15992 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 61 / Wednesday, March 31, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

the VWP. Accordingly, beginning April 

5, 2010, citizens and eligible nationals 

from Greece may apply for admission to 

the United States at U.S. ports of entry 

as nonimmigrant visitors for a period of 

ninety days or less for business or 

pleasure without first obtaining a 

nonimmigrant visa, provided that they 

are otherwise eligible for admission 

under applicable statutory and 

regulatory requirements. 

III. Statutory and Regulatory 

Requirements 

A. Administrative Procedure Act 

Under the Administrative Procedure 

Act (5 U.S.C. 553(b)), an agency may 

waive the normal notice and comment 

requirements if it finds, for good cause, 

that they are impracticable, 

unnecessary, or contrary to the public 

interest. The final rule merely lists a 

country that the Secretary of Homeland 

Security, in consultation with the 

Secretary of State, has designated as a 

VWP eligible country in accordance 

with 8 U.S.C. 1187(c). This amendment 

is a technical change simply updating 

the list of VWP eligible countries. 

Therefore, notice and comment for this 

rule are unnecessary and contrary to the 

public interest because the rule has no 

substantive impact, is technical in 

nature, and relates only to management, 

organization, procedure, and practice. 

For the same reasons, pursuant to 5 

U.S.C. 553(d)(3), a delayed effective date 

is not required. 

This final rule is also excluded from 

the rulemaking provisions of 5 U.S.C. 

553 as a foreign affairs function of the 

United States, because it advances the 

President’s foreign policy goals, 

involves a bilateral agreement that the 

United States has entered into with 

Greece, and directly involves 

relationships between the United States 

and its alien visitors. Accordingly, DHS 

is not required to provide public notice 

and an opportunity to comment before 

implementing the requirements under 

this final rule. 

B. Regulatory Flexibility Act 

The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) 

(5 U.S.C. 603(b)), as amended by the 

Small Business Regulatory Enforcement 

and Fairness Act of 1996 (SBREFA), 

requires an agency to prepare and make 

available to the public a regulatory 

flexibility analysis that describes the 

effect of a proposed rule on small 

entities (i.e., small businesses, small 

organizations, and small governmental 

jurisdictions) when the agency is 

required ‘‘to publish a general notice of 

proposed rulemaking for any proposed 

rule.’’ Because this rule is being issued 

as a final rule, on the grounds set forth 

above, a regulatory flexibility analysis is 

not required under the RFA. 

DHS has considered the impact of this 

rule on small entities and has 

determined that this rule will not have 

a significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities. 

The individual aliens to whom this rule 

applies are not small entities as that 

term is defined in 5 U.S.C. 601(6). 

Accordingly, there is no change 

expected in any process as a result of 

this rule that would have a direct effect, 

either positive or negative, on a small 

entity. 

C. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 

1995 

This rule will not result in the 

expenditure by State, local, and tribal 

governments, in the aggregate, or by the 

private sector, of $100 million or more 

in any one year, and it will not 

significantly or uniquely affect small 

governments. Therefore, no actions were 

deemed necessary under the provisions 

of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

of 1995. 

D. Executive Order 12866 

This amendment does not meet the 

criteria for a ‘‘significant regulatory 

action’’ as specified in Executive Order 

12866. 

E. Executive Order 13132 

The rule 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 section 6 of Executive 

Order 13132, DHS has determined that 

this final rule does not have sufficient 

federalism implications to warrant the 

preparation of a federalism summary 

impact statement. 

F. Executive Order 12988 Civil Justice 

Reform 

This rule meets the applicable 

standards set forth in sections 3(a) and 

3(b)(2) of Executive Order 12988. 

List of Subjects in 8 CFR Part 217 

Air carriers, Aliens, Maritime carriers, 

Passports and visas. 

Amendments to the Regulations 

■ For the reasons stated in the preamble, 

DHS amends part 217 of title 8 of the 

Code of Federal Regulations (8 CFR part 

217), as set forth below. 

