issue-1996-07-17•Federal Register final rules — 1996-07-17
Federal Register final rules — 1996-07-17
issue-1996-07-17Federal Register final rules — 1996-07-17Regulation
Published Federal Register documents, not public-inspection drafts. The GPO XML/text rendition is a research aid; the linked complete official PDF retains the printed layout and all graphics. Graphics are retained in that PDF and are not independently reproduced in this text rendition. Publication does not establish that every provision remains legally in force.
FR Doc. 96-18123 Magnuson Act Provisions; Consolidation and Update of Regulations
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 138 (Wednesday, July 17, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 37224-37225]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-18123]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 37225]]
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
50 CFR Part 600
[Docket No. 960315081-6160-02; I.D. 030596B]
RIN 0648-AI17
Magnuson Act Provisions; Consolidation and Update of Regulations
AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.
ACTION: Correction to final regulations.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This document contains a correction to the final regulations
(I.D. 030596B), which were published Monday, June 24, 1996, (61 FR
32538). The regulations contain general provisions under the Magnuson
Fishery Conservation and Management Act (Magnuson Act).
EFFECTIVE DATE: July 1, 1996.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tom Meyer, 301-713-2339.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
The final regulations that are the subject of this correction,
consolidate nine CFR parts into one part that contains general
provisions under the Magnuson Act.
Need for Correction
As published, the final regulations contain a typographical error
in a reference, which prevents the enforcement of regulations by
authorized officers in the southeast region.
Correction of Publication
Accordingly, the publication on June 24, 1996, of the final
regulation (I.D. 030596B), which were the subject of FR Doc. 96-15767,
is corrected as follows:
Sec. 600.730 [Corrected]
On page 32574, in the first column, in Sec. 600.730, paragraph (a),
on line three the number ``625'' is corrected to read ``622''.
Dated: July 12, 1996.
Gary Matlock,
Program Management Officer, National Marine Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. 96-18123 Filed 7-16-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-F
Complete official Federal Register PDF
FR Doc. 96-18114 Security Zone; San Diego Bay, San Diego, CA
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 138 (Wednesday, July 17, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 37211-37213]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-18114]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
33 CFR Part 165
[COTP San Diego 96-002]
RIN 2115-AA97
Security Zone; San Diego Bay, San Diego, CA
AGENCY: Coast Guard, DOT.
[[Page 37212]]
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: At the request of the U.S. Secret Service, the Coast Guard is
establishing a temporary security zone within San Diego Bay adjacent to
the San Diego Convention Center. The security zone is needed to protect
those attending the Republican National Convention by securing the
nearby Marriott Marina and any adjacent vessels, waterfront facilities,
or waters. Authorized vessels will be permitted to remain within the
security zone.
EFFECTIVE DATES: This rule is in effect from 8 a.m. Pacific Daylight
Time (PDT) on August 11, 1996 until 11 p.m. PDT on August 15, 1996.
ADDRESSES: Copies of documents referenced in this rulemaking are
available for inspection or copying at Marine Safety Office San Diego,
2716 N. Harbor Dr., San Diego, California between 8 a.m. and 3 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lieutenant (j.g.) John V. Reinert,
Marine Safety Office San Diego, (619) 683-6486.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Regulatory History
On May 23, 1996 the Coast Guard published a Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking (NPRM) entitled ``Security Zone; San Diego Bay, San Diego,
CA'' (COTP San Diego, CA'' (COTP San Diego 96-002) in the Federal
Register (61 FR 25838). The Captain of the Port (COTP) held public
meetings on June 1 and July 2, 1996 on the proposal. Twelve people made
comments at the public meetings, and 23 written comments were submitted
prior to the closure of the comment period on July 8, 1996. Copies of
the comments and a videotape of the public meetings are available for
inspection or copying at the location indicated under ADDRESSES.
Discussion of Comments and Changes
The Coast Guard received 29 comments from individuals, 6 comments
from small businesses, and two comments from organizations concerning
the proposal.
Nine commenters questioned the legal authority of the COTP to
perform searches of vessels within the security zone. The establishment
of marine security zones is authorized by 50 U.S.C. 191. Through 33
U.S.C. 1223, 1225, and 1226, the Coast Guard is authorized to take
measures, including the establishment of security zones, to protect
vessels, harbors, and waterfront facilities. The authority to establish
and enforce these security zones has been delegated to the COTP under
33 CFR Parts 6 and 165. Under 33 CFR Part 6, the COTP may utilize this
security zone authority to regulate navigation and other activities,
and limit access to defined areas by conditioning entry or presence in
the zone on receiving the permission of the COTP. When a security zone
is established, vessels entering or remaining in the zone are doing so
with the permission of the COTP. The COTP has determined that the
Republican National Convention presents a security need for a search of
vessels and facilities within this security zone in order to detect
explosives, weapons, or other articles which may pose a threat to the
Marriott Marina or any adjacent vessels, waterfront facilities, or
waters. Under this rule, permission by the COTP for vessels to enter or
remain in the security zone is conditioned upon consent to such a
search. Vessel owners electing not to give consent for a search will
not be granted permission to enter or remain in the security zone, once
it is established.
Thirty-four comments were received regarding the proposed
limitation on access to docks and vessels within the security zone
between the hours of 10 p.m. and 8 a.m. In light of the comments
received and a change in the event security plan by the U.S. Secret
Service, the COTP has removed this item from the Final Rule.
Seventeen comments were received regarding the proposed limitation
on access to the docks and restriction on vessel movements from 2 p.m.
until 11 p.m. on 15 August. In light of the comments received and a
change in the event security plan by the U.S. Secret Service, the COTP
has removed this item from the Final Rule.
Several comments were received concerning the proposed requirement
that a vessel owner or operator provide the COTP a list of names of all
individuals transiting the security zone, prior to transiting the zone.
In light of the comments received and a change in the event security
plan by the U.S. Secret Service, the COTP has removed this item from
the Final Rule.
Several questions were received concerning operational enforcement
of the security zone, e.g., number of patrol boats involved, number of
Coast Guard personnel, and pay grades of personnel involved with
searches. Security considerations preclude publicizing Coast Guard
enforcement resource information before and during the effective period
of the security zone. Access to agency records regarding resources
utilized may be requested after August 15, 1996 by writing to the
address under ADDRESSES.
Discussion of Regulations
The Republican National Convention will be held at the San Diego
Convention Center in San Diego, CA from August 12 through 15, 1996. The
Secret Service has requested that the Coast Guard establish this
security zone to ensure the security of those attending the Republican
National Convention by securing the nearby Marriott Marina and any
adjacent vessels, waterfront facilities, and waters. Expected attendees
at the convention include former U.S. Presidents and their spouses,
high ranking U.S. Government officials, and the Republican Presidential
and Vice-Presidential Nominees and their spouses.
The security zone is in effect from 8 a.m. PDT on August 11, 1996
until 11 p.m. PDT on August 15, 1996. The security zone will encompass
the entrance to the Marriott Marina starting at a point along the
waterfront between Marriott Marina finger piers ``F'' and ``G'' at a
point 32 deg.42'26''N, 117 deg.09'56''W; extending southwesterly to the
south end of North Embarcadero Park at a point 32 deg.42'20''N,
117 deg.10'01''W; continuing 500 feet southwesterly toward channel buoy
``23'' at a point 32 deg.42'16''N, 117 deg.10'07''W; then extending
southeasterly following the South Embarcadero Park shoreline to a point
where it intersects with the easterly side of the navigable channel at
32 deg.42'13''N, 117 deg.10'02''W; then proceeding along the channel
edge 100 feet past the southernmost point of South Embarcadero Park to
a point 32 deg.42'09''N, 117 deg.09'50''W; then northeasterly until it
intersects with the shoreline at a point 32 deg.42'16''N,
117 deg.09'42''W; then along shoreline to the point of beginning.
Pursuant to the Coast Guard's authority in 33 U.S.C. 1223, 50
U.S.C. 191, and the general regulations governing security zones in 33
CFR 165.33 and 33 CFR 6.04, no vessel will be allowed to enter or
remain in this zone unless specifically authorized by the COTP. The
COTP may grant permission for a vessel to enter or remain within the
security zone if the vessel owner or operator first consents to a
search of the vessel by the U.S. Secret Service, the Coast Guard, or
other authorities for the purpose of detection of explosives, weapons,
or other articles which may pose a threat to the Marriott Marina or any
adjacent vessels, waterfront facilities, or waters. The owner or
operator of a vessel entering the security zone must also provide the
COTP with the number of persons on board and destination slip number.
[[Page 37213]]
Vessels whose owners or operators do not consent to a search of their
vessels or who refuse to provide any information requested by the COTP
will not be granted permission to enter or remain within the security
zone.
The COTP may grant permission for a vessel in the moorings at the
Marriott Marina to remain within the security zone if the owners or
operators consent to a search of the vessel. If a vessel leaves its
mooring and exits the security zone, its reentry will be conditioned on
consent to be searched.
The COTP, working with Secret Service and other law enforcement
authorities during this operation, may impose other restrictions within
the security zone if circumstances dictate. Restrictions imposed by the
COTP will be tailored to impose the least impact on maritime interests
while ensuring the security of the Marriott Marina and any adjacent
vessels, waterfront facilities, or waters.
Regulatory Evaluation
This rule is not a significant regulatory action under section 3(f)
of Executive Order 12866 and does not require an assessment of
potential costs and benefits under section 6(a)(3) of that Order. It
has been exempted from review by the Office of Management and Budget
under that Order. It is not significant under the regulatory policies
and procedures of the Department of Transportation (DOT) (44 FR 11040;
February 26, 1979). The Coast Guard expects the economic impact of this
rule to be so minimal that a full Regulatory Evaluation under paragraph
10(e) of the regulatory policies and procedures of DOT is unnecessary.
Small Entities
Under 5 U.S.C. 601 et seq., known as the Regulatory Flexibility
Act, the Coast Guard considered whether this rule will have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
``Small Entities'' include independently owned and operated small
businesses that are not dominant in their field and that otherwise
qualify as ``small business concerns'' under section 3 of the Small
Business Act (15 U.S.C. 632). The COTP will allow vessels in the
Marriott Marina to remain at their moorings while the security zone is
in place, subject to the conditions discussed previously. Costs
incurred by vessel owners and commercial entities within the security
zone are expected to be minimal. Any such costs are greatly outweighed
by the need to safeguard the security of the attendees at the
convention. Since the impact of this rule is expected to be minimal,
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.
Collection of Information
This rule contains no collection of information requirements under
the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).
Federalism Assessment
This action has been analyzed in accordance with the principles and
criteria contained in Executive Order 12612, and this rule does not
have sufficient federalism implications to warrant the preparation of a
Federalism Assessment.
Environmental Assessment
This rule has been thoroughly reviewed by the Coast Guard and
determined to be categorically excluded from further environmental
documentation in accordance with section 2.B.2.c of Commandant
Instruction M16475.1B, as revised in 59 FR 38654, July 29, 1994. A
Categorical Exclusion Determination and Environmental Analysis
Checklist are included in the docket and is available for inspection
and copying at the address listed under ADDRESSES.
List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165
Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation (water), Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Security measures, Waterways.
Final Regulations
In consideration of the foregoing, Part 165 of Title 33, Code of
Federal Regulations, is amended as follows:
PART 165--[AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for Part 165 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1231; 50 U.S.C. 191: 33 CFR 1.05-1(g),
6.04-1, 6.04-6 and 160.5; 49 CFR 1.46.
2. A new section 165.T11-030 is added to read as follows:
Sec. 165.T11-030 Security Zone; San Diego Bay, San Diego, CA.
(a) Location. The following area is a security zone: the water and
land area adjacent to the San Diego Convention Center, San Diego, CA,
described as follows:
Beginning at 32 deg.42'26''N, 117 deg.09'56''W; then southwest to
32 deg.42'20''N, 117 deg.10'01''W; then southwest to 32 deg.42'16''N,
117 deg.10'07''W; then southeast to the outer channel line to
32 deg.42'13''N, 117 deg.10'02''W; then continuing along the outer
channel line to 32 deg.42'09''N, 117 deg.09'50''W; then northeast to
point of land at 32 deg.42'16''N, 117 deg.09'42''W; then along the
shoreline to the point of beginning. Datum: NAD 83).
(b) Effective dates. This section is effective from 8 a.m. PDT on
August 11, 1996 until 11 p.m. PDT on August 15, 1996.
(c) Regulations.
(1) In accordance with the general regulations in Sec. 165.33 of
this part, entry into this zone is prohibited except as authorized by
the Captain of the Port.
(2) The Captain of the Port may grant permission for a vessel to
enter or remain within the security zone if the owners or operators
consent to a search of their vessel for the purpose of locating
explosives, weapons, or other articles or things which could pose a
threat to the security of the Marriott Marina, adjacent vessels,
waterfront facilities, or waters.
(3) All persons and vessels within the security zone shall comply
with the instructions of the Coast Guard Captain of the Port or the
designated on scene patrol personnel. Upon being hailed via siren,
radio, flashing light, or other means, the operator of a vessel shall
follow the instructions of the patrol personnel.
(4) The Captain of the Port will notify the public of the status of
this security zone by Marine Safety Radio Broadcast on VHF Marine Band
Radio, Channel 22 (157.1 MHz).
Dated: July 9, 1996.
J.A. Watson,
Commander, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port, San Diego.
[FR Doc. 96-18114 Filed 7-16-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-14-M
Complete official Federal Register PDF
FR Doc. 96-18113 Temporary Deviation; Isle of Wight Bay Drawbridge, Ocean City, MD
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 138 (Wednesday, July 17, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 37211]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-18113]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 117
[CGD05-96-043]
Temporary Deviation; Isle of Wight Bay Drawbridge, Ocean City, MD
AGENCY: Coast Guard, DOT.
ACTION: Notice of temporary deviation; request for comments.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: At the request of the Maryland Department of Transportation
(MDOT), Commander, Fifth Coast Guard District has approved a temporary
deviation from the regulations that govern the operation of the Route
50 drawbridge across Isle of Wight Bay, mile 0.5, located in Ocean
City, Maryland. This temporary deviation will test the effects of
restricted drawbridge openings for all vessels each Saturday between
July 13 through August 31, 1996, between the hours of 1 p.m. to 5 p.m.
During these times, the bridge need open only on the hour, and must
remain in the open position until all waiting vessels pass. All other
provisions of the existing regulation for the Route 50 bridge remain
the same. This test is intended to help the Coast Guard determine if a
permanent change to the regulations would reduce motor vehicle traffic
delays and congestion related to summer traffic entering and exiting
the town of Ocean City, while still providing for the reasonable needs
of navigation.
EFFECTIVE DATES: This deviation is effective from July 13 through
August 31, 1996. Comments must be received before September 30, 1996.
ADDRESSES: Comments should be mailed or delivered to Commander (Aowb),
US Coast Guard Atlantic Area, 4th Floor Federal Bldg., 431 Crawford
Street, Portsmouth, Virginia 23704-5004.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Ann B. Deaton, Bridge
Administrator, Fifth Coast Guard District, at 757-398-6222.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Request for Comments
The Coast Guard encourages interested persons to comment on this
temporary deviation by submitting written data, views, or arguments.
Persons submitting comments should include their names and addresses,
identify this notice of temporary deviation (CGD05-96-043) and the
specific section of this deviation to which each comment applies, and
give the reason for each comment. The Coast Guard requests that all
comments and attachments be submitted in an unbound format suitable for
copying and electronic filing. If not practical, a second copy of any
bound material is requested. Persons wanting acknowledgment of receipt
of comments should enclose a stamped self-addressed postcard or
envelop.
The Coast Guard will consider all comments received during the
comment period when determining whether to propose a permanent change
to the regulation.
The Coast Guard plans no public hearing. Persons may request a
public hearing by writing to the Commander (Aowb) at the address under
ADDRESSES. The request should include reasons why a hearing would be
beneficial. If it determines that the opportunity for oral
presentations will aid any future proposed rulemaking, the Coast Guard
will hold a public hearing at a time and place announced by a later
notice in the Federal Register.
Background and Purpose
The Maryland Department of Transportation (MDOT) has requested a
deviation from the requirements of 33 CFR 117.559 to test the effects
of reduced opening periods during which the Route 50 drawbridge opens
for marine traffic on Saturday afternoons during the summer months.
Section 117.559 requires the Isle of Wight Bay Route 50 bridge to open
at 25 minutes and 55 minutes after the hour for a maximum of 5 minutes
from 9:25 a.m. to 9:55 p.m. from May 25 through September 15. MDOT's
request is based on a large number of vacationers traveling to and from
Ocean City on Saturday afternoons during the tourist season (summer
months). Vacationers check in and out of hotels on Ocean City Island
every Saturday afternoon of the season. This creates a traffic surge of
vehicles entering and exiting the island with only two highway bridges
(Route 50 and Route 90) available for access. The Route 90 bridge is a
fixed-span structure, and the Route 50 bridge is a drawbridge. Over 350
charter boats historically pass through the Route 50 drawbridge on
Saturdays from July 15 through September 15. This produces a dilemma to
both waterway users and vehicular traffic trying to access the same
drawbridge. MDOT proposes that, by providing only hourly openings on
Saturday afternoons as opposed to the current half-hourly openings,
vehicular traffic congestion on U.S. 50 will be reduced and highway
safety will be increased. This test is intended to provide information
needed to determine whether the Coast Guard should propose a permanent
change to the regulation to better balance the needs of both waterway
users and vehicular traffic.
Based on the above information, Commander, Fifth Coast Guard
District has approved a temporary deviation from the requirements of 33
CFR 117.559 from July 13, 1996 through August 31, 1996. This temporary
deviation will require the drawbridge to open only on the hour from 1
p.m. to 5 p.m. for waiting vessels on each Saturday from July 13
through August 31, 1996. When the bridge is opened, it will remain in
the open position until all waiting vessels pass. The provisions of 33
CFR 117.31 which provide for the passage on signal for Federal, State
and local government vessels used for public safety; vessels in
distress where a delay would endanger life or property; commercial
vessels engaged in rescue or emergency salvage operations; and vessels
seeking shelter from severe weather will remain unchanged.
The terms of the approved temporary deviation are as follows:
The draw of the US 50 bridge, mile 0.5, located in Ocean City,
Maryland, shall open according to 117.559 except from July 13, 1996
through August 31, 1996, on every Saturday, the bridge need open only
on the hour from 1 p.m. to 5 p.m. for any waiting vessels, and shall
remain in the open position until all waiting vessels pass. Vessels in
an emergency involving danger to life or property shall be passed at
any time.
Kent H. Williams,
Vice Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, Fifth Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. 96-18113 Filed 7-16-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-14-M
Complete official Federal Register PDF
FR Doc. 96-18105 Digital Phonorecord Delivery Rate Adjustment Proceeding
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 138 (Wednesday, July 17, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 37213-37216]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-18105]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
LIBRARY OF CONGRESS
Copyright Office
37 CFR Part 251
[Docket No. 96-4 CARP DPRA]
Digital Phonorecord Delivery Rate Adjustment Proceeding
AGENCY: Copyright Office, Library of Congress.
ACTION: Final regulations, notice of initiation of negotiation period.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Copyright Office is announcing the initiation of the
negotiation period for determining reasonable rates and terms for
digital transmissions that constitute a digital phonorecord delivery.
