This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER

contains notices to the public of the proposed

issuance of rules and regulations. The

purpose of these notices is to give interested

persons an opportunity to participate in the

rule making prior to the adoption of the final

rules.

Proposed Rules Federal Register

33494

Vol. 66, No. 121

Friday, June 22, 2001

1 66 FR 27476.

COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING

COMMISSION

17 CFR Parts 3 and 170

RIN Number 3038–AB84

Notice Registration as a Futures

Commission Merchant or Introducing

Broker for Certain Securities Brokers

or Dealers

AGENCY: Commodity Futures Trading

Commission.

ACTION: Reopening and extension of

comment period.

SUMMARY: On May 17, 2001, the

Commodity Futures Trading

Commission (‘‘CFTC’’) published in the

Federal Register a request for public

comment on a proposal to amend Rule

3.10, so as to provide notice registration

as a futures commission merchant

(‘‘FCM’’) or introducing broker (‘‘IB’’)

for certain securities brokers or dealers

(‘‘BDs’’), and to amend Rule 170.15, so

as to exempt these BDs from the

requirement to become a member of the

National Futures Association (‘‘CFTC

Proposal’’).1 Among other things, these

BDs would be required to be registered

with the Securities and Exchange

Commission (‘‘SEC’’) and to limit their

involvement with commodity interests

to security futures products. The CFTC

Proposal was made in accordance with

the Commodity Futures Modernization

Act of 2000 (‘‘CFMA’’). In response to a

request it has received, the CFTC is

extending the comment period on the

CFTC Proposal to July 11, 2001.

DATES: Written comments must be

received on or before July 11, 2001.

ADDRESSES: Comments on the proposal

should be sent to Jean A. Webb,

Secretary, Commodity Futures Trading

Commission, Three Lafayette Center,

1155 21st Street, NW, Washington, DC

20581. Comments may be sent by

facsimile transmission to (202) 418–

5521, or by e-mail to secretary@cftc.gov.

Reference should be made to ‘‘Notice

Registration as a Futures Commission

Merchant or Introducing Broker for

Certain Securities Brokers or Dealers.’’

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Barbara S. Gold, Assistant Chief

Counsel, or Lawrence B. Patent,

Associate Chief Counsel, Division of

Trading and Markets, Commodity

Futures Trading Commission, Three

Lafayette Center, 1155 21st Street NW,

Washington, D.C. 20581, (202) 418–

5450, electronic mail: bgold@cftc.gov, or

lpatent@cftc.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The CFTC

Proposal would provide for notice

registration as an FCM or IB for certain

BDs subject to the condition that they

limit their commodity interest-related

activity to security futures products.

The comment period on the CFTC

Proposal expires June 18, 2001. The

CFMA also authorizes notice

registration as a BD with the SEC of

certain FCMs and IBs for the limited

purpose of effecting transactions in

security futures products. The SEC has

not, however, as of this date published

for comment in the Federal Register a

notice registration proposal for such

FCMs and IBs (‘‘SEC Proposal’’).

Because it would like the opportunity

to review the SEC Proposal before

commenting on the CFTC Proposal, the

Futures Industry Association (‘‘FIA’’)

has requested an extension of time of

the comment period on the CFTC

Proposal. In response, the CFTC has

determined to extend the comment

period on the CFTC Proposal until July

11, 2001 in order to insure that an

adequate opportunity is provided for

submission of meaningful comments.

This date is intended to provide the

FIA with its requested ‘‘two-week

extension . . . from the date the SEC’s

release is published.’’ However, in the

event the date of July 11, 2001 is not

sufficient to provide for the requested

two-week extension, the CFTC intends

to provide for another extension of the

comment period on the CFTC Proposal

so as to in fact provide interested

persons with two weeks after the date of

publication in the Federal Register of

the SEC Proposal in which to comment

on the Proposal.

Issued in Washington, D.C. on June 18,

2001 by the Commission.

Jean A. Webb,

Secretary of the Commission.

[FR Doc. 01–15724 Filed 6–21–01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6351–01–M

NATIONAL INDIAN GAMING

COMMISSION

25 CFR Part 502

RIN 3141–AA10

Definitions: Electronic or

Electromechanical Facsimile

AGENCY: National Indian Gaming

Commission.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

SUMMARY: The National Indian Gaming

Commission proposes to amend its

regulations by removing the definition

of ‘‘electronic and electromechanical

facsimile’’ now set forth at 25 CFR

502.8.

DATES: Comments may be submitted on

or before July 23, 2001.

ADDRESSES: Send comments by mail,

facsimile, or hand delivery to:

Definitions: Electronic and

Electromechanical Facsimile,

Amendment Comments, National Indian

Gaming Commission, Suite 9100, 1441 L

Street, NW., Washington, DC 20005. Fax

number: 202–632–7066 (not a toll-free

number). Public comments may be

delivered or inspected from 9 a.m. until

noon and from 2 p.m. to 5 p.m. Monday

through Friday.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Michele F. Mitchell at 202–632–7003 or,

by fax, at 202–632–7066 (these are not

toll-free numbers).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The

Indian Gaming Regulatory Act (‘‘IGRA’’

or ‘‘Act’’) 25 U.S.C. 2701–2721, enacted

on October 17, 1988, established the

National Indian Gaming Commission

(Commission). Under the Act, the

Commission is charged, among other

things, with regulating Class II gaming

by Indian tribes. The Act defines Class

II gaming as including the game of

chance commonly known as bingo

(whether or not electronic, computer, or

other technological aids are used in

connection therewith), but does not

include electronic or electromechanical

facsimiles of any game of chance or slot

Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 121 / Friday, June 22, 2001 / Proposed Rules 33495

machines of any kind. On April 9, 1992,

the Commission issued a final rule

defining key terms in the Act. Among

the terms defined by the Commission

was ‘‘electronic or electromechanical

facsimile.’’ The Commission defined

this term by reference to the Johnson

Act, 15 U.S.C. 1171(a)(2) and (3). See 25

CFR 502.8. Although an agency’s

interpretation of ambiguous terms in a

federal law that it is responsible for

administering is ordinarily entitled to

great deference, the courts, in several

recent decisions, have not relied on the

Commission’s definition of electronic or

electromechanical facsimile. Instead the

courts have relied exclusively on the

terms contained in the Indian Gaming

Regulatory Act, applying a plain

language interpretation of this phrase.