PART 217—VISA WAIVER PROGRAM 

■ 1. The general authority citation for 

part 217 continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 8 U.S.C. 1103, 1187; 8 CFR part 

2. 

* * * * * 

■ 2. In section 217.2 the definition of 

the term ‘‘Designated country’’ in 

paragraph (a) is revised to read as 

follows: 

§ 217.2 Eligibility. 

(a) * * * 

Designated country refers to Andorra, 

Australia, Austria, Belgium, Brunei, 

Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, 

Finland, France, Germany, Greece, 

Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Japan, 

Latvia, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, 

Luxembourg, Malta, Monaco, the 

Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, 

Portugal, Republic of Korea, San 

Marino, Singapore, Slovak Republic, 

Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, 

and the United Kingdom. The United 

Kingdom refers only to British citizens 

who have the unrestricted right of 

permanent abode in the United 

Kingdom (England, Scotland, Wales, 

Northern Ireland, the Channel Islands 

and the Isle of Man); it does not refer to 

British overseas citizens, British 

dependent territories’ citizens, or 

citizens of British Commonwealth 

countries. After May 15, 2003, citizens 

of Belgium must present a machinereadable passport in order to be granted 

admission under the Visa Waiver 

Program. 

* * * * * 

Janet Napolitano, 

Secretary. 

[FR Doc. 2010–7211 Filed 3–30–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 73 

[Docket No. FAA–2009–0921; Airspace 

Docket No. 09–AWA–3] 

RIN 2120–AA66 

Revision of Prohibited Area P–49; 

Crawford, TX 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: This action amends 

Prohibited Area 49 (P–49) Crawford, TX. 

While the United States Secret Service 

(USSS) recognizes the ongoing security 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 61 / Wednesday, March 31, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 15993 

1The Commission voted 4–1 to approve the Final 

Rule as amended. Chairman Tenenbaum, 

Commissioner Nord, Commissioner Adler, and 

Moore voted to approve the final rule as amended. 

Continued 

requirement for this prohibited area, it 

considers reducing prohibited airspace 

area appropriate at this time. This action 

restores previously prohibited airspace 

to public use within the National 

Airspace System. 

DATES: Effective date 0901 UTC, June 3, 

2010. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Colby Abbott, Airspace and Rules 

Group, Office of System Operations 

Airspace and AIM, Federal Aviation 

Administration, 800 Independence 

Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20591; 

telephone: (202) 267–8783. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

History 

On October 5, 2009, the Department 

of the Treasury, USSS, notified the FAA 

that while the security requirements for 

establishing P–49 Crawford, TX (66 FR 

16391) remain valid, consideration of a 

modification of the existing prohibited 

area was appropriate. After a six-month 

security review of P–49, the USSS 

determined the dimensions (boundary 

and altitude) of the prohibited area 

could be reduced. This action responds 

to that notification. 

The Rule 

This action amends Title 14 Code of 

Federal Regulations (14 CFR) part 73 by 

revising the legal description for P–49 

Crawford, TX. After conducting a 

security review of P–49, the USSS 

notified the FAA to reduce the 

boundary and altitude dimensions of 

the prohibited area. This action reduces 

the boundary from a 3 NM radius to a 

2 NM radius of lat. 31°34′45′′ N., 

97°32′00′′ W., and lowers the designated 

altitude from ‘‘Surface to but not 

including 5,000 feet MSL’’ to ‘‘Surface to 

but not including 2,000 feet MSL.’’ 

Because this action restores 

previously prohibited airspace to public 

use, I find that notice and public 

procedures under 5 U.S.C. 553(b) are 

unnecessary as it would only delay the 

return of the airspace to public use. 

Section 73.89 of Title 14 CFR part 73 

was republished in FAA Order 7400.8S, 

effective February 16, 2010. 

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. Therefore, 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) does not 

warrant preparation of a regulatory 

evaluation as the anticipated impact is 

so minimal. Since this is a routine 

matter that will only affect air traffic 

procedures and air navigation, it is 

certified that this rule, when 

promulgated, will not have a significant 

economic impact on a substantial 

number of small entities under the 

criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act. 

The FAA’s authority to issue rules 

regarding aviation safety is found in 

Title 49 of the United States Code. 

Subtitle I, section 106 describes the 

authority of the FAA Administrator. 

Subtitle VII, Aviation Programs, 

describes in more detail the scope of the 

agency’s authority. 

This rulemaking is promulgated 

under the authority described in subtitle 

VII, part A, subpart I, section 40103. 

Under that section, the FAA is charged 

with prescribing regulations to assign 

the use of the airspace necessary to 

ensure the safety of aircraft and the 

efficient use of airspace. This regulation 

is within the scope of that authority as 

it amends prohibited airspace in 

Crawford, Texas. 

Environmental Review 

The FAA has determined that this 

action qualifies for categorical exclusion 

under the National Environmental 

Policy Act in accordance with 

paragraph 311c, FAA Order 1050.1E, 

Environmental Impacts: Policies and 

Procedures. This airspace action is not 

expected to cause any potentially 

significant environmental impacts, and 

no extraordinary circumstances exist 

that warrant preparation of an 

environmental assessment. 

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 73 

Airspace, Prohibited areas, Restricted 

areas. 

Adoption of Amendment 

■ In consideration of the foregoing, the 

Federal Aviation Administration 

amends 14 CFR part 73 as follows: 

PART 73—SPECIAL USE AIRSPACE 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 73 

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. 

§ 73.89 [Amended] 

■ 2. § 73.89 is amended as follows: 

* * * * * 

P–49 Crawford, TX [Revised] 

Boundaries. That airspace within a 2 NM 

radius of lat. 31°34′45′′ N., long. 97°32′00′′ W. 

Designated altitudes. Surface to 2,000 feet 

MSL. 

Time of designation. Continuous. 

Using agency. United States Secret Service, 

Washington, DC. 

Issued in Washington, DC, on March 25, 

2010. 

Kelly Neubecker, 

Acting Manager, Airspace and Rules Group. 

[FR Doc. 2010–7242 Filed 3–30–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

CONSUMER PRODUCT SAFETY 

COMMISSION 

16 CFR Part 1119 

Civil Penalty Factors 

AGENCY: Consumer Product Safety 

Commission. 

ACTION: Final interpretative rule. 

SUMMARY: The Consumer Product Safety 

Improvement Act of 2008 (‘‘CPSIA’’) 

requires the Consumer Product Safety 

Commission (‘‘Commission’’) to issue a 

final rule providing its interpretation of 

the civil penalty factors found in the 

Consumer Product Safety Act (‘‘CPSA’’), 

the Federal Hazardous Substances Act 

(‘‘FHSA’’), and the Flammable Fabrics 

Act (‘‘FFA’’), as amended by section 217 

of the CPSIA. These statutory provisions 

require the Commission to consider 

certain factors in determining the 

amount of any civil penalty to seek. The 

Commission published an interim final 

rule on September 1, 2009, providing its 

interpretation of the statutory factors 

and seeking public comment. The 

Commission is now issuing a final rule 

interpreting the statutory factors. 

DATES: This rule is effective March 31, 

2010. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Melissa V. Hampshire, Assistant 

General Counsel, Division of 

Enforcement and Information, Office of 

the General Counsel, Consumer Product 

Safety Commission, 4330 East-West 

Highway, Bethesda, Maryland 20814, 

telephone: 301–504–7631, e-mail: 

mhampshire@cpsc.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

A. Background 

The CPSIA specified that the 

Commission, by August 14, 2009, issue 

a final regulation providing its 

interpretation of civil penalty factors in 

section 20(b) of the CPSA, section 

5(c)(3) of the FHSA, and section 5(e)(2) 

of the FFA.1 The Commission issued an 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with RULES