60036 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 198 / Friday, October 14, 2005 / Proposed Rules 

5. Technical information on test and 

evaluation methods for defining ATV 

characteristics that are specifically 

relevant to the vehicles’ stability. 

6. Technical information on motion 

sensing technology that can be used to 

measure displacement, velocity, and 

acceleration of both the test operator 

and test vehicle. 

7. Technical reports and evaluations 

of any prototype ATVs with enhanced 

safety designs. 

8. Technical reports and evaluations 

of ATV low pressure tire performance 

on various surfaces. 

9. Information about ATV rider 

training programs, including 

descriptions of these programs, copies 

of materials used, expertise of 

instructors, consumer reactions to the 

programs, evaluations of the 

effectiveness of these programs, etc. 

10. Information about ATV rider 

training and education programs 

(including public service campaigns, 

videos, school materials, Web sites, etc.) 

targeted to children and teenagers and/ 

or targeted to parents and any 

evaluations of the effectiveness of these 

programs. 

11. Studies, reports, focus group 

information, etc. dealing with children 

and teenagers’ attitudes and/or behavior 

regarding ATVs or other off-road 

vehicles. 

12. Information about the feasibility 

and marketability of a transitional ATV 

geared to larger children and/or small 

adults, and the effect such an ATV 

might have on safety. 

13. Information about the 

applicability of sensor technology to 

improve the safety of ATVs; 

14. Studies documenting the 

effectiveness of state and local 

legislation; 

15. Studies documenting the 

effectiveness of ATV helmet use; and 

16. Information about tandem ATVs, 

particularly their similarities to and 

differences from traditional ATVs. 

17. All other relevant information and 

suggestions about ways in which ATV 

safety might be improved, including 

proposals and specific suggestions for 

greater public information efforts, 

enhanced safety activities by ATV 

dealers, associations and clubs, etc. 

Comments should be e-mailed to 

cpsc-os@cpsc.gov. and should be 

captioned ‘‘ATV ANPR.’’ Comments 

may also be mailed, preferably in five 

copies, to the Office of the Secretary, 

Consumer Product Safety Commission, 

Washington, DC 20207–0001, or 

delivered to the Office of the Secretary, 

Consumer Product Safety Commission, 

Room 502, 4330 East-West Highway, 

Bethesda, Maryland 20814; telephone 

(301) 504–0800. Comments also may be 

filed by telefacsimile to (301) 504–0127. 

All comments and submissions should 

be received no later than December 13, 

2005. 

Dated: October 7, 2005. 

Todd A. Stevenson, 

Secretary, Consumer Product Safety 

Commission. 

[FR Doc. 05–20557 Filed 10–13–05; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6355–01–P 

POSTAL SERVICE 

39 CFR Part 111 

Use of Ancillary Service Endorsement 

for Mailing Certain Types of Checks 

AGENCY: Postal Service. 

ACTION: Proposed rule; withdrawal. 

SUMMARY: The Postal Service is 

withdrawing a proposed rule that would 

require ancillary service endorsements 

on mailpieces containing certain types 

of checks. 

DATES: Withdrawal effective October 14, 

2005. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

William Chatfield, Mailing Standards, 

United States Postal Service, 202–268–

7278. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In a 

proposed rule published in the Federal 

Register on October 27, 2004 (69 FR 

6263), the Postal Service presented for 

public comment a proposed revision to 

Mailing Standards of the United States 

Postal Service, Domestic Mail Manual 

(DMM) to require the use of ancillary 

service endorsements on mailpieces 

containing certain types of checks 

mailed at Standard Mail postage rates. 

The proposed revision was intended to 

protect postal customers. 

We received comments from the 

financial industry discussing a number 

of safeguards for customers that reduce 

the incidence of fraud and the misuse of 

information on these checks. We have 

concluded that the requirements in our 

proposal are unnecessary, and we 

withdraw our proposal. 

Neva R. Watson, 

Attorney, Legislative. 

[FR Doc. 05–20563 Filed 10–13–05; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7710–12–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[R09–OAR–2005–CA–0009; FRL–7975–2] 

Revisions to the California State 

Implementation Plan, Monterey Bay 

United Air Pollution Control District 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve 

revisions to the Monterey Bay United 

Air Pollution Control District 

(MBUAPCD) portion of the California 

State Implementation Plan (SIP). These 

revisions concern oxides of nitrogen 

(NOX) and sulfur compounds emitted by 

various sources. We are proposing to 

approve a local rule to regulate these 

emission sources under the Clean Air 

Act as amended in 1990 (CAA or the 

Act). 

DATES: Any comments on this proposal 

must arrive by November 14, 2005. 

ADDRESSES: Submit comments, 

identified by docket number R09–OAR–

2005–CA–0009, by one of the following 

methods: 

1. Agency Web site: http:// 

docket.epa.gov/rmepub/. EPA prefers 

receiving comments through this 

electronic public docket and comment 

system. Follow the on-line instructions 

to submit comments. 

2. Federal eRulemaking Portal: 

http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

on-line instructions. 

3. E-mail: steckel.andrew@epa.gov. 

4. Mail or deliver: Andrew Steckel 

(Air-4), U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, 

San Francisco, CA 94105–3901. 

Instructions: All comments will be 

included in the public docket without 

change and may be made available 

online at 

http://docket.epa.gov/rmepub/, 

including any personal information 

provided, unless the comment includes 

Confidential Business Information (CBI) 

or other information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. Information that 

you consider CBI or otherwise protected 

should be clearly identified as such and 

should not be submitted through the 

agency Web site, eRulemaking portal or 

e-mail. The agency Web site and 

eRulemaking portal are ‘‘anonymous 

access’’ systems, and EPA will not know 

your identity or contact information 

unless you provide it in the body of 

your comment. If you send e-mail 

directly to EPA, your e-mail address 

will be automatically captured and