This negotiation period is mandated by the Digital
[[Page 37214]]
Performance Right in Sound Recordings Act of 1995 and is intended to
promote the private settlement of the rates and terms for digital
phonorecord delivery. In addition, the Office is adopting procedural
regulations implementing the Digital Performance Right in Sound Records
Act of 1995. The Office also solicits comments on the advisability of
consolidating the digital phonorecord delivery rate adjustment
proceeding with the physical phonorecord rate adjustment proceeding.
EFFECTIVE DATES: The regulations are effective August 16, 1996. The
negotiation period begins July 17, 1996 and ends December 31, 1996.
Comments on consolidation are due November 8, 1996. Petitions for rate
adjustment are due January 10, 1997.
ADDRESSES: Comments, copies of voluntary license agreements, and
petitions, when sent by mail should be addressed to: Copyright
Arbitration Royalty Panel (CARP), P.O. Box 70977, Southwest Station,
Washington, D.C. 20024. Comments, copies of voluntary license
agreements, and petitions, when hand delivered, should be brought to:
Office of the General Counsel, Copyright Office, James Madison Memorial
Building, Room LM-407, First and Independence Avenue, SE., Washington,
DC.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Marilyn J. Kretsinger, Acting General Counsel, or William Roberts,
Senior Attorney, Copyright Arbitration Royalty Panel, P.O. Box 70977,
Southwest Station, Washington, DC 20024, (202) 707-8380.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
On November 1, 1995, Congress passed the Digital Performance Right
in Sound Recordings Act of 1995 (``Digital Performance Act''). Public
Law 104-39, 109 Stat. 336. Among other things, it confirms and
clarifies that the scope of the compulsory license to make and
distribute phonorecords of nondramatic musical compositions includes
digital transmissions which constitute ``digital phonorecord
deliveries.'' 17 U.S.C. 115(c)(3). A ``digital phonorecord delivery''
is each individual delivery of a phonorecord by digital transmission of
a sound recording which results in a specifically identifiable
reproduction by or for any transmission recipient. 17 U.S.C. 115(d), 37
CFR 255.4.
The Digital Performance Act also provides that the rate for all
digital phonorecord deliveries made or authorized under a compulsory
license on or before December 31, 1997, shall be the same as the rate
in effect for the making and distribution of physical phonorecords.
Accordingly, the Copyright Office and the Library of Congress amended
part 255 of the Copyright Office's rules to set the rate for digital
phonorecord deliveries at 6.95 cents for each work embodied in a
phonorecord, or 1.3 cents per minute of playing time or fraction
thereof, whichever amount is larger. 60 FR 61655 (December 1, 1995); 37
CFR 255.5. This is the same rate that applies to the manufacture and
distribution of physical phonorecords.
This Rate Adjustment Proceeding
The current rate for digital phonorecord deliveries expires
December 31, 1997. Accordingly, in the Digital Performance Act,
Congress established a two-step process for adjusting the royalty rate:
a negotiation period during the second half of 1996 wherein the owners
and the users attempt to reach their own voluntary licenses, and the,
if necessary, and upon petition in 1997, the convening of a copyright
arbitration panel (CARP) to establish rates and terms for those persons
who are not covered by such voluntary licenses. 17 U.S.C. 115(c)(3)(C)
and (D).
For the first step in the process, the negotiation period, the
Digital Performance Act provides that during the period of June 30,
1996, through December 31, 1996, the Librarian of Congress shall cause
notice to be published in the Federal Register of the initiation of
voluntary negotiation proceedings for the purpose of determining
reasonable terms and rates for digital phonorecord deliveries. 17
U.S.C. 115(c)(3)(C).
The Digital Performance Act does not require the negotiation period
to begin on June 30, 1996, nor does it require that the negotiation
period be six months long. It is the Office's understanding that the
Act leaves the commencement and the length of the negotiation period to
the discretion of the Librarian.
Upon consideration, the Office believes that the negotiation period
should begin in July, 1996, and should conclude by December 31, 1996,
and that petitions to convene a CARP should be filed by January 10,
1997, for the following reason. The current rate for digital
phonorecord deliveries, by operation of law, is set to expire December
31, 1997. Should negotiations fail and the Librarian be petitioned to
convene a CARP, written direct cases would have to be filed by January
31, 1997, if the precontroversy period (three months), the arbitration
proceeding (six months) and the Librarian's review of the CARP's
decision (two moths) is to conclude by December 31, 1997. Otherwise,
there will be a lapse in time when no rates apply to digital
phonorecord deliveries.
Therefore, the following procedural dates shall apply:
From today's publication in the Federal Register to
December 31, 1996, there is established the voluntary negotiation
proceeding for determining reasonable terms and rates of royalty
payments for digital phonorecord deliveries. Such terms and rates shall
distinguish between (a) digital phonorecord deliveries where the
reproduction or distribution of a phonorecord is incidental to the
transmission which constitutes the digital phonorecord delivery, and
(b) digital phonorecord deliveries in general.
If negotiations are successful, any copyright owners of
nondramatic musical works and any persons entitled to obtain a
compulsory license for digital phonorecord deliveries may submit to the
Librarian of Congress licenses covering such activities. 17 U.S.C.
115(c)(3)(C).
In addition, if negotiations are successful, the Librarian
may, upon the request of the parties to the negotiation proceeding,
submit the agreed upon rates and terms to the public in a notice-and-
comment proceeding. The Librarian may adopt the rates and terms
embodied in the proposed settlement without convening a CARP, provided
that no opposing comment is received by the Librarian from a party with
an intent to participate in a CARP proceeding. 37 CFR 251.63(a). Such
petitions are to be filed by January 10, 1997.
If negotiations are not successful, petitions to convene a
CARP are to be filed by January 10, 1997.\1\ The petition shall detail
petitioner's interest in the royalty rate sufficiently to permit the
Librarian of Congress to determine whether the petitioner has a
``significant interest'' in the rate. The petition must also identify
the extent to which the petitioner's interest is shared by other owners
or users; owners or users with similar interests may file a joint
petition. 37 CFR 251.62.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Because the law requires petitions to be filed in 1997, and
because written direct cases must be filed by January 31, 1997, if
the proceeding is to conclude by December 31, 1997, the petitions
must be received by the Copyright Office by January 10, 1997.
Therefore, it is advisable for petitioners to deliver their
petitions to the Copyright Office. If petitions are mailed to the
CARP post office box, it is advisable that they be sent well in
advance.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Notices of Intent to Participate in a CARP proceeding to
adjust the rates and establish the terms of the digital
[[Page 37215]]
phonorecord delivery compulsory license are to be filed by January 17,
1997.
Written direct cases in the CARP proceeding shall be filed
by January 31, 1997.
After the precontroversy discovery period, the Librarian
will initiate the CARP proceeding on May 1, 1997.
Relationship to Rate Adjustment Proceeding for Physical
Phonorecords
The year 1997 is also when the mechanical royalty rate for physical
phonorecords may be adjusted. This rate can be the same as, or
different from, the rate that applies to digital phonorecord
deliveries. While the rate for digital phonorecord deliveries expires,
by law, on December 31, 1997, and needs to be replaced, there is no
similar urgency to adjust the mechanical royalty rate for physical
phonorecords. If no rate adjustment proceeding for physical
phonorecords is concluded by December 31, 1997, the rate in existence
now will simply continue until such time as it is adjusted.
The question is still raised whether it wouldn't be more efficient
and less costly to have the same CARP panel, if one is to be convened,
consider the mechanical royalty rates for both physical phonorecords
and digital phonorecord deliveries. To consolidate such proceedings, it
would be necessary to have a petition to adjust the physical
phonorecord rate filed at the same time as the petition to adjust the
digital phonorecord deliveries rate, January 10, 1997.
However, to require petitions to be filed by January 10, 1997,
might deprive the interested copyright owners and users of time in 1997
to negotiate the rate. Therefore, the Office solicits comments on the
advisability of consolidating the two rate adjustment proceedings.
Comments are due by November 8, 1996. If the comments favor
consolidation, the Office will issue an order indicating that the two
proceedings will be consolidated. The order will also call for physical
phonorecord petitions to be filed by January 10, 1997, Notices of
Intent to Participate to be filed by January 17, 1997, written direct
cases to be filed by January 31, 1997, and list all other procedural
dates. The order will also cancel, because of time constraints, the 30-
day negotiation period that follows the filing of a physical
phonorecord petition set out in 37 CFR 251.63(a). The Librarian will
initiate the consolidated proceeding on May 1, 1997.
Amendment of CARP Rules to Reflect Passage of Digital Performance Act
In addition to expanding the scope of the mechanical compulsory
license to include digital phonorecord deliveries, the Digital
Performance Act also added a new compulsory license: the license for
qualifying subscription digital audio transmission services to perform
sound recordings. The rates and terms for both these licenses are to be
set by the CARP, if negotiations prove successful. Therefore, the
current CARP rules need to be amended to reflect these additional
responsibilities.
Section 553(b)(3)(A) of the Administrative Procedure Act states
that general notice of proposed rulemaking is not required for rules of
agency organization, procedure, or practice. Since the Office finds
that the following final regulations are rules of agency organization,
procedure, or practice, no notice of proposed rulemaking is required.
List of Subjects in 37 CFR Part 251
Administrative practice and procedure, Cable television, Copyright,
Jukeboxes, Organization and functions (government agencies),
Recordings, Satellites.
For the reasons set forth in the preamble, the Copyright Office and
the Library of Congress amend 37 CFR part 251 as follows:
PART 251--COPYRIGHT ARBITRATION ROYALTY PANEL RULES OF PROCEDURE
1. The authority citation for part 251 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 17 U.S.C. 801-803.
2. Section 251.2 is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 251.2 Purpose of Copyright Arbitration Royalty Panels.
The Librarian of Congress, upon the recommendation of the Register
of Copyrights, may appoint and convene a Copyright Arbitration Royalty
Panel (CARP) for the following purposes:
(a) To make determinations concerning royalty rates for the cable
compulsory license, 17 U.S.C. 111;
(b) To make determinations concerning royalty rates and terms for
the subscription digital audio transmissions compulsory license, 17
U.S.C. 114;
(c) To make determinations concerning royalty rates for making and
distributing phonorecords, and royalty rates and terms for digital
transmissions that constitute digital phonorecord deliveries, 17 U.S.C.
115;
(d) To make determinations concerning royalty rates for coin-
operated phonorecord players (jukeboxes) whenever a negotiated license
expires or is terminated and is not replaced by another such license
agreement, 17 U.S.C. 116;
(e) To make determinations concerning royalty rates and terms for
the use by noncommercial educational broadcast stations for certain
copyrighted works, 17 U.S.C. 118;
(f) To make determinations concerning royalty rates for the
satellite carrier compulsory license, 17 U.S.C. 119; and
(g) To make determinations concerning the distribution of cable and
satellite carrier royalty fees and digital audio recording devices and
media payments deposited with the Register of Copyrights, 17 U.S.C.
111, 119, and chapter 10, respectively.
3. Section 251.58(c) is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 251.58 Judicial review.
* * * * *
(c) The pendency of any appeal shall not relieve persons obligated
to make royalty payments under 17 U.S.C. 111, 114, 115, 116, 118, 119,
or 1003, and who would be affected by the determination on appeal, from
depositing statements of account and royalty fees by those sections.
4. The first sentence of Sec. 251.60 is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 251.60 Scope.
This subpart governs only those proceedings dealing with royalty
rate adjustments affecting cable (17 U.S.C. 111), subscription digital
audio transmission (17 U.S.C. 114), the manufacture and distribution of
phonorecords, including digital phonorecord deliveries (17 U.S.C. 115),
performances on coin-operated phonorecord players (jukeboxes) (17
U.S.C. 116), noncommercial educational broadcasting (17 U.S.C. 118) and
satellite carriers (17 U.S.C. 119). * * *
5. In Sec. 251.61, paragraph (a) is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 251.61 Commencement of adjustment proceedings.
(a) In the case of cable, subscription digital audio transmissions,
phonorecords, digital phonorecord deliveries, and coin-operated
phonorecord players (jukeboxes), rate adjustment proceedings shall
commence with the filing of a petition by an interested party according
to the following schedule:
(1) Cable: During 1995, and each subsequent fifth calendar year.
[[Page 37216]]
(2) Subscription Digital Audio Transmissions: During a 60-day
period prescribed by the Librarian in 1996, 2000, and each subsequent
fifth calendar year.
(3) Phonorecords: During 1997 and each subsequent tenth calendar
year.
(4) Digital Phonorecord Deliveries: During 1997 and each subsequent
fifth calendar year except to the extent that different years may be
determined by the parties to a negotiated settlement or by the
copyright arbitration royalty panel.
(5) Coin-operated phonorecord players (jukeboxes): Within one year
of the expiration or termination of a negotiated license authorized by
17 U.S.C. 116.
* * * * *
6. In Sec. 251.62, the first sentence of paragraph (a) is revised
to read as follows:
Sec. 251.62 Content of petition.
(a) In the case of a petition for rate adjustment proceedings for
cable, subscription digital audio transmissions, phonorecords, digital
phonorecord deliveries,and coin-operated phonorecord players
(jukeboxes), the petition shall detail the petitioner's interest in the
royalty rate sufficiently to permit the Librarian of Congress to
determine whether the petitioner has a ``significant interest'' in the
matter. * * *
* * * * *
7. In Sec. 251.63, the first sentence of paragraph (a) is revised
to read as follows:
Sec. 251.63 Consideration of petition; settlements.
(a) To allow time for the parties to settle their differences
concerning cable, phonorecord, and jukebox rate adjustments, the
Librarian of Congress shall, after the filing of the petition under
Sec. 251.62 and before the 45-day period specified in
Sec. 251.45(b)(2)(i), designate a 30-day period for consideration of
their settlement. * * *
* * * * *
Dated: July 12, 1996.
Recommended by:
Marybeth Peters,
Register of Copyrights.
Approved by:
James H. Billington,
The Librarian of Congress.
[FR Doc. 96-18105 Filed 7-16-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 1410-33-M
Complete official Federal Register PDF
FR Doc. 96-18090 Removal of Obsolete Regulations
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 138 (Wednesday, July 17, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 37199]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-18090]
========================================================================
Rules and Regulations
Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains regulatory documents
having general applicability and legal effect, most of which are keyed
to and codified in the Code of Federal Regulations, which is published
under 50 titles pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 1510.
The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by the Superintendent of Documents.
Prices of new books are listed in the first FEDERAL REGISTER issue of each
week.
========================================================================
Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 138 / Wednesday, July 17, 1996 /
Rules and Regulations
[[Page 37199]]
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Office of the Secretary
7 CFR Part 16
Removal of Obsolete Regulations
AGENCY: Office of the Secretary, USDA.
ACTION: Final rule; removal of part.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Department of Agriculture is removing Part 16--Limitation
on Imports of Meat, from Title 7 of the Code of Federal Regulations
since this part is obsolete.
EFFECTIVE DATE: July 17, 1996.
ADDRESSES: Comments should be addressed to the Director, Dairy,
Livestock and Poultry Division, Foreign Agricultural Service, U.S.
Department of Agriculture, Room 6616-S, 14th and Independence Ave.,
S.W., Washington, D.C. 20250. All comments will be available for public
inspection in room 6621-S at the above address.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Lisa Hardy-Bass, Livestock Group Leader, Dairy, Livestock and Poultry
Division, Foreign Agricultural Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture,
Room 6621-S, 14th and Independence Ave., S.W., Washington, D.C. 20250.
Telephone: (202) 720-7217.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Executive Order 12866
This rule is issued in conformance with Executive Order 12866. It
has been determined to be neither significant nor economically
significant for the purposes of E.O. 12866 and, therefore, has not been
reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget.
Regulatory Flexibility Act
It has been determined that the Regulatory Flexibility Act is not
applicable to this rule since the Office of the Secretary is not
required by 5 U.S.C. 553 or any other provision of law to publish a
notice of proposed rulemaking with respect to the subject matter of
this rule.
Executive Order 12372
This program is not subject to the provisions of Executive Order
12372, which requires intergovernmental consultation with State and
local officials. See notice related to 7 CFR part 3015, subpart V,
published at 48 FR 29115 (June 24, 1983).
Environmental Evaluation
It has been determined by an environmental evaluation that this
action will not have a significant impact on the quality of the human
environment. Therefore, neither an Environmental Assessment nor an
Environmental Impact Statement is needed.
Executive Order 12778
This rule has been reviewed under Executive Order 12778. The
provisions of this rule are not retroactive and do not preempt state or
local laws.
Background
The Department of Agriculture is removing Part 16--Limitation on
Imports of Meat, from Title 7 of the Code of Federal Regulations since
it is obsolete. Section 403 of the Uruguay Round Agreements Act, P.L.
103-465, 108 Stat. 4959, repealed the Meat Import Act of 1979, as
amended (the Meat Import Act) (19 U.S.C. 2253 note), effective January
1, 1995. The Meat Import Act was the statutory authority for this part.
The Meat Import Act provided for the imposition of quotas on
certain meat articles if imports exceeded a specified quantity
determined according to a statutory formula. Under the Uruguay Round, a
system of tariff rate quotas replaced the absolute quotas that could
have been imposed pursuant to the Meat Import Act. Section 204 of the
Agricultural Act of 1956, 7 U.S.C. 1854, provides authority for the
President to negotiate voluntary restraint agreements on agricultural
commodities. This authority was used to negotiate agreements with the
principal meat exporting countries to limit their exports to the United
States so that the trigger level for quotas under the Meat Import Act
was not exceeded. These quantitative restrictions were then published
in this part. The Meat Import Act has now been repealed.
List of Subjects
7 CFR Part 16
Agriculture Department, Imports, Meat and meat products.
Accordingly, Part 16--Limitation on Imports of Meat is removed.
Issued at Washington, D.C. this 10th day of July 1996.
Dan Glickman,
Secretary of Agriculture.
[FR Doc. 96-18090 Filed 7-16-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-10-M
Complete official Federal Register PDF
FR Doc. 96-18080 Groundfish of the Gulf of Alaska; Northern Rockfish in the Western Gulf of Alaska
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 138 (Wednesday, July 17, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 37226]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-18080]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
50 CFR Part 679
[Docket No. 960129018-6018-01; I.D. 071096B]
Groundfish of the Gulf of Alaska; Northern Rockfish in the
Western Gulf of Alaska
AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.
ACTION: Closure.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: NMFS is prohibiting directed fishing for northern rockfish in
the Western Regulatory Area of the Gulf of Alaska (GOA). This action is
necessary to prevent exceeding the northern rockfish total allowable
catch (TAC) in this area.
EFFECTIVE DATE: 12 noon, Alaska local time (A.l.t.), July 11, 1996,
until 12 midnight, A.l.t., December 31, 1996.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mary Furuness, 907-586-7228.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The groundfish fishery in the GOA exclusive
economic zone is managed by NMFS according to the Fishery Management
Plan for Groundfish of the Gulf of Alaska (FMP) prepared by the North
Pacific Fishery Management Council under authority of the Magnuson
Fishery Conservation and Management Act. Fishing by U.S. vessels is
governed by regulations implementing the FMP at subpart H of 50 CFR
part 600 and 50 CFR parts 679.
