54006 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 201 / Friday, October 17, 1997 / Proposed Rules

the field are supported with parts

(inactive), or no longer in production or

supported with replacement parts

(obsolete).

The status listing of Active, Inactive,

or Obsolete status is included in the

NIOSH certified equipment list (CEL). In

accordance with received comments,

NIOSH is requesting the manufacturers

to provide this production status

information as soon as it becomes

available, to update the CEL. NIOSH

intends to address the reporting of

production status information in an

Administrative/Quality Assurance

module to be proposed in the near

future.

VII. Priority of Quality Assurance/

Administrative Modules

Based on the comments received,

NIOSH intends to propose three

Administrative/Quality Assurance

modules. The intended subjects for

these modules are:

A. Corrections and Existing Policies

1. Discussion of Comments Received

One commenter recommended that

NIOSH publish technical amendments

to 42 CFR part 84 prior to any other

modules. Specifically, this commenter

requested clarification of the 200 mg.

filter loading levels for particulate filters

used in pairs.

One commenter suggested that air

purifying respirators with end of service

life indicators (ESLI) should be certified

for polyisocyanate catalyzed paints.

Several commenters stated that workers

were improperly protected because the

adequate NIOSH-certified (supplied-air)

respirators were not conducive to use.

Estimates of 50,000 auto body shops

with over 100,000 workers, with

additional unnumbered workers such as

law enforcement personnel and first

response teams with accidental release

of chemical agents and chemical warfare

agents were given.

Air-purifying respirators can be

certified with ESLI’s in accordance with

requirements published in the Federal

Register on July 19, 1984 (49 FR 29270).

That notice provided for the approval of

air purifying respirators with either

effective passive or active ESLI for use

against gases and vapors with adequate

warning properties or for use against

gases and vapors with inadequate

warning properties whenever there is a

regulatory standard already permitting

the use of air purifying respirators.

Two commenters suggested a module

to address self contained self rescuers

(SCSR) that are used in the mining

industry. Both commenters urged

development of a duration testing

protocol using a metabolic simulator to

replace human subject testing.

2. Conclusions

There are typographical errors in 42

CFR 84 to be corrected. There are also

a number of existing program policies

that have been developed since 1972

that are not included in the regulations.

Policies affecting areas such as ESLI for

air purifying respirators and service life

plans for SCSR, need to be codified in

the regulations as a single source for the

respirator approval requirements.

NIOSH will publish a module to make

corrections and incorporate all existing

certification program policies into 42

CFR 84.

B. Upgrade of Quality Assurance

Requirements and Fee Schedule

1. Discussion of Comments Received

As discussed previously in VI.B., no

commenter opposed the use of private

sector quality auditors in the

certification program. Commenters also

generally endorsed the use of ISO–9000

or similar quality assurance

requirements. NIOSH acceptance of

audits conducted by private sector

auditors was also generally

recommended by commenters.

As discussed previously in VI.C., the

majority of commenters supported fees

that reflect the costs of the certification

program.

As discussed previously in VI.F., a

number of commenters supported use of

the NIOSH CEL to notify respirator

users of the production status of

approved respirators.

2. Conclusions

NIOSH intends to publish a module to

address the use of independent quality

auditors, respirator production status

information and updated fees.

C. Use of Independent Testing

Laboratories in the Certification

Program and Restructured Fee Schedule

1. Discussion of Comments Received

As discussed previously in VI.A., a

number of commenters expressed

reservations about the ability of NIOSH

to use private sector testing laboratories

in the certification program. Several

concerns, such as the availability of test

procedures and the accreditation

method, were presented.

As discussed previously in VI.C.,

some of the comments on fee revision

recommended substantial changes to the

fees structure. These recommendations

included concepts such as: retention of

the fees in the certification program;

annual maintenance fees; and fees for

complaint investigations.

2. Conclusions

NIOSH intends to publish a module to

address the use of independent testing

laboratories and a restructured fee

schedule.

VIII. Continued Comments

As stated previously, NIOSH is

requesting additional comments and

information on content for the modules

identified and prioritized in this notice.

Comments for the need to prioritize

other module topics are also welcomed.

NIOSH will periodically review the

information in the docket to assist in

determining if a priority reassessment is

needed. Comments should be mailed to

the NIOSH Docket Office, Robert A. Taft

Laboratories, M/S C34, 4676 Columbia

Parkway, Cincinnati, Ohio 45226,

telephone (513) 533–8450, fax (513)

533–8285. Comments may also be

submitted by e-mail to:

DMM2@CDC.GOV. E-mail attachments

should be formatted as WordPerfect 4.2,

5.0, 5.1/5.2, 6.0/6.1, or ASCII files.

Dated: October 8, 1997.

Linda Rosenstock,

Director, National Institute for Occupational

Safety and Health (NIOSH), Centers for

Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).

[FR Doc. 97–27224 Filed 10–16–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4163–19–P

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS

COMMISSION

47 CFR Part 73

[MM Docket No. 97–210, RM–9166]

Radio Broadcasting Services; Soldiers

Grove, WI

AGENCY: Federal Communications

Commission.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

SUMMARY: This document requests

comments on a petition filed by Lyle

Robert Evans d/b/a Rural Radio

Company proposing the allotment of

Channel 290A to Soldiers Grove,

Wisconsin, as that community’s first

local FM broadcast service. There is a

site restriction 11.8 kilometers (7.3

miles) northeast of the community at

coordinates 43–28–16 and 90–40–21.

DATES: Comments must be filed on or

before November 24, 1997, and reply

comments on or before December 9,

1997.

ADDRESSES: Federal Communications

Commission, Washington, DC. 20554. In

addition to filing comments with the

FCC, interested parties should serve the

petitioner, as follows: Lyle Robert

Evans, d/b/a Rural Radio Company,
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 201 / Friday, October 17, 1997 / Proposed Rules 54007

1296, Marian Lane, Green Bay,

Wisconsin 54304.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Kathleen Scheuerle, Mass Media

Bureau, (202) 418–2180.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a

summary of the Commission’s Notice of

Proposed Rule Making, MM Docket No.

97–210, adopted September 24, 1997,

and released October 3, 1997. The full

text of this Commission decision is

available for inspection and copying

during normal business hours in the

Commission’s Reference Center (Room

239), 1919 M Street, NW., Washington,

DC. The complete text of this decision

may also be purchased from the

Commission’s copy contractors,

International Transcription Services,

Inc., 1231 20th Street, NW.,

Washington, DC. 20036, (202) 857–3800,

facsimile (202) 857–3805.

Provisions of the Regulatory

Flexibility Act of l980 do not apply to

this proceeding.

Members of the public should note

that from the time a Notice of Proposed

Rule Making is issued until the matter

is no longer subject to Commission

consideration or court review, all ex

parte contacts are prohibited in

Commission proceedings, such as this

one, which involve channel allotments.

See 47 CFR 1.1204(b) for rules

governing permissible ex parte contact.

For information regarding proper

filing procedures for comments, see 47

CFR 1.415 and 1.420.

List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 73

Radio broadcasting.

Federal Communications Commission.

John A. Karousos,

Chief, Allocations Branch, Policy and Rules

Division, Mass Media Bureau.

[FR Doc. 97–27513 Filed 10–16–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6712–01–F

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS

COMMISSION

47 CFR Part 73

[MM Docket No.97–209, RM–9152]

Radio Broadcasting Services;

Coarsegold, CA

AGENCY: Federal Communications

Commission.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

SUMMARY: This document requests

comments on a petition for rule making

filed on behalf of Thomas L. Whitlock

d.b.a. West Coast Wireless, seeking the

allotment of FM Channel 233A to

Coarsegold, California, as that

community’s first local aural

transmission service. Coordinates for

this proposal are 37–18–51 and 119–42–

20.

DATES: Comments must be filed on or

before November 24, 1997, and reply

comments on or before December 9,

1997.

ADDRESSES: Secretary, Federal

Communications Commission,

Washington, DC 20554. In addition to

filing comments with the FCC,

interested parties should serve the

petitioner’s counsel, as follows: James

A. Koerner, Esq., Baraff, Koerner &

Olender, P.C., Three Bethesda Metro

Center, Suite 640, Bethesda, MD 20814.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Nancy Joyner, Mass Media Bureau, (202)

418–2180.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a

synopsis of the Commission’s Notice of

Proposed Rule Making, MM Docket No.

97–209, adopted September 24, 1997,

and released October 3, 1997. The full

text of this Commission decision is

available for inspection and copying

during normal business hours in the

FCC’s Reference Center (Room 239),

1919 M Street, NW., Washington, DC.

The complete text of this decision may

also be purchased from the

Commission’s copy contractor,

International Transcription Service,

Inc., 1231 20th Street, NW.,

Washington, DC 20036, (202) 857–3800.

Provisions of the Regulatory

Flexibility Act of l980 do not apply to

this proceeding.

Members of the public should note

that from the time a Notice of Proposed

Rule Making is issued until the matter

is no longer subject to Commission

consideration or court review, all ex

parte contacts are prohibited in

Commission proceedings, such as this

one, which involve channel allotments.

See 47 CFR 1.1204(b) for rules

governing permissible ex parte contacts.

For information regarding proper

filing procedures for comments, See 47

CFR 1.415 and 1.420.

List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 73

Radio broadcasting.

Federal Communications Commission.

John A. Karousos,

Chief, Allocations Branch, Policy and Rules

Division, Mass Media Bureau.

[FR Doc. 97–27512 Filed 10–16–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6712–01–F

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS

COMMISSION

47 CFR Part 73

[MM Docket No. 97–136, RM–9083 and RM–

9136]

Radio Broadcasting Services; Ironton,

Malden and Salem, MO

AGENCY: Federal Communications

Commission.

ACTION: Proposed rule; Order to Show

Cause.

SUMMARY: In response to a

counterproposal filed by B.B.C., Inc. and

Dockins Communications, Inc., we have

issued an Order to Show Cause to the

Ultra-Sonic Broadcast Stations, Inc.,

licensee of Station KMMC, Channel

240A, Salem, Missouri. This document

affords Station KMMC an opportunity to

object to the proposed channel change

but it does not afford an additional

opportunity to comment on the merits

of the proposal set forth in the Notice of

Proposed Rule Making and Order to

Show Cause or the proposal advanced

in the counterproposal. See 62 FR

29090, May 29, 1997.

DATES: Comments must be filed on or

before November 24, 1997.

ADDRESSES: Federal Communications

Commission, Washington, DC. 20554.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Kathleen Scheuerle, Mass Media

Bureau, (202) 418–2180.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a

summary of the Commission’s Order to

Show Cause, MM Docket No. 97–136,

adopted September 24, 1997, and

released October 3, 1997. The full text

of this Commission decision is available

for inspection and copying during

normal business hours in the

Commission’s Reference Center (Room

239), 1919 M Street, NW., Washington,

DC. The complete text of this decision

may also be purchased from the

Commission’s copy contractors,

International Transcription Services,

Inc., 1231 20th Street, NW.,

Washington, DC. 20036, (202) 857–3800.

Provisions of the Regulatory

Flexibility Act of l980 do not apply to

this proceeding.

Members of the public should note

that from the time a Notice of Proposed

Rule Making is issued until the matter

is no longer subject to Commission

consideration or court review, all ex

parte contacts are prohibited in

Commission proceedings, such as this

one, which involve channel allotments.

See 47 CFR 1.1204(b) for rules

governing permissible ex parte contact.