Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 80 / Wednesday, April 24, 1996 / Rules and Regulations 18049

Class of

substance Substance Purpose Products Amount

* * * * * * *

Miscellaneous

* * * * * * *

Sodium citrate

buffered with

citric acid to a

pH of 5.6.

To inhibit the growth of micro-organisms and retain product flavor during storage.Cured and uncured, processed

whole-muscle poultry food

products, e.g., chicken breasts.

Not to exceed 1.3 percent of the

formulation weight of the product in accordance with 21 CFR

184.1751.

* * * * * * *

Done at Washington, DC, on April 17,

1996.

Michael R. Taylor,

Acting Under Secretary for Food Safety.

[FR Doc. 96–9980 Filed 4–23–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3410–DM–P

FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION

11 CFR Parts 100, 110 and 114

[Notice 1996–11]

Candidate Debates and News Stories

AGENCY: Federal Election Commission.

ACTION: Final rule and transmittal of

regulations to Congress.

SUMMARY: The Federal Election

Commission is issuing revised

regulations governing candidate debates

and new stories produced by cable

television organizations. These

regulations implement the provisions of

the Federal Election Campaign Act

(FECA) which exempt news stories from

the definition of expenditure under

certain conditions. The revisions

indicate that cable television

programmers, producers and operators

may cover or stage candidate debates in

the same manner as broadcast and print

news media. The rules also restate

Commission policy that news

organizations may not stage candidate

debates if they are owned or controlled

by any political party, political

committee or candidate.

DATES: Further action, including the

publication of a document in the

Federal Register announcing an

effective date, will be taken after these

regulations have been before Congress

for 30 legislative days pursuant to 2

U.S.C. 438(d).

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Ms. Susan E. Propper, Assistant General

Counsel, or Ms. Rosemary C. Smith,

Senior Attorney, 999 E Street NW.,

Washington, DC 20463, (202) 219–3690

or (800) 424–9530.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The

Commission is publishing today the

final text of revisions to its regulations

at 11 CFR 100.7(b)(2), 100.8(b)(2),

110.13 and 114.4(f) regarding news

stories and candidate debates produced

by cable television operators,

programmers and producers. The

revised rules also address candidate

debates sponsored by news

organizations owned or controlled by

candidates, political parties and

political committees. These provisions

implement 2 U.S.C. 431(9) and 441b,

provisions of the Federal Election

Campaign Act of 1971, as amended (the

Act or FECA), 2 U.S.C. 431 et seq.

On February 1, 1996, the Commission

issued a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking

(NPRM) in which it sought comments

on proposed revisions to these

regulations. 61 FR 3621 (Feb. 1, 1996).

Four written comments were received

from the Internal Revenue Service (IRS),

the Federal Communications

Commission (FCC), Turner Broadcasting

System, Inc. (Turner), and the National

Cable Television Association, Inc.

(NCTA). A public hearing on these

changes was scheduled for March 20,

1996. The hearing was subsequently

canceled when the Commission

received no requests to testify.

Section 438(d) of Title 2, United

States Code, requires that any rules or

regulations prescribed by the

Commission to carry out the provisions

of Title 2 of the United States Code be

transmitted to the Speaker of the House

of Representatives and the President of

the Senate 30 legislative days before

they are finally promulgated. These

regulations were transmitted to

Congress on April 18, 1996.

Explanation and Justification for 11

CFR 100.7(b)(2), § 100.8(b)(2), § 110.13,

and § 114.4(f)

The FECA generally prohibits

corporations from making contributions

or expenditures in connection with any

election. 2 U.S.C. 441b. However, the

definition of ‘‘expenditure’’ in section

431(9) indicates that news stories,

commentaries, and editorials distributed

through the facilities of any broadcast

station, newspaper, magazine, or other

periodical publication are not

considered to be expenditures unless

the facilities are owned or controlled by

a political party, political committee, or

candidate. 2 U.S.C. 431(9)(B)(i). This

statutory exemption forms the basis for

the Commission’s long-standing

regulations at 11 CFR 100.7(b)(2) and

100.8(b)(2) exempting such

communications from the definitions of

contribution and expenditure. Section

431(9) is also the basis underlying

sections 110.13 and 114.4(f), which

permit broadcasters and bona fide print

media to stage candidate debates under

certain conditions.