The northern rockfish TAC for the Western Regulatory Area was
established by the Final 1996 Harvest Specifications of Groundfish (61
FR 4304, February 5, 1996) as 640 metric tons (mt). See
Sec. 679.20(c)(3)(ii).
The Director, Alaska Region, NMFS (Regional Director), established
a directed fishing allowance for northern rockfish of 600 mt, with
consideration that 40 mt will be taken as incidental catch in directed
fishing for other species in this area. See Sec. 679.20(d)(1). The
Regional Director has determined that this directed fishing allowance
has been reached. Consequently, NMFS is prohibiting directed fishing
for northern rockfish in the Western Regulatory Area.
The maximum retainable bycatch amounts at Sec. 679.20(e), apply to
a fishery that is closed to directed fishing.
Classification
This action is taken under 50 CFR 679.20 and is exempt from review
under E.O. 12866.
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.
Dated: July 11, 1996.
Richard W. Surdi,
Acting Director, Office of Fisheries Conservation and Management,
National Marine Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. 96-18080 Filed 7-11-96; 4:51 pm]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-F
Complete official Federal Register PDF
FR Doc. 96-18079 Groundfish of the Gulf of Alaska; Pacific Ocean Perch in the Western Regulatory Area
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 138 (Wednesday, July 17, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 37226]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-18079]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
50 CFR Part 679
[Docket No. 960129018-6018-01; I.D. 071096D]
Groundfish of the Gulf of Alaska; Pacific Ocean Perch in the
Western Regulatory Area
AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.
ACTION: Closure.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: NMFS is closing the directed fishery for Pacific ocean perch
in the Western Regulatory Area of the Gulf of Alaska management area
(GOA). This action is necessary to prevent exceeding the Pacific ocean
perch total allowable catch (TAC) in the Western Regulatory Area.
EFFECTIVE DATE: Effective 1200 hrs, Alaska local time (A.l.t.), July
11, 1996, until 2400 hrs, A.l.t., December 31, 1996.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Andrew Smoker, 907-586-7228.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The groundfish fishery in the GOA exclusive
economic zone is managed by NMFS according to the Fishery Management
Plan for Groundfish of the Gulf of Alaska (FMP) prepared by the North
Pacific Fishery Management Council under authority of the Magnuson
Fishery Conservation and Management Act. Fishing by U.S. vessels is
governed by regulations implementing the FMP at subpart H of 50 CFR
part 600 and 50 CFR part 679.
The Pacific ocean perch TAC for the Western Regulatory Area was
established by the Final 1996 Harvest Specifications of Groundfish (61
FR 4304, February 5, 1996) as 1,260 metric tons (mt). (See
Sec. 679.20(c)(3)(ii).)
The Director, Alaska Region, NMFS (Regional Director), has
determined that the Pacific ocean perch TAC in the Western Regulatory
Area soon will be reached. (See Sec. 679.20(d)(1).) Therefore, the
Regional Director has established a directed fishing allowance of 1,100
mt, with consideration that 160 mt will be taken as incidental catch in
directed fishing for other species in the Western Regulatory Area. The
Regional Director has determined that the directed fishing allowance
has been reached. Consequently, NMFS is prohibiting directed fishing
for the Pacific ocean perch in the Western Regulatory Area.
Maximum retainable bycatch amounts for applicable gear types may be
found in the regulations at Sec. 679.20(e).
Classification
This action is taken under Sec. 679.20 and is exempt from OMB
review under E.O. 12866.
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.
Dated: July 11, 1996.
Richard W. Surdi,
Acting Director, Office of Fisheries Conservation and Management,
National Marine Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. 96-18079 Filed 7-11-96; 4:51 pm]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-F
Complete official Federal Register PDF
FR Doc. 96-18074 Groundfish of the Gulf of Alaska; Pacific Ocean Perch in the Eastern Regulatory Area
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 138 (Wednesday, July 17, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 37225]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-18074]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
50 CFR Part 679
[Docket No. 960129018-6018-01; I.D. 071096G]
Groundfish of the Gulf of Alaska; Pacific Ocean Perch in the
Eastern Regulatory Area
AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.
ACTION: Closure.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: NMFS is closing the directed fishery for Pacific ocean perch
in the Eastern Regulatory Area of the Gulf of Alaska management area
(GOA). This action is necessary to prevent exceeding the Pacific ocean
perch total allowable catch (TAC) in the Eastern Regulatory Area.
EFFECTIVE DATE: Effective 1200 hrs, Alaska local time (A.l.t.), July
11, 1996, until 2400 hrs, A.l.t., December 31, 1996.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Andrew Smoker, 907-586-7228.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The groundfish fishery in the GOA exclusive
economic zone is managed by NMFS according to the Fishery Management
Plan for Groundfish of the Gulf of Alaska (FMP) prepared by the North
Pacific Fishery Management Council under authority of the Magnuson
Fishery Conservation and Management Act. Fishing by U.S. vessels is
governed by regulations implementing the FMP at subpart H of 50 CFR
part 600 and 50 CFR part 679.
The Pacific ocean perch TAC for the Eastern Regulatory Area was
established by the Final 1996 Harvest Specifications of Groundfish (61
FR 4304, February 5, 1996) as 2,366 metric tons (mt). (See
Sec. 679.20(c)(3)(ii).)
The Director, Alaska Region, NMFS (Regional Director), has
determined, in accordance with Sec. 679.20(d)(1), that the Pacific
ocean perch TAC in the Eastern Regulatory Area soon will be reached.
Therefore, the Regional Director has established a directed fishing
allowance of 2,066 mt, with consideration that 300 mt will be taken as
incidental catch in directed fishing for other species in the Eastern
Regulatory Area. The Regional Director has determined that the directed
fishing allowance has been reached. Consequently, NMFS is prohibiting
directed fishing for Pacific ocean perch in the Eastern Regulatory
Area.
Maximum retainable bycatch amounts for applicable gear types may be
found in the regulations at Sec. 679.20(e).
Classification
This action is taken under Sec. 679.20 and is exempt from OMB
review under E.O. 12866.
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.
Dated: July 11, 1996.
Richard W. Surdi,
Acting Director, Office of Fisheries Conservation and Development,
National Marine Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. 96-18074 Filed 7-11-96; 4:51 pm]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-F
Complete official Federal Register PDF
FR Doc. 96-18073 Groundfish of the Gulf of Alaska; Pacific Ocean Perch in the Central Regulatory Area
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 138 (Wednesday, July 17, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 37225-37226]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-18073]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
50 CFR Part 679
[Docket No. 960129018-6018-01; I.D. 071096H]
Groundfish of the Gulf of Alaska; Pacific Ocean Perch in the
Central Regulatory Area
AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.
ACTION: Closure.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: NMFS is closing the directed fishery for Pacific ocean perch
in the Central Regulatory Area of the Gulf of Alaska management area
(GOA). This action is necessary to prevent exceeding the Pacific ocean
perch total allowable catch (TAC) in the Central Regulatory Area.
EFFECTIVE DATE: Effective 1200 hrs, Alaska local time (A.l.t.), July
11, 1996, until 2400 hrs, A.l.t., December 31, 1996.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Andrew Smoker, 907-586-7228.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The groundfish fishery in the GOA exclusive
economic zone is managed by NMFS according to the Fishery Management
Plan for Groundfish of the Gulf of Alaska (FMP) prepared by the North
Pacific Fishery Management Council under authority of the Magnuson
Fishery Conservation and Management Act. Fishing by U.S. vessels is
governed by regulations implementing the FMP at subpart H of 50 CFR
part 600 and 50 CFR part 679.
The Pacific ocean perch TAC for the Central Regulatory Area was
established by the Final 1996 Harvest Specifications of Groundfish (61
FR 4304, February 5, 1996) as 3,333 metric tons (mt). (See
Sec. 679.20(c)(3)(ii).)
The Director, Alaska Region, NMFS (Regional Director), has
determined that the Pacific ocean perch TAC in the Central Regulatory
Area soon will be reached. (See Sec. 679.20(d)(1).) Therefore, the
Regional Director has established a
[[Page 37226]]
directed fishing allowance of 2,933 mt, with consideration that 400 mt
will be taken as incidental catch in directed fishing for other species
in the Central Regulatory Area. The Regional Director has determined
that the directed fishing allowance has been reached. Consequently,
NMFS is prohibiting directed fishing for Pacific ocean perch in the
Central Regulatory Area.
Maximum retainable bycatch amounts for applicable gear types may be
found in the regulations at Sec. 679.20(e).
Classification
This action is taken under Sec. 679.20 and is exempt from OMB
review under E.O. 12866.
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.
Dated: July 11, 1996.
Richard W. Surdi,
Acting Director, Office of Fisheries Conservation and Management,
National Marine Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. 96-18073 Filed 7-11-96; 4:51 pm]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-F
Complete official Federal Register PDF
FR Doc. 96-18072 Indirect Food Additives: Paper and Paperboard Components
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 138 (Wednesday, July 17, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 37208-37210]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-18072]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 37209]]
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
21 CFR Part 176
[Docket No. 96F-0070]
Indirect Food Additives: Paper and Paperboard Components
AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is amending the food
additive regulations to provide for the additional safe use of ammonium
zirconium lactate-citrate complexes for use as insolubilizers with
protein binders in coatings for paper and paperboard intended for food-
contact applications. This action is in response to a petition filed by
Sequa Chemicals, Inc.
DATES: Effective July 17, 1996; written objections and requests for a
hearing by August 16, 1996.
ADDRESSES: Submit written objections to the Dockets Management Branch
(HFA-305), Food and Drug Administration, 12420 Parklawn Dr., rm. 1-23,
Rockville, MD 20857.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Vir D. Anand, Center for Food Safety
and Applied Nutrition (HFS-216), Food and Drug Administration, 200 C
St. SW., Washington, DC 20204, 202-418-3081.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In a notice published in the Federal
Register of March 8, 1996 (61 FR 9462), FDA announced that a food
additive petition (FAP 6B4497) had been filed by Sequa Chemicals, Inc.,
One Sequa Dr., Chester, SC 29706-0070. The petition proposed to amend
the food additive regulations in Sec. 176.170 Components of paper and
paperboard in contact with aqueous and fatty foods (21 CFR 176.170) to
provide for the safe use of ammonium zirconium lactate-citrate
complexes for use as insolubilizers with protein binders in coatings
for paper and paperboard intended for food-contact applications.
FDA has evaluated the data in the petition and other relevant
material and concludes that the proposed use of the additive in paper
and paperboard products in contact with food is safe. Based on this
information, the agency has also concluded that the additive will have
the intended technical effect. Therefore, Sec. 176.170 should be
amended as set forth below.
In accordance with Sec. 171.1(h) (21 CFR 171.1(h)), the petition
and the documents that FDA considered and relied upon in reaching its
decision to approve the petition are available for inspection at the
Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition by appointment with the
information contact person listed above. As provided in Sec. 171.1(h),
the agency will delete from the documents any materials that are not
available for public disclosure before making the documents available
for inspection.
The agency has carefully considered the potential environmental
effects of this action. FDA has concluded that the action will not have
a significant impact on the human environment, and that an
environmental impact statement is not required. The agency's finding of
no significant impact and the evidence supporting that finding,
contained in an environmental assessment, may be seen in the Dockets
Management Branch (address above) between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday
through Friday.
Any person who will be adversely affected by this regulation may at
any time on or before August 16, 1996, file with the Dockets Management
Branch (address above) written objections thereto. Each objection shall
be separately numbered, and each numbered objection shall specify with
particularity the provisions of the regulation to which objection is
made and the grounds for the objection. Each numbered objection on
which a hearing is requested shall specifically so state. Failure to
request a hearing for any particular objection shall constitute a
waiver of the right to a hearing on that objection. Each numbered
objection for which a hearing is requested shall include a detailed
description and analysis of the specific factual information intended
to be presented in support of the objection in the event that a hearing
is held. Failure to include such a description and analysis for any
particular objection shall constitute a waiver of the right to a
hearing on the objection. Three copies of all documents shall be
submitted and shall be identified with the docket number found in
brackets in the heading of this document. Any objections received in
response to the regulation may be seen in the Dockets Management Branch
between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday.
List of Subjects in 21 CFR Part 176
Food additives, Food packaging.
Therefore, under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act and under
authority delegated to the Commissioner of Food and Drugs and
redelegated to the Director, Center for Food Safety and Applied
Nutrition, 21 CFR part 176 is amended as follows:
PART 176--INDIRECT FOOD ADDITIVES: PAPER AND PAPERBOARD COMPONENTS
1. The authority citation for 21 CFR part 176 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: Secs. 201, 402, 406, 409, 721 of the Federal Food,
Drug, and Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 321, 342, 346, 348, 379e).
2. Section 176.170 is amended in the table in paragraph (a)(5) by
revising the entry for ``Ammonium zirconium citrate (CAS Reg. No.
149564-62-5)'' to read as follows:
Sec. 176.170 Components of paper and paperboard in contact with
aqueous and fatty foods.
* * * * *
(a) * * *
(5) * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
List of substances Limitations
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * *
*
Ammonium zirconium citrate (CAS Reg. No 149564-62-5), For use as insolubilizers with protein binders in
ammonium zirconium lactate-citrate (CAS Reg. No. coatings for paper and paperboard, at a level not to
149564-64-7), ammonium zirconium lactate (CAS Reg. No. exceed 1.4 percent by weight of coating solids.
149564-63-6).
* * * * * *
*
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 37210]]
* * * * *
Dated: June 28, 1996.
Fred R. Shank,
Director, Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition.
[FR Doc. 96-18072 Filed 7-16-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4160-01-F
Complete official Federal Register PDF
FR Doc. 96-18070 Indirect Food Additives: Polymers
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 138 (Wednesday, July 17, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 37210-37211]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-18070]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
21 CFR Part 177
[Docket No. 95F-0332]
Indirect Food Additives: Polymers
AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is amending the food
additive regulations to provide for the safe use of
polymethylsilsesquioxane as a surface lubricant or anti-blocking agent
in polyolefin films intended for use in contact with food. This action
is in response to a petition filed by GE Silicones.
DATES: Effective July 17, 1996; written objections and requests for a
hearing by August 16, 1996.
ADDRESSES: Submit written objections to the Dockets Management Branch
(HFA-305), Food and Drug Administration, 12420 Parklawn Dr., rm. 1-23,
Rockville, MD 20857.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Vir D. Anand, Center for Food Safety
and Applied Nutrition (HFS-216), Food and Drug Administration, 200 C
St. SW., Washington, DC 20204, 202-418-3081.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In a notice published in the Federal
Register of October 17, 1995 (60 FR 53789), FDA announced that a food
additive petition (FAP 5B4484) had been filed by GE Silicones, c/o
Hyman, Phelps & McNamara, P.C., 700 13th St. NW., suite 1200,
Washington, DC 20005. The petition proposed to amend the food additive
regulations in Sec. 177.1520 Olefin polymers (21 CFR 177.1520) to
provide for the safe use of polymethylsilsesquioxane as a surface
lubricant or anti-blocking agent in polyolefin films intended for use
in contact with food.
FDA has evaluated data in the petition and other relevant material.
The agency concludes that: (1) The proposed use of the additive is
safe, (2) the additive will achieve its intended technical effect, and
(3) the regulations in Sec. 177.1520 should be amended as set forth
below.
In accordance with Sec. 171.1(h) (21 CFR 171.1(h)), the petition
and the documents that FDA considered and relied upon in reaching its
decision to approve the petition are available for inspection at the
Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition by appointment with the
information contact person listed above. As provided in Sec. 171.1(h),
the agency will delete from the documents any materials that are not
available for public disclosure before making the documents available
for inspection.
The agency has carefully considered the potential environmental
effects of this action. FDA has concluded that the action will not have
a significant impact on the human environment, and that an
environmental impact statement is not required. The agency's finding of
no significant impact and the evidence supporting that finding,
contained in an environmental assessment, may be seen in the Dockets
Management Branch (address above) between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday
through Friday.
Any person who will be adversely affected by this regulation may at
any time on or before August 16, 1996, file with the Dockets Management
Branch (address above) written objections thereto. Each objection shall
be separately numbered, and each numbered objection shall specify with
particularity the provisions of the regulation to which objection is
made and the grounds for the objection. Each numbered objection on
which a hearing is requested shall specifically so state. Failure to
request a hearing for any particular objection shall constitute a
waiver of the right to a hearing on that objection. Each numbered
objection for which a hearing is requested shall include a detailed
description and analysis of the specific factual information intended
to be presented in support of the objection in the event that a hearing
is held. Failure to include such a description and analysis for any
particular objection shall constitute a waiver of the right to a
hearing on the objection. Three copies of all documents shall be
submitted and shall be identified with the docket number found in
brackets in the heading of this document. Any objections received in
response to the regulation may be seen in the Dockets Management Branch
between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday.
List of Subjects in 21 CFR Part 177
Food additives, Food packaging.
Therefore, under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act and under
authority delegated to the Commissioner of Food and Drugs and
redelegated to the Director, Center for Food Safety and Applied
Nutrition, 21 CFR part 177 is amended as follows:
PART 177--INDIRECT FOOD ADDITIVES: POLYMERS
1. The authority citation for 21 CFR part 177 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: Secs. 201, 402, 409, 721 of the Federal Food, Drug,
and Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 321, 342, 348, 379e).
2. Section 177.1520 is amended in the table in paragraph (b) by
alphabetically adding a new entry under the headings ``Substance'' and
``Limitations'' to read as follows:
Sec. 177.1520 Olefin polymers.
* * * * *
(b) * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Substance- Limitations
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * *
* * *
Polymethylsilsesquioxane (CAS Reg. No. For use only as a surface
68554-70-1).. lubricant or anti-blocking
agent in films.
* * * *
* * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 37211]]
* * * * *
Dated: June 28, 1996.
Fred R. Shank,
Director, Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition.
[FR Doc. 96-18070 Filed 7-16-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4160-01-F
Complete official Federal Register PDF
FR Doc. 96-18069 Indirect Food Additives; Adhesives and Components of Coatings
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 138 (Wednesday, July 17, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 37208]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-18069]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
Food and Drug Administration
21 CFR Part 175
[Docket No. 94F-0398]
Indirect Food Additives; Adhesives and Components of Coatings
AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is amending the food
additive regulations to provide for the safe use of 1,4-
cyclohexanedicarboxylic acid as a polybasic acid for use in polyester
resins intended for food-contact coatings. This action is in response
to a petition filed by Eastman Chemical Co.
DATES: Effective July 17, 1996; written objections and requests for a
hearing August 16, 1996.
ADDRESSES: Submit written objections to the Dockets Management Branch
(HFA-305), Food and Drug Administration, Parklawn Dr., rm. 1-23,
Rockville, MD 20857.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Vir D. Anand, Center for Food Safety
and Applied Nutrition (HFS-216), Food and Drug Administration, 200 C
St. SW., Washington, DC 20204, 202-418-3081.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In a notice published in the Federal
Register of November 23, 1994 (59 FR 60364), FDA announced that a food
additive petition (FAP 4B4431) had been filed by Eastman Chemical Co.,
P.O. Box 1994, Kingsport, TN 37662. The petition proposed to amend the
food additive regulations in Sec. 175.300 Resinous and polymeric
coatings (21 CFR 175.300) to provide for the safe use of 1,4-
cyclohexanedicarboxylic acid as a polybasic acid for use in polyester
resins intended for food-contact coatings.
