Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 31 / Friday, February 14, 1997 / Rules and Regulations 6865

Part 71) establishes Class E airspace area

at Johnstown, NY to accommodate a

GPS RWY 10 and a GPS RWY 28 SIAP

and for IFR operations at Fulton County

Airport.

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 DOT

Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44

FR 10034; 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 will not have

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 71

Airspace, Incorporation by reference,

Navigation (air).

Adoption of the Amendment

In consideration of the foregoing, the

Federal Aviation Administration

amends 14 CFR Part 71 as follows:

PART 71—[AMENDED]

1. The authority citation for 14 CFR

Part 71 continues to read as follows:

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40103, 40113,

40120; EO 10854, 24 FR 9565, 3 CFR, 1959–

1963 Comp., p. 389; 14 CFR 11.69.

§ 71.1 [Amended]

2. The incorporation by reference in

14 CFR 71.1 of Federal Aviation

Administration Order 7400.9D, Airspace

Designations and Reporting Points,

dated September 4, 1996, and effective

September 16, 1996, is amended as

follows:

Paragraph 6005 Class E airspace areas

extending upward from 700 feet or more

above the surface of the earth.

* * * * *

AEA NY E5 Johnstown, NY [New]

Fulton County Airport, NY

(lat. 42°59′54′′N., long. 74°19′46′′W.)

That airspace extending upward from 700

feet above the surface within a 9.5-mile

radius of the Fulton County Airport,

excluding that portion that coincides with

the Albany, NY Class E airspace area.

* * * * *

Issued in Jamaica, New York on February

3, 1997.

James K. Buckles,

Acting Manager, Air Traffic Division, Eastern

Region.

[FR Doc. 97–3751 Filed 2–13–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–M

14 CFR Part 71

[Airspace Docket No. 96–AEA–14]

Establishment of Class E Airspace;

Canandaigua, NY

AGENCY: Federal Aviation

Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: This action establishes Class

E airspace at Canandaigua, NY, to

accommodate Global Positioning

System (GPS) Standard Instrument

Approach Procedures (SIAP) to Runway

(RWY) 13 at Canandaigua Airport. The

intended effect of this action is to

provide adequate controlled airspace for

instrument flight rules (IFR) operations

at the airport.

EFFECTIVE DATE: 0901 UTC, May 22,

1997.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr.

Frances Jordan, Airspace Specialist,

Operations Branch, AEA–530, Air

Traffic Division, Eastern Region, Federal

Aviation Administration, Federal

Building #111, John F. Kennedy

International Airport, Jamaica, New

York 11430, telephone: (718) 553–4521.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

History

On December 27, 1996, the FAA

proposed to amend Part 71 of the

Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR

Part 71) by establishing Class E airspace

at Canandaigua, NY (61 FR 68172). This

action would provide adequate Class E

airspace for IFR operations at

Canandaigua Airport. Interested parties

were invited to participate in this

rulemaking proceeding by submitting

written comments on the proposal to the

FAA. No comments objecting to the

proposal were received.

Class E airspace areas designations are

published in paragraph 6005 of FAA

Order 7400.9D, dated September 4,

1996, and effective September 16, 1996,

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 Rule

This amendment to Part 71 of the

Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR

Part 71) establishes Class E airspace area

at Canandaigua, NY, to accommodate a

GPS RWY 13 and for IFR operations at

Canandaigua Airport.

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 DOT

Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44

FR 10034; 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 will not have

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 71

Airspace, Incorporation by reference,

Navigation (air).

Adoption of the Amendment

In consideration of the foregoing, the

Federal Aviation Administration

amends 14 CFR Part 71 as follows:

PART 71—[AMENDED]

1. The authority citation for 14 CFR

Part 71 continues to read as follows:

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40103, 40113,

40120; EO 10854, 24 FR 9565, 3 CFR, 1959–

1963 Comp., p. 389; 14 CFR 11.69.

§ 71.1 [Amended]

2. The incorporation by reference in

14 CFR 71.1 of Federal Aviation

Administration Order 7400.9D, Airspace

Designations and Reporting Points,

dated September 4, 1996, and effective

September 16, 1996, is amended as

follows:

Paragraph 6005 Class E airspace areas

extending upward from 700 feet or more

above the surface of the earth.

* * * * *

AEA NY E5 Canadaigua, NY [New]

Canandaigua Airport, NY

(lat. 42°54′26′′N., long. 77°19′18′′W.)

That airspace extending upward from 700

feet above the surface within a 10-mile radius

of the Canandaigua Airport, excluding that

portion that coincides with the Rochester,

NY Class E airspace area and the Palmyra,

NY airspace area.

* * * * *
6866 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 31 / Friday, February 14, 1997 / Rules and Regulations

Issued in Jamaica, New York on February

6, 1997.

James K. Buckles,

Acting Manager, Air Traffic Division, Eastern

Region.

[FR Doc. 97–3753 Filed 2–13–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–M

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND

HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

21 CFR Part 341

Cold, Cough, Allergy, Bronchodilator,

and Antiasthmatic Drug Products for

Over–the–Counter Human Use

CFR Correction

In title 21 of the Code of Federal

Regulations, parts 300 to 499, revised as

of April 1, 1996, on page 247, in

§ 341.12, paragraph (h) should read:

§ 341.12 Antihistamine active ingredients.

* * * * *

(h) Doxylamine succinate.

* * * * *

[FR Doc. 97–55501 Filed 2-13-97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 1505-01-D

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Highway Administration

23 CFR Part 627

[FHWA Docket No. 94–12]

RIN 2125–AD33

Value Engineering

AGENCY: Federal Highway

Administration (FHWA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: The FHWA is establishing a

program requiring the application of a

value engineering (VE) analysis for all

Federal-aid highway projects on the

National Highway System (NHS) with

an estimated cost of $25 million or

more. The regulation also provides State

highway agencies (SHA) with

information and guidance on

performing VE reviews. This final rule

also implements the VE provisions of

section 303(b) of the National Highway

System Designation Act of 1995.

EFFECTIVE DATE: March 17, 1997.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Keith Borkenhagen, Office of

Engineering, 202–366–4630, or David

Sett, Office of Chief Counsel, 202–366–

0780, Federal Highway Administration,

400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington,

DC 20590. Office hours are from 7:45

a.m. to 4:15 p.m., e.t., Monday through

Friday, except Federal holidays.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The

FHWA recognizes that VE, when

applied in the development of highway

projects, is an effective and proven

technique for improving quality,

fostering innovation, reducing project

costs, and eliminating unnecessary and

costly design elements. An FHWA study

has confirmed the effectiveness of VE in

States with active VE programs and

concluded that a significant

improvement in program effectiveness

would result if all States had active

programs. As a result of this study, the

FHWA published a notice of proposed

rulemaking (NPRM) on November 16,

1994, seeking comments on a proposal

to require all States to apply VE to

selected Federal-aid highway projects.

In the NPRM, the FHWA proposed to

require States to establish, administer,

and monitor VE programs; develop

written procedures for implementing VE

programs; and provide a trained staff or

hire a qualified consultant to conduct

studies on projects representing 50

percent of the dollar value of their

Federal-aid highway program. In

addition, the FHWA proposed to allow

States to exempt certain categories of

projects from reviews and be required to

report the yearly results achieved

through the application of VE to projects

financed with Federal-aid highway

funds.

Comments were received from 39

SHAs, 22 consultant/contractor firms, 8

associations/agencies, 14 individuals,

and the American Association of State

Highway and Transportation Officials’’

VE task force. The following discussion

summarizes the major comments.

Eighteen States and thirty-eight

organizations, firms, and/or individuals

provided comments supporting VE.

Sixteen States and two organizations

provided comments opposing a Federal

VE mandate. Three firms/individuals

suggested that FHWA’s projected

additional VE savings under the

proposed rule of $100 million could

approach $500 million. Twenty-one

States requested clarification of the type

and amounts of Federal-aid highway

funds involved in determining the 50

percent dollar value while fourteen

States, five organizations and four

individuals suggested replacing this

requirement with a dollar threshold or

lower percentage. Two firms thought the

50 percent value was excellent because

it gave States great flexibility in

selecting projects while four individuals

suggested that all projects should

receive a VE analysis. Six States

suggested that additional staff might be

required to conduct all of the studies

necessary to represent 50 percent of

their Federal-aid program. Six States

requested that VE change proposals and

VE studies of standards be used to help

meet the 50 percent dollar value, and

five States requested that they be

allowed to deduct the dollar value of

exempted programs from the 50 percent

requirement. Each of these comments

concerns the threshold for application

of Federal VE requirements. Because the

National Highway System (NHS)

Designation Act mandates a threshold of

$25 million for projects on the NHS, the

agency has virtually no discretion in the

area.

Eight comments suggested various

changes to the training guidelines to

require specific VE certification of team

leaders and training workshops. All

training requirements have been

eliminated from the rule text.

One firm suggested that a VE team

leader be a Certified Value Specialist

(CVS), as approved by the Society of

American Value Engineers and a

Professional Engineer (PE) while

another firm suggested that a team

leader be a CVS when leading studies of

projects larger than a specific dollar

threshold. The FHWA did not include

these suggested requirements into the

final rule because the States have the

responsibility for establishing any

certification and training requirements

(e.g., CVS, PE) for their VE personnel.

While the FHWA was in the process

of analyzing these comments, the

National Highway System Designation

Act of 1995 (NHS Act) (Pub. L. 104–59,

109 Stat. 568) was enacted on November

28, 1995. Section 303(b) of the NHS Act

directs the Secretary of Transportation

to establish a program to require States

to carry out a VE analysis for all projects

on the NHS with an estimated total cost

of $25 million or more. The Conference

Report accompanying the NHS Act

explains that this provision prohibits

the Secretary from requiring VE on other

projects, though ‘‘[a] State remains free

to choose to undertake such analyses on

additional projects at a State’s

discretion.’’ The report also prohibits

DOT from being prescriptive as to the

form of VE analysis a State must

undertake to satisfy the requirement.

H.R. Conf. Rep. No. 345, 104th Cong.,

1st Sess. 80 (1995).

Based on this mandate, as well as the

public comments made as part of the

rulemaking process, the final rule has

been revised substantially from the

NPRM. The threshold for application of

the VE requirement has been modified

to be consistent with the statute. The