To ensure consistency with

developments in the case law and to

ensure a uniform approach to this term

by the Commission and the courts, the

Commission now proposes and seeks

public comment on removal of 25 CFR

502.8 and use instead the plain language

interpretation that has been preferred by

the courts.

Regulatory Flexibility Act

This rule will not have a significant

economic effect on a substantial number

of small entities as defined under the

Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601

et seq. Indian Tribes are not considered

to be small entities for the purposes of

the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

Small Business Regulatory Enforcement

Fairness Act

This rule is not a major rule under 5

U.S.C. 804(2), the Small Business

Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act.

This rule does not have an annual effect

on the economy of $100 million or

more. This rule will not cause a major

increase in costs or prices for

consumers, individual industries,

Federal, state or local government

agencies or geographic regions and does

not have a significant adverse effect on

competition, employment, investment,

productivity, innovation, or the ability

of U.S. based enterprises to compete

with foreign-based enterprises.

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

The Commission has determined that

this proposed rule does not impose an

unfunded mandate on State, local or

tribal governments or on the private

sector of more than $100 million per

year. Thus, it is not a ‘‘significant

regulatory action’’ under the Unfunded

Mandates Reform Act, 2 U.S.C. 1501 et

seq. The Commission has also

determined that the proposed rule does

not have a unique effect on tribal

governments because the proposed

removal of the reference to the Johnson

Act merely codifies the practice of

defining ‘‘electronic and

electromechanical facsimile’’ in

accordance with the plain meaning of

those words.

Takings

In accordance with Executive Order

12630, the Commission has determined

that this rule does not have significant

takings implications. A takings

implication assessment is not required.

Civil Justice Reform

In accordance with Executive Order

12988, the Office of General Counsel has

determined that the rule does not

unduly burden the judicial system and

meets the requirements of sections 3(a)

and 3(b)(2) of the Order. Instead, the

rule is likely to decrease litigation with

Indian tribes and reduce unnecessary

friction between the Department of

Justice and the Commission.

Paperwork Reduction Act

This regulation does not require an

information collection under the

Paperwork Reduction Act 44 U.S.C.

3501 et seq.

National Environmental Policy Act

The Commission has analyzed this

rule in accordance with the criteria of

the National Environmental Policy Act.

This rule does not constitute a major

Federal action significantly affecting the

quality of the human environment. An

environmental assessment is not

required.

List of Subjects in 25 CFR Part 502

Gaming, Indian lands.

For the reasons set forth in the

preamble, the National Indian Gaming

Commission proposes to amend 25 CFR

Part 502 as follows:

PART 502—DEFINITIONS OF THIS

CHAPTER

1. The authority citation for part 502

continues to read as follows:

Authority 25 U.S.C. 2701 et seq.

2. Amend § 502.8 as follows:

§ 502.8 [Removed and Reserved]

Remove and reserve § 502.8.

Dated: June 18, 2001.

Elizabeth L. Homer,

Vice Chair.

Teresa E. Poust,

Commissioner.

[FR Doc. 01–15700 Filed 6–21–01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7565–01–U

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[WI85–01–7316; FRL–7000–6]

Approval and Promulgation of Air

Quality Plans; Wisconsin; Post-1996

Rate Of Progress Plan for the

Milwaukee-Racine Ozone

Nonattainment Area

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

SUMMARY: The EPA proposes to approve

the post-1996 Rate-Of-Progress (ROP)

plan submitted by the State of

Wisconsin for the Milwaukee-Racine

ozone nonattainment area, as a

requested revision of the State

Implementation Plan (SIP) for ozone.

The Clean Air Act (Act) requires a post1996 ROP plan for the MilwaukeeRacine ozone nonattainment area. The

purpose of the post-1996 ROP plan is to

incrementally provide for progress

toward attainment of the 1-hour ozone

standard in the Milwaukee-Racine

ozone nonattainment area by reducing

ground-level ozone precursor emissions.

The submitted plan, which covers the

period of 1996 through 1999 and

emission reductions occurring by

November 15, 1999, shows that

Wisconsin reduced emissions of volatile

organic compounds (VOC), ozoneforming pollutants by the amounts

required by the Act.

DATES: EPA must receive comments in

writing by July 23, 2001.

ADDRESSES: Written comments should

be sent to: Carlton Nash, Chief,

Regulation Development Section, Air

Programs Branch (AR–18J), U.S.

Environmental Protection Agency, 77

West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago,

Illinois 60604.

Copies of the state’s submittal

addressed in this proposed rule, and

other relevant materials are available for

public inspection during normal

business hours at the following address:

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,

Region 5, Air and Radiation Division, 77

West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago,

Illinois 60604. Please contact Jacqueline

Nwia at (312) 886–6081 before visiting

the Region 5 office.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Jacqueline Nwia, Environmental

Scientist, U.S. Environmental Protection

Agency, Air and Radiation Division

(AR–18J), 77 West Jackson Boulevard,

Chicago cv, Illinois 60604, (312) 886–

6081, nwia.jacqueline@epa.gov.