Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 10 / Thursday, January 15, 2009 / Proposed Rules 2439 

Commission determines that it is not 

technologically feasible to have this 

lower limit. Paint, coatings or 

electroplating may not be considered a 

barrier that would make the lead 

content of a product inaccessible to a 

child. 

(b) Section 101(b)(4) of the CPSIA 

provides that if the Commission 

determines that it is not technologically 

feasible for certain electronic devices to 

comply with the lead limits, the 

Commission must issue requirements by 

regulation to eliminate or minimize the 

potential for exposure to and 

accessibility of lead in such electronic 

devices and establish a compliance 

schedule unless the Commission 

determines that full compliance is not 

technologically feasible. 

(c) Lead-containing component parts 

in electronic devices unable to meet the 

lead limits set forth in section (a) due to 

technological feasibility are granted 

exemptions published in the Annex to 

the European Union Directive 2002/95/ 

EC, as amended through European 

Union Commission Decision of January 

24, 2008, provided that the exemption is 

based on a functional requirement both 

for the use of a lead-containing 

component and for the use of lead in 

such component, and does not include 

the crystal glass exemption and any 

other exemption for decorative or nonfunctional uses of lead. 

(d) Components of electronic devices 

that are removable or replaceable such 

as battery packs and light bulbs that are 

inaccessible when the product is 

assembled in functional form or are 

otherwise granted an exemption 

published in the Annex of European 

Union Directive 2002/95/EC are not 

subject to the lead limits in section (a). 

(e) Commission staff is directed to 

reevaluate and report to the Commission 

on the technological feasibility of 

compliance with the lead limits in 

section (a) no less than five years after 

publication of a final rule in the Federal 

Register on electronic devices. 

Dated: January 9, 2009. 

Todd A. Stevenson, 

Secretary, Consumer Product Safety 

Commission. 

[FR Doc. E9–716 Filed 1–14–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6335–01–P 

CONSUMER PRODUCT SAFETY 

COMMISSION 

16 CFR Part 1500 

Children’s Products Containing Lead; 

Interpretative Rule on Inaccessible 

Component Parts 

AGENCY: Consumer Product Safety 

Commission. 

ACTION: Proposed interpretative rule. 

SUMMARY: On August 14, 2008, Congress 

enacted the Consumer Product Safety 

Improvement Act of 2008 (CPSIA), 

Public Law 110–314, 122 Stat. 3016. 

Section 101(a) of the CPSIA provides for 

specific lead limits in children’s 

products. Section 101(b)(2) of the CPSIA 

provides that the lead limits will not 

apply to any component part of a 

children’s product that is not accessible 

to a child through normal and 

reasonably foreseeable use and abuse. 

Section 101(b)(2)(B) of the CPSIA 

further directs the Commission to 

promulgate by August 14, 2009, a rule 

providing guidance with respect to what 

product components or classes of 

components will be considered to be 

inaccessible. In this document, the 

Commission is proposing an 

interpretative rule providing guidance 

on inaccessible component parts. 

DATES: Written comments and 

submissions in response to this notice 

must be received by February 17, 2009. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Comments should be e-mailed to 

Sec101InaccessibleRule@cpsc.gov. 

Comments should be captioned 

‘‘Section 101 Inaccessible Component 

Parts.’’ Comments may also be mailed, 

preferably in five copies, to the Office of 

the Secretary, Consumer Product Safety 

Commission, Room 502, 4330 East West 

Highway, Bethesda, Maryland 20814, or 

delivered to the same address 

(telephone (301) 504–7923). Comments 

also may be filed by facsimile to (301) 

504–0127. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

A. Background 

The CPSIA provides for specific lead 

limits in children’s products. Section 

101(a) of the CPSIA provides that by 

February 10, 2009, products designed or 

intended primarily for children 12 and 

younger may not contain more than 600 

parts per million (ppm) of lead. After 

August 14, 2009, products designed or 

intended primarily for children 12 and 

younger cannot contain more than 300 

ppm of lead. On August 14, 2011, the 

limit may be further reduced to 100 

ppm, unless the Commission 

determines that it is not technologically 

feasible to have this lower limit. A 

children’s product is defined as a 

consumer product designed or intended 

primarily for children 12 years of age or 

younger under section 235(a) of the 

CPSIA (to be codified at section 3(a)(2) 

of the Consumer Product Safety Act). In 

determining whether a consumer 

product is primarily intended for a child 

12 years of age or younger, the following 

factors will be considered: 

• A statement by the manufacturer 

about the intended use of such product, 

including a label on such product if 

such statement is reasonable. 

