This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains regulatory documents having general applicability and legal effect, most of which are keyed to and codified in the Code of Federal Regulations, which is published under 50 titles pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 1510.

The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by the Superintendent of Documents. Prices of new books are listed in the first FEDERAL REGISTER issue of each week. 

# Rules and Regulations Federal Register 

### 15211

Vol. 76, No. 54

Monday, March 21, 2011

1 To view the final rule and related documents, go to http://www.regulations.gov/fdmspublic/ component/main?main=DocketDetail&d=APHIS–
2009–0034. **DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE**

**Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service** 

**9 CFR Part 94**

**[Docket No. APHIS–2009–0034]**

**RIN 0579–AD12**

**Changes in Disease Status of the Brazilian State of Santa Catarina With**  **Regard to Certain Ruminant and Swine Diseases; Technical Amendment** 

**AGENCY :**  Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, USDA.

**ACTION :**  Final rule; technical amendment.

**SUMMARY :**  In a final rule that was published in the Federal Register on November 16, 2010, and effective on December 1, 2010, we added the Brazilian State of Santa Catarina to the list of regions we recognize as free of foot-and-mouth disease (FMD), rinderpest, swine vesicular disease (SVD), classical swine fever (CSF), and African swine fever. We also added Santa Catarina to the list of regions that are subject to certain import restrictions on meat and meat products because of their proximity to or tradingrelationships with rinderpest- or FMDaffected countries. In the final rule, we neglected to add Santa Catarina to the lists of regions that are subject to certain import restrictions on pork and pork products because of their proximity to or trading relationships with SVD- and CSF-affected countries. This document corrects that error.

**DATES :**  Effective Date: March 21, 2011.

**FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT :**  Dr. Silvia Kreindel, Senior Staff Veterinarian, Regionalization Evaluation Services Staff, National Center for Import and Export, VS, APHIS, 4700 River Road Unit 38, Riverdale, MD 20737; (301) 734–4356 or (301) 734–
8419.

**SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION :**  Background

The regulations in 9 CFR part 94 (referred to below as the regulations) govern the importation into the United States of specified animals and animal products in order to prevent the introduction of various animal diseases, including rinderpest, foot-and-mouth disease (FMD), African swine fever (ASF), classical swine fever (CSF), and swine vesicular disease (SVD). These are dangerous and destructive communicable diseases of swine and ruminants.

In a final rule 1 published in the Federal Register on November 16, 2010 (75 FR 69851–69857, Docket No. APHIS–2009–0034), with an effective date of December 1, 2010, we amended the regulations by adding the Brazilian State of Santa Catarina to the list in § 94.1 of regions that are free of rinderpest and FMD, the list in § 94.11 of regions that are declared to be free of rinderpest and FMD but that are subject to certain restrictions because of their proximity to or trading relationships with rinderpest or FMD-affected regions, the lists in §§ 94.9 and 94.10 of regions that are free of CSF, and the list in § 94.12 of regions that are free of SVD. We also excluded Santa Catarina from the list in § 94.8 of regions where ASF is known to or reasonably believed to exist.

Section 94.13 of the regulations lists regions of the world that have been determined to be free of SVD, but that are subject to certain restrictions because of their proximity to or trading relationships with SVD-affected regions. Section 94.25 of the regulations lists regions of the world that have been determined to be free of CSF, but that are subject to certain restrictions because of their proximity to or trading relationships with CSF-affected regions.

Because we have not declared the rest of Brazil to be free of SVD or CSF, the importation of pork and pork products into the United States from Santa Catarina are subject to these restrictions. In the final rule, we neglected to add Santa Catarina to the lists in § 94.13 and § 94.25 of regions that are subject to certain import restriction on pork and pork products because of their proximity to or trading relationships with SVD- and CSF-affected countries. Therefore, this document amends § 94.13, introductory text, and § 94.25, paragraph (a), to add Santa Catarina to those lists.

USDA’s Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) is responsible for regulating the importation of meat and meat products to ensure that they are safe for human consumption. Individual meat exporting establishments must be certified to FSIS in order to be eligible to export meat and meat products to the United States. FSIS has not certified any such establishments in Santa Catarina, and therefore no pork or pork products have been imported into the United States from Santa Catarina since the final rule became effective.
List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 94

Animal diseases, Imports, Livestock, Meat and meat products, Milk, Poultry, and poultry products, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

Accordingly, we are amending 9 CFR part 94 as follows:

**PART 94—RINDERPEST, FOOT-AND MOUTH DISEASE, EXOTIC**  **NEWCASTLE DISEASE, AFRICAN SWINE FEVER, CLASSICAL SWINE**  **FEVER, SWINE VESICULAR DISEASE, AND BOVINE SPONGIFORM**  **ENCEPHALOPATHY: PROHIBITED AND RESTRICTED IMPORTATIONS** 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 94 continues to read as follows:

Authority: 7 U.S.C. 450, 7701–7772, 7781– 7786, and 8301–8317; 21 U.S.C. 136 and 136a; 31 U.S.C. 9701; 7 CFR 2.22, 2.80, and

371.4.

**§ 94.13 [Amended]**

■ 2. In § 94.13, introductory text, the first sentence is amended by adding the words ‘‘the Brazilian State of Santa Catarina, ’’ after the word ‘‘Belgium, ’’

. **§ 94.25 [Amended]**

■ 3. In § 94.25, paragraph (a) is amended by adding the words ‘‘The Brazilian State of Santa Catarina, ’’ after the word

‘‘ section: ’’ and by adding a comma after the word ‘‘Chile ’’

.


### 15212 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 54 / Monday, March 21, 2011 / Rules and Regulations

Done in Washington, DC, this 16th day of March 2011. Kevin Shea, Acting Administrator, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service.
[FR Doc. 2011–6538 Filed 3–18–11; 8:45 am]

**BILLING CODE 3410–34–P**

**DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION**

**Federal Aviation Administration**

**14 CFR Part 129**

**[Docket No. FAA–2009–0140; Amdt. No. 129–49–A]** 

**RIN 2120–AJ45**

**Operations Specifications; Correction**

**AGENCY :**  Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

**ACTION :**  Final rule; correction.

**SUMMARY :**  The FAA is correcting a final rule published on February 10, 2011 (76 FR 7482). In that rule, the FAA amended its regulations to clarify and standardize the rules for applications by foreign air carriers and foreign persons for part 129 operations specifications and establish new standards for amendment, suspension, and termination of those operations specifications. This document corrects errors in the codified text of that document.

**DATES :**  The final rule and this correction will become effective on April 11, 2011.

**FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT :**  For technical questions contact Darcy D. Reed, International Programs and Policy Division, AFS–50, Flight Standards Service, Federal Aviation Administration, 800 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington DC 20591; email: Darcy.D.Reed@faa.gov; Telephone: 202–385–8078. For legal questions contact Lorna John, Office of the Chief Counsel, Regulations Division, AGC– 200, Federal Aviation Administration, 800 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20591; e-mail: Lorna.John@faa.gov; Telephone: 202– 267–3921.

**SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION :**  Background

On February 10, 2011, the FAA published a final rule entitled,

‘‘ Operations Specifications ’’ (76 FR 7482).

In that final rule the FAA revised its regulations to clarify and standardize the rules for applications by foreign air carriers and foreign persons for part 129 operations specifications and establish new standards for amendment, suspension, and termination of those operations specifications. As part of the amendment, the FAA added new § 129.9(a)(2) and (b)(2) concerning the designation of an agent for service. The

**DATES** section correctly listed the compliance date for § 129.9(a)(2) and (b)(2) as February 10, 2012. Section 129.9(a)(2) and (b)(2) in the regulatory text incorrectly stated that the compliance date was ‘‘Within 1 year after February 10, 2012. ’’

Correction

In FR Doc. 2011–2834, beginning on page 7484 in the Federal Register of February 10, 2011, make the following corrections: Corrections to Regulatory Text

**§ 129.9 [Corrected]**

1. On page 7489, in the third column, in § 129.9(a)(2) and (b)(2), remove the words ‘‘February 10, 2012 ’’ and add in their place the words ‘‘February 10,
2011 ’’

.

Issued in Washington, DC, on March 15,
2011. Pamela Hamilton-Powell, Director, Office of Rulemaking.
[FR Doc. 2011–6489 Filed 3–18–11; 8:45 am]

**BILLING CODE 4910–13–P**

**DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE**

**28 CFR Part 0**

**[Tax Division Directive No. 139]**

**Redelegation of Authority to Compromise and Close Civil Claims** 

**AGENCY :**  Department of Justice.

**ACTION :**  Final rule.

**SUMMARY :**  This Tax Division directive delegates to a Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General all of the Assistant Attorney General’s authority to compromise and close civil claims, except when such action is opposed by the client agency or agencies. This Tax Division directive further delegates settlement authority of the Chiefs of the Civil Trial Sections, the Court of Federal Claims Section, the Appellate Section, the Office of Review, and the Deputy Assistant Attorneys General, to compromise and close civil claims. In addition, this directive allows discretionary redelegation of limited authority by a Section Chief to his or her Assistant Chiefs and Reviewers. This directive supersedes Directive No. 135.

**DATES :**  Effective Date: March 21, 2011.

**FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT :**  Deborah Meland, Tax Division, Department of Justice, Washington, DC 20530, (202) 307–6567.

**SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION :**  This rule relates to internal agency management. Therefore, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553, notice of proposed rulemaking and opportunity for comment are not required, and this rule may be made effective less than 30 days after publication in the Federal Register

. This regulation is not a significant rule within the meaning of Executive Order 13866, as amended, and therefore was not reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget. This regulation does not have an impact on small entities and, therefore, is not subject to the Regulatory Flexibility Act. This action pertains to agency management, personnel and organization and does not substantiallyaffect the rights or obligations of nonagency parties and, accordingly, is not

a ‘‘rule ’’ as that term is used by the Congressional Review Act (Subtitle E of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (SBREFA)). Therefore, the reporting requirement of 5 U.S.C. 801 does not apply. List of Subjects in 28 CFR Part 0

Authority delegations (Government agencies), Government employees, Organization and functions (Government agencies).

Accordingly, 28 CFR part 0 is amended as follows:

**PART 0—ORGANIZATION OF THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE** 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 0 continues to read as follows:

Authority: 5 U.S.C. 301; 28 U.S.C. 509, 510, 515–19.

■ 2. The Appendix to subpart Y of part 0 is amended by removing Tax Division Directive No. 135 and adding in its place Tax Division Directive No. 139, to read as follows: Appendix to Subpart Y of Part 0— Redelegations of Authority To Compromise and Close Civil Claims

* * * * *

[Tax Division Directive No. 139]

By virtue of the authority vested in me by Part 0 of Title 28 of the Code of Federal Regulations, particularly Sections 0.70, 0.160, 0.162, 0.164, 0.166, and 0.168, it is hereby ordered as follows:

Section 1. The Chiefs of the Civil Trial Sections, the Court of Federal Claims Section, and the Appellate Section are authorized to reject offers in compromise, regardless of amount, provided that such action is not opposed by the agency or agencies involved.