Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 71 / Wednesday, April 13, 2011 / Proposed Rules 20569 

selecting rules for review. For example, 

should the amount of time a regulation 

is in effect be criteria for review? If so, 

how much time should that be? Should 

HHS involve outside experts in setting 

its review priorities? What metrics 

should HHS use to evaluate regulations 

after they have been implemented? For 

example, should review be limited to 

rules based on their projected or actual 

impact? 

• Public Participation—HHS solicits 

comments on ways to further engage 

and increase public comment in its 

rulemaking. Comments might suggest 

ways to improve HHS’ continuing 

efforts to use online technologies to 

facilitate greater participation in the 

rulemaking process, particularly social 

media and regulations.gov. Comments 

might also suggest ways to increase 

open exchanges of information by 

interested parties, or ways to allow 

interested parties the opportunity to 

react to (and benefit from) the 

comments, arguments, and information 

of others during the rulemaking process. 

HHS also welcomes comments on how 

it can remain informed on new 

technologies, events or processes that 

may render significant rules potentially 

obsolete, outdated, or require 

modification. 

• Analysis of Costs and Benefits— 

HHS invites public comment on how it 

ought to develop its analysis of costs 

and benefits of those rules under 

consideration for retrospective review. 

The metrics used to assess costs and 

benefits at the time a rule is 

promulgated are likely to be different 

from those available or necessary to 

assess costs and benefits of a rule in its 

present form. Comments might usefully 

address data sources that will help 

assess the cost benefit analysis of a 

regulation after the initial projection has 

been made or whether there are existing 

sources of data that HHS should use to 

evaluate the post-promulgation effects 

of regulations over time. Additionally, 

HHS is interested in comments on ways 

to quantify values that are difficult or 

impossible to quantify, including 

equity, human dignity, fairness, and 

distributive impacts. 

• Coordination with Other 

Departments—HHS is interested in 

public comment on ways that HHS can 

consider the combined effects of 

regulations (together with those of other 

agencies) on particular sectors and 

industries, particularly small 

businesses, and State, local and tribal 

governments; and ways to promote 

greater coordination across agencies, 

harmonization of regulatory 

requirements, and the identification of 

regulations that are redundant, 

inconsistent or overlapping. 

• General Comments on What HHS 

Should Include in Its Plan—HHS seeks 

comment on how best to structure its 

framework for conducting ongoing 

retrospective reviews, and other criteria 

that should be considered in 

preparation of its preliminary plan. 

HHS notes that this RFI is issued 

solely for information and programplanning purposes. HHS will not 

respond to individual comments, but 

will consider them as it formulates its 

preliminary plan. While responses to 

this RFI do not bind HHS to any further 

actions related to the response, all 

submissions will be made publicly 

available on http://www.regulations.gov. 

Dated: April 7, 2011. 

Dawn L. Smalls, 

Executive Secretary to the Department. 

[FR Doc. 2011–8780 Filed 4–12–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4150–03–P 

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 

Animal and Plant Health Inspection 

Service 

9 CFR Part 11 

[Docket No. APHIS–2011–0006] 

Horse Protection Act; Petition for 

Amendments to Regulations 

AGENCY: Animal and Plant Health 

Inspection Service, USDA. 

ACTION: Notice. 

SUMMARY: We are notifying the public 

that the Animal and Plant Health 

Inspection Service has received a 

petition requesting changes to our horse 

protection regulations and our current 

enforcement practices and related 

policies regarding those regulations. We 

are making this petition available to the 

public for review and comment. We are 

noting, however, that certain requests in 

the petition lack authority in the Horse 

Protection Act to implement. 

DATES: We will consider all comments 

that we receive on or before June 13, 

2011. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments 

by either of the following methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to 

http://www.regulations.gov/fdmspublic/

component/main?main=DocketDetail&

d=APHIS-2011-0006 to submit or view 

comments and to view supporting and 

related materials available 

electronically. 

• Postal Mail/Commercial Delivery: 

Please send one copy of your comment 

to Docket No. APHIS–2011–0006, 

Regulatory Analysis and Development, 

PPD, APHIS, Station 3A–03.8, 4700 

River Road, Unit 118, Riverdale, MD 

20737–1238. Please state that your 

comment refers to Docket No. APHIS– 

2011–0006. 

Reading Room: You may read any 

comments that we receive on the 

petition in our reading room. The 

reading room is located in room 1141 of 

the USDA South Building, 14th Street 

and Independence Avenue, SW., 

Washington, DC. Normal reading room 

hours are 8 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday 

through Friday, except holidays. To be 

sure someone is there to help you, 

please call (202) 690–2817 before 

coming. 

Other Information: Additional 

information about APHIS and its 

programs is available on the Internet at 

http://www.aphis.usda.gov. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. 

Rachel Cezar, Horse Protection Program 

National Coordinator, Animal Care, 

APHIS, 4700 River Road, Unit 84, 

Riverdale, MD 20737–1238; (301) 734– 

5784. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

The Horse Protection Act (HPA, 15 

U.S.C. 1821–1831) authorizes the 

Secretary of Agriculture to promulgate 

regulations prohibiting the showing, 

exhibition, transport, or sale of horses 

subjected to soring, a practice of 

accentuating a horses’ gait through the 

infliction of pain. The Secretary of 

Agriculture has delegated the 

responsibility for enforcing the HPA to 

the Administrator of the Animal and 

Plant Health Inspection Service 

(APHIS). Exercising its rulemaking 

authority under the Act, APHIS enforces 

regulations that are contained in 9 CFR 

part 11, referred to below as the 

regulations, that prohibit, among other 

things, devices and methods that might 

sore horses. 

In a petition sent on August 4, 2010, 

The Humane Society of the United 

States, the American Society for the 

Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, the 

American Horse Protection Association, 

Inc., Friends of Sound Horses, Inc., and 

former Senator Joseph D. Tydings 

(referred to below as the petitioners) 

requested that APHIS change its 

regulations and policies regarding the 

protection of horses from the practice of 

soring. The petitioners’ requests 

included permanently disqualifying 

horses that have been scarred from 

soring from competitions, permanently 

disqualifying repeat violators of the 

HPA, requiring horse industry 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with PROPOSALS
20570 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 71 / Wednesday, April 13, 2011 / Proposed Rules 

organizations to impose minimum 

penalties for violations, and decertifying 

noncompliant horse industry 

organizations. 

The HPA does not provide APHIS 

with the authority to implement certain 

requests in the petition. Specifically, 

APHIS does not have the authority 

under the HPA to permanently 

disqualify horses that have been scarred 

from soring from competitions, nor does 

APHIS have the authority to 

permanently disqualify repeat violators 

of the HPA. The disqualification 

provisions and penalty provisions are 

clearly enumerated in the HPA. 

You may review the petition and 

submit comments through the 

Regulations.gov Web site (see 

ADDRESSES above for instructions for 

accessing Regulations.gov). We welcome 

all comments on the issues outlined in 

the petition. We are particularly 

interested in receiving comments 

regarding those areas where APHIS has 

existing authority under the HPA. We 

encourage the submission of scientific 

data, studies, or research to support 

your comments and position, including 

scientific data or research that supports 

any industry or professional standards 

that pertain to horse care. We also invite 

data on the costs and benefits associated 

with any recommendations. We will 

consider all comments and 

recommendations we receive. 

Authority: 15 U.S.C. 1823–1825 and 1828; 

7 CFR 2.22, 2.80, and 371.7. 

Done in Washington, DC, this 7th day of 

April 2011. 

Gregory L. Parham, 

Acting Administrator, Animal and Plant 

Health Inspection Service. 

[FR Doc. 2011–8773 Filed 4–12–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3410–34–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 139 

[Docket No. FAA- 2010–0247; Notice No. 11– 

01] 

RIN 2120–AJ70 

Safety Enhancements, Certification of 

Airports; Reopening of Comment 

Period 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking 

(NPRM); Reopening of comment period. 

SUMMARY: The FAA published a 

proposed rule on February 1, 2011, to 

establish minimum standards for 

training of personnel who access the 

airport non-movement area (ramp and 

apron) to help prevent accidents and 

incidents in that area. This proposal 

would require a certificate holder to 

conduct pavement surface evaluations 

to ensure reliability of runway surfaces 

in wet weather conditions. This 

proposed action would also require a 

Surface Movement Guidance Control 

System (SMGCS) plan if the certificate 

holder conducts low visibility 

operations, facilitating the safe 

movement of aircraft and vehicles in 

low visibility conditions. Finally, this 

proposal would clarify the applicability 

of part 139 and explicitly prohibit 

fraudulent or intentionally false 

statements in a certificate application or 

record required to be maintained. This 

action reopens the comment period. 

DATES: The comment period for the 

NPRM published on February 1, 2011, 

(76 FR 5510) closed on April 4, 2011, 

and is reopened until May 13, 2011. 

ADDRESSES: You may send comments 

identified by Docket Number FAA– 

2010–0247 using any of the following 

methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to 

http://www.regulations.gov and follow 

the online instructions for sending your 

comments electronically. 

• Mail: Send comments to Docket 

Operations, M–30; U.S. Department of 

Transportation (DOT), 1200 New Jersey 

Avenue, SE., Room W12–140, West 

Building Ground Floor, Washington, DC 

20590–0001. 

• Hand Delivery or Courier: Take 

comments to Docket Operations in 

Room W12–140 of the West Building 

Ground Floor at 1200 New Jersey 

Avenue, SE., Washington, DC, between 

9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through 

Friday, except Federal holidays. 

• Fax: Fax comments to Docket 

Operations at 202–493–2251. 

Privacy: The FAA will post all 

comments it receives, without change, 

to http://www.regulations.gov, including 

any personal information the 

commenter provides. Using the search 

function of the docket Web site, anyone 

can find and read the electronic form of 

all comments received into any FAA 

docket, including the name of the 

individual sending the comment (or 

signing the comment for an association, 

business, labor union, etc.). DOT’s 

complete Privacy Act Statement can be 

found in the Federal Register published 

on April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19477–19478), 

as well as at http://DocketsInfo.dot.gov. 

Docket: Background documents or 

comments received may be read at 

http://www.regulations.gov at any time. 

Follow the online instructions for 

accessing the docket or go to Docket 

Operations in Room W12–140 of the 

West Building Ground Floor at 1200 

New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, 

DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday 

through Friday, except Federal holidays. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Kenneth Langert, AAS–300, Office of 

Airports, Federal Aviation 

Administration, 800 Independence 

Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20591, 

telephone (202) 493–4529; e-mail 

kenneth.langert@faa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: See the 

‘‘Additional Information’’ section for 

information on how to comment on this 

proposal and how the FAA will handle 

comments received. The ‘‘Additional 

Information’’ section also contains 

related information about the docket, 

privacy, and the handling of proprietary 

or confidential business information. In 

addition, there is information on 

obtaining copies of related rulemaking 

documents. 

Background 

On February 1, 2011, the FAA issued 

Notice No. 11–01, entitled ‘‘Safety 

Enhancements Part 139, Certification of 

Airports’’ [76 FR 5510]. Comments to 

that document were to be received on or 

before April 4, 2011. 

Historically, the FAA’s Flight 

Standards Service (AFS) has approved 

airlines (via Operations Specifications) 

to depart at visibilities less than runway 

visual range (RVR) 1200 feet even in 

cases where the instrument approach 

procedures are published at landing 

visibilities above RVR 1200. These 

departure operations are routinely 

available where runway centerline 

lights and RVR equipment are installed. 

Recently, the FAA Office of Airports 

(ARP) learned that a number of airport 

operators may not be aware that lowvisibility approaches and departures 

have been approved for their airport. 

Advisory Circular AC 120–57A, Surface 

Movement Guidance and Control 

System (SMGCS) Plans, includes 

recommendations that airports should 

follow in low-visibility take-off 

operations or develop their own similar 

procedures. The proposed rule would 

require a SMGCS plan, similar to that 

described in AC–120–57A, for each 

certificate holder where departures 

below RVR 1200 are authorized, as well 

as where approach minima less than 

RVR 1200 are published. 

The FAA would like to ensure all 

airports and industry associations are 

fully aware of both AC 120–57A and the 

proposed rule. For this reason, and in 

the interest of transparency, the FAA 

will notify, by letter, airports with 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with PROPOSALS