• Whether the product is represented 

in its packaging, display, promotion or 

advertising as appropriate for use by 

children 12 years of age or younger. 

• Whether the product is commonly 

recognized by consumers as being 

intended for use by a child 12 years of 

age or younger. 

• The Age Determination Guidelines 

issued by the Commission in September 

2002, and any successor to such 

guidelines. 

Section 101(b)(2) of the CPSIA 

provides that the lead limits do not 

apply to component parts of a product 

that are not accessible to a child. This 

section specifies that a component part 

is not accessible if it is not physically 

exposed by reason of a sealed covering 

or casing and does not become 

physically exposed through reasonably 

foreseeable use and abuse of the product 

including swallowing, mouthing, 

breaking, or other children’s activities, 

and the aging of the product, as 

determined by the Commission. Paint, 

coatings, or electroplating may not be 

considered to be a barrier that would 

render lead in the substrate to be 

inaccessible to a child. Section 

101(b)(2)(B) further provides that the 

Commission must promulgate a rule 

providing guidance with respect to what 

product components or classes of 

components will be considered to be 

inaccessible. 

To the extent a component part is 

inaccessible to a child, that component 

part would be relieved from the testing 

requirement of section 102 of the CPSIA 

for purposes of supporting the required 

certification. Of course even where a 

component part has been so relieved of 

the testing requirement, other 

component parts that are accessible 

must still meet the statutory lead level 

requirements, and would be subject to 

the testing requirement of section 102. 

The Commission will obtain and test 

products in the marketplace to assure 

that this remains the case and will take 

appropriate enforcement action in 

situations where the limits are exceeded 

in accessible parts. 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS

2440 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 10 / Thursday, January 15, 2009 / Proposed Rules 

In addition, if the Commission 

determines that it is not technologically 

feasible for certain electronic devices to 

fully comply with the lead limits, 

section 101(b)(4) of the CPSIA provides 

that the Commission will issue 

requirements by regulation to eliminate 

or minimize the potential for exposure 

to and accessibility of lead in such 

electronic devices. A notice of proposed 

rulemaking on electronic devices is 

published elsewhere in this Federal 

Register. 

On September 26, 2008, the 

Commission staff requested comments 

on the CPSC Web site on section 

101(b)(2), Exception for Inaccessible 

Component Parts, and section 101(b)(4), 

Certain Electronic Devices. In particular, 

the staff requested comments and 

information on the identification of any 

component part of any children’s 

product that currently contains lead in 

any concentration; whether any 

children’s product currently on the 

market contains lead-containing 

component parts that are inaccessible, 

and the reasons why such component 

parts are considered inaccessible; and 

whether test methods or processes exist 

that are used or may be used to assess 

the accessibility by children of 

component parts of products. Comments 

were due on October 31, 2009. The 

proposed interpretative rule provides 

guidance for determining whether leadcontaining components of children’s 

products are not accessible to children. 

B. Comments 

Seventeen comments addressed issues 

related to accessibility or inaccessibility 

of lead-containing component parts of 

children’s products, including methods 

for evaluating accessibility. Three 

comments discussed fully enclosed 

parts that should be deemed 

inaccessible. Four comments asserted 

that accessibility should refer to 

exposure to lead, e.g., leaching of lead 

from the product, not physical 

accessibility. Two comments suggested 

that only materials that physically 

degrade or break down should be 

considered as resulting in accessibility. 

Fourteen comments stated that 

accessible parts should be only those 

that are ingestible, and refer to testing 

for small parts. Seven comments stated 

that the use of tools should not be 

considered in evaluating accessibility. 

The CPSIA defines accessibility as 

physical exposure to lead-containing 

component parts. Based on staff’s 

review, the Commission preliminarily 

determines that an accessible 

component part of a children’s product 

is one that a child may touch, and an 

inaccessible component part is one that 

is located inside the product that a child 

cannot touch. The Commission 

preliminarily accepts staff’s 

recommendation to assess 

inaccessibility through the use of 

accessibility probes and use and abuse 

testing. 

Further, based on staff’s review, the 

Commission preliminarily determines 

that an accessible component part 

includes a part that a child may touch 

or place in the mouth, not just a 

component part that a child might 

ingest, since exposure to lead may occur 

during direct mouthing of an object or 

mouthing of fingers/hands. In addition, 

a definition of accessibility that refers 

solely to exposure to lead, e.g., resulting 

from leaching of lead from a part, or 

degradation of a material, is not 

consistent with the definition of 

accessibility provided in the CPSIA. The 

Commission also preliminarily finds 

that the intentional disassembly of 

products by children through the use of 

tools should not be considered in 

evaluating products for accessibility of 

lead-containing components. 

Several comments suggested that the 

accessibility probes defined in the 

CPSC’s regulations for evaluating 

accessibility of sharp points or sharp 

metal or glass edges could be used to 

evaluate accessibility of lead-containing 

components. The Commission 

preliminarily finds that these 

accessibility probes could be used to 

determine whether a lead-containing 

component part of a product is 

accessible to a child. 

Three comments suggested that use 

and abuse tests could be used to assess 

whether a product contains ingestible 

small parts. The Commission 

preliminarily finds that appropriate use 

and abuse tests as defined in current 

CPSC regulations could be part of an 

evaluation of whether certain 

component parts of a product become 

accessible to a child during normal and 

reasonably foreseeable use and abuse of 

the product by a child. However, 

accessibility does not refer only to 

ingestion of lead-containing 

components. Rather, the definition of 

accessibility provided in the CPSIA is 

physical contact with lead-containing 

component parts, and the Commission 

preliminarily finds that this includes 

touching, placing in the mouth, or 

ingestion of a part of a product. 

C. Proposed Guidance for Inaccessible 

Component Parts 

A component part of a product that 

contains lead at a level that exceeds the 

lead limits specified in the CPSIA may 

be excluded from compliance with the 

specified limits if the part is not 

accessible to a child. The CPSIA 

specifies that accessibility is defined as 

physical contact with lead-containing 

component parts. 

Thus, the Commission accepts the 

staff’s recommendation to consider that 

an accessible component part of a 

children’s product is one that a child 

may touch, and an inaccessible 

component part is one that is located 

inside the product and not capable of 

being touched by child, whether or not 

such part is visible to a user of the 

product. While an inaccessible part may 

be enclosed in any type of material, e.g., 

hard or soft plastic, rubber or metal, the 

CPSIA prohibits the use of surface 

treatments on a lead-containing 

component part in the form of paint, 

coatings, or electroplating as a barrier 

that would render lead in the substrate 

to be inaccessible to a child. The 

Commission seeks comments on 

whether fabric coverings could be used 

as a barrier that would make lead within 

the product inaccessible to a child. 

Since a lead-containing component 

part may be inside a product and not 

actually fully enclosed by another part 

of the product, children may have 

opportunities to contact lead-containing 

component parts; e.g., they might touch 

a part with their fingers or tongues. The 

Commission’s proposed approach to 

addressing section 101(b)(2) is to 

describe means to test accessibility of 

potentially lead-containing component 

parts through evaluation of whether 

children might touch a lead-containing 

part. 

Currently the Commission’s 

regulations provide that sharp points 

and sharp metal or glass edges on toys 

or other articles intended for use by 

children under age eight years present a 

potential risk of injury. 16 CFR 1500.48 

and 1500.49 provide specific technical 

requirements for determining 

accessibility of sharp points or edges 

through use of accessibility probes 

specified in these regulations. Both 

provisions require that a test of 

accessibility of sharp points or edges 

shall be applied both before and after 

use and abuse tests specified in 16 CFR 

sections 1500.50 through 1500.53. As 

defined in 16 CFR 1500.48 and 1500.49, 

an accessible sharp point or edge is 

present in the product if the result of the 

test is that any part of the specified 

portion of the accessibility probe 

contacts the sharp part. 

The ASTM F963 Standard Consumer 

Safety Specification for Toy Safety 

(ASTM F963 standard) also includes 

requirements for accessible sharp points 

and sharp edges through references to 

the definitions at 16 CFR 1500.48 and 

1500.49. As with the corresponding 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS

Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 10 / Thursday, January 15, 2009 / Proposed Rules 2441 

1The staff’s toy testing manual, which is on the 

Commission’s Web site at http://www.cpsc.gov/ 

BUSINFO/testtoys.pdf, explains in greater detail the 

sharp point accessibility test and the use and abuse 

testing currently conducted by Commission staff. 

regulations, the ASTM F963 standard 

indicates that accessibility is to be 

determined both before and after use 

and abuse tests. 

The Commission proposes that the 

accessibility probes specified for 

determining accessibility of sharp 

points or edges be designated as 

appropriate for determining whether a 

lead-component part of a product is 

accessible to a child. An accessible leadcontaining component part would be 

defined as one that contacts any portion 

of the specified segment of the 

accessibility probe. An inaccessible 

lead-containing component part would 

be defined as one that cannot be 

contacted by any portion of the 

specified segment of the accessibility 

probe. Under the provisions of the 

CPSIA, a lead-containing component 

part is not subject to the lead limits if 

it is not accessible to a child. 

1. Description of Accessibility Probes 

16 CFR sections 1500.48 and 1500.49 

provide identical technical 

requirements for two accessibility 

probes applicable to two categories of 

children’s products, based on the age of 

the intended consumer. A detailed 

drawing of the probes is reproduced 

below as Figure 1. 

The two probes differ by size for use 

with products intended for children 

aged three years or less (Probe A) or for 

children up to eight years (Probe B). The 

probe section of the test fixture is a 

jointed, three-segment cylindrical piece 

(the part of the probe on the right side 

of the illustration in Figure 1) attached 

to a larger collared section. Under 16 

CFR 1500.48, for example, an accessible 

point is one that can be contacted by 

any portion forward of the collar. For 

children aged three years and younger, 

the probe section is 0.220 inches in 

diameter with each of the three sections 

0.577 inches in length, for a total length 

of 1.731 inches. 

2. Use and Abuse Tests 

16 CFR 1500.50 through 1500.53 

(excluding the bite tests of 1500.51(c) 

and 1500.52(c)) provide specific test 

methods for simulating normal use of 

toys and other articles intended for use 

by children as well as the reasonably 

foreseeable damage or abuse to which 

the articles may be subjected. The test 

methods are for use in exposing 

potential hazards that would result from 

the normal use or the reasonably 

foreseeable damage or abuse of such 

articles intended for children. 

The first of these four sections (16 

CFR sections 1500.50) describes the 

objective, general application of the 

tests, and definitions; the next three 

sections detail the test methods for 

articles intended for specified age 

groups of children: 18 months of age or 

less, over 18 months but not over 36 

months of age, and over 36 months but 

not over 96 months of age. Products for 

each of the age groups may be subject 

to up to five different tests (impact test, 

flexure test, torque test, tension test, and 

compression test) depending on the 

specifications of the regulations and the 

characteristics of the product.1

The Commission preliminarily 

concludes that these use and abuse tests 

are appropriate for evaluating whether 

lead-containing component parts of a 

product become accessible to a child 

during normal and reasonably 

foreseeable use and abuse of the product 

by a child, since the stated purpose of 

the tests is to simulate use and damage 

or abuse of a product by children and 

to expose potential hazards that might 

result from use and abuse. However, the 

Commission is interested in obtaining 

comment on the effect, if any, of 

product aging on the use and abuse 

evaluation. 

3. Testing Products for Children Aged 

12 Years and Under 

The existing testing paradigms for 

accessibility of sharp points and edges 

are intended for products for use by 

children in designated age groups up to 

age eight years. The Commission 

preliminarily concludes that the 

application of the current accessibility 

tests is sufficient for products intended 

for children older than age eight years, 

given that the accessibility probes are 

designed to test whether children’s 

relatively small fingers might enter 

small holes, gaps, or recesses where 

they could physically contact certain 

components, and considering that older 

children’s larger fingers would likely 

have more limited access to such small 

holes, gaps, or recesses. 

Use and abuse testing is also 

designated for products for children up 

to age eight years. While the 

Commission recognizes that as children 

age they gain strength and dexterity and 

participate in a greater range of 


mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALSEP15JA09.000</GPH>
2442 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 10 / Thursday, January 15, 2009 / Proposed Rules 

activities that could lead to inaccessible 

components eventually becoming 

accessible, older children (ages 9 

through 12 years) also gain cognitive 

skills and knowledge that they use to 

care for and appropriately use their toys 

and other articles. The Commission 

preliminarily determines, therefore, that 

applying the use and abuse tests 

described for products for children up 

to age eight years to products for 

children through age 12 years will 

appropriately reveal inherent 

characteristics or possible defects in 

products that could result in 

accessibility of components. 

Further, the Commission recognizes 

that as children 12 years of age or 

younger grow and mature, they become, 

in many respects, indistinguishable 

from children older than 12 years, and 

even adults. Consequently, the 

Commission preliminary determines 

that intentional disassembly or 

destruction of products by children 

older than age 8 years by means or 

knowledge not generally available to 

younger children should not be 

considered in evaluating products for 

accessibility of lead-containing 

components. For example, accessibility 

arising from the use of tools, such as a 

screwdriver, should not be considered 

in accessibility and use and abuse 

testing. 

On the other hand, testing of products 

should consider the normal and 

expected children’s interactions with 

products. For example, children may be 

expected to operate zippers or snaps, 

open unsealed and unsecured 

compartments, or remove unsecured 

covers. Products with such features 

should be evaluated for accessibility in 

all the intended and likely 

configurations of the product during use 

by children. 

D. Effective Date 

The Commission was directed by the 

CPSIA to promulgate a rule providing 

guidance on inaccessible component 

parts by August 14, 2009. Although 

interpretative rules do not require a 

particular effective date under the 

Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C. 

553(d)(2), the Commission recognizes 

the need for providing the guidance 

expeditiously. Accordingly, the 

proposed interpretative rule would take 

effect upon publication of a final 

interpretative rule in the Federal 

Register. 

E. Request for Comments 

Interested persons are invited to 

submit comment on the proposed rule. 

Comments should be e-mailed to 

Sec101InaccessibleRule@cpsc.gov. 

Comments should be captioned 

‘‘Section 101 Inaccessible Component 

Parts.’’ Comments may also be mailed, 

preferably in five copies, to the Office of 

the Secretary, Consumer Product Safety 

Commission, Room 502, 4330 East West 

Highway, Bethesda, Maryland 20814, or 

delivered to the same address 

(telephone (301) 504–7923). Comments 

also may be filed by facsimile to (301) 

504–0127. 

F. List of Relevant Documents 

Memorandum from Kristina M. 

Hatlelid, Ph.D., M.P.H., Toxicologist, 

Directorate for Health Sciences 

‘‘Consumer Product Safety Improvement 

Act of 2008 (CPSIA) Exclusions and 

Exemptions from Compliance with 

Limits for Lead: Inaccessibility and 

Certain Electronic Devices.’’ December 

2008. 

List of Subjects in 16 CFR Part 1500 

Consumer protection, Hazardous 

materials, Hazardous substances, 

Imports, Infants and children, Labeling, 

Law enforcement, and Toys. 

G. Conclusion 

For the reasons stated above, the 

Commission amends Title 16 of the 

Code of Federal Regulations as follows: 

PART 1500—HAZARDOUS 

SUBSTANCES AND ARTICLES: 

ADMINISTRATION AND 

ENFORCEMENT REGULATIONS 

1. The authority for part 1500 is 

amended to read as follows: 

Authority: 15 U.S.C. 1261–1278, 122 Stat. 

3016. 

2. Add a new § 1500.87 to read as 

follows: 

§ 1500.87 Children’s Products Containing 

Lead: Inaccessible Component Parts. 

(a) The Consumer Product Safety 

Improvement Act (CPSIA) provides for 

specific lead limits in children’s 

products. Section 101(a) of the CPSIA 

provides that by February 10, 2009, 

products designed or intended primarily 

for children 12 and younger may not 

contain more than 600 ppm of lead. 

After August 14, 2009, products 

designed or intended primarily for 

children 12 and younger cannot contain 

more than 300 ppm of lead. On August 

14, 2011, the limit may be further 

reduced to 100 ppm after three years, 

unless the Commission determines that 

it is not technologically feasible to have 

this lower limit. Paint, coatings or 

electroplating may not be considered a 

barrier that would make the lead 

content of a product inaccessible to a 

child. 

(b) Section 101(b)(2) of the CPSIA 

provides that the lead limits do not 

apply to component parts of a product 

that are not accessible to a child. This 

section specifies that a component part 

is not accessible if it is not physically 

exposed by reason of a sealed covering 

or casing and does not become 

physically exposed through reasonably 

foreseeable use and abuse of the product 

including swallowing, mouthing, 

breaking, or other children’s activities, 

and the aging of the product, as 

determined by the Commission. Paint, 

coatings, or electroplating may not be 

considered to be a barrier that would 

render lead in the substrate to be 

inaccessible to a child. 

(c) Section 101(b)(2)(B) of the CPSIA 

directs the Commission to promulgate 

by August 14, 2009, this interpretative 

rule to provide guidance with respect to 

what product components or classes of 

components will be considered to be 

inaccessible. 

(d) The accessibility probes specified 

for sharp points or edges under the 

Commission’s regulations at 16 CFR 

1500.48–1500.49 will be used to assess 

the accessibility of lead-component 

parts of a children’s product. A leadcontaining component part would be 

considered accessible if it contacts any 

portion of the specified segment of the 

accessibility probe. A lead-containing 

component part would be considered 

inaccessible if it cannot be contacted by 

any portion of the specified segment of 

the accessibility probe. 

(e) The use and abuse tests set forth 

under the Commission’s regulations at 

16 CFR 1500.50–1500.53 (excluding the 

bite tests of 1500.51(c) and 1500.52(c)) 

will be used to evaluate accessibility of 

lead-containing component parts of a 

children’s product as a result of normal 

and reasonably foreseeable use and 

abuse of the product by children that are 

18 months of age or less, over 18 months 

but not over 36 months of age, and over 

36 months but not over 96 months of 

age. 

(f) The use and abuse tests set forth 

under the Commission’s regulations at 

16 CFR 1500.50–1500.53 (excluding the 

bite tests of 1500.51(c) and 1500.52(c)) 

intended for children aged 37–96 

months will be used to evaluate 

accessibility of lead-containing 

component parts of a children’s product 

as a result of normal and reasonably 

foreseeable use and abuse of the product 

by a child through 12 years of age. 

(g) The intentional disassembly or 

destruction of products by children 

older than age 8 years by means or 

knowledge not generally available to 

younger children, including use of tools, 

will not be considered in evaluating 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS

Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 10 / Thursday, January 15, 2009 / Proposed Rules 2443 

products for accessibility of leadcontaining components. 

Dated: January 9, 2009. 

Todd A. Stevenson, 

Secretary, Consumer Product Safety 

Commission. 

[FR Doc. E9–717 Filed 1–14–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6335–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

Federal Energy Regulatory 

Commission 

18 CFR Part 284 

[Docket No. RM09–2–000] 

Contract Reporting Requirements of 

Intrastate Natural Gas Companies 

January 7, 2009. 

AGENCY: Federal Energy Regulatory 

Commission, DOE. 

ACTION: Notice of Inquiry: extension of 

comment deadline. 

SUMMARY: On November 20, 2008, the 

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission 

issued a Notice of Inquiry to consider 

whether to revise its contract reporting 

requirements for those natural gas 

pipelines that fall under the 

Commission’s jurisdiction pursuant to 

section 311 of the Natural Gas Policy 

Act of 1978 or section 1(c) of the Natural 

Gas Act (November 28, 2008, 73 FR 

72395). The deadline for filing 

comments is being extended at the 

request of the Texas Pipeline 

Association. 

Comment Date: Comments are due on 

or before February 13, 2009. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments 

on the Notice of Inquiry, identified by 

Docket No. RM09–2–000, by one of the 

following methods: 

• Agency Web site: http:// 

www.ferc.gov. Follow instructions for 

submitting comments via the eFiling 

link found in the Comment Procedures 

Section of the preamble. 

• Mail: Commenters unable to file 

comments electronically must mail or 

hand deliver an original and 14 copies 

of their comments to the Federal Energy 

Regulatory Commission, Secretary of the 

Commission, 888 First Street, NE., 

Washington, DC 20426. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Vince Mareino (Legal Information), 

Office of the General Counsel, Federal 

Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 

First Street, NE., Washington, DC 

20426, (202) 502–6167, 

Vince.Mareino@ferc.gov. 

Brian White (Technical Information), 

Office of Energy Markets Regulation, 

Federal Energy Regulatory 

Commission, 888 First Street, NE., 

Washington, DC 20426, (202) 502– 

8332, Brian.White@ferc.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Notice of Extension of Time 

On December 19, 2008, the Texas 

Pipeline Association (TPA) filed a 

motion for an extension of time to file 

comments in response to the 

Commission’s Notice of Inquiry issued 

November 20, 2008, in the abovereferenced proceeding. Contract 

Reporting Requirements of Intrastate 

Natural Gas Companies, 125 FERC 

¶ 61,190 (2008) (NOI). The motion states 

that because of the potential impact of 

the NOI on TPA and its members and 

because of the press of other business 

and the intervening holidays, additional 

time is needed to file responsive 

comments. 

Upon consideration, notice is hereby 

given that an extension of time for filing 

comments on the Commission’s NOI is 

granted to and including February 13, 

2009, as requested by TPA. 

Kimberly D. Bose, 

Secretary. 

[FR Doc. E9–394 Filed 1–14–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6717–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND 

HUMAN SERVICES 

Food and Drug Administration 

21 CFR Part 131 

[Docket No. FDA–2000–P–0126] (formerly 

Docket No. 2000P–0685) 

Milk and Cream Products and Yogurt 

Products; Proposal to Revoke the 

Standards for Lowfat Yogurt and 

Nonfat Yogurt and to Amend the 

Standard for Yogurt 

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, 

HHS. 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug 

Administration (FDA) is proposing to 

revoke its regulations on the standards 

of identity for lowfat yogurt and nonfat 

yogurt and amend the standard of 

identity for yogurt in numerous 

respects. This action is in response, in 

part, to a citizen petition submitted by 

the National Yogurt Association (the 

NYA). FDA tentatively concludes that 

this action will promote honesty and 

fair dealing in the interest of consumers 

and, to the extent practicable, will 

achieve consistency with existing 

international standards of identity for 

yogurt. 

DATES: Submit comments by March 31, 

2009. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, 

identified by Docket No. FDA–2000–P– 

0126, by any of the following methods: 

Electronic Submissions 

Submit electronic comments in the 

following ways: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// 

www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

instructions for submitting comments. 

Written Submissions 

Submit written submissions in the 

following ways: 

• FAX: 301–827–6870. 

• Mail/Hand delivery/Courier (for 

paper, disk, or CD–ROM submissions): 

Division of Dockets Management (HFA– 

305), Food and Drug Administration, 

5630 Fishers Lane, rm. 1061, Rockville, 

MD 20852. 

To ensure more timely processing of 

comments, FDA is no longer accepting 

comments submitted to the agency by email. FDA encourages you to continue 

to submit electronic comments by using 

the Federal eRulemaking Portal, as 

described previously, in the ADDRESSES

portion of this document under 

Electronic Submissions. 

Instructions: All submissions received 

must include the agency name and 

docket number for this rulemaking. All 

comments received may be posted 

without change to http:// 

www.regulations.gov, including any 

personal information provided. For 

additional information on submitting 

comments, see the ‘‘Comments’’ heading 

of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION

section of this document. 

Docket: For access to the docket to 

read background documents or 

comments received, go to http:// 

www.regulations.gov and insert the 

docket number, found in brackets in the 

heading of this document, into the 

‘‘Search’’ box and follow the prompts 

and/or go to the Division of Dockets 

Management, 5630 Fishers Lane, rm. 

1061, Rockville, MD 20852. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ritu 

Nalubola, Center for Food Safety and 

Applied Nutrition (HFS–820), Food and 

Drug Administration, 5100 Paint Branch 

Pkwy., College Park, MD 20740, 301– 

436–2371. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Table of Contents 

I. Background 

A. Current Standards of Identity for 

Yogurt, Lowfat Yogurt, and Nonfat 

Yogurt 

B. The National Yogurt Association 

Petition 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS