7690 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 28 / Monday, February 11, 2008 / Proposed Rules 

The procedure must be followed each 

time another grower’s feed is added to 

the load. 

* * * * * 

James E. Link, 

Administrator, Grain Inspection, Packers and 

Stockyards Administration. 

[FR Doc. 08–577 Filed 2–8–08; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3410–KD–P 

NUCLEAR REGULATORY 

COMMISSION 

10 CFR Part 50 

[Docket No. PRM–50–57] 

North Carolina Utilities Commission 

Public Staff; Withdrawal of Petition for 

Rulemaking 

AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory 

Commission. 

ACTION: Petition for rulemaking; 

withdrawal. 

SUMMARY: The Nuclear Regulatory 

Commission (NRC) is withdrawing, at 

the petitioner’s request, a petition for 

rulemaking (PRM–50–57) (57 FR 2059; 

January 17, 1992) filed by the North 

Carolina Utilities Commission Public 

Staff (petitioner). The petitioner 

requested that the Commission amend 

its regulations to substantially reduce or 

eliminate insurance requirements for 

nuclear power reactors when all the 

nuclear reactors on a reactor station site 

have been shut down or are awaiting 

decommissioning, and all nuclear fuel 

has been removed from the reactor site. 

ADDRESSES: A copy of the petitioner’s 

email submittal, dated October 29, 2007, 

requesting withdrawal of the petition is 

available for public inspection, or 

copying for a fee, at the NRC’s Public 

Document Room, One White Flint 

North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Room 

O1F21, Rockville, Maryland. 

Single copies of the petitioner’s email 

submission may be obtained free of 

charge by writing to Michael T. Lesar, 

Chief, Rules, Directives and Editing 

Branch, Division of Administrative 

Services, Office of Administration, U.S. 

Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 

Washington, DC 20555. 

Documents created or received at the 

NRC after November 1, 1999, are also 

available electronically at the NRC’s 

Public Electronic Reading Room on the 

Internet at http://www.nrc.gov/NRC/ 

ADAMS/index.html. For the petitioner’s 

e-mail the accession number is 

ML080320147. From this site, the public 

can gain entry into the NRC’s 

Agencywide Document Access and 

Management System (ADAMS) that 

provides text and image files of NRC’s 

public documents. For more 

information, contact the NRC Public 

Document Room (PDR) Reference staff 

at 1–800–397–4209, (301) 415–4737, or 

by e-mail to pdr@nrc.gov. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Michael T. Lesar, Chief, Rules, 

Directives and Editing Branch, Division 

of Administrative Services, Office of 

Administration, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory 

Commission, Washington, DC 20555. 

Telephone: 301–415–7163, or Toll Free: 

1–800–368–5642, or by e-mail at 

mtl@nrc.gov. 

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 5th day 

of February 2008. 

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. 

Annette L. Vietti-Cook, 

Secretary of the Commission. 

[FR Doc. E8–2481 Filed 2–8–08; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2008–0150; Directorate 

Identifier 2007–NM–325–AD] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; Boeing 

Model 767–200, –300, and –400ER 

Series Airplanes 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), Department of 

Transportation (DOT). 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking 

(NPRM). 

SUMMARY: The FAA proposes to 

supersede an existing airworthiness 

directive (AD) that applies to certain 

Boeing Model 767 series airplanes. The 

existing AD currently requires a onetime inspection for missing, damaged, 

or incorrectly installed parts in the 

separation link assembly on the 

deployment bar of the emergency escape 

system on the entry or service door, and 

installation of new parts if necessary. 

This proposed AD would require 

replacing the separation link assembly 

on the applicable entry and service 

doors with an improved separation link 

assembly, and related investigative and 

corrective actions if necessary. This 

proposed AD would also remove certain 

airplanes from the applicability. This 

proposed AD results from reports that 

entry and service doors did not open 

fully during deployment of emergency 

escape slides, and additional reports of 

missing snap rings. We are proposing 

this AD to prevent failure of an entry or 

service door to open fully in the event 

of an emergency evacuation, which 

could impede exit from the airplane. 

This condition could result in injury to 

passengers or crewmembers. 

DATES: We must receive comments on 

this proposed AD by March 27, 2008. 

ADDRESSES: You may send comments by 

any of the following methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to 

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

instructions for submitting comments. 

