30690 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 105 / Wednesday, June 2, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

from the 007° bearing from the airport 

clockwise to the 127° bearing from the 

airport. This Class C airspace area is effective 

during the specific dates and times 

established in advance by a Notice to 

Airmen. The effective date and time will 

thereafter be continuously published in the 

Airport/Facility Directory. 

Issued in Washington, DC, May 25, 2010. 

Edith V. Parish, 

Manager, Airspace and Rules Group. 

[FR Doc. 2010–13137 Filed 6–1–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 91 

[Docket No. FAA–2010–0563; Amendment 

No. 91–315 (Related to Docket No. FAA– 

18334)] 

Minimum Altitudes for IFR Operations 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Technical amendment. 

SUMMARY: The FAA is correcting the 

introductory text in paragraph (a) of 

§ 91.177 that was published on August 

18, 1989. The phrase, ‘‘or unless 

otherwise authorized by the 

Administrator’’ was inadvertently 

removed from paragraph (a) 

introductory text. This action reinstates 

that phrase with a minor revision. 

DATES: Effective June 2, 2010. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Ellen Crum, Air Traffic Systems 

Operations, Airspace and Rules Group, 

800 Independence Ave., SW., 

Washington, DC 20591; telephone (202) 

267–8783; e-mail ellen.crum@faa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

On August 18, 1989 (54 FR 34288), 

the FAA published a final rule that 

revised 14 CFR part 91. In the final rule, 

the phrase in § 91.177 (a) introductory 

text ‘‘unless otherwise authorized by the 

Administrator’’ was inadvertently 

removed. The impact of this action was 

not apparent until the FAA recently 

amended the guidelines for establishing 

minimum vectoring altitudes. Without 

this phrase in the regulation, certain 

altitudes are unavailable to air traffic 

control. This action corrects this error 

with a minor revision. We are replacing 

the word ‘‘Administrator’’ with ‘‘FAA’’. 

The new phrase will read ‘‘unless 

otherwise authorized by the FAA’’. 

Good Cause for Immediate Adoption of 

This Final Rule 

Until recently, the FAA was unaware 

of the erroneous amendment to this 

regulation and its impact on minimum 

vectoring altitudes. The FAA concludes 

that immediate action is necessary to 

correct this error and therefore, finds 

that notice and public comment under 

5 U.S.C. 553(b) are impracticable and 

contrary to the public interest. Further, 

the FAA finds that good cause exists 

under 5 U.S.C. 553(d) for making this 

rule effective immediately upon 

publication. 

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 91 

Air traffic control, Aircraft, Airmen, 

Aviation safety, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements. 

The Amendment 

■ In consideration of the foregoing, the 

Federal Aviation Administration 

amends Chapter 1 of Title 14, Code of 

Federal Regulations, as follows: 

PART 91—GENERAL OPERATING AND 

FLIGHT RULES 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 91 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 1155, 40103, 

40113, 40120, 44101, 44111, 44701, 44704, 

44709, 44711, 44712, 44715, 44716, 44717, 

44722, 46306, 46315, 46316, 46504, 46506– 

46507, 47122, 47508, 47528–47531, articles 

12 and 29 of the Convention on International 

Civil Aviation (61 Stat. 1180). 

■ 2. Amend § 91.177 by revising 

paragraph (a) introductory text to read 

as follows: 

§ 91.177 Minimum altitudes for IFR 

operations. 

(a) Operation of aircraft at minimum 

altitudes. Except when necessary for 

takeoff or landing, or unless otherwise 

authorized by the FAA, no person may 

operate an aircraft under IFR below— 

* * * * * 

Issued in Washington, DC on May 27, 

2010. 

Pamela Hamilton-Powell, 

Director, Office of Rulemaking. 

[FR Doc. 2010–13132 Filed 6–1–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 406 

[Docket No. FAA–2009–1240; Amendment 

No. 406–6] 

RIN 2120–AJ63 

Civil Penalty Inflation Adjustment for 

Commercial Space Adjudications 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration, DOT. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: This final rule brings Federal 

Aviation Administration commercial 

space transportation regulations into 

compliance with the Federal Civil 

Penalties Inflation Adjustment Act of 

1990, as amended by the Debt 

Collection Improvement Act of 1996. 

The rule makes mandatory inflationbased adjustments to the maximum civil 

penalty contained in 14 CFR part 406 

authorized for violations of the 

Commercial Space Launch Act of 1984, 

as codified at 49 U.S.C. subtitle IX, ch. 

701, Commercial Space Launch 

Activities. 

DATES: This amendment becomes 

effective July 2, 2010. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Laura Montgomery, Senior Attorney, 

Office of the Chief Counsel, Regulations 

Division, AGC–200, Federal Aviation 

Administration, 800 Independence 

Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20591; 

telephone (202) 267–3150; facsimile 

(202) 267–7971; e-mail 

laura.montgomery@faa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Authority for This Rulemaking and 

Applicable Statutes 

The statute under which the Secretary 

of Transportation regulates commercial 

space transportation, 49 U.S.C. Subtitle 

IX, sections 70101–70121 (chapter 701), 

provides for the Department of 

Transportation (DOT), and, through 

delegation, the Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA) to impose civil 

penalties on persons who violate 

chapter 701, a regulation issued under 

chapter 701, or any term or condition of 

a license or permit issued or transferred 

under chapter 701. 49 U.S.C. 

70105a(h)(i), 70115. 

This rule implements the Federal 

Civil Penalties Inflation Adjustment Act 

of 1990 (FCPIAA), Public Law (Pub. L.) 

101–410, as amended by the Debt 

Collection Improvement Act of 1996, 

Public Law 104–134, codified at 28 

U.S.C. 2461 note. 

WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with RULES

Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 105 / Wednesday, June 2, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 30691 

The FCPIAA requires Federal 

agencies to adjust minimum and 

maximum civil penalty amounts for 

inflation to preserve their deterrent 

impact. Under these laws, each agency 

must make an initial inflationary 

adjustment for all applicable civil 

monetary penalties, and further adjust 

these penalties at least once every 4 

years. The FCPIAA required the first 

adjustment to the maximum civil 

penalty found in 14 CFR part 406 to 

have been made in 1996. 

Prior Rulemakings 

This rule is the FAA’s initial 

adjustment to the maximum civil 

penalty found in 14 CFR part 406 which 

governs commercial space 

transportation adjudications. The FAA 

has routinely adjusted for inflation civil 

monetary penalties for aviation 

contained in 14 CFR part 13. [See 61 FR 

67445, Dec. 20, 1996, as amended by 

Amdt. 13–28, 62 FR 4134, Jan. 29, 1997; 

67 FR 6366, Feb. 11, 2002; Amdt. 13– 

33, 71 FR 28522, May 16, 2006; 71 FR 

47077, Aug. 16, 2006; 71 FR 52407, 

Sept. 6, 2006.] 

Background 

The FCPIAA determines inflationary 

adjustments by increasing civil 

penalties by a cost-of-living adjustment 

(COLA). The COLA for each civil 

penalty is the percentage by which the 

U.S. Department of Labor’s Consumer 

Price Index for all-urban consumers 

(CPI–U) for the month of June of the 

calendar year preceding the adjustment 

exceeds the CPI–U for the month of June 

of the calendar year in which the 

amount of such civil penalty was last set 

or adjusted pursuant to the FCPIAA. 

The FCPIAA contains specific rules for 

rounding the inflationary increase based 

on the initial amount of the civil penalty 

being adjusted. However, the FCPIAA 

limits the increase to a maximum of ten 

percent for the first adjustment. This 

limitation does not apply to subsequent 

adjustments. 

Method of Calculation 

14 CFR 406.9 states that under 49 

U.S.C. 70115(c)(1)(a) a maximum civil 

penalty of $100,000 is imposed for 

violations of chapter 701, a regulation 

proscribed under chapter 701, or any 

term or condition of a license or permit 

issued or transferred under chapter 701. 

However, this rulemaking is our initial 

adjustment and any adjustment in civil 

penalty is limited by statute to a 

maximum ten percent increase. Thus, 

instead of using the COLA, the penalty 

is increased by ten percent of $100,000, 

which is $10,000. Therefore, the new 

civil penalty becomes $110,000 

($100,000 + $10,000). 