The Commission has decided to

expand the types of media entities that

may stage candidate debates under

sections 110.13 and 114.4 to include

cable television operators, programmers

and producers. Hence, revised sections

110.13(a)(2) and 114.4(f) allows these

types of cable organizations to stage

debates under the same terms and

conditions as other media organizations

such as broadcasters, and bona fide

print media organizations. New

language in sections 110.13, 100.7(b)(2)

and 100.8(b)(2) also permits cable

organizations, acting in their capacity as

news media, to cover or carry candidate

debates staged by other groups.

Examples of the types of programming

that the Federal Communications

Commission considers to be bona fide

newscasts and news interview programs

are provided in The Law of Political

Broadcasting and Cablecasting: A

Political Primer, 1984 ed., Federal

Communications Commission, at p.

1994–99.

The revised rules are consistent with

the intent of Congress not ‘‘to limit or

burden in any way the first amendment

freedoms of the press * * *.’’ H.R. Rep.

No. 93–1239, 93d Cong., 2d Sess. at 4

(1974). In Turner Broadcasting System,

Inc. v. Federal Communications

Commission, lll U.S. lll, 114 S.
18050 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 80 / Wednesday, April 24, 1996 / Rules and Regulations

Ct. 2445, 2456 (1994), the Supreme

Court recognized that cable operators

and cable programmers ‘‘engage in and

transmit speech, and they are entitled to

the protection of the speech and press

provisions of the First Amendment.’’

The 1974 legislative history of the

FECA also indicates that in exempting

news stories from the definition of

‘‘expenditure,’’ Congress intended to

assure ‘‘the unfettered right of the

newspapers, TV networks, and other

media to cover and comment on

political campaigns.’’ H.R. Rep. No. 93–

1239, 93d Cong., 2d Sess. at 4 (1974).

Although the cable television industry

was much less developed when

Congress express this intent, it is

reasonable to conclude that cable

operators, programmers and producers,

when operating in their capacity as

news producers and distributors, would

be precisely the type of ‘‘other media’’

appropriately included within this

exemption. For these reasons, the

Commission has decided to allow cable

operators, programmers and producers

to act as debate sponsors.

The Internal Revenue Service found

no conflict with the Internal Revenue

Code or regulations thereunder. The

Federal Communications Commission

stated that the proposed amendments

regarding candidate debates and news

stories are not inconsistent with the

FCC’s policies in implementing the

Communications Act of 1934, and

appear to complement and further the

FCC’s regulatory scheme and goals. Two

other commenters supported the

Commission’s efforts to confirm that the

FECA’s exemption applies to candidate

debates, news, commentary and

editorial programming produced and

distributed by cable news organizations.

These commenters stated they felt any

other course of action would present

serious Constitutional problems under

the First Amendment. They also argued

that the Commission’s interpretation is

consistent with the statutory framework

established by Congress when it enacted

the 1974 Amendments to the FECA, and

would serve the public interest.

The NPRM sought comments on

whether there are distinctions between

cable operators, programmers and

producers that should be considered in

determining which of these types of

organizations may stage candidate

debates, and in determining which of

these organizations are bona fide news

organizations entitled to the press

exemption. It also asked if there other

types of cable new organizations that

should be included as debate sponsors.

One commenter stated that the

Commission should confirm that the

FECA’s exemption applies to cable

operators and cable networks as well as

to independent producers of news,

commentary and editorials they carry.

Under the new regulations, the

exemption applies to each of these

entities. The commenter also urged the

Commission to expand the list of

permissible debate sponsors and bona

fide news media to include regional,

state and national trade associations

whose members are cable operators and

programmers. The role of trade

associations was not addressed in the

NPRM and is beyond the scope of this

rulemaking.

The revised rules are also consistent

with Advisory Opinion 1982–44, in

which the Commission concluded that

the press exemption permitted Turner

Broadcasting System, Inc. to donate free

cable cast time to the Republican and

Democratic National Committees

without making a prohibited corporate

contribution. The cablecast

programming on ‘‘super satellite’’

television station, WTBS in Atlanta,

Georgia, was to be provided to a

network of cable system operators. The

Commission stated inter alia that ‘‘the

distribution of free time to both political

parties is within the broadcaster’s

legitimate broadcast function and,

therefore, within the purview of the

press exemption.’’ AO 1982–44.