• Fax: 202–493–2251. 

• Mail: U.S. Department of 

Transportation, Docket Operations, M–

30, West Building Ground Floor, Room 

W12–140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., 

Washington, DC 20590. 

• Hand Delivery: U.S. Department of 

Transportation, Docket Operations, M–

30, West Building Ground Floor, Room 

W12–140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., 

Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. 

and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, 

except Federal holidays. 

For service information identified in 

this AD, contact Boeing Commercial 

Airplanes, P.O. Box 3707, Seattle, 

Washington 98124–2207. 

Examining the AD Docket 

You may examine the AD docket on 

the Internet at http:// 

www.regulations.gov; or in person at the 

Docket Management Facility between 9 

a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through 

Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD 

docket contains this proposed AD, the 

regulatory evaluation, any comments 

received, and other information. The 

street address for the Docket Office 

(telephone 800–647–5527) is in the 

ADDRESSES section. Comments will be 

available in the AD docket shortly after 

receipt. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Keith Ladderud, Aerospace Engineer, 

Cabin Safety and Environmental 

Systems Branch, ANM–150S, FAA, 

Seattle Aircraft Certification Office, 

1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, 

Washington 98057–3356; telephone 

(425) 917–6435; fax (425) 917–6590. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Comments Invited 

We invite you to send any written 

relevant data, views, or arguments about 

this proposed AD. Send your comments 

to an address listed under the 

ADDRESSES section. Include ‘‘Docket No. 

FAA–2008–0150; Directorate Identifier 

2007–NM–325–AD’’ at the beginning of 

your comments. We specifically invite 

comments on the overall regulatory, 

economic, environmental, and energy 

aspects of this proposed AD. We will 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS

Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 28 / Monday, February 11, 2008 / Proposed Rules 7691 

consider all comments received by the 

closing date and may amend this 

proposed AD because of those 

comments. 

We will post all comments we 

receive, without change, to http:// 

www.regulations.gov, including any 

personal information you provide. We 

will also post a report summarizing each 

substantive verbal contact we receive 

about this proposed AD. 

Discussion 

On December 21, 2001, we issued 

AD–2001–26–19, amendment 39–12585 

(67 FR 265, January 3, 2002, for certain 

Boeing Model 767 series airplanes. That 

AD requires a one-time inspection for 

missing, damaged, or incorrectly 

installed parts in the separation link 

assembly on the deployment bar of the 

emergency escape system on the entry 

or service door, and installation of new 

parts if necessary. That AD resulted 

from reports that entry and service 

doors did not open fully during 

deployment of emergency escape slides 

on several Boeing Model 767 series 

airplanes. We issued that AD to prevent 

failure of an entry or service door to 

open fully in the event of an emergency 

evacuation, which could impede exit 

from the airplane. This condition could 

result in injury to passengers or 

crewmembers. 

Actions Since Existing AD Was Issued 

Since we issued AD–2001–26–19, we 

have received additional reports of 

missing snap rings, which are used for 

securing the separation link assembly. 

Investigation revealed that the snap 

rings fell off after they were possibly 

damaged during the inspection of the 

separation link assembly as required by 

paragraph (a) of AD–2001–26–19. As a 

result, the manufacturer has developed 

a new corrective action that replaces the 

snap rings with nuts and washers. 

Therefore, we have determined that the 

existing separation link assembly must 

be secured with a nut and washer 

instead of a snap ring to adequately 

address the unsafe condition. This 

replacement would eliminate the need 

for inspecting the separation link 

assembly. We have also removed Model 

767–300F series airplanes from the 

applicability of this proposed AD, since 

those airplanes are not equipped with 

the affected escape slides. 

Relevant Service Information 

We have reviewed Boeing Special 

Attention Service Bulletin 767–25–

0428, dated August 23, 2007, for Model 

767–200, –300, and –400ER series 

airplanes. The service bulletin describes 

procedures for replacing the separation 

link assembly having a snap ring with 

an improved separation link assembly 

secured with a nut and washer, on the 

deployment bar of the emergency escape 

system on the applicable entry and 

service doors. The service bulletin also 

describes procedures for doing related 

investigative and corrective actions if 

necessary. The related investigative 

actions include doing a general visual 

inspection of the separation link 

housing assembly for worn primer 

around the assembly, and inspecting the 

spring in the separation link housing to 

determine the spring tolerance. The 

corrective action includes applying two 

coats of a certain primer if the 

separation link housing assembly is 

worn, and replacing any spring that 

does not fall within a certain tolerance 

with a new spring. Accomplishing the 

actions specified in the service 

information is intended to adequately 

address the unsafe condition. 