FDA has evaluated the data in the petition and other relevant
material. The agency concludes that the proposed use of the additive in
polyester resins intended for food-contact coatings is safe, that the
additive will have its intended technical effect, and therefore, that
Sec. 175.300 should be amended as set forth below.
In accordance with Sec. 171.1(h) (21 CFR 171.1(h)), the petition
and the documents that FDA considered and relied upon in reaching its
decision to approve the petition are available for inspection at the
Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition by appointment with the
information contact person listed above. As provided in Sec. 171.1(h),
the agency will delete from the documents any materials that are not
available for public disclosure before making the documents available
for inspection.
The agency has carefully considered the potential environmental
effects of this action. FDA has concluded that the action will not have
a significant impact on the human environment, and that an
environmental impact statement is not required. The agency's finding of
no significant impact and the evidence supporting that finding,
contained in an environmental assessment, may be seen in the Dockets
Management Branch (address above) between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday
through Friday.
Any person who will be adversely affected by this regulation may at
any time on or before August 16, 1996, file with the Dockets Management
Branch (address above) written objections thereto. Each objection shall
be separately numbered, and each numbered objection shall specify with
particularity the provisions of the regulation to which objection is
made and the grounds for the objection. Each numbered objection on
which a hearing is requested shall specifically so state. Failure to
request a hearing for any particular objection shall constitute a
waiver of the right to a hearing on that objection. Each numbered
objection for which a hearing is requested shall include a detailed
description and analysis of the specific factual information intended
to be presented in support of the objection in the event that a hearing
is held. Failure to include such a description and analysis for any
particular objection shall constitute a waiver of the right to a
hearing on the objection. Three copies of all documents shall be
submitted and shall be identified with the docket number found in
brackets in the heading of this document. Any objections received in
response to the regulation may be seen in the Dockets Management Branch
between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday.
List of Subjects in 21 CFR Part 175
Adhesives, Food additives, Food packaging.
Therefore, under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act and under
authority delegated to the Commissioner of Food and Drugs and
redelegated to the Director, Center for Food Safety and Applied
Nutrition, 21 CFR part 175 is amended as follows:
PART 175--INDIRECT FOOD ADDITIVES: ADHESIVES AND COMPONENTS OF
COATINGS
1. The authority citation for 21 CFR part 175 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: Secs. 201, 402, 409, 721 of the Federal Food, Drug,
and Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 321, 342, 348, 379e).
2. Section 175.300 is amended in paragraph (b)(3)(vii)(a) by
alphabetically adding a new item to read as follows:
Sec. 175.300 Resinous and polymeric coatings.
* * * * *
(b) * * *
(3) * * *
(vii) * * *
(a) * * *
* * * * *
1,4-cyclohexanedicarboxylic (CAS Reg. No. 1076-97-7).
* * * * *
Dated: June 28, 1996.
Fred R. Shank,
Director, Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition.
[FR Doc. 96-18069 Filed 7-16-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4160-01-F
Complete official Federal Register PDF
FR Doc. 96-18064 Amendment to Definition of ``Substance Abuse Professional''
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 138 (Wednesday, July 17, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 37222-37224]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-18064]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Office of the Secretary of Transportation
49 CFR Part 40
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 121
Research and Special Programs Administration
49 CFR Part 199
Federal Railroad Administration
49 CFR Part 219
Federal Highway Administration
49 CFR Part 382
Federal Transit Administration
49 CFR Parts 653 and 654
[OST Docket No. OST-96-1533]
RIN 2105-AC33
Amendment to Definition of ``Substance Abuse Professional''
AGENCIES: Office of the Secretary, Federal Aviation Administration,
Research and Special Programs Administration, Federal Highway
Administration, Federal Railroad Administration, Federal Transit
Administration, DOT.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: Each of the Department's alcohol testing rules include a
definition of a substance abuse professional. By this action, the
Department is consolidating these definitions into its Department-wide
testing procedures rule and adding to the definition substance abuse
professionals certified by the International Certification Reciprocity
Consortium.
EFFECTIVE DATE: This rule is effective July 17, 1996.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jim Swart, Program Analyst, Office of
Drug Enforcement and Program Compliance, Room 10317 (202-366-3784); or
Robert C. Ashby, Deputy Assistant General Counsel for Regulation and
Enforcement, Room 10424, (202-366-9306); 400 7th Street, SW.,
Washington, DC 20590.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
The Omnibus Transportation Employees Testing Act of 1991 required
that an opportunity for treatment be made available to covered
employees. To implement this requirement in its alcohol and drug
testing rules issued in February 1994, the Department of Transportation
established the role of the ``substance abuse professional'' (SAP). The
DOT rules require an employer to advise a covered employee, who engages
in conduct prohibited under these rules, of the resources available for
evaluation and treatment of substance abuse problems, including the
names, addresses, and telephone numbers of SAPs and counseling and
treatment programs. The rules also provide for SAP evaluation to
identify the assistance needed by employees with substance abuse
problems. In many cases (e.g., the Federal Highway Administration and
Federal Transit Administration rules), this process and the role of the
SAP apply to drug testing as well as alcohol testing.
The primary safety objective of the DOT rules is to prevent,
through deterrence and detection, alcohol and controlled substance
users from performing transportation safety-sensitive functions. The
SAP is responsible for several duties important to the evaluation,
referral, and treatment of employees identified through breath and
urinalysis testing as being positive for alcohol and/or controlled
substance use, or who refuse to be tested, or who have violated other
provisions of the DOT rules.
The SAP's fundamental responsibility is to provide a comprehensive
face-to-face assessment and clinical evaluation to determine if the
employee needs assistance resolving problems associated with alcohol
use or prohibited drug use. If the employee is found to need assistance
as a result of this evaluation, the SAP recommends a course of
treatment with which the employee must demonstrate successful
compliance prior to returning to DOT safety-sensitive duty. Assistance
recommendations can include, but are not limited to: In-patient
treatment, partial in-patient treatment, out-patient treatment,
education programs, and aftercare. Upon the determination of the best
recommendation for assistance, the SAP will serve as a referral source
to assist the employee's entry into an acceptable treatment or
education program.
In general, the DOT rules prohibit a covered employee who has
engaged in conduct prohibited by the rules from performing any safety-
sensitive functions until meeting the conditions for returning to work,
which include a SAP evaluation, demonstration of successful compliance
with any required assistance program, and a successful return-to-duty
test result (below 0.02 for alcohol test and/or a negative drug test).
Therefore, the SAP follow-up evaluation is needed to determine if the
employee demonstrates successful compliance with the original treatment
recommendation. In addition, the SAP directs the employee's follow-up
testing program.
The DOT rules define the SAP to be a licensed physician (Medical
Doctor or Doctor of Osteopathy), a licensed or certified psychologist,
a licensed or certified social worker, or a licensed or certified
employee assistance professional. In addition, alcohol and drug abuse
counselors certified by the National Association of Alcoholism and Drug
Abuse Counselors (NAADAC) Certification Commission, a national
organization that imposes qualification standards for treatment of
alcohol and drug related disorders, are included in the SAP definition.
All must have knowledge of and clinical experience in the diagnosis and
treatment of substance abuse-related disorders (the degrees and
certificates alone do not confer this knowledge). The rules do not
authorize individuals to be SAPs who meet only state certification
criteria because qualifications vary greatly by state. In some states,
certified counselors do not have the experience or training deemed
[[Page 37223]]
necessary to implement the objectives of the rules. State-certified
addiction counselors could have, of course, taken the NAADAC competency
examination to receive certification.
The issue of who should be regarded as qualified to be a SAP was
one of the most commented-upon issues in the rulemaking leading to the
February 1994 rules (see 59 FR 7334-36; February 15, 1994). In the time
since these rules were issued, various parties have continued to
request that they be included within the definition of SAPs. In
evaluating how to respond to such requests, the Department has taken
the view that any expansion of the definition of SAPs should ensure
that the qualifications of persons playing this important role not be
diluted.
The International Certification Reciprocity Consortium (ICRC)/
Alcohol & Other Drug Abuse (Suite 213, 3725 National Drive, Raleigh,
North Carolina 27612), petitioned the DOT for inclusion of its
certified counselors in the SAP definition. Upon receipt of the
petition, the DOT began a thorough evaluation of the ICRC proposal,
including information from ICRC related to counselor eligibility
criteria, quality assurance procedures, codes of ethics, and
certification and testing parameters. We also reviewed ICRC information
on testing procedures, examination availability, and psychometrician
standards.
The results of our evaluation supported the conclusion that ICRC
has rigorous standards in place and that their counselors warrant
inclusion in the Department's SAP definition. Their program
requirements for professional counselors and their testing and
certification procedures (as well as test availability) are consistent
with those of other groups already defined as qualified for
participation. After careful review and evaluation of the ICRC
petition, supporting documentation, and testing methodology the DOT
proposed including ICRC certified counselors in its SAP definition.
ICRC-certified counselors must meet examination, experience, and other
standards comparable to NAADAC-certified counselors, who are included
in the existing SAP definition.
At the same time, the Department proposed consolidating SAP-related
matters into Part 40, its Department-wide procedural regulation. Under
the NPRM, the Department proposed to place the revised definition of
SAP--including ICRC-certified counselors--in part 40, while removing
the SAP definitions in each of the operating administration rules.
Comments and DOT Responses
Twenty-eight comments addressed the inclusion of ICRC-certified
counselors in the SAP definition. No one opposed the proposed
amendment. For the reasons noted above, the Department will include
ICRC counselors in the definition.
Three comments suggested that additional professions or
certifications be recognized in the SAP definition. Further additions
to the definition are beyond the scope of this rulemaking. However,
representatives of any group or profession seeking inclusion may
contact the individuals listed above in ``For Further Information
Contact'' to discuss the process for considering such requests.
One comment asked for further clarification of the operational role
of the SAP, with respect to such matters as referral for treatment, the
return to duty process, and follow-up testing. The Department has
issued guidance in these areas and, if needed, can issue additional
guidance in the future. In our view, further elaboration of the
regulatory text in these areas is not necessary.
One comment, from a trade association, suggested that the
definition of SAP remain in the regulation for the operating
administration that regulates its members, rather than being
consolidated in 49 CFR part 40. The rationale for this suggestion
appears to be that employers would prefer to find all relevant terms in
one rule--the operating administration rule--rather than needing to be
familiar with both the operating administration rule and part 40.
This rationale is unpersuasive. Part 40 already applies to all
employers covered by all the operating administration drug and alcohol
testing rules. Each operating administration rule already incorporates
by reference and applies Part 40 with respect to all tests conducted by
covered employers. Employers must already be familiar with and refer to
part 40 in order to conduct tests properly. Having a DOT-wide, common
definition of SAP in part 40 is no more remarkable or difficult for
employers to grasp than having the existing common definitions of
Medical Review Officer or Breath Alcohol Technician in part 40. The
ease of reference to common terms affecting the drug and alcohol
testing process found in a single place, particularly for the many
multi-modal employers covered by the Department's rules, is a
significant reason for adopting the proposed consolidation. Moreover,
it is much quicker to amend one rule than to amend six, an important
consideration when the SAP definition is potentially subject to
additional amendments if additional professions or certifications are
included. The Department is adopting the proposed consolidation.
Regulatory Process Matters
The final rule is considered to be a nonsignificant rulemaking
under DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures, 44 FR 11034. It also is a
nonsignificant rule for purposes of Executive Order 12866. The
Department certifies, under the Regulatory Flexibility Act, that the
NPRM, if adopted, would not have a significant economic effect on a
substantial number of small entities. The NPRM would not impose any
costs or burdens on regulated entities, serving merely to broaden the
definition of service providers under the rule. The rule has also been
analyzed in accordance with the principles and criteria contained in
Executive Order 12612, and it has been determined that it does not have
sufficient federalism implications to warrant the preparation of a
Federalism Assessment.
The Department finds good cause to make this final rule effective
immediately. There are a substantial number of ICRC-certified
counselors who are ready and waiting to participate as SAPs in the DOT
drug and alcohol testing program, and there is no opposition to their
beginning to participate. The interest of the DOT program, the
counselors themselves, and the employers who will be able to make use
of them is served by making this rule change effective as soon as
possible. In addition, this rule can be viewed as relieving a
restriction on the participation of ICRC-counselors in the program.
Office of the Secretary
List of Subjects in 49 CFR Part 40
Drug testing, Alcohol testing, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Safety, Transportation.
For the reasons set forth in the preamble, 49 CFR part 40 is
amended as follows:
PART 40--[AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for part 40 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 102, 301, 322; 49 U.S.C. app. 1301nt., app.
1434nt., app. 2717, app. 1618a.
2. In Sec. 40.3, after the definition of ``specimen bottle,'' a
definition of ``substance abuse professional'' is added, to read as
follows:
[[Page 37224]]
Sec. 40.3 Definitions.
* * * * *
Substance abuse professional. A licensed physician (Medical Doctor
or Doctor of Osteopathy); or a licensed or certified psychologist,
social worker, or employee assistance professional; or an addiction
counselor (certified by the National Association of Alcoholism and Drug
Abuse Counselors Certification Commission or by the International
Certification Reciprocity Consortium/Alcohol & Other Drug Abuse). All
must have knowledge of and clinical experience in the diagnosis and
treatment of alcohol and controlled substances-related disorders.
Issued this 9th day of July, 1996, at Washington, DC.
Federico Pena,
Secretary of Transportation.
Federal Aviation Administration
List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 121
Air carriers, Aircraft, Aircraft pilots, Airmen, Airplanes, Air
transportation, Aviation safety, Drug abuse, Drugs, Narcotics, Pilots,
Safety, Transportation.
For the reasons set out in the preamble, the Federal Aviation
Administration amends 14 CFR part 121, as follows:
PART 121--OPERATING REQUIREMENTS: DOMESTIC, FLAG, AND SUPPLEMENTAL
OPERATIONS
1. The authority citation for part 121 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 40119, 44101, 44701-44702,
44705, 44709-44711, 44713, 44716-44717, 44722, 44901, 44903-44904,
44912, 46105.
Appendix I [Amended]
2. In Appendix I, Sec. II, the definition of ``Substance abuse
professional'' is removed.
Appendix J [Amended]
3. In Appendix J, Sec. I, subsection C, the definition of
``Substance abuse professional'' is removed.
Issued in Washington, DC on May 13, 1996.
David R. Hinson,
Administrator, Federal Aviation Administration.
Research and Special Programs Administration
List of Subjects in 49 CFR Part 199
Alcohol testing, Drug testing, Pipeline safety, Recordkeeping and
reporting.
For the reasons stated in the preamble, RSPA amends 49 CFR part 199
as follows:
PART 199--DRUG AND ALCOHOL TESTING
1. The authority for Part 199 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 5103, 60102, 60103, 60104, and 60108; 49
CFR 1.53.
Sec. 199.205 [Amended]
2. In 49 CFR 199.205, the definition of ``Substance abuse
professional'' is removed.
Issued in Washington, DC on June 11, 1996.
D.K. Sharma,
Administrator, Research and Special Programs Administration.
Federal Railroad Administration
List of Subjects in 49 CFR Part 219
Alcohol and drug abuse, Railroad safety, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
For the reasons stated in the preamble, FRA amends 49 CFR part 219,
as follows:
PART 219--CONTROL OF ALCOHOL AND DRUG USE
1. The authority for part 219 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 20103, 20107, 20111, 20112, 20113, 20140,
21301, 21304; Pub. L. 103-272 (July 5, 1994); and 49 CFR 1.49(m).
Sec. 219.5 [Amended]
2. In Sec. 219.5, the definition of ``Substance abuse
professional'' is removed.
Issued in Washington, DC on July 9, 1996.
Donald M. Itzkoff,
Deputy Administrator, Federal Railroad Administration.
Federal Highway Administration
List of Subjects in 49 CFR Part 382
Alcohol and drug abuse, Highway safety, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
For the reasons stated in the preamble, the FHWA amends 49 CFR part
382, as follows:
PART 382--CONTROLLED SUBSTANCES AND ALCOHOL USE AND TESTING
1. The authority for part 382 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 31133, 31136, 31301 et seq., 31502; and 49
CFR 1.48.
2. In Sec. 382.107, the definition of ``Substance abuse
professional'' is removed.
Issued in Washington, DC on July 9, 1996.
Rodney E. Slater,
Administrator, Federal Highway Administration.
Federal Transit Administration
List of Subjects
49 CFR Part 653
Drug testing, Grant programs--transportation, Mass transportation,
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Safety, Transportation.
49 CFR Part 654
Alcohol testing, Grant programs--transportation, Mass
transportation, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Safety,
Transportation.
For the reasons set out in the preamble, the Federal Transit
Administration amends 49 CFR parts 653 and 654, as follows:
PART 653--PREVENTION OF PROHIBITED DRUG USE IN TRANSIT OPERATIONS
1. The authority for part 653 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 5331; 49 CFR 1.51.
Sec. 653.7 [Amended]
2. In Sec. 653.7, the definition of ``Substance abuse
professional'' is removed.
PART 654--PREVENTION OF ALCOHOL MISUSE IN TRANSIT OPERATIONS
1. The authority for part 654 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 5331; 49 CFR 1.51.
Sec. 654.7 [Amended]
2. In Sec. 654.7, the definition of ``Substance abuse
professional'' is removed.
Issued in Washington, DC on July 9, 1996.
Gordon J. Linton,
Administrator, Federal Transit Administration.
[FR Doc. 96-18064 Filed 7-16-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-62-P
Complete official Federal Register PDF
FR Doc. 96-18059 IFR Altitudes; Miscellaneous Amendments
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 138 (Wednesday, July 17, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 37206-37208]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-18059]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
14 CFR Part 95
[Docket No. 28621; Amdt. No. 397]
IFR Altitudes; Miscellaneous Amendments
AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This amendment adopts miscellaneous amendments to the required
IFR (instrument flight rules) altitudes and changeover points for
certain Federal airways, jet routes, or direct routes for which a
minimum or maximum en route authorized IFR altitude is prescribed. This
regulatory action is needed because of changes occurring in the
National Airspace System. These changes are designed to provide for the
safe and efficient use of the navigable airspace under instrument
conditions in the affected areas.
EFFECTIVE DATE: 0901 UTC, August 15, 1996.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Paul J. Best, Flight Procedures Standards Branch (AFS-420), Technical
Programs Division, Flight Standards Service Federal Aviation
Administration, 800 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, D.C. 20591;
telephone: (202) 267-8277.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This amendment to part 95 of the Federal
Aviation Regulations (14 CFR part 95) amends, suspends, or revokes IFR
altitudes governing the operation of all aircraft in flight over a
specified route or any portion of that route, as well as the changeover
points (COPs) for Federal airways, jet routes, or direct routes as
prescribed in part 95.
The Rule
The specified IFR altitudes, when used in conjunction with the
prescribed changeover points for those routes, ensure navigation aid
coverage that is adequate for safe flight operations and free of
frequency interference. The reasons and circumstances that create the
need for this amendment involve matters of flight safety and
operational efficiency in the National Airspace System, are related to
published
[[Page 37207]]
aeronautical charts that are essential to the user, and provide for the
safe and efficient use of the navigable airspace. In addition, those
various reasons or circumstances require making this amendment
effective before the next scheduled charting and publication date of
the flight information to assure its timely availability to the user.
