Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 195 / Friday, October 6, 2000 / Rules and Regulations 59713

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 187

[Docket No. FAA–00–7018; Amendment No.

187–11]

RIN 2120–AG17

Fees for FAA Services for Certain

Flights; Extension of Comment Period

AGENCY: Federal Aviation

Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Interim final rule; extension of

comment period.

SUMMARY: On June 6, 2000, the FAA

published an Interim Final Rule (IFR)

establishing fees for FAA air traffic and

related services for certain aircraft that

transit U.S.-controlled airspace but

neither take off from, nor land in, the

United States and invited comments for

a 120-day period. The IFR went into

effect on August 1, 2000, and the

comment period was originally

scheduled to close on October 4, 2000.

However, the FAA is extending the

comment period to October 27, 2000, to

ensure that affected entities( mostly

foreign) have sufficient time to comment

on the contents of the docket.

DATES: Comments must be received on

or before October 27, 2000.

ADDRESSES: Address your comments to

the Docket Management System (DMS),

U.S. Department of Transportation,

Room Plaza Level 401, 400 Seventh

Street, SW., Washington, DC 20590–

0001. You must identify the docket

number ‘‘FAA–00–7018’’ at the

beginning of your comments, and you

should submit two copies of your

comments.

You may also submit comments

through the Internet to http://

dms.dot.gov.

You may review the public docket

containing comments to this interim

rule in person in the Dockets Office

between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday

through Friday, except Federal holidays.

The Dockets Office is on the plaza level

of the NASSIF Building at the

Department of Transportation at the

above address. Also, you may review

public dockets on the Internet at http:/

/dms.dot.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Randall Fiertz, Office of Performance

Management, (APF–1), Federal Aviation

Administration, 800 Independence

Avenue, SW., Washington, 20591;

telephone (202) 267–7140; fax (202)

493–4191.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

Interested persons are invited to

comment on the interim rule submitting

such written data, views, or arguments

as they may desire. Comments relating

to the environmental, energy,

federalism, or economic impact that

might result from adopting the interim

rule are also invited. Substantive

comments should be accompanied by

cost estimates. Comments must identify

the regulatory docket or notice number

and be submitted in duplicate to the

Rules Docket address specified above.

All comments received, as well as a

report summarizing each substantive

public contact with FAA personnel on

this interim rule will be filed in the

docket. The docket is available for

public inspection before and after the

comment closing date.

The Administrator will consider all

comments received on or before the

closing date. Late-filed comments will

be considered to the extent practicable.

The Interim Final Rule, as well as the

Final Rule, may be changed in light of

the comments received.

Commenters wishing the FAA to

acknowledge receipt of their comments

must include a pre-addressed, stamped

postcard on which the following

statement is made: ‘‘Comments to

Docket No. FAA–00–7018.’’ The

postcard will be date-stamped and

mailed to the commenter.

Availability of Interim Final Rule

You can get an electronic copy using

the Internet by taking the following

steps:

(1) Go to the search function of the

Department of Transportation’s

electronic Docket Management System

(DMS) web page (http://dms.dot.gov/

search).

(2) On the search page type in the last

four digits of the Docket number shown

at the beginning of this notice. Click on

‘‘search.’’

(3) On the next page, which contains

the Docket summary information for the

Docket you selected, click on the

document number for the item you wish

to view.

You can also get an electronic copy

using the Internet through FAA’s web

page at http://www.faa.gov/avr/arm/

nprm/nprm.htm or the Federal

Register’s web page at http://

www.access.gpo.gov/su_docs/aces/

aces140.html.

You can also get a copy by submitting

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 docket number of this

rulemaking.

Extension of Comment Period

On June 6, 2000, the FAA published

Amendment No. 187–11, Fees for FAA

Services for Certain Flights (65 FR

36002). The FAA requested that

comments to that document be

submitted on or before October 4, 2000.

The FAA has received and reviewed

approximately 70 comments. In

response to the extreme significance and

international implications of this IFR, as

expressed in the comments, FAA is

extending the comment period to give

affected entities (mostly foreign)

additional time to comment on the

contents of the docket. Also, the first

billing under this rule has recently

occurred and entities that may not have

commented to date may desire to

comment. This action provides the

opportunity.

The FAA determines that extending

the comment period is in the public

interest and that good cause exists for

taking this action. Accordingly, the

comment period for Amendment No.

187–11 is extended until October 27,

2000. If possible, any comments

received after this date will be

considered by the FAA prior to any

further action in this rulemaking.

Issued in Washington, DC, September 29,

2000.

Donna McLean,

Assistant Administrator for Financial

Services.

[FR Doc. 00–25633 Filed 10–3–00; 2:42 pm]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–M

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

Bureau of the Census

15 CFR Part 101

[Docket No.: 000609172–0268–02]

RIN: 0607–AA33

Report of Tabulations of Population to

States and Localities Pursuant to 13

U.S.C. 141(c) and Availability of Other

Population Information

AGENCY: Department of Commerce.

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce

is issuing a final rule setting forth how

the Bureau of the Census will carry out

its responsibilities to report tabulations

of population to States and localities

pursuant to 13 U.S.C. 141(c) and in

making available certain other

population information.

59714 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 195 / Friday, October 6, 2000 / Rules and Regulations

DATES: This rule is effective November

6, 2000.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John

H. Thompson, (301) 457–3946.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Through

the Census Act, which is codified in

title 13 of the United States Code,

Congress has delegated to the Secretary

of Commerce its broad constitutional

authority over the decennial census (see

U.S. Constitution Art. I, Sec. 2, Cl.3). On

June 13, the Commerce Department

issued a proposed rule that would set

forth how the Bureau of the Census will

carry out its responsibilities to report

tabulations of population to States and

localities pursuant to the Census Act.

See 65 FR 38370 (June 20, 2000). The

proposed rule would establish a process

for the release of data to the States and

codify the process by which a

committee of senior career officials of

the Census Bureau would advise the

Director of the Census. In addition, the

proposed rule contained a delegation of

authority from the Secretary to the

Director of the Census to make a

determination regarding the

methodology to be used in calculating

the tabulations of population to be

reported to States and localities

pursuant to 13 U.S.C. 141(c). While the

background and basis for the entire

proposal were included in the June 20

publication and are not repeated here,

this delegation of authority to the

Director, in particular, was included in

the proposed rule because the decision

turns entirely on operational and

methodological implementation within

the scientific expertise of the Bureau of

the Census, and it is important to avoid

even the appearance that considerations

other than those relating to statistical

science are being taken into account.

Comments and Responses

Comments in Support of the Proposed

Rule

The Department received 17 letters in

support of the proposed rule. There

were a total of 243 signatories to these

letters. Comments included one letter

signed by four former Directors of the

Census Bureau; five letters with six

signatories from statistical, social

science, and survey research

organizations; three letters with six

signatories from universities or

university-based research institutions;

two letters signed by 69 Members of

Congress; three letters with 15

signatories from national associations

and organizations; two letters with two

signatories from state or local

government officials; and one letter with

141 signatories from a public interest

organization.

Comment

Common to the letters in support of

the proposed rule were the following

two comments: (1) The decision on the

use of statistically corrected

redistricting and other nonapportionment data from Census 2000 is

a technical/scientific decision that

should be made by the Director of the

Census upon the recommendation of his

or her professional staff, and (2) the rule

ensures that other, irrelevant

considerations, especially those that are

political in nature, do not affect the

decision-making process. A number of

comments stated agreement with the

intent to ensure that politics do not

dictate what should be a scientific

decision. Others said the proposed rule

sets forth a fair and unbiased procedure

for making a vital decision on the

release of statistically corrected

redistricting and other nonapportionment data. Others viewed the

release of the recommendation of the

Executive Steering Committee for

Accuracy and Coverage Evaluation

(A.C.E.) Policy (ESCAP) to the public at

the same time that it is delivered to the

Director as helpful in ensuring that the

proposed decision-making process is an

open and transparent one.

Response

The Department notes the support for

the proposal stated in these comments.

Comments in Opposition to the

Proposed Rule

The Department received seven letters

in opposition to the proposed rule.

There were a total of 12 signatories to

these letters. Two of these letters were

signed by university officials; one letter

was signed by six Members of Congress;

two letters with two signatories from

state government officials; one letter

with one signatory from a non-profit

legal organization; and one letter from a

private individual.

Comment

Several of those commenting viewed

the contents of the ‘‘Accuracy and

Coverage Evaluation—Statement on the

Feasibility of Using Statistical Methods

to Improve the Accuracy of Census

2000,’’ 65 FR 38373–38398 (hereinafter,

the Feasibility Statement), as evidence

that the Census Bureau pre-judged the

superior accuracy of the sampling-based

counts.

Response

We regret this concern. To date, no

decision has been reached. The Census

Bureau has stated that it expects the

statistically corrected data to be more

accurate for non-apportionment uses of

the data, including redistricting and for

this reason it is implementing the

Accuracy and Coverage Evaluation

(A.C.E.) (see the Feasibility Statement).

However, the Census Bureau will not

determine whether it is appropriate to

release statistically corrected

redistricting data until it has brought its

technical judgment to bear in assessing

the available data to verify that its

expectations have been met. The Census

Bureau will consider operational data to

validate the successful conduct of the

A.C.E., assess whether the A.C.E.

measurements of undercount are

consistent with historical patterns of

undercount and independent

Demographic Analysis benchmarks, and

review measures of quality. If the

Census Bureau determines that

incorporating the results of the survey

would not improve the accuracy of the

initial census counts, then the data

without statistical correction would be

released to meet the requirements of

Pub.L. 94–171.

Comment

Several letters raised technical

concerns regarding the use of statistical

methods to correct the census and

challenged the arguments set forth in

the Feasibility Statement.

Response

These concerns or issues are beyond

the scope of the rulemaking and will not

be addressed specifically. However, as

part of the evaluation process described

in the proposed rule, these and other

technical issues will be considered.

Also, this fall, at a public meeting with

outside statistical experts and other

interested parties, the Census Bureau

will provide additional information

regarding the detailed analyses it plans

to conduct as part of its decision-making

process.

Comment

Two letters questioned the expertise

of the National Academy of Sciences

(NAS) panels that have been convened

over this decade to review the planning

and conduct of Census 2000. One

questioned the expertise of the Secretary

of Commerce’s and the Census Bureau’s

advisory committees in their work

relating to Census 2000.

Response

The NAS panels and the various

advisory committees are composed of

professionals with excellent credentials

to review and provide advice on the

planning and conduct of the decennial

census. In particular, the NAS panel

members are carefully selected from

among the country’s leading experts in

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 195 / Friday, October 6, 2000 / Rules and Regulations 59715

a wide variety of research fields,

including statistical and survey

methodology. The NAS has a long and

distinguished history of advising the

federal government on scientific and

technical matters. With regard to the

selection of advisory committee

members, both the Secretary of

Commerce and the Census Bureau went

to great lengths to ensure that the

committees possess well-documented

expertise in a wide range of areas

relating to the conduct of the decennial

census, including, but not limited to,

statistical and survey methodology.

Comment

Several letters indicated that the

Census Bureau professional staff have a

vested interest in the acceptance and

use of the statistically derived counts.

One stated that past Census Bureau

judgments on adjustment issues lead

one to question the agency’s ability to

reach the correct decision. In addition,

one letter stated that the lack of review

or input from independent scientific

experts biases the decision making

process.

Response

The senior professional officials who

serve on the Executive Steering

Committee for A.C.E. Policy (ESCAP)

are distinguished, objective, career civil

servants whose only interest is in

producing the most reliable and

accurate census data possible. Many of

these individuals have been recognized

by leading statistical organizations for

their significant contributions in the

areas of survey methodology and

statistics in general. Based on their years

of experience and expertise, these

officials are best suited to bring their

professional judgment and integrity to

bear in reviewing all the available data

and directing a comprehensive,

scientifically-defensible analysis in

making a recommendation on their

findings to the Director regarding the

use of the statistically corrected census

data. The ESCAP’s recommendation

will be released publicly, at the same

time that it is delivered to the Director,

to demonstrate the thoroughness and

integrity of the process for all interested

parties.

Comment

One comment acknowledged that the

Census Bureau committed itself to

achieving an open and transparent

planning and decision process,

however, the writer considered Census

Bureau reports and documentation,

including the A.C.E. documentation, on

statistical adjustment to be difficult to

access because they were not catalogued

to facilitate external access.

Response

The Census 2000 A.C.E. methodology

has been pre-specified and

documentation regarding the

methodology has been disseminated

through a variety of forums including

the Census Bureau’s website, public

meetings, two public workshops

sponsored by the National Academy of

Sciences (October 6, 1999, and February

2–3, 2000), and at a May 19, 2000,

hearing before the House Subcommittee

on the Census. The Census Bureau will

continue to make documentation

relating to Census 2000 publicly

available and available upon request.

Comment

One comment questioned whether the

Secretary’s proposed delegation of

authority to the Director of the Census

for making certain determinations

concerning the census amounted to a

divestiture of obligations vested in the

Secretary by the Congress. The comment

expressed three key concerns: (1) That

the delegation of authority is, in fact, a

‘‘divestiture’’ of authority because the

Secretary is seeking to escape

responsibility for the decision of the

Census Director by stating that the

Secretary will not review or reverse that

decision, (2) that by issuing a regulation

that allegedly divests the Secretary of

his statutory responsibility, the

Secretary is attempting to supersede the

statutory scheme passed by the

Congress, and (3) that if ‘‘the Commerce

Secretary believes he cannot, or should

not, be responsible for the final release

of adjusted numbers, then he should ask

that Congress remove the Census Bureau

entirely from the Commerce Department

and make it a separate agency.’’

Response

The Department of Commerce

considers Section 4 of Title 13, United

States Code to clearly provide the

Secretary authority to issue the

proposed rule and to include in that

proposal the delegation of authority at

issue. That section provides that:

The Secretary shall perform the functions

and duties imposed upon him by this title,

may issue such rules and regulations as he

deems necessary to carry out such functions

and duties, and may delegate the

performance of such functions and duties

and the authority to issue such rules and

regulations to such officers and employees of

the Department of Commerce as he may

designate. (Emphasis added.)

This statutory language provides the

Secretary with broad authority to take

the steps he deems appropriate to carry

out his responsibilities under the law,

and that language does not establish

limitations on the Secretary’s ability to

delegate the performance of his

functions and duties under the Census

Act. As such, the Secretary may delegate

the authority to determine the

methodology to be used in calculating

the tabulations of population reported to

States and localities pursuant to 13

U.S.C. 141(c).

The delegation of authority contained

in the Department’s proposed rule is not

an unlawful divestiture of the

Secretary’s statutory responsibility or

authority because the delegation, if

adopted in a final rule, would not be

irrevocable. Thus, the current or any

future Secretary of Commerce could

revoke that delegation by issuing

another final rule doing so. It is

unassailable that a rule revoking the

delegation would be effective, if it

satisfied the requirements of the

Administrative Procedure Act and other

applicable legal standards. Further, the

fact that the rule seeks to authorize the

Director of the Census to make a

determination under the Census Act,

and states that the Director’s decision

would not be subject to review or

reconsideration by the Secretary, does

not mean the Secretary would escape

responsibility for that determination. By

establishing this delegation of authority

by regulation, the Secretary is merely

creating a transparent process for

allowing a scientific determination to be

made by scientists. However, the

decision is being made on behalf of the

Secretary. Inherent in the delegation of

authority is the notion that the Secretary

is responsible for the determination

made by the head of the scientific

bureau in which the particular

knowledge and experience for making

that determination lies. Nevertheless, in

order to erase any doubt that the

delegation of authority is not a

divestiture of obligations or

responsibility by the Secretary, text has

been added to 15 CFR 101.1(a) that

explicitly states that nothing in the rule

diminishes the authority of the

Secretary of Commerce to revoke this

delegation of authority or relieves the

Secretary of Commerce of responsibility

for any decision made by the Director of

the Census pursuant to this delegation,

and that this rule shall remain in effect

unless or until amended or revoked by

the Secretary of Commerce.

Comment

One letter provided the Memorandum

of Law in a case currently proceeding in

the U.S. District Court for the District of

Columbia (Commonwealth of Virginia v.

United States of America, Case No.

59716 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 195 / Friday, October 6, 2000 / Rules and Regulations

1:00CV00751) stating that the

memorandum demonstrates the

rulemaking provides no real

opportunity to provide meaningful

comments.

Response

The Department considers the notice

and comment associated with this

rulemaking to be an appropriate venue

for meaningful comment. With respect

to the Memorandum of Law, the

Department is not party to the case and,

therefore, does not believe it appropriate

to make any statement on the arguments

presented.

Administrative Law Requirements

Executive Order 12866

This final rule has been determined to

be not significant under section 3(f) of

Executive Order 12866.

Paperwork Reduction Act

This final rule contains no new

information collection requests subject

to the Paperwork Reduction Act.

Regulatory Flexibility Act

The Chief Counsel for Regulation of

the Department of Commerce certified

to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the

Small Business Administration that the

proposed rule, if adopted, would not

have a significant economic impact on

a substantial number of small entities.

No comments were received regarding

this certification. Thus, the factual basis

for the certification has not changed. As

such, a final regulatory flexibility

analysis is not required, and none has

been prepared.

Unfunded Mandate Reform Act of 1995

This rule contains no Federal

mandates, as that term is defined in the

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act, on

State, local and tribal governments or

the private sector.

Executive Order 12630

This rule does not contain policies

that have takings implications.

List of Subjects in 15 CFR Part 101

Administrative practice and

procedure, Census data.

Dated: September 28, 2000.

Norman Y. Mineta,

Secretary of Commerce.

For the reasons set out in the

preamble, 15 CFR Part 101 is added to

read as follows:

PART 101—RELEASE OF DECENNIAL

CENSUS POPULATION INFORMATION

101.1 Report of tabulations of population to

states and localities pursuant to 13

U.S.C. 141(c).

101.2 Availability of other population

information.

Authority: 5 U.S.C. 301; 13 U.S.C. 4, 141,

195; 15 U.S.C. 1512.

PART 101—RELEASE OF DECENNIAL

CENSUS POPULATION INFORMATION

§ 101.1 Report of tabulations of population

to states and localities pursuant to 13

U.S.C. 141(c).

(a)(1) The Director of the Census shall

make the final determination regarding

the methodology to be used in

calculating the tabulations of population

reported to States and localities

pursuant to 13 U.S.C. 141(c). The

determination of the Director will be

published in the Federal Register.

(2) All relevant authority of the

Secretary of Commerce under 13 U.S.C.

141(c) and other applicable provisions

of title 13 of the U.S. Code with respect

to the decision to be made pursuant to

paragraph (a)(1) of this section is hereby

conferred upon the Director of the

Census.

(3) The Director of the Census shall

not make the determination specified in

paragraph (a)(1) of this section until

after he or she receives the

recommendation of the Executive

Steering Committee for A.C.E. Policy

(ESCAP) in accordance with paragraph

(b)(1) of this section.

(4) The determination of the Director

of the Census shall not be subject to

review, reconsideration, or reversal by

the Secretary of Commerce.

(5) Nothing in this section diminishes

the authority of the Secretary of

Commerce to revoke or amend this

delegation of authority or relieves the

Secretary of Commerce of responsibility

for any decision made by the Director of

the Census pursuant to this delegation.

This section shall remain in effect

unless or until amended or revoked by

the Secretary of Commerce.

(b)(1) The Executive Steering

Committee for A.C.E. Policy shall

prepare a written report to the Director

of the Census recommending the

methodology to be used in making the

tabulations of population reported to

States and localities pursuant to 13

U.S.C. 141(c).

(2) The report of the Executive

Steering Committee for A.C.E. Policy

described in paragraph (b)(1) of this

section shall be released to the public at

the same time it is delivered to the

Director of the Census. This release to

the public shall include, but is not

limited to, posting of the report on the

Bureau of the Census website and

publication of the report in the Federal

Register.

(3) The ‘‘Executive Steering

Committee for A.C.E. Policy’’ (ESCAP)

is composed of the following employees

of the Bureau of the Census:

(i) Deputy Director and Chief

Operating Officer;

(ii) Principal Associate Director and

Chief Financial Officer;

(iii) Principal Associate Director for

Programs;

(iv) Associate Director for Decennial

Census (Chair);

(v) Assistant Director for Decennial

Census;

(vi) Associate Director for

Demographic Programs;

(vii) Associate Director for

Methodology and Standards;

(viii) Chief; Planning, Research, and

Evaluation Division;

(ix) Chief; Decennial Management

Division;

(x) Chief; Decennial Statistical Studies

Division;

(xi) Chief; Population Division; and

(xii) Senior Mathematical Statistician.

§ 101.2 Availability of Other Population

Information.

(a) When the Director of the Census

determines pursuant to § 101.1(a)(1) of

this part to use methodologies including

the statistical method known as

‘‘sampling’’ to produce the tabulations

of population to report to States and

localities pursuant to 13 U.S.C. 141(c),

data prepared without the use of such

statistical method shall be made

available to the public in accordance

with the standards set forth in section

209(j) of Public Law 105–119, 111 Stat.

2440, simultaneously with the issuance

of the report to States.

(b) When the Director of the Census

determines pursuant to § 101.1(a)(1) of

this part to produce tabulations of

population without the use of

methodologies including the statistical

method known as sampling, for

reporting to States and localities

pursuant to 13 U.S.C. 141(c)

notwithstanding a recommendation by

the Executive Steering Committee for

A.C.E. Policy to use sampling, data

prepared with the use of such statistical

method shall be made available to the

public in accordance with the standards

set forth in section 209(j) of Public Law

105–119, 111 Stat. 2440, for the release

of data prepared without the use of such

statistical method, simultaneously with

the issuance of the report to States.

[FR Doc. 00–25501 Filed 10–5–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3510–07–U