28356 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 118 / Tuesday, June 19, 2018 / Rules and Regulations 

■ 28. In § 147.54, paragraphs (a)(1), (3), 

and (4) are revised to read as follows: 

§ 147.54 Approval of diagnostic test kits 

not licensed by the Service. 

(a) * * * 

(1) The sensitivity of the kit will be 

evaluated in at least three NPIP 

authorized laboratories by testing 

known positive samples, as determined 

by the official NPIP procedures found in 

the NPIP Program Standards or through 

other procedures approved by the 

Administrator. Field samples, for which 

the presence or absence of the target 

organism or analyte has been 

determined by the current NPIP test, are 

the preferred samples and should be 

used when possible. Samples from a 

variety of field cases representing a 

range of low, medium, and high analyte 

concentrations should be used. In some 

cases it may be necessary to utilize 

samples from experimentally infected 

animals. Spiked samples (clinical 

sample matrix with a known amount of 

pure culture added) should only be used 

in the event that no other sample types 

are available. When the use of spiked 

samples may be necessary, prior 

approval from the NPIP Technical 

Committee is required. Pure cultures 

should never be used. Additionally, 

laboratories should be selected for their 

experience with testing for the target 

organism or analyte with the current 

NPIP approved test. (e.g., a Salmonella 

test should be evaluated by NPIP 

authorized laboratories that test for 

Salmonella routinely). If certain 

conditions or interfering substances are 

known to affect the performance of the 

kit, appropriate samples will be 

included so that the magnitude and 

significance of the effect(s) can be 

evaluated. 

* * * * * 

(3) The kit will be provided to the 

cooperating laboratories in its final form 

and include the instructions for use. 

The cooperating laboratories must 

perform the assay exactly as stated in 

the supplied instructions. Each 

laboratory must test a panel of at least 

25 known positive samples. In addition, 

each laboratory must test at least 50 

known negative samples obtained from 

several sources, to provide a 

representative sampling of the general 

population. The cooperating 

laboratories must perform a current 

NPIP procedure or NPIP approved test 

on the samples alongside the test kit for 

comparison and must provide an 

outline of the method on the worksheet 

for diagnostic test evaluation. 

Reproducibility and robustness data 

should also be included. 

(4) Cooperating laboratories will 

submit to the kit manufacturer all 

compiled output data regarding the 

assay response. Each sample tested will 

be reported as positive or negative, and 

the official NPIP procedure used to 

classify the sample must be submitted 

in addition to the assay response value. 

A completed worksheet for diagnostic 

test evaluation is required to be 

submitted with the compiled output 

data and may be obtained by contacting 

the NPIP Senior Coordinator. Data and 

the completed worksheet for diagnostic 

test evaluation must be submitted to the 

NPIP Senior Coordinator 4 months prior 

to the next scheduled General 

Conference Committee meeting, which 

is when approval will be sought. 

* * * * * 

Done in Washington, DC, this 13th day of 

June 2018. 

Kevin Shea, 

Administrator, Animal and Plant Health 

Inspection Service. 

[FR Doc. 2018–13128 Filed 6–18–18; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3410–34–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 71 

[Docket No. FAA–2017–1061; Airspace 

Docket No. 17–AEA–20] 

RIN 2120–AA66 

Amendment of Class D Airspace and 

Class E Airspace, and Removal of 

Class E Airspace; Binghamton, NY 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: This action amends Class D 

airspace, Class E surface airspace, and 

Class E airspace extending upward from 

700 feet above the surface; and removes 

Class E airspace designated as an 

extension to a Class D surface area; at 

Greater Binghamton Airport/Edwin A. 

Link Field (formerly Binghamton 

Regional Airport/Edwin A. Link Field), 

Binghamton, NY. This action 

accommodates airspace reconfiguration 

due to the decommissioning of the 

Binghamton VHF omni-directional radio 

range tactical air navigation aid 

(VORTAC), and cancellation of the VOR 

approaches. Controlled airspace is 

necessary for the safety and 

management of instrument flight rules 

(IFR) operations at the airport. This 

action also updates the geographic 

coordinates of the airport, and corrects 

the airport’s name. Additionally, this 

action replaces the outdated term 

‘‘Airport/Facility Directory’’ with the 

term ‘‘Chart Supplement’’ in Class D 

and E surface airspace descriptions. 

DATES: Effective 0901 UTC, September 

13, 2018. The Director of the Federal 

Register approves this incorporation by 

reference action under Title 1 Code of 

Federal Regulations, part 51, subject to 

the annual revision of FAA Order 

7400.11 and publication of conforming 

amendments. 

ADDRESSES: FAA Order 7400.11B, 

Airspace Designations and Reporting 

Points, and subsequent amendments can 

be viewed online at http://www.faa.gov/ 

air_traffic/publications/. For further 

information, you can contact the 

Airspace Policy Group, Federal Aviation 

Administration, 800 Independence 

Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20591; 

telephone: (202) 267–8783. The Order is 

also available for inspection at the 

National Archives and Records 

Administration (NARA). For 

information on the availability of FAA 

Order 7400.11B at NARA, call (202) 

741–6030, or go to https://

www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ 

ibr-locations.html. 

FAA Order 7400.11, Airspace 

Designations and Reporting Points, is 

published yearly and effective on 

September 15. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John 

Fornito, Operations Support Group, 

Eastern Service Center, Federal Aviation 

Administration, 1701 Columbia Ave., 

College Park, GA 30337; telephone (404) 

305–6364. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Authority for This Rulemaking 

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 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 

Class D and Class E airspace at Greater 

Binghamton Airport/Edwin A. Link 

Field, Binghamton, NY, to support IFR 

operations at the airport. 

History 

The FAA published a notice of 

proposed rulemaking in the Federal 


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 118 / Tuesday, June 19, 2018 / Rules and Regulations 28357 

Register (83 FR 5750, February 9, 2018) 

for Docket No. FAA–2017–1061 to 

amend Class D airspace and Class E 

surface airspace, and Class E airspace 

extending upward from 700 feet or more 

above the surface at Greater Binghamton 

Airport/Edwin A. Link Field, 

Binghamton, NY (formerly Binghamton 

Regional Airport/Edwin A. Link Field). 

Interested parties were invited to 

participate in this rulemaking effort by 

submitting written comments on the 

proposal to the FAA. One comment was 

received requesting a graphic on the 

airspace proposal. The FAA has since 

posted a graphic to the docket. 

Class D and E airspace designations 

are published in paragraph 5000, 6002, 

6004,and 6005, respectively, of FAA 

Order 7400.11B dated August 3, 2017, 

and effective September 15, 2017, which 

is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 

part 71.1. The Class D and E airspace 

designations listed in this document 

will be published subsequently in the 

Order. 

Availability and Summary of 

Documents for Incorporation by 

Reference 

This document proposes to amend 

FAA Order 7400.11B, Airspace 

Designations and Reporting Points, 

dated August 3, 2017, and effective 

September 15, 2016. FAA Order 

7400.11B is publicly available as listed 

in the ADDRESSES section of this 

document. FAA Order 7400.11B lists 

Class A, B, C, D, and E airspace areas, 

air traffic service routes, and reporting 

points. 

The Rule 

This amendment to Title 14 Code of 

Federal Regulations (14 CFR) part 71 

amends Class D airspace, Class E surface 

airspace, and Class E airspace extending 

upward from 700 feet or more above the 

surface at Greater Binghamton Airport/ 

Edwin A. Link Field, Binghamton, NY 

(formerly Binghamton Regional Airport/ 

Edwin A. Link Field), due to the 

decommissioning of the Binghamton 

VORTAC, and cancellation of the VOR 

approaches. These changes enhance the 

safety and management of IFR 

operations at the airport. 

The Class D airspace area is amended 

to within a 4.4-mile radius (from a 4.3- 

mile radius) of Greater Binghamton 

Airport/Edwin A. Link Field. 

The Class E surface area airspace is 

amended to within a 4.4-mile radius 

(increased from a 4.3-mile radius) of 

Greater Binghamton Airport/Edwin A. 

Link Field. The Binghamton VORTAC is 

removed as it is being decommissioned. 

The SMITE LOM, and ILS Runway 34 

Localizer navigation aids are no longer 

needed in the airspace redesign. 

The Class E airspace designated as an 

extension to a Class D surface area is 

removed as this airspace was only 

necessary for the cancelled approaches. 

Class E airspace extending upward 

from 700 feet above the surface is 

amended to within a 7-mile radius 

(initially from a boundary line formed 

by the geographic coordinates) of the 

airport. The exclusionary language 

contained in the legal description is 

removed to comply with FAA Order 

7400.2L, Procedures for Handling 

Airspace Matters. Also, an editorial 

change is made by adding the airport’s 

geographic coordinates to the airspace 

designation. 

The geographic coordinates of the 

airport also are adjusted in the classes 

of airspace listed above to coincide with 

the FAA’s aeronautical database, and 

the airport name is updated to Greater 

Binghamton Airport/Edwin A. Link 

Field, formerly Binghamton Regional 

Airport/Edwin A. Link Field. 

Regulatory Notices and Analyses 

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. It, therefore: (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 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 only affects air traffic 

procedures and air navigation, it is 

certified that this rule, when 

promulgated, does not have a significant 

economic impact on a substantial 

number of small entities under the 

criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act. 

Environmental Review 

The FAA has determined that this 

action qualifies for categorical exclusion 

under the National Environmental 

Policy Act in accordance with FAA 

Order 1050.1F, ‘‘Environmental 

Impacts: Policies and Procedures,’’ 

paragraph 5–6.5a. 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. 

Lists 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—DESIGNATION OF CLASS A, 

B, C, D, AND E AIRSPACE AREAS; AIR 

TRAFFIC SERVICE ROUTES; AND 

REPORTING POINTS 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 71 

continues to read as follows: 

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

40113, 40120; E.O. 10854, 24 FR 9565, 3 CFR, 

1959–1963 Comp., p. 389. 

§ 71.1 [Amended] 

■ 2. The incorporation by reference in 

14 CFR 71.1 of Federal Aviation 

Administration Order 7400.11B, 

Airspace Designations and Reporting 

Points, dated August 3, 2017, effective 

September 15, 2017, is amended as 

follows: 

Paragraph 5000 Class D Airspace. 

* * * * * 

AEA NY D Binghamton, NY [Amended] 

Greater Binghamton Airport/Edwin A. Link 

Field, NY 

(Lat. 42°12′30′′ N, long. 75°58′47′′ W) 

That airspace extending upward from the 

surface to and including 4,100 feet MSL 

within a 4.4-mile radius of Greater 

Binghamton Airport/Edwin A. Link Field. 

This Class D airspace area is effective during 

the specific days and times established in 

advance by a Notice to Airmen. The effective 

days and times will thereafter be 

continuously published in the Chart 

Supplement. 

Paragraph 6002 Class E Surface Area 

Airspace. 

* * * * * 

AEA NY E2 Binghamton, NY [Amended] 

Greater Binghamton Airport/Edwin A. Link 

Field, NY 

(Lat. 42°12′30′′ N, long. 75°58′47′′ W) 

That airspace extending upward from the 

surface within a 4.4-mile radius of Greater 

Binghamton Airport/Edwin A. Link Field. 

This Class E airspace area is effective during 

the specific days and times established in 

advance by a Notice to Airmen. The effective 

days and times will thereafter be 

continuously published in the Chart 

Supplement. 

Paragraph 6004 Class E Airspace 

Designated as an Extension to a Class D 

Surface Area. 

* * * * * 

AEA NY E4 Binghamton, NY [Removed] 

Paragraph 6005 Class E Airspace Areas 

Extending Upward From 700 Feet or More 

Above the Surface of the Earth. 

* * * * * 


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with RULES
28358 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 118 / Tuesday, June 19, 2018 / Rules and Regulations 

1After the Commission issued the NPR, staff 

learned of a reclined infant seat accessory for a high 

chair product that is intended for young infants. 

The product consists of a high chair base that is 

sold separately from, but accommodates, several 

seat accessories that are appropriate for different 

ages and sizes of children. One of the seat 

accessories is a reclined seat that, when placed on 

the high chair base, allows infants to be raised to 

the height of a dining table. Based on the 

characteristics of the infant seat accessory, its 

intended use, and marketing materials, CPSC staff 

believes that these products also meet the definition 

of a high chair. 

2Under SBA size standards, a high chair 

manufacturer is ‘‘small’’ if it has 500 or fewer 

employees, and an importer is ‘‘small’’ if it has 100 

or fewer employees. 

AEA NY E5 Binghamton, NY [Amended] 

Greater Binghamton Airport/Edwin A. Link 

Field, NY 

(Lat. 42°12′30′′ N, long. 75°58′47′′ W) 

That airspace extending upward from 700 

feet above the surface within a 7-mile radius 

of Greater Binghamton Airport/Edwin A. 

Link Field. 

Issued in College Park, Georgia, on June 6, 

2018. 

Ryan W. Almasy, 

Manager, Operations Support Group, Eastern 

Service Center, Air Traffic Organization. 

[FR Doc. 2018–13050 Filed 6–18–18; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

CONSUMER PRODUCT SAFETY 

COMMISSION 

16 CFR Parts 1112 and 1231 

[Docket No. CPSC–2015–0031] 

Safety Standard for High Chairs 

AGENCY: Consumer Product Safety 

Commission. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Consumer Product Safety 

Improvement Act of 2008 (CPSIA) 

directs the Commission to issue 

standards for durable infant or toddler 

products. To comply with section 104 of 

the CPSIA, CPSC is issuing a safety 

standard for high chairs. This rule 

incorporates by reference ASTM F404– 

18, Standard Consumer Safety 

Specification for High Chairs (ASTM 

F404–18). In addition, this rule amends 

the regulations regarding third party 

conformity assessment bodies to include 

the safety standard for high chairs in the 

list of Notices of Requirements (NORs). 

DATES: The rule will become effective 

on June 19, 2019. The incorporation by 

reference of the publication listed in 

this rule is approved by the Director of 

the Federal Register as of June 19, 2019. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Keysha Walker, Office of Compliance 

and Field Operations, U.S. Consumer 

Product Safety Commission; 4330 East 

West Highway, Bethesda, MD 20814; 

email: KWalker@cpsc.gov; telephone: 

(301) 504–6820. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Background and Statutory Authority 

Congress enacted the CPSIA (Pub. L. 

110–314, 122 Stat. 3016), as part of the 

Danny Keysar Child Product Safety 

Notification Act, on August 14, 2008. 

Section 104(b) of the CPSIA requires 

CPSC to: (1) Examine and assess the 

effectiveness of voluntary consumer 

product safety standards for durable 

infant or toddler products, in 

consultation with representatives of 

consumer groups, juvenile product 

manufacturers, and independent child 

product engineers and experts; and (2) 

promulgate consumer product safety 

standards for durable infant or toddler 

products. Any standard CPSC adopts 

under this mandate must be 

substantially the same as the applicable 

voluntary standard, or more stringent 

than the voluntary standard if CPSC 

determines that more stringent 

requirements would further reduce the 

risk of injury associated with the 

product. Section 104(f)(1) of the CPSIA 

defines the term ‘‘durable infant or 

toddler product’’ as ‘‘a durable product 

intended for use, or that may be 

reasonably expected to be used, by 

children under the age of 5 years,’’ and 

section 104(f)(2)(C) specifically 

identifies high chairs as a durable infant 

or toddler product. 

On November 9, 2015, the 

Commission issued a notice of proposed 

rulemaking (NPR), proposing to 

incorporate by reference the thencurrent voluntary standard for high 

chairs, ASTM F404–15, with more 

stringent requirements for rearward 

stability and warnings on labels and in 

instructional literature. 80 FR 69144; 81 

FR 3354 (January 21, 2016) (correcting 

an error in the NPR). After the 

Commission issued the NPR, ASTM 

revised the voluntary standard several 

times, as discussed in section V of this 

preamble, and published the current 

version of the standard, ASTM F404–18, 

in March 2018. 

In this final rule, the Commission is 

incorporating by reference ASTM F404– 

18, with no modifications, as the 

mandatory safety standard for high 

chairs. As section 104(b)(1)(A) of the 

CPSIA requires, CPSC staff consulted 

with manufacturers, retailers, trade 

organizations, laboratories, consumer 

advocacy groups, consultants, and the 

public to develop this standard, largely 

through the ASTM standarddevelopment process. In addition, this 

final rule amends the list of NORs in 16 

CFR part 1112 to include the standard 

for high chairs. 

II. Product Description 

ASTM F404–18 defines a ‘‘high chair’’ 

as ‘‘a free standing chair for a child up 

to 3 years of age which has a seating 

surface more than 15 in. above the floor 

and elevates the child normally for the 

purposes of feeding or eating.’’ The 

ASTM standard further specifies that a 

high chair may be sold with or without 

a tray, have adjustable heights, or 

recline for infants.1

High chairs are available in various 

designs, including four-legged A-frame 

styles, single-leg pedestals, Z-frame 

styles, and restaurant-style. 

Construction materials often include a 

plastic, wood, or metal frame, and a 

padded fabric seat. Some designs 

include a tray or mounted toy 

accessories, fold for storage and 

transport, or convert for continued use 

as a child grows. ASTM F404–18 

requires high chairs to have a passive 

crotch restraint (i.e., two separate 

bounded openings for the occupant’s 

legs) and a three-point restraint system; 

some designs also include a rigid front 

torso support or a five-point restraint 

system with shoulder harnesses. 

III. Market Description 

CPSC staff has identified 59 domestic 

firms that currently supply high chairs 

to the U.S. market. Thirty-three of these 

firms manufacture high chairs and the 

remaining 26 firms are importers. Fortythree of the firms (26 manufacturers and 

17 importers) are small, according to the 

U.S. Small Business Administration’s 

(SBA) standards,2 and the remaining 16 

(7 manufacturers and 9 importers) are 

large. Of the 59 domestic firms, 43 

market their high chairs only to 

consumers, and 4 sell their high chairs 

to both consumers and restaurants. In 

addition, staff identified 9 foreign firms 

that supply high chairs to the U.S. 

market, including 8 manufacturers and 

1 importer. Staff also identified 

numerous high chairs that are 

manufactured outside the United States 

and bought domestically through online 

sales. 

At the time CPSC staff assessed the 

high chairs market, 13 of the 26 small 

domestic manufacturers, and 9 of the 17 

small domestic importers, reported that 

they complied with the ASTM standard 

for high chairs. 

IV. Incident Data 

CPSC receives data regarding productrelated injuries from several sources. 


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with RULES