The effective date of this amendment reflects those considerations. In
view of the close and immediate relationship between these regulatory
changes and safety in air commerce, I find that notice and public
procedure before adopting this amendment are impracticable and contrary
to the public interest and that good cause exists for making the
amendment effective in less than 30 days. The FAA has determined that
this regulation only involves an established body of technical
regulations for which frequent and routine amendments are necessary to
keep them operationally current.
It, therefore--(1) is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under
Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a ``significant rule'' under DOT
Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034; February 26, 1979);
and (3) does not warrant preparation of a regulatory evaluation as the
anticipated impact is so minimal. For the same reason, the FAA
certifies that this amendment will not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria of
the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 95
Airspace, Navigation (air).
Issued in Washington, D.C. on July 5, 1996.
Thomas C. Accardi,
Director, Flight Standards Service.
Adoption of the Amendment
Accordingly, pursuant to the authority delegated to me by the
Administrator, part 95 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR part
95) is amended as follows effective at 0901 UTC,
1. The authority citation for part 95 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40103, 40113, and 14 CFR
11.49(b)(2).
2. Part 95 is amended to read as follows:
Revisions to Minimum Enroute IFR Altitudes and Changeover Points
[Amendment 397 effective date, August 15, 1996]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
From To MEA
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec. 95.1001 Direct Routes--U.S.
B9
Atlantic Routes is Added to Read
Marathon, FL NDB *4000-MRA **1500- *Deeds, FL FIX.......... **2000
MOCA.
Sec. 95.6099 VOR Federal Airway 99 is Amended to Delete
Hartford, CT VORTAC *4000-MRA *Graym, MA FIX.......... **3000
**2500-MOCA.
Sec. 95.6151 VOR Federal Airway 151 is Amended to Read in Part
Gails, MA FIX.................... Inndy, RI FIX........... 2000
Inndy, RI FIX *1500-MOCA......... Providence, RI VORTAC... *2000
Sec. 95.6175 VOR Federal Airway 175 is Amended to Read in Part
Madup, IA FIX *3900-MRA.......... *Welte, IA FIX.......... 5500
Welte, IA FIX.................... Sioux City, IA VORTAC... 3000
Sec. 95.6189 VOR Federal Airway 189 is Amended to Read in Part
Wright Brothers, NC VOR/DME *2000- Tar River, NC VORTAC.... *4000
MOCA.
Sec. 95.6233 VOR Federal Airway 233 is Amended to Read in Part
Gaylord, MI VOR/DME *5000-MRA.... *Dripe, MI FIX.......... 3100
Sec. 95.6268 VOR Federal Airway 268 is Amended by Adding
Tonni, MA FIX *5000-MRA.......... *Meshl, ME FIX.......... 5000
Meshl, ME FIX.................... Sappe, ME FIX........... 3000
Sappe, ME FIX *1800-MOCA......... Augusta, ME VOR/DME..... *3000
Is Amended to Read in Part
Inndy, RI FIX *6000-MRA.......... *Tonni, MA FIX.......... 6000
Sec. 95.6451 VOR Federal Airway 451 is Amended to Delete
Groton, CT VOR................... Avonn, RI FIX........... 6000
Avonn, RI FIX.................... Inndy, RI FIX........... 2000
Inndy, RI FIX *6000-MRA.......... *Tonni, MA FIX.......... 6000
Tonni, MA FIX.................... Seedy, NH FIX........... 5000
------------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From To MEA MAA
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec. 95.7062 Jet Route No. 62 is amended to Delete
Nantucket, MA VORTAC.......................... Saile, MA W/P......................... 18000 45000
Sec. 95.7086 Jet Route No. 86 is amended by Adding
Beatty, NV VORTAC............................. Fuzzy, NV FIX......................... 18000 45000
Fuzzy, NV FIX................................. Boulder City, NV VORTAC............... 29000 45000
Sec. 95.7092 Jet Route No. 92 is Amended to Read in Part
Beatty, NV VORTAC............................. Boulder City, NV VORTAC............... 24000 45000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 37208]]
Sec. 95.7092 VOR Federal Airways Changeover Points
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Airway Segment Changeover Points
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From To Distance From
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
J-92
Beatty, NV VORTAC.................... Boulder City, NV VORTAC...... 12 Boulder City.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[FR Doc. 96-18059 Filed 7-16-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-M
Complete official Federal Register PDF
FR Doc. 96-18057 Amendment to Class E Airspace, McCook, NE
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 138 (Wednesday, July 17, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 37204-37205]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-18057]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
14 CFR Part 71
[Docket No. 96-ACE-8]
Amendment to Class E Airspace, McCook, NE
AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.
ACTION: Direct final rule; request for comments.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This action amends the Class E airspace area at McCook
Municipal Airport, McCook NE. The Federal Aviation Administration has
developed a Standard Instrument Approach Procedure (SIAP) based on the
Global Positioning System (GPS) which has made this change necessary.
The effect of this rule is to provide additional controlled airspace
for aircraft executing the new SIAP at McCook Municipal Airport.
DATES: Effective date. October 7, 1996. Comment date. Comments must be
received on or before August 16, 1996.
ADDRESSES: Send comments regarding the rule in triplicate to: Manager,
Operations Branch, Air Traffic Division, ACE-530, Federal Aviation
Administration, Docket Number 96-ACE-8, 601 East 12th St., Kansas City,
MO 64106.
The official docket may be examined in the Office of the Assistant
Chief Counsel for the Central Region at the same address between 9:00
a.m. and 3:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, except federal holidays.
An informal docket may also be examined during normal business
hours in the Air Traffic Division at the same address listed above.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Kathy Randolph, Air Traffic Division, Operations Branch, ACE-530C,
Federal Aviation Administration, 601 East 12th Street, Kansas City,
Missouri 64106: telephone: (816) 426-3408.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The FAA has developed a Standard Instrument
Approach Procedure (SIAP) utilizing the Global Positioning System (GPS)
at the McCook Municipal Airport, McCook, NE. The amendment to Class E
airspace at McCook, NE, will provide additional controlled airspace to
segregate aircraft operating under Visual Flight Rules (VFR) from
aircraft operating under Instrument Flight Rules (IFR) procedures while
arriving or departing the airport. The area will be depicted on
appropriate aeronautical charts thereby enabling pilots to either
circumnavigate the area, continue to operate under VFR to and from the
airport, or otherwise comply with IFR procedures. Class E airspace
areas extending from 700 feet or more above the surface of the earth
are published in paragraph 6005 of FAA Order 7400.9C, dated August 17,
1995, and effective September 16, 1995, which is incorporated by
reference in 14 CFR 71.1. The Class E airspace designation listed in
this document will be published subsequently in the Order.
The Direct Final Rule Procedure
The FAA anticipates that this regulation will not result in adverse
or negative comment and, therefore, is issuing it as a direct final
rule. Previous actions of this nature have not been controversial and
have not resulted in adverse comments or objections. The amendment will
enhance safety for all flight operations by designating an area where
VFR pilots may anticipate the presence of IFR aircraft at lower
altitudes, especially during inclement weather conditions. A greater
degree of safety is achieved by depicting the area on aeronautical
charts. Unless a written adverse or negative comment, or a written
notice of intent to submit an adverse or negative comment is received
within the comment period, the regulation will become effective on the
date specified above. After the close of the comment period, the FAA
will publish a document in the Federal Register indicating that no
adverse or negative comments were received, confirming the date on
which the final rule will become effective. If the FAA does receive an
adverse or negative comment within the comment period, or written
notice of intent to submit such a comment, a document withdrawing the
direct final rule will be published in the Federal Register, and a
notice of proposed rulemaking may be published with a new comment
period.
Comments Invited
Although this action is in the form of a final rule and was not
preceded by a notice of proposed rulemaking, comments are invited on
this rule. Interested persons are invited to comment on this rule by
submitting such written data, views, or arguments as they may desire.
Communications should identify the Rules Docket number and be submitted
in triplicate to the address specified under the caption ADDRESSES. All
communications received on or before the closing date for comments will
be considered, and this rule may be amended or withdrawn in light of
the comments received. Factual information that supports the
commenter's ideas and suggestions is extremely helpful in evaluating
the effectiveness of this action and determining whether additional
rulemaking action would be needed.
[[Page 37205]]
Comments are specifically invited on the overall regulatory,
economic, environmental, and energy aspects of the rule that might
suggest a need to modify the rule. All comments submitted will be
available, both before and after the closing date for comments in the
Rules Docket for examination by interested persons. A report that
summarizes each FAA-public contact concerned with the substance of this
action will be filed in the Rules Docket.
Commenters wishing the FAA to acknowledge receipt of their comments
submitted in response to this rule must submit a self-addressed,
stamped postcard on which the following statement is made: ``Comments
to Docket No. 96-ACE-8.'' The postcard will be date stamped and
returned to the commenter.
Agency Findings
The regulations adopted herein will not have substantial direct
effects on the States, on the relationship between the national
government and the States, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various levels of government. Therefore, in
accordance with Executive Order 12612, it is determined that this final
rule does not have sufficient federalism implications to warrant the
preparation of a Federalism Assessment.
The FAA has determined that this regulation is noncontroversial and
unlikely to result in adverse or negative comments. For the reasons
discussed in the preamble, I certify that this regulation (1) is not a
``significant regulatory action'' under Executive Order 12866; (2) is
not a ``significant rule'' under Department of Transportation (DOT)
Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979);
and (3) if promulgated, 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.
List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71
Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).
Adoption of the Amendment
Accordingly, the Federal Aviation Administration amends Part 71 of
the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR Part 71) as follows:
PART 71--AMENDED
1. The authority citation for Part 71 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g); 40103, 40113, 40120; E.O. 10854, 24
FR 9565, 3 CFR, 1959-1963 Comp., p. 389; 14 CFR 11.69.
Sec. 71.1 [Amended]
2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 of Federal
Aviation Administration Order 7400.9C, Airspace Designations and
Reporting Points, dated August 17, 1995, and effective September 16,
1995, is amended as follows:
Paragraph 6005 Class E airspace areas extending upward from 700
feet or more above the surface of the earth.
* * * * *
ACE NE E5 McCook, NE [Revised]
McCook Municipal Airport, NE
(Lat. 40 deg.12'22''N., long. 100 deg.35'31''W.)
That airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface
within a 6.8-mile radius of McCook Municipal Airport and within 4
miles southwest and 6 miles northeast of the 120 deg. bearing from
McCook Municipal Airport extending from the 6.8-mile radius to 10.6
miles southeast of the airport and within 4 miles southwest and 6
miles northeast of the 325 deg. bearing from McCook Municipal
Airport extending from the 6.8-mile radius to 10.5 miles northwest
of the airport.
* * * * *
Issued in Kansas City, MO, on June 27, 1996.
Christopher R. Blum,
Acting Manager, Air Traffic Division, Central Region.
[FR Doc. 96-18057 Filed 7-16-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-M
Complete official Federal Register PDF
FR Doc. 96-18056 Amendment to Class E Airspace, Russell, KS
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 138 (Wednesday, July 17, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 37205-37206]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-18056]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
14 CFR Part 71
[Docket No. 96-ACE-7]
Amendment to Class E Airspace, Russell, KS
AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.
ACTION: Direct final rule; request for comments.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This action amends the Class E airspace area at Russell
Municipal Airport, Russell, KS. The Federal Aviation Administration has
developed a Standard Instrument Approach Procedure (SIAP) based on the
Global Positioning System (GPS) which has made this change necessary.
The effect of this rule is to provide additional controlled airspace
for aircraft executing the new SIAP at Russell Municipal Airport.
DATES: Effective date. October 7, 1996. Comment date. Comments must be
received on or before August 16, 1996.
ADDRESSES: Send comments regarding the rule in triplicate to: Manager,
Operations Branch, Air Traffic Division, ACE-530, Federal Aviation
Administration, Docket Number 96-ACE-7, 601 East 12th St., Kansas City,
MO 64106.
The official docket may be examined in the Office of the Assistant
Chief Counsel for the Central Region at the same address between 9:00
a.m. and 3:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, except federal holidays.
An informal docket may also be examined during normal business
hours in the Air Traffic Division at the same address listed above.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Kathy Randolph, Air Traffic Division, Operations Branch, ACE-530C,
Federal Aviation Administration, 601 East 12th Street, Kansas City,
Missouri 64106: telephone: (816) 426-3408.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The FAA has developed a Standard Instrument
Approach Procedure (SIAP) utilizing the Global Positioning System (GPS)
at the Russell Municipal Airport, Russell, KS. The amendment to Class E
airspace at Russell, KS, will provide additional controlled airspace to
segregate aircraft operating under Visual Flight Rules (VFR) from
aircraft operating under Instrument Flight Rules (IFR) procedures while
arriving or departing the airport. The area will be depicted on
appropriate aeronautical charts thereby enabling pilots to either
circumnavigate the area, continue to operate under VFR to and from the
airport, or otherwise comply with IFR procedures. Class E airspace
areas extending from 700 feet or more above the surface of the earth
are published in paragraph 6005 of FAA Order 7400.9C, dated August 17,
1995, and effective September 16, 1995, which is incorporated by
reference in 14 CFR 71.1. The Class E airspace designation listed in
this document will be published subsequently in the Order.
The Direct Final Rule Procedure
The FAA anticipates that this regulation will not result in adverse
or negative comment and, therefore, is issuing it as a direct final
rule. Previous actions of this nature have not been controversial and
have not resulted in adverse comments or objections. The amendment will
enhance safety for all flight operations by designating an area where
VFR pilots may anticipate the presence of IFR aircraft at lower
altitudes, especially during inclement weather conditions. A greater
degree of safety is achieved by depicting the area on aeronautical
charts. Unless a written adverse or negative comment, or a written
notice of intent to submit an adverse or negative comment is received
within the comment period, the regulation will become effective on the
date specified above. After the close of
[[Page 37206]]
the comment period, the FAA will publish a document in the Federal
Register indicating that no adverse or negative comments were received,
confirming the date on which the final rule will become effective. If
the FAA does receive an adverse or negative comment within the comment
period, or written notice of intent to submit such a comment, a
document withdrawing the direct final rule will be published in the
Federal Register, and a notice of proposed rulemaking may be published
with a new comment period.
Comments Invited
Although this action is in the form of a final rule and was not
preceded by a notice of proposed rulemaking, comments are invited on
this rule. Interested persons are invited to comment on this rule by
submitting such written data, views, or arguments as they may desire.
Communications should identify the Rules Docket number and be submitted
in triplicate to the address specified under the caption ADDRESSES. All
communications received on or before the closing date for comments will
be considered, and this rule may be amended or withdrawn in light of
the comments received. Factual information that supports the
commenter's ideas and suggestions is extremely helpful in evaluating
the effectiveness of this action and determining whether additional
rulemaking action would be needed.
Comments are specifically invited on the overall regulatory,
economic, environmental, and energy aspects of the rule that might
suggest a need to modify the rule. All comments submitted will be
available, both before and after the closing date for comments in the
Rules Docket for examination by interested persons. A report that
summarizes each FAA-public contact concerned with the substance of this
action will be filed in the Rules Docket.
Commenters wishing the FAA to acknowledge receipt of their comments
submitted in response to this rule must submit a self-addressed,
stamped postcard on which the following statement is made: ``Comments
to Docket No. 96-ACE-7.'' The postcard will be date stamped and
returned to the commenter.
Agency Findings
The regulations adopted herein will not have substantial direct
effects on the States, on the relationship between the national
government and the States, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various levels of government. Therefore, in
accordance with Executive Order 12612, it is determined that this final
rule does not have sufficient federalism implications to warrant the
preparation of a Federalism Assessment.
The FAA has determined that this regulation is noncontroversial and
unlikely to result in adverse or negative comments. For the reasons
discussed in the preamble, I certify that this regulation (1) is not a
``significant regulatory action'' under Executive Order 12866; (2) is
not a ``significant rule'' under Department of Transportation (DOT)
Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979);
and (3) if promulgated, 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.
List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71
Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).
Adoption of the Amendment
Accordingly, the Federal Aviation Administration amends Part 71 of
the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR Part 71) as follows:
PART 71--AMENDED
1. The authority citation for Part 71 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g); 40103, 40113, 40120; E.O. 10854, 24
FR 9565, 3 CFR, 1959-1963 Comp., p. 389; 14 CFR 11.69.
Sec. 71.1 [Amended]
2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 of Federal
Aviation Administration Order 7400.9C, Airspace Designations and
Reporting Points, dated August 17, 1995, and effective September 16,
1995, is amended as follows:
Paragraph 6005 Class E airspace areas extending upward from 700
feet or more above the surface of the earth.
* * * * *
ACE KS E5 Russell, KS [Revised]
Russell Municipal Airport, KS
(Lat. 38 deg.52'20''N., long. 98 deg.48'42''W.)
Hays VORTAC
(Lat. 38 deg.50'52''N., long. 99 deg.16'36''W.)
That airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface
within a 6.3-mile radius of Russell Municipal Airport and within 4
miles each side of the 086 deg. radial of Hays VORTAC extending from
the 6.3-mile radius to 6.6 miles west of the airport and within 2
miles each side of the 354 deg. bearing from Russell Municipal
Airport extending from the 6.3-mine radius to 9.6 miles north of the
airport and within 2 miles each side of the 174 deg. bearing from
Russell Municipal Airport extending from the 6.3-mile radius to 8.8
miles south of the airport.
* * * * *
Issued in Kansas City, MO, on June 14, 1996.
Herman J. Lyons, Jr.,
Manager, Air Traffic Division, Central Region.
[FR Doc. 96-18056 Filed 7-16-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-M
Complete official Federal Register PDF
FR Doc. 96-17990 Approval and Promulgation of State Implementation Plan; Wisconsin; Site-Specific Revision For General Electric Medical Systems
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 138 (Wednesday, July 17, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 37216-37218]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-17990]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[WI72-01-7298a; FRL-5528-3]
Approval and Promulgation of State Implementation Plan;
Wisconsin; Site-Specific Revision For General Electric Medical Systems
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Direct final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency approves a site-specific
volatile organic compound (VOC) reasonably available control technology
(RACT) state implementation plan (SIP) revision for the General
Electric Medical Systems (GEM) facility located at 4855 West Electric
Avenue in Milwaukee, Wisconsin. This SIP revision was submitted by the
Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources (WDNR) on March 15, 1996.
This approval makes federally enforceable the State's consent order
establishing an alternate control system for GEM's cold cleaning
operation.
In the proposed rules section of this Federal Register, the EPA is
proposing approval of, and soliciting comments on, this requested SIP
revision. If adverse comments are received on this action, the EPA will
withdraw this final rule and address the comments received in response
to this action in a final rule on the related proposed rule, which is
being published in the proposed rules section of this Federal Register.
A second public comment period will not be held. Parties interested in
commenting on this action should do so at this time. This approval
makes federally enforceable the State's rule that has been incorporated
by reference.
DATES: The ``direct final'' is effective on September 16, 1996, unless
EPA receives adverse or critical comments by August 16, 1996. If the
effective date is delayed, timely notice will be published in the
Federal Register.
ADDRESSES: Written comments should be sent to: Carlton T. Nash, Chief,
Regulation Development Section, Air Programs Branch (AR-18J), U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago,
Illinois 60604.
Copies of the proposed SIP revision and EPA's analysis are
available for inspection at the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Region 5, Air and Radiation Division, 77 West Jackson Boulevard,
Chicago, Illinois 60604. (Please telephone Kathleen D'Agostino at (312)
886-1767 before visiting the Region 5 Office.)
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kathleen D'Agostino, Environmental
Engineer, Regulation Development Section, Air Programs Branch (AR-18J),
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, Chicago, Illinois
60604, (312) 886-1767.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
General Electric Medical Systems (GEM) owns a facility located at
4855 West Electric Avenue in Milwaukee, Wisconsin. The GEM facility
manufactures X-ray tubes and components for other medical systems, and
includes a cold cleaning operation which is part of an automated batch
chemical treatment process for X-ray tubes. The GEM facility is located
in the Milwaukee severe nonattainment area and is subject to rule NR
423 of the Wisconsin Administrative Code, which regulates VOC emissions
from solvent cleaning operations. This rule has been approved by the
United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) as meeting the RACT
requirements of the Clean Air Act (Act).
Specifically, under sections NR 423.03(3)(d), (i), and (j), GEM is
required to control organic compound emissions from the cold cleaning
operation through a freeboard ratio greater than or equal to 1.0,
through a water cover, or through an alternate control system
equivalent to a freeboard ratio of 1.0. Under section 423.03(9), any
alternate control method approved by the WDNR must be submitted to and
approved by EPA as a site-specific SIP revision. For the reasons
outlined below, GEM chose to install an alternate control system. The
WDNR has made the determination that the controls proposed by GEM are
more effective than those required by Rule 423 and has approved GEM's
proposal through Consent Order AM-96-200. On March 15, 1995, the
Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources (WDNR) submitted this Order
to EPA, along with associated materials, for incorporation into
Wisconsin's SIP.
II. Facility and Process Description
As noted above, GEM manufactures X-ray tubes and components for
other medical systems. This includes glass blowing, graphite target
manufacturing, cathode and anode machining and X-ray assembly. The X-
ray units are also tested and rebuilt at this facility.
The facility has a cold cleaning operation which is part of an
automated batch chemical treatment process for X-ray tubes. This
process consists of loading parts into a carrier that automatically
immerses them in various
[[Page 37217]]
chemicals, baths and water rinses, ending with immersion in the cold
cleaner bath which contains 95 percent ethanol and 5 percent methanol.
The equipment associated with the cold cleaning process was specially
made for this facility. The overhead conveyor was designed with a
limited vertical travel distance. With this limitation, the equipment
can not be modified to comply with a freeboard ratio greater than or
equal to 1.0 without significant expense. Consequently, GEM has
proposed an alternate control system.
GEM's proposed system includes an enclosed solvent storage tank,
control valves, pump and piping with an automated operating sequence.
The following is the proposed operation procedure for the equipment.
1. The cover opens.
2. The parts are lowered into an empty immersion tank.
3. The cover closes.
4. The solvent is pumped into the tank.
5. The parts are slowly agitated.
6. The solvent is drained from the tank.
7. The parts remain inside the tank until the excess solvent drips
off.
8. The cover opens.
9. The parts are removed.
10. The cover closes.
Additional design information for the proposed equipment is as
follows.
1. The cleaner will be fitted with a mechanically assisted bi-
parting cover.
2. The solvent storage tank will be enclosed.
3. The enclosed solvent storage tank along with associated control
valves, pump and piping will be installed and programmed to provide an
automated operating sequence.
4. The size of the tank will be 16'' W x 20'' L x 12'' H.
5. The cover will only be opened when the parts are being placed in
or removed from the tank.
III. Evaluation of State's Submittal
As noted previously, EPA has approved Wisconsin's rule NR 423 as
meeting the RACT requirements of the Act. Under sections
423.03(3)(d)3., and (j), sources may comply through an alternate method
approved by WDNR, providing that it achieves emission reductions
equivalent to that achieved under a freeboard ratio of 1.0.
Additionally, this alternate must be submitted to, and approved by,
EPA.
To demonstrate that the proposed alternate method of control is
equivalent to the level of control that would be achieved under a
freeboard ratio of 1.0, GEM relied on emission factors developed by EPA
and contained in the fifth edition of AP-42, dated January 1995. GEM
estimated that evaporative emissions from the cold cleaner operating
with a freeboard ratio of 1.0 and uncovered when in use (as allowed
under Wisconsin's rule), would be 0.35 pounds of VOC per day. The VOC
emissions resulting from the proposed enclosed system were estimated to
be 0.33 pounds per day.
The State has determined that the alternate control system proposed
by GEM meets the requirements of NR 423, as approved by EPA, and is
thus sufficient to meet the requirements of RACT. Furthermore, by
complying through the proposed alternate control method, the GEM
facility will be achieving greater emission reductions than it would
had it complied through the freeboard ratio specified in rule 423.
The proposed alternate control system has been reviewed by EPA, as
well as the procedures used to establish this alternate system. The
alternate control system will result in a net environmental benefit and
is consistent with the RACT regulation promulgated by the State and
approved by EPA.
IV. Final Rulemaking Action
The EPA approves Wisconsin's site-specific SIP revision for
incorporation into the State's federally enforceable ozone SIP.
Because EPA considers this action noncontroversial and routine, we
are approving it without prior proposal. This action will become
effective on September 16, 1996. However, if we receive adverse
comments by August 16, 1996, EPA will publish a document that withdraws
this action.
V. Miscellaneous
A. Applicability to Future SIP Decisions
Nothing in this action should be construed as permitting, allowing
or establishing a precedent for any future request for revision to any
SIP. The EPA shall consider each request for revision to the SIP in
light of specific technical, economic, and environmental factors and in
relation to relevant statutory and regulatory requirements.
B. Executive Order 12866
This action has been classified as a Table 3 action for signature
by the Regional Administrator under the procedures published in the
Federal Register on January 19, 1989 (54 FR 2214), as revised by a July
10, 1995 memorandum from Mary Nichols, Assistant Administrator for Air
and Radiation. The Office of Management and Budget has exempted this
regulatory action from E.O. 12866 review.
C. Regulatory Flexibility
Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 600 et seq., EPA
must prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis assessing the impact of
any proposed or final rule on small entities (5 U.S.C. 603 and 604).
Alternatively, EPA may certify that the rule will not have a
significant impact on a substantial number of small entities. Small
entities include small businesses, small not-for-profit enterprises,
and government entities with jurisdiction over populations of less than
50,000.
This approval does not create any new requirements. Therefore, I
certify that this action does not have a significant impact on any
small entities affected. Moreover, due to the nature of the Federal-
State relationship under the Act, preparation of the regulatory
flexibility analysis would constitute Federal inquiry into the economic
reasonableness of the State action. The Act forbids EPA to base its
actions concerning SIPs on such grounds. Union Electric Co. v. U.S.
EPA, 427 U.S. 246, 256-66 (1976).
D. Unfunded Mandates
Under Section 202 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
(``Unfunded Mandates Act''), 2 U.S.C. 1532, the EPA must prepare a
budgetary impact statement to accompany any proposed or final rule that
includes a Federal mandate that may result in estimated costs to State,
local, or tribal governments in the aggregate; or to the private
sector, of $100 million or more. Under Section 205, 2 U.S.C. 1532, the
EPA must select the most cost-effective and least burdensome
alternative that achieves the objectives of the rule and is consistent
with statutory requirements. Section 203, 2 U.S.C. 1532, requires the
EPA to establish a plan for informing and advising any small
governments that may be significantly or uniquely impacted by the rule.
The EPA has determined that the approval action promulgated today
does not include a Federal mandate that may result in estimated costs
of $100 million or more to either State, local, or tribal governments
in the aggregate, or to the private sector.
This Federal action approves pre-existing requirements under State
or local law, and imposes no new Federal requirements. Accordingly, no
additional costs to State, local, or tribal governments, or the private
sector, result from this action.
E. Petitions for Judicial Review
Under Section 307(b)(1) of the Act, petitions for judicial review
of this
[[Page 37218]]
action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for the
appropriate circuit by September 16, 1996. Filing a petition for
reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect
the finality of this rule for the purposes of judicial review, nor does
it extend the time within which a petition for judicial review may be
filed and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such rule or action.
This action may not be challenged later in proceedings to enforce its
requirements (see Section 307(b)(2)).
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Hydrocarbons,
Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Ozone,
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
Dated: June 17, 1996.
David A. Ullrich,
Acting Regional Administrator.
40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows:
PART 52--[AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401-7671q.
Subpart YY--Wisconsin
2. Section 52.2570 is amended by adding paragraph (c)(95) to read
as follows:
Sec. 52.2570 Identification of plan.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(95) On March 15, 1996, Wisconsin submitted a site-specific SIP
revision in the form of a consent order for incorporation into the
federally enforceable ozone SIP. This consent order establishes an
alternate volatile organic compound control system for a cold cleaning
operation at the General Electric Medical Systems facility located at
4855 West Electric Avenue in Milwaukee.
(i) Incorporation by reference. The following items are
incorporated by reference.
(A) State of Wisconsin Consent Order AM-96-200, dated February 20,
1996.
(B) September 15, 1995 letter from Michael S. Davis, Manager--Air
and Chemical Management Programs, General Electric Medical Systems to
Denese Helgeland, Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, along with
the enclosed system diagram. (This letter is referenced in Consent
Order AM-96-200.)
[FR Doc. 96-17990 Filed 7-16-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
Complete official Federal Register PDF
FR Doc. 96-17984 Airworthiness Directives; British Aerospace Model BAe 146-100A, - 200A, and -300A Series Airplanes
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 138 (Wednesday, July 17, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 37199-37202]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-17984]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. 96-NM-162-AD; Amendment 39-9694; AD 96-14-09]
RIN 2120-AA64
Airworthiness Directives; British Aerospace Model BAe 146-100A, -
200A, and -300A Series Airplanes
AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration, DOT.
ACTION: Final rule; request for comments.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This document publishes in the Federal Register an amendment
adopting Airworthiness Directive (AD) 96-14-09 that was sent previously
to all known U.S. owners and operators of British Aerospace Model BAe
146-100A, -200A, and -300A series airplanes by individual notices. This
amendment supersedes a previously issued AD that currently requires
installation of a placard prescribing special procedures to be followed
when operating at certain flight levels with the engine and airframe
anti-ice switch ON; modification of the air brake auto-retract
function; and a revision to the Airplane Flight Manual (AFM) to include
special procedures for operating in certain icing conditions. This new
amendment adds a requirement to accomplish an additional revision to
the AFM relative to altitude and operating limitations associated with
flight in icing conditions above 26,000 feet. This amendment is
prompted by reports of uncommanded engine thrust reductions
[[Page 37200]]
(rollback) when operating in certain icing conditions that exist in the
vicinity of thunderstorms. The actions specified by this AD are
intended to prevent engine power rollback during flight in icing
conditions, a condition that could result in insufficient power to
sustain flight.
DATES: Effective July 22, 1996, to all persons except those persons to
whom it was made immediately effective by AD 96-14-09, issued July 2,
1996, which contained the requirements of this amendment.
The incorporation by reference of certain publications listed in
the regulations is approved by the Director of the Federal Register as
of July 22, 1996.
Comments for inclusion in the Rules Docket must be received on or
before September 16, 1996.
ADDRESSES: Submit comments in triplicate to the Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), Transport Airplane Directorate, ANM-103,
Attention: Rules Docket No. 96-NM-162-AD, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW.,
Renton, Washington 98055-4056.
The applicable service information may be obtained from British
Aerospace Holding, Inc., Avro International Aerospace Division, P.O.
Box 16039, Dulles International Airport, Washington DC 20041-6039. This
information may be examined at the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate,
1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington; or at the Office of the
Federal Register, 800 North Capitol Street, NW., suite 700, Washington,
DC.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: William Schroeder, Aerospace Engineer,
Standardization Branch, ANM-113, FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate,
1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 98055-4056; telephone (206)
227-2148; fax (206) 227-1149.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On March 24, 1994, the FAA issued AD 94-07-
09, amendment 39-8867 (59 FR 15042, March 31, 1994), applicable to all
British Aerospace Model BAe 146-100A, -200A, and -300A airplanes. That
AD requires:
1. installation of a placard, which prescribes special procedures
when operating at certain flight levels with the engine and airframe
anti-ice switch ON;
2. modification of the air brake auto-retract function; and
3. revisions to the FAA-approved Airplane Flight Manual (AFM),
which prescribe certain altitude and operating limitations and
procedures.
That AD was prompted by reports of uncommanded engine thrust
reductions (rollback) when operating in certain icing conditions that
exist in the vicinity of thunderstorms. The requirements of that AD are
intended to prevent engine power rollback during flight in icing
conditions.
Actions Since Issuance of Previous AD
Since issuance of that AD, the Civil Aviation Authority (CAA),
which is the airworthiness authority for the United Kingdom, notified
the FAA that it has received two additional reports of uncommanded
engine thrust reductions (rollback) when operating these airplanes in
icing conditions at altitudes above 26,000 feet. In these incidents,
the power level of one or more of the engine(s) simultaneously rolled
back below the level set by the flightcrew. The engines failed to
respond when the flightcrew attempted to restore power by moving the
power controls. In one of these incidents, the airplane lost altitude
before the flightcrew could restart the engines that are needed to
arrest the descent of the airplane. In addition, some of these engines
had exceeded their temperature limits during the rollback event and,
consequently, the flightcrew had to shut down those engines in flight.
The cause of these engine power rollback incidents has been
attributed to the accumulation of ice on a stator in the compressor
section of the engine. If engine power rollback occurs during flight in
icing conditions, it could result in insufficient power to sustain
flight.
Explanation of Relevant Service Information
British Aerospace has issued the following Temporary Revisions (TR)
to the AFM, all of which are dated July 1996:
1. TR 32, Issue No. 2, Document No. BAe 3.3 (for Model BAe 146-100A
airplanes);
2. TR 44, Issue No. 2, Document No. BAe 3.6 (for Model BAe 146-200A
airplanes); and
3. TR 25, Issue No. 2, Document No. BAe 3.11 (for Model BAe 146-
300A airplanes).
These TR's prescribe certain altitude and operating limitations,
which prohibit flight into known or forecast icing conditions above an
altitude of 26,000 feet, and define procedures to be followed when
icing conditions are inadvertently encountered above 26,000 feet.
The CAA has approved these AFM revisions and has issued British
airworthiness directive 003-06-096, dated July 1, 1996, to mandate the
described limitations and procedures in order to assure the continued
airworthiness of these airplanes in the United Kingdom.
FAA's Conclusion
This airplane model is manufactured in the United Kingdom and is
type certificated for operation in the United States under the
provisions of Section 21.29 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR
21.29) and the applicable bilateral airworthiness agreement. Pursuant
to this bilateral airworthiness agreement, the CAA has kept the FAA
informed of the situation described above. The FAA has examined the
findings of the CAA, reviewed all available information, and determined
that AD action is necessary for products of this type design that are
certificated for operation in the United States.
Explanation of Requirements of AD
Since an unsafe condition has been identified that is likely to
exist or develop on other airplanes of this same type design registered
in the United States, this airworthiness directive is issued to
supersede AD 94-07-09. It continues to require installation of a
placard, which prescribes special procedures when operating at certain
flight levels with the engine and airframe anti-ice switch ON; and
modification of the air brake auto-retract function. This new AD also
requires additional new revisions to the FAA-approved AFM. These new
revisions prescribe certain altitude and operating limitations, which
prohibit flight into known or forecast icing conditions above an
altitude of 26,000 feet, and define procedures to be followed when
icing conditions are inadvertently encountered above 26,000 feet. The
AFM revisions are required to be accomplished in accordance with the
TR's described previously.
Interim Action
The requirements of this AD are considered to be interim action
until final action is identified, at which time the FAA may consider
further rulemaking.
Publication and Effectivity of AD
Since it was found that immediate corrective action was required,
notice and opportunity for prior public comment thereon were
impracticable and contrary to the public interest, and good cause
existed to make the AD effective immediately by individual notices
issued on July 2, 1996, to all known U.S. owners and operators of
British Aerospace Model BAe 146-100A, -200A, and -300A series
airplanes. These conditions still exist,
[[Page 37201]]
and the AD is hereby published in the Federal Register as an amendment
to section 39.13 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR 39.13) to
make it effective as to all persons.
Comments Invited
Although this action is in the form of a final rule that involves
requirements affecting flight safety and, thus, was not preceded by
notice and an opportunity for public comment, comments are invited on
this rule. Interested persons are invited to comment on this rule by
submitting such written data, views, or arguments as they may desire.
Communications shall identify the Rules Docket number and be submitted
in triplicate to the address specified under the caption ADDRESSES. All
communications received on or before the closing date for comments will
be considered, and this rule may be amended in light of the comments
received. Factual information that supports the commenter's ideas and
suggestions is extremely helpful in evaluating the effectiveness of the
AD action and determining whether additional rulemaking action would be
needed.
Comments are specifically invited on the overall regulatory,
economic, environmental, and energy aspects of the rule that might
suggest a need to modify the rule. All comments submitted will be
available, both before and after the closing date for comments, in the
Rules Docket for examination by interested persons. A report that
summarizes each FAA-public contact concerned with the substance of this
AD will be filed in the Rules Docket.
Commenters wishing the FAA to acknowledge receipt of their comments
submitted in response to this rule must submit a self-addressed,
stamped postcard on which the following statement is made: ``Comments
to Docket Number 96-NM-162-AD.'' The postcard will be date stamped and
returned to the commenter.
Regulatory Impact
The regulations adopted herein will not have substantial direct
effects on the States, on the relationship between the national
government and the States, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various levels of government. Therefore, in
accordance with Executive Order 12612, it is determined that this final
rule does not have sufficient federalism implications to warrant the
preparation of a Federalism Assessment.
The FAA has determined that this regulation is an emergency
regulation that must be issued immediately to correct an unsafe
condition in aircraft, and that it is not a ``significant regulatory
action'' under Executive Order 12866. It has been determined further
that this action involves an emergency regulation under DOT Regulatory
Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979). If it is
determined that this emergency regulation otherwise would be
significant under DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures, a final
regulatory evaluation will be prepared and placed in the Rules Docket.
A copy of it, if filed, may be obtained from the Rules Docket at the
location provided under the caption ADDRESSES.
List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39
Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by
reference, Safety.
Adoption of the Amendment
Accordingly, pursuant to the authority delegated to me by the
Administrator, the Federal Aviation Administration amends part 39 of
the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR part 39) as follows:
PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES
1. The authority citation for part 39 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.
Sec. 39.13 [Amended]
2. Section 39.13 is amended by removing amendment 39-8867 (59 FR
15042, March 31, 1994), and by adding a new airworthiness directive
(AD), amendment 39-9694, to read as follows:
96-14-09 British Aerospace Regional Aircraft Limited, Avro
International Aerospace Division (Formerly British Aerospace, plc;
British Aerospace Commercial Aircraft Limited): Docket No. 96-NM-
162-AD. Supersedes AD 94-07-09, Amendment 39-8867.
Applicability: All Model BAe 146-100A, -200A, and -300A
airplanes, certificated in any category.
Note 1: This AD applies to each airplane identified in the
preceding applicability provision, regardless of whether it has been
modified, altered, or repaired in the area subject to the
requirements of this AD. For airplanes that have been modified,
altered, or repaired so that the performance of the requirements of
this ad is affected, the owner/operator must request approval for an
alternative method of compliance in accordance with paragraph (e) of
this AD. The request should include an assessment of the effect of
the modification, alteration, or repair on the unsafe condition
addressed by this AD; and, if the unsafe condition has not been
eliminated, the request should include specific proposed actions to
address it.
Compliance: Required as indicated, unless accomplished
previously.
To prevent engine power rollback during flight in icing
conditions above an altitude of 26,000 feet, accomplish the
following:
(a) For airplanes listed in British Aerospace Service Bulletin
SB.11-97-01285A, Revision 1, dated April 3, 1992: Within 30 days
after December 17, 1992 (the effective date of AD 92-24-09,
amendment 39-8415), install a placard below the ice protection
switches on the flight deck overhead panel to include additional
procedures to be followed when operating at certain flight levels
with the engine and airframe anti-ice switch ON, in accordance with
British Aerospace Service Bulletin SB.11-97-01285A, Revision 1,
dated April 3, 1992.
(b) For airplanes listed in British Aerospace Service Bulletin
SB.11-97-01285A, Revision 1, dated April 3, 1992: Within 30 days
after December 17, 1992 (the effective date of AD 92-24-09,
amendment 39-8415), modify the air brake auto-retract function, in
accordance with British Aerospace Service Bulletin SB.11-97-01285A,
Revision 1, dated April 3, 1992.
(c) Within 6 days after the effective date of this AD, amend the
FAA-approved Airplane Flight Manual (AFM) as required by paragraphs
(c)(1) and (c)(2) of this AD.
(1) Remove the following Temporary Revisions (TR) from the
Limitations Section and Normal/Abnormal Procedures Section, as
applicable:
(i) For Model BAe 146-100A airplanes: TR 30, Issue No. 2
(Document No. BAe 3.3), dated February 1994.
(ii) For Model BAe 146-200A airplanes: TR 41, Issue No. 2
(Document No. BAe 3.3), dated February 1994, or TR 42, Issue No. 2
(Document No. BAe 3.3), dated February 1994, as applicable.
(iii) For Model BAe 146-300A airplanes: TR 23, Issue No. 2
(Document No. BAe 3.3), dated February 1994.
(2) Insert the following TR's into the Limitations Section and
the Normal/Abnormal Procedures/Handling Section, as applicable.
(i) For Model BAe 146-100A airplanes: TR 32, Issue No. 2
(Document BAe 3.3), dated July 1996.
(ii) For Model BAe 146-200A airplanes: TR 44, Issue No. 2
(Document BAe 3.6), dated July 1996.
(iii) For Model BAe 146-300A airplanes: TR 25, Issue No. 2
(Document BAe 3.11), dated July 1996.
(d) When the TR's specified in paragraph (c)(2) have been
incorporated into an AFM General Revision, the applicable AFM
General Revision may be inserted into the corresponding FAA-approved
AFM, provided the information contained in the AFM General Revision
corresponds identically to that specified in TR 32, TR 44, or TR 25.
(e) An alternative method of compliance or adjustment of the
compliance time that provides an acceptable level of safety may be
used if approved by the Manager, Standardization Branch, ANM-113,
FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate. Operators shall submit their
requests through an appropriate FAA Principal Operations
[[Page 37202]]
Inspector, who may add comments and then send it to the Manager,
Standardization Branch, ANM-113.
Note 2: Information concerning the existence of approved
alternative methods of compliance with this AD, if any, may be
obtained from the Standardization Branch, ANM-113.
(f) Special flight permits may be issued in accordance with
Sections 21.197 and 21.199 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14
CFR 21.197 and 21.199) to operate the airplane to a location where
the requirements of this AD can be accomplished.
(g) The AFM revisions shall be done in accordance with Temporary
Revision (TR) 32, Issue No. 2 (Document BAe 3.3), dated July 1996
(for Model BAe 146-100A airplanes); TR 44, Issue No. 2 (Document BAe
3.6), dated July 1996 (for Model BAe 146-200A airplanes); and TR 25,
Issue No. 2 (Document BAe 3.11), dated July 1996 (for Model BAe 146-
300A airplanes); as applicable. This incorporation by reference was
approved by the Director of the Federal Register in accordance with
5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51. Copies may be obtained from
British Aerospace Holding, Inc., Avro International Aerospace
Division, P.O. Box 16039, Dulles International Airport, Washington
DC 20041-6039. Copies may be inspected at the FAA, Transport
Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington; or
at the Office of the Federal Register, 800 North Capitol Street,
NW., suite 700, Washington, DC.
(h) This amendment becomes effective on July 22, 1996, to all
persons except those persons to whom it was made immediately
effective by emergency AD 96-14-09, issued July 2, 1996, which
contained the requirements of this amendment.
Issued in Renton, Washington, on July 10, 1996.
Darrell M. Pederson,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 96-17984 Filed 7-16-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-U
Complete official Federal Register PDF
FR Doc. 96-17982 Airworthiness Directives; Boeing Model 767 Series Airplanes
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 138 (Wednesday, July 17, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 37202-37204]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-17982]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. 96-NM-161-AD; Amendment 39-9695; AD 96-14-51]
RIN 2120-AA64
Airworthiness Directives; Boeing Model 767 Series Airplanes
AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration, DOT.
ACTION: Final rule; request for comments.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This document publishes in the Federal Register an amendment
adopting Airworthiness Directive (AD) T96-14-51 that was sent
previously to all known U.S. owners and operators of Boeing Model 767
series airplanes by individual telegrams. This AD requires an
inspection of the aileron control cables and the generator feeder
cables to detect chafing damage of the cables and to ensure that a
minimum clearance exists between them. It also requires the correction
of any discrepancies detected and submission of a report of inspection
results to the FAA. This amendment is prompted by reports of failure of
the aileron control cables due to inadequate clearance between the
aileron control cable and the generator power feeder cable, which
occurred during manufacture of the airplane.. The actions specified by
this AD are intended to prevent reduced controllability of the airplane
due to failure of the aileron control cable.
DATES: Effective July 22, 1996, to all persons except those persons to
whom it was made immediately effective by telegraphic AD T96-14-51,
issued July 3, 1996, which contained the requirements of this
amendment.
The incorporation by reference of certain publications listed in
the regulations is approved by the Director of the Federal Register as
of July 22, 1996.
Comments for inclusion in the Rules Docket must be received on or
before September 16, 1996.
ADDRESSES: Submit comments in triplicate to the Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), Transport Airplane Directorate, ANM-103,
Attention: Rules Docket No. 96-NM-161-AD, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW.,
Renton, Washington 98055-4056.
The applicable service information may be obtained from Boeing
Commercial Airplane Group, P. O. Box 3707, Seattle, Washington 98124-
2207. This information may be examined at the FAA, Transport Airplane
Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington; or at the
Office of the Federal Register, 800 North Capitol Street, NW., suite
700, Washington, DC.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Stephen S. Oshiro, Aerospace Engineer,
Systems and Equipment Branch, ANM-130S, FAA, Transport Airplane
Directorate, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office, 1601 Lind Avenue,
SW., Renton, Washington 98055-4056; telephone (206) 227-2793; fax (206)
227-1181.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On July 3, 1996, the FAA issued telegraphic
AD T96-14-51, which is applicable to certain Boeing Model 767 series
airplanes. That action was prompted by two reports of failure of the
aileron control cable on these airplanes. The failures have been
attributed to inadequate clearance between the left side aileron
control cable and the right generator power feeder cable, which
occurred during manufacture of the airplane.
One of the reported failures resulted in uncommanded movement of
the left side ailerons shortly after takeoff, which required
significant compensating control wheel input to correct, and resulted
in an air turnback to the departure airport. The uncommanded aileron
movement occurred almost concurrently with the right generator tripping
off-line. Investigation revealed that the aileron control cable A2B-3
was broken. Further investigation revealed that the right generator
power feeder cable (W208) had been damaged (due to chafing) and
approximately \1/4\-inch of the conductor was exposed. This cable is
routed from the aft side of the P32 panel. The power feeder cable can
chafe the aileron control cable (A2B-3) at approximately Station 340,
Water Line (WL) 190, Right Buttock Line (RBL) 67.5. The airplane
involved in this incident had accumulated 5,940 flight hours and 857
flight cycles.
The second reported failure occurred during a pre-flight control
check of the airplane while it was on the ground. Investigation
revealed that the left side aileron control cable was broken at the
same approximate location as breakage found on the airplane involved in
the previous incident. Additionally, the right generator power feeder
cable was damaged.
Contact between the generator power feeder cable and the aileron
control cable on either the left or right side of the airplane could
result in chafing damage to the insulation on the feeder cable. Such
damage could cause short circuiting and arcing, which could sever the
aileron control cable. This condition, if not corrected, could result
in failure of the aileron control cable, and consequent reduced
controllability of the airplane.
Explanation of Relevant Service Information
The FAA has reviewed and approved Boeing Alert Service Bulletin
767-24A0113, Revision 1, dated July 2, 1996, which describes procedures
for a one-time inspection of the aileron control cable (A2B-3) and the
right generator power feeder cable (W208) on the right side of the
airplane, and the aileron control cable (A1A-3) and the left generator
power feeder cable (W204) on the left side of the airplane. The intent
of this inspection is to detect chafing damage of the cables, and to
ensure that a minimum clearance of one inch exists between the power
feeder cables and aileron control cables. The service bulletin also
describes procedures for
[[Page 37203]]
repair or adjustment of the cables, if necessary.
Explanation of Requirements of the Rule
Since the unsafe condition described is likely to exist or develop
on other airplanes of the same type design, the FAA issued Telegraphic
AD T96-14-51 to prevent reduced controllability of the airplane due to
failure of the aileron control cable. The AD requires a one-time
inspection of the aileron control cables and the generator power feeder
cables on the left and right sides of the airplane to detect chafing
damage of the cables, and to ensure that a minimum clearance of one
inch exists between them. The AD also requires repair or adjustment of
the cables, if necessary. These actions are required to be accomplished
in accordance with the alert service bulletin previously described.
This AD also requires that operators submit a report to the FAA of
inspection findings where clearance is found to be less than one inch.
Publication and Effectivity of AD
Since it was found that immediate corrective action was required,
notice and opportunity for prior public comment thereon were
impracticable and contrary to the public interest, and good cause
existed to make the AD effective immediately by individual telegrams
issued on July 3, 1996, to all known U.S. owners and operators of
Boeing Model 767 series airplanes. These conditions still exist, and
the AD is hereby published in the Federal Register as an amendment to
section 39.13 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR 39.13) to
make it effective to all persons.
Comments Invited
Although this action is in the form of a final rule that involves
requirements affecting flight safety and, thus, was not preceded by
notice and an opportunity for public comment, comments are invited on
this rule. Interested persons are invited to comment on this rule by
submitting such written data, views, or arguments as they may desire.
Communications shall identify the Rules Docket number and be submitted
in triplicate to the address specified under the caption ADDRESSES. All
communications received on or before the closing date for comments will
be considered, and this rule may be amended in light of the comments
received. Factual information that supports the commenter's ideas and
suggestions is extremely helpful in evaluating the effectiveness of the
AD action and determining whether additional rulemaking action would be
needed.
Comments are specifically invited on the overall regulatory,
economic, environmental, and energy aspects of the rule that might
suggest a need to modify the rule. All comments submitted will be
available, both before and after the closing date for comments, in the
Rules Docket for examination by interested persons. A report that
summarizes each FAA-public contact concerned with the substance of this
AD will be filed in the Rules Docket.
Commenters wishing the FAA to acknowledge receipt of their comments
submitted in response to this rule must submit a self-addressed,
stamped postcard on which the following statement is made: ``Comments
to Docket Number 96-NM-161-AD.'' The postcard will be date stamped and
returned to the commenter.
Regulatory Impact
The regulations adopted herein will not have substantial direct
effects on the States, on the relationship between the national
government and the States, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various levels of government. Therefore, in
accordance with Executive Order 12612, it is determined that this final
rule does not have sufficient federalism implications to warrant the
preparation of a Federalism Assessment.
The FAA has determined that this regulation is an emergency
regulation that must be issued immediately to correct an unsafe
condition in aircraft, and that it is not a ``significant regulatory
action'' under Executive Order 12866. It has been determined further
that this action involves an emergency regulation under DOT Regulatory
Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979). If it is
determined that this emergency regulation otherwise would be
significant under DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures, a final
regulatory evaluation will be prepared and placed in the Rules Docket.
A copy of it, if filed, may be obtained from the Rules Docket at the
location provided under the caption ADDRESSES.
List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39
Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by
reference, Safety.
Adoption of the Amendment
Accordingly, pursuant to the authority delegated to me by the
Administrator, the Federal Aviation Administration amends part 39 of
the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR part 39) as follows:
PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES
1. The authority citation for part 39 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.
Sec. 39.13 [Amended]
2. Section 39.13 is amended by adding the following new
airworthiness directive:
96-14-51 Boeing: Amendment 39-9695. Docket 96-NM-161-AD.
Applicability: Model 767 series airplanes; line numbers 1
through 618 inclusive, except for line numbers 580, 590, 594, 598,
and 600; certificated in any category.
Note 1: This AD applies to each airplane identified in the
preceding applicability provision, regardless of whether it has been
modified, altered, or repaired in the area subject to the
requirements of this AD. For airplanes that have been modified,
altered, or repaired so that the performance of the requirements of
this AD is affected, the owner/operator must request approval for an
alternative method of compliance in accordance with paragraph (c) of
this AD. The request should include an assessment of the effect of
the modification, alteration, or repair on the unsafe condition
addressed by this AD; and, if the unsafe condition has not been
eliminated, the request should include specific proposed actions to
address it.
Compliance: Required as indicated, unless accomplished
previously.
To prevent reduced controllability of the airplane due to
failure of the aileron control cable, accomplish the following:
(a) Within 10 days after the effective date of this AD: Perform
a one-time inspection of the aileron control cables and the
generator feeder cables on both the left and right sides of the
airplane to detect chafing damage of the cables, and to ensure that
a minimum clearance of 1.0 inch exists between the power feeders and
aileron control cables, in accordance with Boeing Alert Service
Bulletin 767-24A0113, Revision 1, dated July 2, 1996.
(1) If a minimum clearance of 1.0 inch exists between the
cables, and if no damage is detected: No further action is required
by this AD.
(2) If the clearance between the cables is 0.5 inch or more, but
less than 1.0 inch, and if no contact between the cables or damage
of the cables is detected: Within 500 flight hours after the
inspection, adjust the power feeder cable to achieve a minimum
clearance of 1.0 inch from the respective aileron control cables, in
accordance with the alert service bulletin.
(3) If the clearance between the cables is less than 0.5 inch,
or if any contact between the cables or damage of the cables is
detected: Prior to further flight, repair the damage and adjust the
cables to achieve a minimum clearance of 1.0 inch from the
respective aileron control cables, in accordance with the alert
service bulletin.
[[Page 37204]]
(b) For any airplane on which damage of the aileron control
cable or the generator feeder cable is observed, or for which
clearance between the cables is less than 1 inch, as detected by the
inspection required by paragraph (a) of this AD: Within 10 days
after accomplishing the inspection, submit a report of inspection
findings to the FAA, Manager, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office,
1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 98055-4056; fax (206) 227-
1181. The report shall include the items identified in paragraphs
(b)(1), (b)(2), (b)(3), and (b)(4) of this AD. Information
collection requirements contained in this regulation have been
approved by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et
seq.) and have been assigned OMB Control Number 2120-0056.
(1) the operator's name;
(2) the line number of the airplane;
(3) a brief description of the damage detected; and
(4) the amount of separation between the aileron control cable
and the power feeder cable.
(c) An alternative method of compliance or adjustment of the
compliance time that provides an acceptable level of safety may be
used if approved by the Manager, Seattle Aircraft Certification
Office (ACO), FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate. Operators shall
submit their requests through an appropriate FAA Principal
Maintenance Inspector, who may add comments and then send it to the
Manager, Seattle ACO.
Note 2: Information concerning the existence of approved
alternative methods of compliance with this AD, if any, may be
obtained from the Seattle ACO.
(d) Special flight permits may be issued in accordance with
sections 21.197 and 21.199 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14
CFR 21.197 and 21.199) to operate the airplane to a location where
the requirements of this AD can be accomplished.
(e) The inspection, adjustment, and repair shall be done in
accordance with Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 767-24A0113, Revision
1, dated July 2, 1996. This incorporation by reference was approved
by the Director of the Federal Register in accordance with 5 U.S.C.
552(a) and 1 CFR part 51. Copies may be obtained from Boeing
Commercial Airplane Group, P.O. Box 3707, Seattle, Washington 98124-
2207. Copies may be inspected at the FAA, Transport Airplane
Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington; or at the
Office of the Federal Register, 800 North Capitol Street, NW., suite
700, Washington, DC.
(f) This amendment becomes effective on July 22, 1996, to all
persons except those persons to whom it was made immediately
effective by telegraphic AD T96-14-51, issued on July 3, 1996, which
contained the requirements of this amendment.
Issued in Renton, Washington, on July 10, 1996.
Darrell M. Pederson,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 96-17982 Filed 7-16-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-U
Complete official Federal Register PDF
FR Doc. 96-16588 Folpet; Revocation of Pesticide Tolerances
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 138 (Wednesday, July 17, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 37218-37222]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-16588]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 180
[OPP-300363B; FRL-5382-1]
RIN 2070-AC18
Folpet; Revocation of Pesticide Tolerances
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final Rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This rule revokes tolerances for folpet residues in or on the
following commodities: celery, cherries, leeks, onions (green),
shallots, blackberries, blueberries, boysenberries, crabapples,
currants, dewberries, gooseberries, huckleberries, loganberries,
raspberries, citrus fruits, garlic, pumpkins, summer squash, and winter
squash. This revocation is necessary because the registrant has
voluntarily canceled use of this fungicide on these commodities.
EFFECTIVE DATE: This final rule becomes effective September 16, 1996.
ADDRESSES: Written objections and hearing requests, identified by the
docket, [OPP-300363B], may be submitted to: Hearing Clerk (1900),
Environmental Protection Agency, Rm. M3708, 401 M St., SW., Washington,
DC 20460. Fees accompanying objections and hearing requests shall be
labeled ``Tolerance Petition Fees'' and forwarded to: EPA Headquarters
Accounting Operations Branch, OPP (Tolerance Fees), P.O. Box 360277M,
Pittsburgh, PA 15251. A copy of any objections and hearing requests
filed with the Hearing Clerk should be identified by the docket number
and submitted to: Public Response and Program Resources Branch, Field
Operations Division (7506C), Office of Pesticide Programs,
Environmental Protection Agency, 401 M St., SW., Washington, DC 20460.
In person, bring copy of objections and hearing requests to: Rm. 1132,
CM #2, 1921 Jefferson Davis Hwy., Arlington, VA 22202.
A copy of objections and hearing requests filed with the Hearing
Clerk may also be submitted electronically by sending electronic mail
(e-mail) to: [email protected]. Copies of objections and
hearing requests must be submitted as an ASCII file avoiding the use of
special characters and any form of encryption. Copies of objections and
hearing requests will also be accepted on disks in WordPerfect in 5.1
file format or ASCII file format. All copies of objections and hearing
requests in electronic form must be identified by the docket number
[OPP-300363B]. No ``Confidential Business Information'' (CBI) should be
submitted through e-mail. Electronic copies of objections and hearing
requests on this rule may be filed online at many Federal Depository
Libraries. Additional information on electronic submissions can be
found below in this document.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: By mail, Jeff Morris, Review Manager,
Special Review Branch (7508W), Office of Pesticide Programs,
Environmental Protection Agency, 401 M St., SW., Washington, DC 20460.
Office location and telephone number: 3rd floor, Crystal Station, 2800
Crystal Drive, Arlington, VA 22202, (703) 308-8029; e-mail:
[email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Following issuance of a proposed rule to
revoke folpet tolerances (59 FR 61859, December 2, 1994)(FRL-4912-6)
and considering comments that EPA received in response to the proposed
rule, this rule serves as a final order to revoke tolerances for folpet
residues in or on the following commodities: celery, cherries, leeks,
onions (green), shallots, blackberries, blueberries, boysenberries,
crabapples, currants, dewberries, gooseberries, huckleberries,
loganberries, raspberries, citrus fruits, garlic, pumpkins, summer
squash, and winter squash. The tolerance for folpet residues in or on
avocados will remain as currently listed in 40 CFR 180.191, and will be
addressed through the reregistration process (the avocado tolerance was
not subject to the December 2, 1994 proposed rule). In a separate
notice, EPA will address the remaining tolerances that were subject to
the proposed rule; the registrant is currently generating data to
support those tolerances.
I. Legal Authorization
The Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA, 21 U.S.C. 301 et
seq.) authorizes the establishment of tolerances (maximum legal residue
levels) and exemptions from the requirement of a tolerance for residues
of pesticide chemicals in or on raw agricultural commodities pursuant
to section 408 [21 U.S.C. 346(a)]. Without such tolerances or
exemptions, a food containing pesticide residues is considered to be
``adulterated'' under section 402 of FFDCA, and hence may not legally
be moved in interstate commerce [21 U.S.C. 342]. To establish a
tolerance or an exemption under section 408 of FFDCA, EPA must make a
finding that the promulgation of the rule would ``protect the public
health'' [21 U.S.C. 346a(b)]. For a pesticide to be sold and
distributed, the pesticide must not only have appropriate tolerances
under FFDCA, but also must be registered under the Federal Insecticide,
[[Page 37219]]
Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA, 7 U.S.C. 136 et seq.).
In 1988, Congress amended FIFRA and required EPA to review and
reassess the potential hazards arising from currently registered uses
of pesticides registered prior to November 1, 1984. As part of this
process, EPA must determine whether a pesticide is eligible for
reregistration or whether any subsequent actions are required to fully
attain reregistration status. EPA has chosen to include in the
reregistration process a reassessment of existing tolerances or
exemptions from the need for a tolerance. Through this reassessment
process, based on more recent data, EPA can determine whether a
tolerance must be amended, revoked, or established, or whether an
exemption from the requirement of one or more tolerances must be
amended or is necessary.
Tolerance procedures are discussed in 40 CFR parts 177 through 180.
Part 177 establishes the procedures for establishing, amending, or
revoking tolerances or exemptions from the requirement of tolerances;
part 178 contains procedures for filing objections and requests for
hearings; part 179 contains rules governing formal evidentiary
hearings; and part 180 contains regulations establishing tolerances or
exemptions from the requirements of a tolerance. The Administrator of
EPA, or any person by petition, may initiate an action proposing to
establish, amend, revoke, or exempt a tolerance for a pesticide
registered for food uses. Each petition or request for a new tolerance,
an amendment to an existing tolerance, or a new exemption from the
requirement of a tolerance must be accompanied by a fee. Comments
submitted in response to EPA's published proposals are reviewed; EPA
then publishes its final determination regarding the specific tolerance
actions. Monitoring and enforcement of pesticide tolerances are carried
out by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the U.S.
Department of Agriculture (USDA). This includes monitoring for
pesticide residues in or on commodities imported into the United
States.
II. Background
Folpet is a broad-spectrum fungicide registered for industrial use
in paints, stains, coatings, and plastics. In addition, two folpet
products are registered for food use. One product is actively
registered for use on avocados in Florida only; the other is a
registration for all folpet food uses, including the food uses covered
by the tolerances that are subject to this rule, that EPA suspended in
1987 for failure of the registrant to supply the data required by EPA
to support the continued registration of these uses. EPA has classified
folpet as a B2 (probable) human carcinogen.
A. Proposed Revocation of Tolerances and Comment Period Extension
At the time the proposed rule was published, with the exception of
data to support the avocado use, the registrant had not submitted the
following residue chemistry data, which, according to the June 1987
folpet registration standard, are needed to support registration of the
commodities subject to this rule: nature of the residues (metabolism)
studies (guideline no. 171-4a) for representative crops; analytical
method validation (guideline no. 171-4c); storage stability studies
(guideline no. 171-4e) for representative crops; crop field trials
(guideline no. 171-4k) for the subject commodities; and processing
studies (guideline no. 171-4l) for applicable commodities. These data
are required under 40 CFR part 158, and are needed to allow EPA to
determine whether a proposed tolerance level is practical and
achievable. Because the establishment of a tolerance under section 408
of FFDCA requires a finding that a tolerance will protect the public
health, and because EPA did not have adequate data to make such a
finding, EPA issued a proposed rule to revoke all folpet tolerances,
except the avocado tolerance. The proposed rule was published in the
Federal Register on December 2, 1994 (59 FR 61859).
In a Federal Register notice dated January 3, 1995 (60 FR 89)(FRL-
4982-3), EPA extended the end of the comment period for the proposed
rule from January 3, 1995, to March 3, 1995. The January 3 notice also
requested the following: (1) That interested parties identify which
tolerances they were willing to support by providing the data necessary
to maintain the tolerances, and (2) that interested parties identify
specific existing data they were prepared to submit in support of the
tolerances.
B. Registrant's Response to the Proposed Rule
1. Commitment to support tolerances. In its comments to the
December 2, 1994 proposed rule, Makhteshim-Agan, the sole folpet
registrant, committed to generate the data necessary to establish
tolerances in or on the following nine commodities: apples,
cranberries, cucumbers, grapes, lettuce, melons, onions, strawberries,
and tomatoes. (Makhteshim-Agan had previously submitted the required
data for the use of folpet on avocados.) Makhteshim-Agan also submitted
use information on the other nine commodities and a summary of the
residue chemistry data that had thus far been generated for those
commodities.
2. Request to delete uses. In a letter to EPA dated June 11, 1995,
Makhteshim-Agan requested that EPA delete the following uses from its
folpet registration number 66222-8: blackberries, boysenberries,
dewberries, loganberries, raspberries, blueberries, huckleberries,
summer/winter squash, pumpkins, celery, cherries (red tart), citrus
(oranges, grapefruit, lemons, limes, tangelos, and tangerines),
gooseberries, currants, and garlic. EPA published a notice of receipt
of this request in a Federal Register notice dated April 17, 1996 (61
FR 16779)(FRL-5360-5). Following the 90-day comment period for this
notice, the deletion of the uses is expected to take effect on July 16,
1996.
III. Final Actions
In response to comments made to the December 2, 1994 proposed rule,
through meetings and other communication with the folpet registrant,
and in accord with EPA's policy regarding data requirements to support
tolerances, EPA is issuing this final order to revoke the 20 tolerances
that have received no commitment for support.
This final rule revokes the following folpet tolerances listed in
40 CFR 180.191: blackberries, blueberries, boysenberries, celery,
cherries, citrus fruits, crabapples, currants, dewberries, garlic,
gooseberries, huckleberries, leeks, loganberries, onions (green),
pumpkins, raspberries, shallots, summer squash, and winter squash. EPA
is revoking these tolerances for two reasons: (1) The registrant is no
longer supporting the uses on its folpet registrations, and (2) EPA
does not have the data necessary to make a finding that the tolerances
are protective of the public health, as is required by section 408 of
FFDCA and 40 CFR part 158. The 25 ppm avocado tolerance is being
supported through the reregistration program for domestic registrations
and is not subject to this rule, and therefore remains unchanged. The
remaining nine supported tolerances will be the subject of a separate
notice that EPA will issue in the future.
Because folpet food-use registrations have been suspended since
1987 and therefore commodities may not be legally treated with any
existing folpet stocks, EPA expects no folpet residues to be in or on
the commodities associated with the tolerances subject to
[[Page 37220]]
this rule; nor, for the same reason, are folpet residues expected to
persist in the environment. Following revocation of the tolerances, any
imported commodities containing folpet residues will be subject to
seizure as a result of FDA and USDA monitoring; this should prohibit
any treated imported commodities from entering domestic channels of
trade. Therefore, final expiration of the tolerances will occur 60 days
from the date of publication of this rule in the Federal Register,
barring submission of a petition for a stay of the effective date of
this rule, and EPA will not require action levels following expiration
of the tolerances.
IV. Comments Received on Proposed Rule and Response to Comments
The following section summarizes the comments received to the
December 2, 1994 proposed revocation of folpet tolerances, and EPA's
response to those comments. The actual comments are in the folpet
docket.
A. Revocation Will Negatively Impact Importation of Commodities
Many commentors stated that the revocation of the U.S. folpet
tolerances may have a significant negative impact on the present and
future importation of agricultural products into the United States.
Commentors were particularly concerned that revocation of the grape
tolerance would negatively affect wine imports.
EPA responds that the folpet registrant has committed to generate
the necessary data for nine tolerances, including a grape tolerance.
EPA will not revoke tolerances for those commodities if adequate data
are submitted by the agreed-upon due date.
B. Need for an Import Tolerance Policy
Other commentors expressed concern regarding the lack of a policy
outlining the data necessary to establish import tolerances, and that
the approach taken in EPA's Federal Register notice of December 2, 1994
is not an efficient regulatory process. They stated that deciding
complex issues, such as data requirements, on a case-by-case basis
cannot be efficient and detracts from regulatory transparency; they
added that an import tolerance policy presented for public comment
would permit EPA to evaluate the appropriateness of the data required
in the December 2, 1994 notice.
EPA's response is that it has an import tolerance policy. EPA's May
3, 1995 letter to Makhteshim-Agan states: ``EPA requires the same
product chemistry and toxicology data for import tolerances as are
required to support U.S. registrations of pesticide products and any
resulting tolerances. In addition, EPA needs residue chemistry data
that are representative of growing conditions in exporting countries.''
It is because EPA has received neither the data required in the 1987
Registration Standard nor a commitment to generate the data necessary
to establish tolerances, that EPA is revoking the tolerances subject to
this rule. EPA is currently reviewing its import tolerance policy to
address issues raised by folpet and other similar cases. In application
of its policy, EPA is committed to consistency and, when possible,
harmonization with international standards.
C. Potential GATT and NAFTA Violations
Some commentors claimed that EPA's proposed action would violate
international obligations of the United States. They stated that the
World Trade Organizations's Sanitary and Phytosanitary (SPS) Agreement
permits EPA to deviate from Codex in exceptional circumstances, but any
higher level of sanitary or phytosanitary protection must have a
scientific justification. Such justification requires a finding by EPA
that the forthcoming Codex standard for folpet is not sufficient to
achieve its appropriate level of protection.
EPA responds that Codex has proposed to revoke most of the folpet
Maximum Residue Limits (MRLs), including the grape MRL, because the
data submitted to Codex are inadequate. The crop field trial program
for the supported import-only tolerances initiated by the folpet
registrant is expected to provide data adequate for setting U.S. and
international residue levels for folpet. Since no data are available
for the remaining tolerances subject to this rule, EPA is revoking
those tolerances.
D. U.S. Standards Must Not Be Compromised
One commentor argued that EPA should revoke folpet tolerances
unless the existing data enable EPA to make the FFDCA public health
finding, and that the unsupported tolerances should not remain in
effect while the data are being developed and submitted. The commentor
also stated that nothing in international trade agreements requires any
deviation from FFDCA's public health mandate.
EPA agrees that its mandate to protect the public health must not
be compromised. All remaining permanent folpet tolerances will be based
on adequate data that demonstrate that such tolerances are protective
of the public health.
V. Effective Date and Stays of Effective Date
This final rule shall become effective September 16, 1996. A person
filing objections to this Order may submit with the objections a
petition to stay the effective date of this Order. Such stay petitions
must be submitted to the Hearing Clerk on or before August 16, 1996. A
copy of the stay request filed with the Hearing Clerk shall be
submitted to the Office of Pesticide Programs Public Docket. A stay may
be requested for a specific time period or for an indefinite time
period. The stay petition must include a citation to this Order and the
specific food additive regulation(s) as to which the stay is sought,
the length of time for which the stay is requested, and a full
statement of the factual and legal grounds upon which the petitioner
relies for the stay. If a petition for a stay is submitted, EPA will
automatically stay the effective date of the Order as to the particular
regulation(s) for which the stay is sought for such time as is required
to review the stay petition, if necessary. In determining whether to
grant a stay, EPA will consider the criteria set out in FDA's
regulations regarding stays of administrative proceedings at 21 CFR
10.35. Under those rules, a stay will be granted if it is determined
that: (1) The petitioner will otherwise suffer irreparable injury; (2)
the petitioner's case is not frivolous and is being pursued in good
faith; (3) the petitioner has demonstrated sound public policy grounds
supporting the stay; and (4) the delay resulting from the stay is not
outweighed by public health or other public interests. Under FDA's
criteria, EPA may also grant a stay if EPA finds that such action is in
the public interest and in the interest of justice.
If a stay petition is submitted, EPA will publish a notice of
receipt in the Federal Register, stating that the effective date of
this Order is stayed as to the regulation(s) to which the stay is
requested pending EPA consideration of the stay request. Any affected
person may submit objections to a stay request to the Hearing Clerk on
or before 15 days after the date of publication in the Federal Register
of the notice of receipt. Any decision lifting the stay will be
published in the Federal Register.
VI. Hearing Request
Any person adversely affected by this regulation may, within 30
days after publication of this document in the Federal Register, file
written objections to the regulation and may also request
[[Page 37221]]
a hearing on those objections. Objections and hearing requests must be
filed with the Hearing Clerk, at the address given above (40 CFR
178.20). A copy of the objections and/or hearing requests filed with
the Hearing Clerk should be submitted to the OPP docket for this
rulemaking. The objections submitted must specify the provisions of the
regulation deemed objectionable and the grounds for the objections (40
CFR 178.25). Each objection must be accompanied by the fee prescribed
by 40 CFR 180.33(i). If a hearing is requested, the objections must
include a statement of the factual issue(s) on which a hearing is
requested, the requestor's contentions on such issues, and a summary of
any evidence relied upon by the objector (40 CFR 178.27). A request for
a hearing will be granted if the Administrator determines that the
material submitted shows the following: There is genuine and
substantial issue of fact; there is a reasonable possibility that
available evidence identified by the requestor would, if established,
resolve one or more of such issues in favor of the requestor, taking
into account uncontested claims or facts to the contrary; and
resolution of the factual issue(s) in the manner sought by the
requestor would be adequate to justify the action requested (40 CFR
178.32).
VII. Public Docket
A record has been established for this rulemaking under docket
number [OPP-300363A] (including any comments and data submitted
electronically). A public version of this record, including printed,
paper versions of electronic comments, which does not include any
information claimed as CBI, is available for inspection from 8 a.m. to
4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The public
record is located in Room 1132 of the Public Response and Program
Resources Branch, Field Operations Division (7506C), Office of
Pesticide Programs, Environmental Protection Agency, Crystal Mall #2,
1921 Jefferson Davis Highway, Arlington, VA.
Electronic comments may be sent directly to EPA at:
[email protected].
Electronic comments must be submitted as an ASCII file avoiding the
use of special characters and any form of encryption.
The official record for this rulemaking, as well as the public
version, as described above will be kept in paper form. Accordingly,
EPA will transfer any copies of objections and hearing requests
received electronically into printed, paper form as they are received
and will place the paper copies in the official rulemaking record which
will also include all comments submitted directly in writing. The
official rulemaking record is the paper record maintained at the
address in ``ADDRESSES'' at the beginning of this document.
VIII. Regulatory Assessment Requirements
To satisfy the requirements for analysis specified by Executive
Order 12866, the Regulatory Flexibility Act, the Paperwork Reduction
Act, the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act, and the Small Business
Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act, EPA has considered the impacts of
this final rule.
A. Executive Order 12866
Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), the
Agency must determine whether the regulatory action is ``significant''
and therefore subject to all the requirements of the Executive Order
(i.e., Regulatory Impact Analysis, review by the Office of Management
and Budget (OMB)). Under section 3(f), the order defines
``significant'' as those actions likely to lead to a rule (1) having an
annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more, or adversely and
materially affecting a sector of the economy, productivity,
competition, jobs, the environment, public health or safety, or State,
local or tribal governments or communities (also known as
``economically significant''); (2) creating serious inconsistency or
otherwise interfering with an action taken or planned by another
agency; (3) materially altering the budgetary impacts of entitlement,
grants, user fees, or loan programs; or (4) raising novel legal or
policy issues arising out of legal mandates, the President's
priorities, or the principles set forth in this Executive Order.
Pursuant to the terms of this Executive Order, EPA has determined
that this rule is not ``significant'' and is therefore not subject to
OMB review.
B. Regulatory Flexibility Act
EPA has reviewed this final rule under the Regulatory Flexibility
Act of 1980 [5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.], and has determined that it will not
have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
businesses, small governments, or small organizations. Accordingly, I
certify that this final rule does not require a separate regulatory
flexibility analysis under the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
C. Paperwork Reduction Act
This regulatory action does not contain any information collection
requirements subject to review by OMB under the Paperwork Reduction Act
of 1980, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.
D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
This final rule contains no Federal mandates under Title II of the
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995, Pub. L. 104-4 for State, local,
or tribal governments or the private sector, because it would not
impose enforceable duties on them.
E. Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act
Under 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A) of the Administrative Procedure Act
(APA) as amended by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness
Act of 1996 (Title II of Pub. L. 104-121, 110 Stat. 847), EPA submitted
a report containing this rule and other required information to the
U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of Representatives, and the Comptroller
General of the General Accounting Office prior to publication of this
rule in today's Federal Register. This rule is not a ``major rule'' as
defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2) of the APA as amended.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180
Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure,
Agricultural commodities, Pesticides and pests, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
Dated: June 24, 1996.
Lois A. Rossi,
Director, Special Review and Reregistration Division, Office of
Pesticide Programs.
[[Page 37222]]
Therefore, 40 CFR, chapter I, part 180 is amended as follows:
PART 180--[AMENDED]
The authority citation for part 180 would continue to read as
follows:
Authority: 21 U.S.C. 346a and 371.
2. Section 180.191 is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 180.191 Folpet; tolerances for residues.
Tolerances are established for the fungicide folpet (N-
(trichloromethylthio)pthalimide) in or on raw agricultural commodities
as follows:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Parts per
Commodity million
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Apples..................................................... 25
Avocados................................................... 25
Cranberries................................................ 25
Cucumbers.................................................. 15
Grapes..................................................... 25
Lettuce.................................................... 50
Melons..................................................... 15
Onion (dry bulb)........................................... 15
Strawberries............................................... 25
Tomatoes................................................... 25
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[FR Doc. 96-16588 Filed 7-16-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-F
Continue your research in ChatGPT or Claude
Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.