Four years from now, when the next 

adjustment is due, we will employ the 

COLA methodology. It works as follows, 

using the current year only as an 

example. Were we using the COLA 

method this year, we would first 

determine the appropriate CPI–U for 

June of the calendar year preceding the 

year of adjustment. For an adjustment in 

2010, we would use the CPI–U for June 

of 2009, which was 215.693. We would 

also determine the CPI–U for June of the 

year the civil penalty came into force. 

Because the civil penalty came into 

force in 1984, we would use the CPI–U 

for June of 1984, which was 103.7. 

Second, we would calculate the 

COLA. To do this we would subtract the 

CPI–U for June 1984 (103.7) from the 

CPI–U of June 2009 (215.693). Next, we 

would divide the resulting difference 

(111.993) by the CPI–U for June 1984 

(103.7). The resulting quotient (1.07997) 

is then multiplied by 100 yielding a 

COLA of 107.997%. 

Were this not our initial adjustment, 

we would calculate the raw inflationary 

increase by multiplying the maximum 

civil penalty ($100,000) by the COLA 

(107.997%). This would provide a raw 

inflation increase of $107,997. Next, we 

would round the raw inflation amounts 

by the statutory rounding formula found 

in Section 5(a) of the FCPIAA. 

Determination of the proper rounding 

formula depends on the current amount 

of the civil penalty at the time the 

calculation is made, not the size of the 

raw inflationary increase. The 

applicable rounding formula for the 

existing civil penalty of $100,000 would 

be that ‘‘[a]ny increase * * * is rounded 

to the nearest * * *[m]ultiple of $5,000 

in the case of penalties greater than 

$10,000 but less than or equal to 

$100,000 * * *’’ Thus, the raw increase 

of $107,997 would become $105,000 

after rounding. Finally, the increase of 

$105,000 would be added to the initial 

civil penalty $100,000 for an adjusted 

civil penalty of $205,000. 

Good Cause for Immediate 

Effectiveness of Final Rule 

Under the Administrative Procedure 

Act, 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(3)(B), a final rule 

may be issued without public notice 

and comment if the agency finds good 

cause that notice and comment are 

impractical, unnecessary, or contrary to 

public interest. Good cause exists in this 

rule to dispense with public notice and 

comment because adjustments to civil 

penalties for inflation are required by 

Congress, as set forth in Section 5 of the 

FCPIAA, in order to maintain the 

deterrent effect of civil penalties and 

promote compliance with the law. This 

rulemaking is ministerial, technical, and 

noncontroversial. The FCPIAA serves as 

a Congressional mandate and the FAA 

may not exercise any discretion or 

policy judgments. The FAA has no 

discretion as to the amount of the 

adjustment. Furthermore, it would be 

contrary to the public interest to delay 

these adjustments in order to receive 

public comment because the regulation 

concerns a civil penalty for conduct that 

is already illegal under existing law. 

Also, any delay would be unnecessary 

as the FAA cannot change the method 

of application of the mandatory 

inflation adjustment as defined by the 

FCPIAA. 

Paperwork Reduction Act 

The Paperwork Reduction Act of 

1995, 44 U.S.C. 3507(d), requires that 

the FAA consider the impact of 

paperwork and other information 

collection burdens imposed on the 

public. The FAA has determined that 

there are no current or new 

requirements for information collection 

associated with this rule. 

International Compatibility 

In keeping with U.S. obligations 

under the Convention on International 

Civil Aviation, it is FAA policy to 

conform to International Civil Aviation 

Organization (ICAO) Standards and 

Recommended Practices to the 

maximum extent practicable. The FAA 

has determined that there are no ICAO 

Standards and Recommended Practices 

that correspond to these regulations. 

Regulatory Evaluation, Regulatory 

Flexibility Determination, International 

Trade Impact Assessment, and 

Unfunded Mandates Assessment 

Changes to Federal regulations must 

undergo several economic analyses. 

First, Executive Order 12866 directs that 

each Federal agency shall propose or 

adopt a regulation only upon a reasoned 

determination that the benefits of the 

intended regulations justify its costs. 