The courts have examined the

application of the press exemption in

section 431(9)(B)(i) on several

occasions. See e.g., Readers Digest Ass’n

v. FEC, 509 F. Supp. 1210 (S.D.N.Y.

1981); FEC v. Phillips Publishing

Company, Inc., 517 F. Supp. 1308

(D.D.C. 1981); and Federal Election

Commission v. Multimedia Cablevision,

Inc., Civ. Action No. 94–1520–MLB, slip

op. (D. Kan. Aug. 15, 1995). In Readers

Digest, the court articulated a two part

test ‘‘on which the exemption turns:

whether the press entity is owned by the

political party or candidate and whether

the press entity was acting as a press

entity in making the distribution

complained of. ‘‘Readers Digest, at p.

1215. The first prong is discussed more

fully below. With regard to the second

prong, the court stated that ‘‘the statute

would seem to exempt only those kinds

of distribution that fall broadly within

the press entity’s legitimate press

function.’’ Id. at 1214. The Commission

believes a cable operator, producer or

programmer can satisfy this standard if

it follows the same guidelines as other

news media follow when they stage

candidate debates. For example, it must

invite at least two candidates and

refrain from promoting or advancing

one over the other(s).

The Commission is also adding

language to sections 100.7(b)(2) and

100.8(b)(2) indicating that the news

story exception in 2 U.S.C. 431(9)

allows cable operators, producers and

programmers to exercise legitimate

press functions by covering or carrying

news stories, commentaries and

editorials in accordance with the same

guidelines that apply to the print or

broadcast media. For example, they are

subject to the same provisions regarding

ownership by candidates and political

parties as are broadcasters or print

media. The public comments regarding

these changes are summarized above.

The approach taken in the new rules

regarding cable television entities

avoids conflict with the FCC’s

application of the equal opportunity

requirements under the

Communications Act of 1934. Section

315(a) of the Communications Act

requires that broadcast station licensees,

including cable television operators,

who permit any legally qualified

candidate to use a broadcasting station,

must afford equal opportunities to all

other such candidates for that office in

the use of that broadcasting station. 47

U.S.C. 315(a). However, the equal

opportunity requirement is not triggered

if the broadcasting station airs a bona

fide newscast, bona fide news interview,

bona fide news documentary or on-thespot coverage of bona fide news events

(including political conventions). 47

U.S.C. 315(a)(1)–(4). In 1975, the FCC

decided that broadcasts of debates

between political candidates would be

exempt from the equal opportunities

requirement as on-the-spot coverage of

bona fide news events where, inter ailia,

the broadcaster exercised a reasonable,

good faith judgment that it was

newsworthy, and not for the purpose of

giving political advantage to any

candidate. See The Law of Political

Broadcasting and Cablecasting: A

Political Primer, 1984 ed., Federal

Communications Commission, at p.

1502. This ruling was expanded in 1983

to permit broadcaster-sponsorship of

candidate debates. Id. Similarly, in

1992, the FCC ruled that independently

produced bona fide news interview

programs qualify for exemption from the

equal opportunities requirement of the

Communications Act. In Matter of

Request for Declaratory Ruling That

Independently Produced Bona Fide

News Interview Programs Qualify for

the Equal Opportunities Exemption

Provided in Section 315(a)(2) of the

Communications Act, FCC 92–288 (July

15, 1992).

The third change in the revised rules

is the addition of language in paragraph

(a)(2) of section 110.13 regarding

ownership of organizations staging

candidate debates. Broadcast, cable and
Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 80 / Wednesday, April 24, 1996 / Rules and Regulations 18051

print media organizations may not stage

candidate debates if they are owned or

controlled by a political party, political

committee or candidate. This policy was

not stated in the previous candidate

debate rules, although it was included

in the 1979 Explanation and

Justification for those rules. See 44 F.R.

76735 (December 27, 1979). It is based

on 2 U.S.C. 431(9)(B)(i), which specifies

that the news story exemption does not

apply to media entities that are owned

or controlled by a political party,

political committee or candidate. Please

note that this new language applies only

to media corporations, and thus does

not change the rules in 11 CFR 110.13

regarding candidate debates staged by

nonprofit corporations described in

section 501(c)(3) or (c)(4) of the Internal

Revenue Code. None of the commenters

specifically addressed this change in the

regulations.

Certification of No Effect Pursuant to 5

U.S.C. 605(b) [Regulatory Flexibility

Act]

The attached final rules will not, if

promulgated, have a significant

economic impact on a substantial

number of small entities. The basis for

this certification is that any small

entities affected are already required to

comply with the requirements of the Act

in these areas.

List of Subjects

11 CFR Part 100

Elections.

11 CFR Part 110

Campaign funds, Political candidates,

Political committees and parties.

11 CFR Part 114

Business and industry, Elections,

Labor.

For the reasons set out in the

preamble, Subchapter A, Chapter I of

Title 11 of the Code of Federal

Regulations is amended as follows:

PART 100—SCOPE AND DEFINITIONS

(2 U.S.C. 431)

1. The authority citation for Part 100

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 2 U.S.C. 431, 438(a)(8)

2. Part 100 is amended by revising

paragraph (b)(2) of section 100.7 to read

as follows:

§ 100.7 Contribution (2 U.S.C. 431(8)).

* * * * *

(b) * * *

(2) Any cost incurred in covering or

carrying a news story, commentary, or

editorial by any broadcasting station

(including a cable television operator,

programmer or producer), newspaper,

magazine, or other periodical

publication is not a contribution unless

the facility is owned or controlled by

any political party, political committee,

or candidate, in which case the costs for

a news story (i) which represents a bona

fide news account communicated in a

publication of general circulation or on

a licensed broadcasting facility, and (ii)

which is part of a general pattern of

campaign-related news accounts which

give reasonably equal coverage to all

opposing candidates in the circulation

or listening area, is not a contribution.

* * * * *

3. Part 100 is amended by revising

paragraph (b)(2) of section 100.8 to read

as follows:

§ 100.8 Expenditure (2 U.S.C. 431(9)).

* * * * *

(b) * * *

(2) Any cost incurred in covering or

carrying a new story, commentary, or

editorial by any broadcasting station

(including a cable television operator,

programmer or producer), newspaper,

magazine, or other periodical

publication is not an expenditure unless

the facility is owned or controlled by

any political party, political committee,

or candidate, in which case the costs for

a news story (i) which represents a bona

fide news account communicated in a

publication of general circulation or on

a licensed broadcasting facility, and (ii)

which is part of a general pattern of

campaign-related news account which

give reasonably equal coverage to all

opposing candidates in the circulation

or listening area, is not an expenditure.

* * * * *

PART 110—CONTRIBUTION AND

EXPENDITURE LIMITATIONS AND

PROHIBITIONS

4. The authority citation for Part 110

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 2 U.S.C. 431(8), 431(9),

432(c)(2), 437d(a)(8), 438(a)(8), 441a, 441b,

441d, 441e, 441f, 441g and 441h.

5. Part 110 is amended by revising

section 110.13 to read as follows:

§ 110.13 Candidate debates.

(a) Staging organizations. (1)

Nonprofit organizations described in 26

U.S.C. 501 (c)(3) or (c)(4) and which do

not endorse, support, or oppose political

candidates or political parties may stage

candidate debates in accordance with

this section and 11 CFR 114.4(f).

(2) Broadcasters (including a cable

television operator, programmer or

producer), bona fide newspapers,

magazines and other periodical

publications may stage candidate

debates in accordance with this section

and 11 CFR 114.4(f), provided that they

are owned or controlled by a political

party, political committee or candidate.

In addition, broadcasters (including a

cable television operator, programmer or

producer), bona fide newspapers,

magazines and other periodical

publications, acting as press entities,

may also cover or carry candidate

debates in accordance with 11 CFR

100.7 and 100.8.

(b) Debate structure. The structure of

debates staged in accordance with this

section and 11 CFR 114.4(f) is left to the

discretion of the staging

organizations(s), provided that:

(1) Such debates include at least two

candidates; and

(2) The staging organization(s) does

not structure the debates to promote or

advance one candidate over another.

(c) Criteria for candidate selection.

For all debates, staging organization(s)

must use pre-established objective

criteria to determine which candidates

may participate in a debate. For general

election debates, staging

organizations(s) shall not use

nomination by a particular political

party as the sole objective criterion to

determine whether to include a

candidate in a debate. For debates held

prior to a primary election, caucus or

convention, staging organizations may

restrict candidate participation to

candidates seeking the nomination of

one party, and need not stage a debate

for candidates seeking the nomination

of any other political party or

independent candidates.

PART 114—CORPORATE AND LABOR

ORGANIZATION ACTIVITY

6. The authority citation for Part 114

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 2 U.S.C. 431(8)(B), 431(9)(B),

432, 437d(a)(8), 438(a)(8), and 441b.

7. Part 114 is amended by revising

paragraph (f) of section 114.4. to read as

follows:

§ 114.4 Disbursements for

communications beyond the restricted

class in connection with a Federal election.

* * * * *

(f) Candidate debates.

(1) A nonprofit organization described

in 11 CFR 110.13(a)(1) may use its own

funds and may accept funds donated by

corporations or labor organizations

under paragraph (f)(3) of this section to

defray costs incurred in staging

candidate debates held in accordance

with 11 CFR 110.13.

(2) A broadcaster (including a cable

television operator, programmer or

producer), bona fide newspaper,
18052 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 80 / Wednesday, April 24, 1996 / Rules and Regulations

magazine or other periodical

publication may use its own funds to

defray costs incurred in staging public

candidate debates held in accordance

with 11 CFR 110.13.

(3) A corporation or labor

organization may donate funds to

nonprofit organizations qualified under

11 CFR 110.13(a)(1) to stage candidate

debates held in accordance with 11 CFR

110.13 and 114.4(f).

* * * * *

Dated: April 18, 1996.

Lee Ann Elliott,

Chairman.

[FR Doc. 96–10038 Filed 4–23–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6715–01–M

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 11

[Docket No. 28518; Amendment No. 11–41]

General Rulemaking Procedures

AGENCY: Federal Aviation

Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Technical amendment.

SUMMARY: The Federal Aviation

Administration is making an editorial

change to part 11 by changing the words

‘‘rule making’’ and ‘‘rule-making’’ to

read ‘‘rulemaking’’. This change is being

made for consistency.

EFFECTIVE DATE: April 24, 1996.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Clara Thieling, Office of the Chief

Counsel, Regulations Division, AGC–

200, Federal Aviation Administration,

800 Independence Ave., SW.,

Washington, DC 20591; telephone (202)

267–3123.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

In response to inquiries as to the

uniformity of the spelling of the word

rulemaking, the FAA is making an

editorial change to part 11 to change the

spelling of ‘‘rule-making’’ and ‘‘rule

making’’ to ‘‘rulemaking’’. Because this

action is merely a technical amendment,

the FAA finds that prior notice and

public procedure under 5 U.S.C.

553(b)(3)(B) are unnecessary. For the

same reason, the FAA finds that good

cause exists for making this amendment

effective upon publication.

The Amendment

The FAA amends 14 CFR part 11 as

follows:

PART 11—GENERAL RULEMAKING

PROCEDURES

1. The authority citation for part 11

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40101, 40103,

40105, 40109, 40113, 44110, 44502, 44701–

44702, 44711, and 46102.

2. In the heading and throughout part

11, remove the words ‘‘rule-making’’

and ‘‘rule making’’ wherever they

appear, and add the word ‘‘rulemaking’’

in their place.

Issued in Washington, DC, on March 29,

1996.

Donald P. Byrne,

Assistant Chief Counsel for Regulations,

Office of the Chief Counsel.

[FR Doc. 96–10002 Filed 4–23–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–M

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 96–ANE–05; Amendment 39–

9568; AD 96–08–02]

Airworthiness Directives; Hamilton

Standard Models 14RF–9, 14RF–19,

14RF–21; and 14SF–5, 14SF–7, 14SF–

11, 14SFL11, 14SF–15, 14SF–17, 14SF–

19, and 14SF–23; and Hamilton

Standard/British Aerospace 6/5500/F

Propellers

AGENCY: Federal Aviation

Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Final rule; request for

comments.

SUMMARY: This amendment supersedes

an existing airworthiness directive (AD),

applicable to Hamilton Standard Models

14RF–9, 14RF–19, 14RF–21; and 14SF–

5, 14SF–7, 14SF–11, 14SFL11, 14SF–15,

14SF–17, 14SF–19, and 14SF–23; and

Hamilton Standard/British Aerospace 6/

5500/F propellers, that currently

requires that all blades of applicable

Hamilton Standard propellers be

calibrated for ultrasonic transmissibility

before conducting the ultrasonic shear

wave inspection. In addition, that AD

decreases the repetitive inspection

interval for the Hamilton Standard

Models 14RF–9, 14SF–5, –7, –11, –15,

–17, –19, and –23 propellers from 1,250

flight cycles to 500 flight cycles. That

AD also establishes a new ultrasonic

shear wave inspection interval of 1,000

flight cycles for the Hamilton Standard

Model 14RF–19, and 2,500 flight cycles

for the Hamilton Standard Model 14RF–

21 and Hamilton Standard/British

Aerospace Model 6/5500/F. Also, that

AD removes Hamilton Standard Model

14SFL11 propellers from service. This

amendment requires a blade repair that

constitutes terminating action to the

repetitive ultrasonic taper bore

inspections. Repetitive ultrasonic taper

bore inspections are required until the

blade is repaired in accordance with

this AD. This amendment is prompted

by the development of a taper bore

repair process that removes the

damaged material and returns the blade

to a condition that does not require

repetitive ultrasonic taper bore

inspections. The actions specified by

this AD are intended to prevent

separation of a propeller blade due to

cracks initiating in the blade taper bore,

that can result in aircraft damage, and

possible loss of aircraft control.

DATES: Effective May 9, 1996.

The incorporation by reference of

Hamilton Standard Alert Service

Bulletins (ASB’s): No. 14RF–9–61–A91,

No. 14RF–19–61–A55, No. 14RF–21–

61–A73, No. 14SF–61–A93, and No. 6/

5500/F–61–A41, all dated December 7,

1995, and Hamilton Standard ASB’s No.

14RF–9–61–A91, Revision 1, No. 14RF–

19–61–A55, Revision 1, No. 14RF–21–

61–A73, and Revision 1, No. 14SF–61–

A93, all dated December 15, 1995, and

No. 6/5500/F–61–A41, Revision 1, dated

December 18, 1995; and Hamilton

Standard ASB’s No. 14RF–9–61–A95,

No. 14RF–19–61–A57, No. 14RF–21–

61–A75, No. 14SF–61–A95, and No. 6/

5500/F–61–A43, all dated December 18,

1995, and Hamilton Standard ASB’s No.

14RF–9–61–A95, Revision 1, No. 14RF–

19–61–A57, Revision 1, No. 14RF–21–

61–A75, Revision 1, No. 14SF–61–A95,

Revision 1, and No. 6/5500/F–61–A43,

Revision 1, all dated December 21, 1995,

was previously approved by the Director

of the Federal Register as of January 9,

1996 (61 FR 617).

The incorporation by reference of

Hamilton Standard ASB’s No. 14RF–9–

61–A94, Revision 1, dated March 6,

1996; No. 14RF–19–61–A53, Revision 1,

dated March 6, 1996; No. 14RF–21–61–

A72, Revision 1, dated March 6, 1996;

No. 14SF–61–A92, Revision 1, dated

March 6, 1996; and No. 6/5500/F–61–

A39, Revision 1, dated March 6, 1996;

is approved by the Director of the

Federal Register as of May 9, 1996.

Comments for inclusion in the Rules

Docket must be received on or before

June 24, 1996.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments in

triplicate to the Federal Aviation

Administration (FAA), New England

Region, Office of the Assistant Chief

Counsel, Attention: Rules Docket No.

96–ANE–05, 12 New England Executive

Park, Burlington, MA 01803–5299.

Comments may also be submitted to the

following Internet address: ‘‘epdadcomments@mail.hq.faa.gov’’.