FAA’s Determination and Requirements 

of the Proposed AD 

We have evaluated all pertinent 

information and identified an unsafe 

condition that is likely to develop on 

other airplanes of the same type design. 

For this reason, we are proposing this 

AD, which would supersede AD–2001–

26–19. This proposed AD would require 

accomplishing the actions specified in 

the service information described 

previously. This proposed AD would 

also remove Model 767–300F series 

airplanes from the applicability. 

Costs of Compliance 

There are about 1,225 airplanes of the 

affected design in the worldwide fleet. 

This proposed AD would affect about 

355 airplanes of U.S. registry. The new 

proposed actions would take up to 

about 6 work hours per airplane, at an 

average labor rate of $80 per work hour. 

Required parts would cost up to about 

$10,671 per airplane. Based on these 

figures, the estimated cost of the new 

actions specified in this proposed AD 

for U.S. operators is $3,958,605, or 

$11,151 per airplane. 

Authority for This Rulemaking 

Title 49 of the United States Code 

specifies the FAA’s authority to issue 

rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, 

Section 106, describes the authority of 

the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII, 

Aviation Programs, describes in more 

detail the scope of the Agency’s 

authority. 

We are issuing this rulemaking under 

the authority described in Subtitle VII, 

Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701, 

‘‘General requirements.’’ Under that 

section, Congress charges the FAA with 

promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in 

air commerce by prescribing regulations 

for practices, methods, and procedures 

the Administrator finds necessary for 

safety in air commerce. This regulation 

is within the scope of that authority 

because it addresses an unsafe condition 

that is likely to exist or develop on 

products identified in this rulemaking 

action. 

Regulatory Findings 

We have determined that this 

proposed AD would not have federalism 

implications under Executive Order 

13132. This proposed AD would not 

have a substantial direct effect on the 

States, on the relationship between the 

national Government and the States, or 

on the distribution of power and 

responsibilities among the various 

levels of government. 

For the reasons discussed above, I 

certify that the proposed regulation: 

1. Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory 

action’’ under Executive Order 12866; 

2. Is not a ‘‘significant rule’’ under the 

DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures 

(44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and 

3. Will not have a significant 

economic impact, positive or negative, 

on a substantial number of small entities 

under the criteria of the Regulatory 

Flexibility Act. 

We prepared a regulatory evaluation 

of the estimated costs to comply with 

this proposed AD and placed it in the 

AD docket. See the ADDRESSES section 

for a location to examine the regulatory 

evaluation. 

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39 

Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation 

safety, Safety. 

The Proposed Amendment 

Accordingly, under the authority 

delegated to me by the Administrator, 

the FAA proposes to amend 14 CFR part 

39 as follows: 

PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS 

DIRECTIVES 

1. The authority citation for part 39 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701. 

§ 39.13 [Amended] 

2. The Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA) amends § 39.13 

by removing amendment 39–12585 (67 

FR 265, January 3, 2002) and adding the 

following new airworthiness directive 

(AD): 

Boeing: Docket No. FAA–2008–0150; 

Directorate Identifier 2007–NM–325–AD. 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS

7692 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 28 / Monday, February 11, 2008 / Proposed Rules 

Comments Due Date 

(a) The FAA must receive comments on 

this AD action by March 27, 2008. 

Affected ADs 

(b) This AD supersedes AD 2001–26–19. 

Applicability 

(c) This AD applies to Boeing Model 767–

200, –300, and –400ER series airplanes, 

certificated in any category, as identified in 

Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 

767–25–0428, dated August 23, 2007. 

Unsafe Condition 

(d) This AD results from reports that entry 

and service doors did not open fully during 

deployment of emergency escape slides, and 

additional reports of missing snap rings. We 

are issuing this AD to prevent failure of an 

entry or service door to open fully in the 

event of an emergency evacuation, which 

could impede exit from the airplane. This 

condition could result in injury to passengers 

or crewmembers. 