Second, the Regulatory Flexibility Act 

of 1980 (RFA), Public Law 96–354, 

codified at 5 U.S.C. 601–612, as 

amended by the Small Business 

Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 

1996, Public Law 104–121, requires 

agencies to analyze the economic 

impact of regulatory changes on small 

entities. Third, the Trade Agreements 

Act of 1999 (Trade Act), Public Law 96– 

39, codified at 19 U.S.C. 2501–2581, 

prohibits agencies from setting 

standards that create unnecessary 

obstacles to the foreign commerce of the 

U.S. In developing U.S. standards, the 

Trade Act requires agencies to consider 

WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with RULES

30692 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 105 / Wednesday, June 2, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

international standards and, where 

appropriate, that they be the basis of 

U.S. standards. Fourth, the Unfunded 

Mandates Reform Act of 1995, (Pub. L. 

104–4), codified at 2 U.S.C. 658, 1501– 

03, and 1531–34, requires agencies to 

prepare a written assessment of the 

costs, benefits, and other effects of 

proposed or final rules that include a 

Federal mandate likely to result in the 

expenditure by State, local, or tribal 

governments, in the aggregate, or by the 

private sector, of $100 million or more, 

in any one year (adjusted for inflation). 

DOT Order 2100.5 prescribes policies 

and procedures for simplification, 

analysis, and review of regulations. If 

the expected impact is so minimal that 

a proposed or final rule does not 

warrant a full evaluation, this order 

permits that a statement to that effect 

and the basis for it be included in the 

preamble if a full regulatory evaluation 

of the cost and benefits is not prepared. 

Such a determination has been made for 

this final rule. The reasoning for this 

determination is as follows. This rule 

adjusts for inflation the maximum civil 

penalty for violations of the Commercial 

Space Launch Act of 1984, to be in 

compliance with the Federal Civil 

Penalties Inflation Adjustment Act of 

1990. This inflation adjustment is an 

economic transfer and not a social cost. 

Regulatory Flexibility Determination 

The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 

(Pub. L. 96–354) (RFA) establishes ‘‘as a 

principle of regulatory issuance that 

agencies shall endeavor, consistent with 

the objectives of the rule and of 

applicable statutes, to fit regulatory and 

informational requirements to the scale 

of the businesses, organizations, and 

governmental jurisdictions subject to 

regulation. To achieve this principle, 

agencies are required to solicit and 

consider flexible regulatory proposals 

and to explain the rationale for their 

actions to assure that such proposals are 

given serious consideration.’’ The RFA 

covers a wide-range of small entities, 

including small businesses, not-forprofit organizations, and small 

governmental jurisdictions. 

Agencies must perform a review to 

determine whether a rule will have a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities. If 

the agency determines that it will, the 

agency must prepare a regulatory 

flexibility analysis as described in the 

RFA. 

However, if an agency determines that 

a rule is not expected to have a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities, 

section 605(b) of the RFA provides that 

the head of the agency may so certify 

and a regulatory flexibility analysis is 

not required. The certification must 

include a statement providing the 

factual basis for this determination, and 

the reasoning should be clear. 

As already noted, this rule adjusts for 

inflation only, as required by the 

Federal Civil Penalties Inflation 

Adjustment Act of 1990. Therefore, as 

FAA Administrator, I certify that this 

rule will not have a significant 

economic impact on a substantial 

number of small entities. 

International Trade Impact Assessment 

The Trade Agreements Act of 1979 

(Pub. L. 96–39) prohibits Federal 

agencies from establishing any 

standards or engaging in related 

activities that create unnecessary 

obstacles to the foreign commerce of the 

United States. Legitimate domestic 

objectives, such as safety, are not 

considered unnecessary obstacles. The 

statute also requires consideration of 

international standards and, where 

appropriate, that they be the basis for 

U.S. standards. 

The FAA has assessed the potential 

effect of this final rule and determined 

that it would impose identical inflation 

adjusted civil penalties on domestic and 

international entities that violate 14 CFR 

part 406, and thus would have a neutral 

trade impact. Furthermore, the 

inflationary adjustment is a legitimate 

domestic objective preserving the 

existing deterrent impact of 49 U.S.C. 

subtitle IX, chapter 701. Therefore, we 

have determined that this rule will 

result in a neutral impact on 

international trade. 

Unfunded Mandates Assessment 

Title II of the Unfunded Mandates 

Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4) 

requires each Federal agency to prepare 

a written statement assessing the effects 

of any Federal mandate in a proposed or 

final agency rule that may result in an 

expenditure of $100 million or more 

(adjusted annually for inflation with the 

base year 1995) in any one year by State, 

local, and tribal governments, in the 

aggregate, or by the private sector; such 

a mandate is deemed to be a ‘‘significant 

regulatory action.’’ The FAA currently 

uses an inflation-adjusted value of 

$143.1 million in lieu of $100 million. 

Because this final rule only increases 

a civil penalty by $10,000, as required 

by FCPIAA, it does not contain a 

mandate that meets this threshold 

amount. Therefore, the requirements of 

Title II of the act do not apply. 

Executive Order 13132, Federalism 

The FAA has analyzed this final rule 

under the principles and criteria of 

Executive Order 13132, Federalism. The 

FAA determined that this action would 

not have a substantial direct effect on 

the States, or the relationship between 

the national government and the States, 

or on the distribution of power and 

responsibilities among the various 

levels of government. Therefore, the 

FAA has determined that this final rule 

does not have federalism implications. 

Environmental Analysis 

FAA Order 1050.1E defines FAA 

actions that are categorically excluded 

from preparation of an environmental 

assessment or environmental impact 

statement under the National 

Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) in the 

absence of extraordinary circumstances. 

The FAA has determined this final rule 

qualifies for the categorical exclusion 

identified in Chapter 3, paragraph 312d, 

and involves no extraordinary 

circumstances. 

Regulations That Significantly Affect 

Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use 

The FAA has analyzed this final rule 

under Executive Order 13211, Actions 

Concerning Regulations that 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use (May 18, 2001). We 

have determined that it is not a 

‘‘significant energy action’’ under the 

executive order because it is not a 

‘‘significant regulatory action’’ under 

Executive Order 12866, and it is not 

likely to have a significant adverse effect 

on the supply, distribution, or use of 

energy. 

Availability of Rulemaking Documents 

You can get an electronic copy of 

rulemaking documents using the 

Internet by— 

1. Searching the Federal eRulemaking 

Portal (http://www.regulations.gov); 

2. Visiting the FAA’s Regulations and 

Policies Web page at http:// 

www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/; or 

3. Accessing the Government Printing 

Office’s Web page at http:// 

www.gpoaccess.gov/fr/index.html. 

You can also get a copy by sending a 

request to the Federal Aviation 

Administration, Office of Rulemaking, 

ARM–1, 800 Independence Avenue, 

SW., Washington, DC 20591, or by 

calling (202) 267–9680. Make sure to 

identify the amendment number or 

docket number of this rulemaking. 

Anyone is able to search the 

electronic form of all comments 

received into any of our dockets by the 

name of the individual submitting the 

comment (or signing the comment, if 

submitted on behalf of an association, 

business, labor union, etc.). You may 

review DOT’s complete Privacy Act 

WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with RULES

Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 105 / Wednesday, June 2, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 30693 

1This means that we will use these final rules on 

and after their effective date in any case in which 

we make a determination or decision. We expect 

that Federal courts will review our final decisions 

using the rules that were in effect at the time we 

issued the decisions. If a court reverses the 

Commissioner’s final decision and remands a case 

for further administrative proceedings after the 

effective date of these final rules, we will apply 

these final rules to the entire period at issue in the 

decision we make after the court’s remand. 

statement in the Federal Register 

published on April 11, 2000 (Volume 

65, Number 70; Pages 19477–78) or you 

may visit http://DocketsInfo.dot.gov. 

Small Business Regulatory Enforcement 

Fairness Act 

The Small Business Regulatory 

Enforcement Fairness Act (SBREFA) of 

1996 requires FAA to comply with 

small entity requests for information or 

advice about compliance with statutes 

and regulations within its jurisdiction. If 

you are a small entity and you have a 

question regarding this document, you 

may contact your local FAA official, or 

the person listed under the FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT heading at the 

beginning of the preamble. You can find 

out more about SBREFA on the Internet 

at http://www.faa.gov/ 

regulations_policies/rulemaking/ 

sbre_act/. 

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 406 

Administrative procedure and review, 

Commercial space transportation, 

Enforcement, Investigations, Penalties, 

Rules of adjudication. 

The Amendment 

■ In consideration of the foregoing, the 

Federal Aviation Administration 

amends part 406 of Title 14, Code of 

Federal Regulations as follows: 

PART 406—INVESTIGATIONS, 

ENFORCEMENT, AND 

ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 406 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 70101–70121. 

■ 2. Amend § 406.9 by revising 

paragraph (a) to read as follows: 

§ 406.9 Civil penalties. 

(a) Civil penalty liability. Under 49 

U.S.C. 70115(c), a person found by the 

FAA to have violated a requirement of 

the Act, a regulation issued under the 

Act, or any term or condition of a 

license or permit issued or transferred 

under the Act, is liable to the United 

States for a civil penalty of not more 

than $110,000 for each violation, as 

adjusted for inflation. A separate 

violation occurs for each day the 

violation continues. 

* * * * * 

Issued in Washington, DC, on May 25, 

2010. 

J. Randolph Babbitt, 

Administrator. 

[FR Doc. 2010–13218 Filed 6–1–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION 

20 CFR Part 404 

[Docket No. SSA–2008–0016] 

RIN 0960–AG20 

Revised Medical Criteria for Evaluating 

Hearing Loss 

AGENCY: Social Security Administration. 

ACTION: Final rules. 

SUMMARY: We are revising the criteria in 

the Listing of Impairments (the listings) 

that we use to evaluate claims involving 

hearing loss under titles II and XVI of 

the Social Security Act (Act). The 

revisions reflect our adjudicative 

experience, advances in medical 

knowledge, treatment, and methods of 

evaluating hearing loss, and public 

comments we received in response to a 

Notice of Proposed Rulemaking 

(NPRM). 

DATES: These rules are effective August 

2, 2010. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tiya 

Marshall, Social Insurance Specialist, 

Office of Medical Listings Improvement, 

Social Security Administration, 6401 

Security Boulevard, Baltimore, 

Maryland 21235–6401, (410) 965–9291. 

For information on eligibility or filing 

for benefits, call our national toll-free 

number, 1–800–772–1213, or TTY 1– 

800–325–0778, or visit our Internet Web 

site, Social Security Online, at http:// 

www.socialsecurity.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Electronic Version 

The electronic file of this document is 

available on the date of publication in 

the Federal Register at http:// 

www.gpoaccess.gov/fr/index.html. 

Background 

We are revising and making final the 

rules for evaluating hearing loss we 

proposed in an NPRM we published in 

the Federal Register on August 13, 2008 

(73 FR 47103). The preamble to the 

NPRM discussed the changes from the 

current rules and our reasons for 

proposing those changes. To the extent 

that we are adopting the proposed rules 

as published, we are not repeating that 

information here. Interested readers may 

refer to the preamble to the NPRM, 

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

We are making a number of changes 

from the NPRM as a result of public 

comments. We explain those changes in 

our summary of the public comments 

and our responses later in this 

preamble. 

Why are we revising the listings for 

hearing loss? 

We are revising the listings for 

hearing loss to update the medical 

criteria, provide more information about 

how we evaluate hearing loss, and 

reflect our adjudicative experience. The 

listings for hearing loss are in the 

special senses and speech body system, 

which also includes listings for visual 

disorders, disturbances of labyrinthinevestibular function, and loss of speech. 

In the NPRM, we proposed changes only 

to the listings for hearing loss and their 

accompanying introductory text. We 

published final rules revising the 

listings for visual disorders in the 

Federal Register on November 20, 2006 

(71 FR 67037). We intend to separately 

publish proposed rules for disturbances 

of labyrinthine-vestibular function and 

loss of speech. 

When will we use these final rules? 

We will use these final rules 

beginning on their effective date. We 

will continue to use the current listings 

until the date these final rules become 

effective. We will apply the final rules 

to new applications filed on or after the 

effective date of the final rules and to 

claims that are pending on and after the 

effective date.1

How long will the rules in the special 

senses and speech body system be in 

effect? 

We are extending the effective date of 

the special senses and speech body 

system in parts A and B of the listings 

until 5 years after the effective date of 

these final rules, except we intend to 

revise the Disturbance of labyrinthinevestibular function and Loss of speech 

listings before then. The rules will 

remain in effect only until that date 

unless we extend them. We will 

continue to monitor the rules and may 

revise them before the end of the 5-year 

period. 

Public Comments on the NPRM 

In the NPRM, we provided the public 

with a 60-day comment period, which 

ended on October 14, 2008. We received 

17 public comment letters. The 

comments came from national medical 

organizations, advocacy groups, a 

national group representing Social 

WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with RULES