, 2008 (8 a.m. to 4:30 p.m.) and July 30, 2008 (8 a.m. to 3 p.m.). ADDRESSES: Meeting addresses are (7/29/08) Department of Homeland Security, 3801 Nebraska Ave., Washington, DC 20393 and (7/30/08) Pentagon, Conference Room TBA, Arlington, VA. Mailing address is Reserve Forces Policy Board, 7300 Defense Pentagon, Washington, DC 20301-7300. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Col Marjorie Davis, Designated Federal Officer,
(703)697-4486 (Voice),
(703)614-0504 (Facsimile), *marjorie.davis@osd.mil.* Mailing address is Reserve Forces Policy Board, 7300 Defense Pentagon, Washington, DC 20301-7300. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: *Purpose of the Meeting:* An open quarterly meeting of the Reserve Forces Policy Board. *Agenda:* Discussion of homeland security and other issues relevant to the Reserve Components. *Meeting Accessibility:* Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552b, as amended, and 41 CFR 102-3.140 through 102-3.165, and the availability of space, this meeting is open to the public. To request a seat, contact the DFO not later than 7/1/08 at 703-697-4486, or by e-mail, *marjorie.davis@osd.mil* and/or *donald.ahern@osd.mil* . *Written Statements:* Pursuant to 41 CFR 102-3.105(j) and 102-3.140, the public or interested organizations may submit written statements to the membership of the Reserve Forces Policy Board at any time or in response to the stated agenda of a planned meeting. Written statements should be submitted to the Reserve Forces Policy Board's Designated Federal Officer. The Designated Federal Officer's contact information can be obtained from the GSA's FACA Database— *https://www.fido.gov/facadatabase/public.asp* . Written statements that do not pertain to a scheduled meeting of the Reserve Forces Policy Board may be submitted at any time. However, if individual comments pertain to a specific topic being discussed at a planned meeting then these statements must be submitted no later than five business days prior to the meeting in question. The Designated Federal Officer will review all submitted written statements and provide copies to all the committee members. Dated: June 17, 2008. Patricia L. Toppings, OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, Department of Defense. [FR Doc. 08-1378 Filed 6-19-08; 11:42 am]
Connectionstraces to 55
Traces to 55 documents
U.S. Code
CFR
42 references not yet in our index
  • 12 CFR 303
  • 43 F.3d 869
  • 757 F.2d 453
  • 396 U.S. 122
  • Pub. L. 106-102
  • 113 Stat. 1338
  • 15 USC 1601-1607
  • 19 CFR 122
  • Pub. L. 98-573
  • Pub. L. 107-296
  • 5 USC 801-808
  • 21 CFR 510
  • 21 CFR 520
  • 21 CFR 558
  • 5 USC 601-612
  • Pub. L. 104-4
  • 33 CFR 100
  • 33 CFR 165
  • Pub. L. 104-121
  • 44 USC 3501-3520
  • 2 USC 1531-1538
  • 42 USC 4321-4370f
  • 33 USC 1225
  • Pub. L. 107-295
  • Pub. L. 109-163
  • 5 CFR 1320.3(c)
  • 5 CFR 295
  • 340 U.S. 462
  • 5 CFR 294
  • 5 CFR 731
  • EO 10577
  • 5 CFR 731.104
  • 5 CFR 731.202
  • 5 CFR 302.203
  • 5 CFR 732
  • 5 CFR 731.106
  • 5 CFR 731.101
  • 5 CFR 731.206
  • 14 CFR 39
  • 40 CFR 82
+ 2 more
Citation graph
cites case law
Unknown
Interim final rule and request for comment
U.S.C.§ 1828
U.S.C.§ 1813
C.F.R.§ 303.41
C.F.R.§ 7.1021
U.S.C.§ 553
U.S.C.§ 603
U.S.C.§ 604
U.S.C.§ 3501
U.S.C.§ 378
F. App'x43 F.3d 869
F. App'x757 F.2d 453
SCOTUS396 U.S. 122
Cites 97 · 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.