Compliance 

(e) You are responsible for having the 

actions required by this AD performed within 

the compliance times specified, unless the 

actions have already been done. 

Replacement 

(f) Within 48 months after the effective 

date of this AD, replace the separation link 

assembly on the deployment bar of the 

emergency escape system on all the 

applicable entry and service doors with an 

improved separation link assembly, and do 

all the applicable related investigative and 

corrective actions, by accomplishing all of 

the applicable actions specified in the 

Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing 

Special Attention Service Bulletin 767–25–

0428, dated August 23, 2007. 

Alternative Methods of Compliance 

(AMOCs) 

(g)(1) The Manager, Seattle Aircraft 

Certification Office, Transport Airplane 

Directorate, FAA, has the authority to 

approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested in 

accordance with the procedures found in 14 

CFR 39.19. 

(2) To request a different method of 

compliance or a different compliance time 

for this AD, follow the procedures in 14 CFR 

39.19. Before using any approved AMOC on 

any airplane to which the AMOC applies, 

notify your appropriate principal inspector 

(PI) in the FAA Flight Standards District 

Office (FSDO), or lacking a PI, your local 

FSDO. 

Issued in Renton, Washington, on January 

31, 2008. 

Ali Bahrami, 

Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, 

Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. 08–571 Filed 2–8–08; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND 

HUMAN SERVICES 

Food and Drug Administration 

21 CFR Part 133 

[Docket No. FDA–2008–P–0086] (formerly 

Docket No. 2000P–0586) 

Cheeses and Related Cheese 

Products; Proposal to Permit the Use 

of Ultrafiltered Milk; Extension of the 

Comment Period 

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, 

HHS. 

ACTION: Proposed rule; extension of the 

comment period. 

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug 

Administration (FDA) is extending the 

comment period until April 11, 2008, 

for a proposed rule that was published 

in the Federal Register of October 19, 

2005 (70 FR 60751). FDA issued a 

Federal Register notice to reopen the 

comment period on this proposal on 

December 11, 2007 (72 FR 70251), to 

seek further comment on only two 

specific issues raised by the comments 

concerning the proposed ingredient 

declaration. The agency is extending 

this comment period in response to a 

request to give interested parties 

additional time to provide the 

information requested by FDA in that 

notice. 

DATES: Submit written or electronic 

comments by April 11, 2008. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, 

identified by Docket No. FDA–2008–P–

0086, by any of the following methods: 

Electronic Submissions 

Submit electronic comments in the 

following way: 

• 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 No(s). and Regulatory 

Information Number (RIN) (if a RIN 

number has been assigned) 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(s), 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: 

I. Background 

In the Federal Register of October 19, 

2005 (70 FR 60751), FDA proposed to 

amend the definitions of ‘‘milk’’ and 

‘‘nonfat’’ milk in § 133.3 (21 CFR 133.3) 

for cheeses and related cheese products 

to: (1) Provide for ultrafiltration of milk 

and nonfat milk; (2) define UF milk and 

UF nonfat milk as raw or pasteurized 

milk or nonfat milk that is passed over 

one or more semipermeable membranes 

to partially remove water, lactose, 

minerals, and water-soluble vitamins 

without altering the casein-to-whey 

protein ratio of the milk or nonfat milk 

and resulting in a liquid product; and 

(3) require that such treated milk be 

declared in the ingredient statement of 

the finished food as ‘‘ultrafiltered milk’’

and ‘‘ultrafiltered nonfat milk,’’

respectively. 

The agency received about 24 

responses, each containing one or more 

comments to the 2005 proposal. Most 

comments supported the proposed use 

of fluid UF milk in standardized cheeses 

and related cheese products and several 

comments encouraged the agency to 

adopt the definition of fluid UF milk as 

proposed. However, although they did 

not disagree that fluid UF milk is 

significantly different from ‘‘milk,’’

several comments opposed the proposed 

provision to require fluid UF milk or 

fluid UF nonfat milk to be declared as 

‘‘ultrafiltered milk’’ or ‘‘ultrafiltered 

nonfat milk,’’ respectively. They cited 

several reasons for their opposition. 

FDA reopened the comment period on 

the proposed rule on December 11, 2007 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS