Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 88 / Monday, May 6, 1996 / Proposed Rules 20195

caused by FOD, locked shrouds, which

can reduce blade vibratory dampening,

and leading edge erosion, which can

produce blade flutter. That condition, if

not corrected, could result in fan blade

failure, which can result in damage to

the aircraft.

Since the issuance of that AD, the

manufacturer has introduced into

service fan blades with an improved

design configuration that is more

resistant to HCF-induced failures.

The FAA has reviewed and approved

the technical contents of PW Alert

Service Bulletin (ASB) No. A6241, dated

January 25, 1996, that describes

procedures for inspection of fan blades

for locked rotors and FOD, unlocking of

shrouds if necessary, lubrication of fan

blade shrouds, and dimensional

restoration of the fan blade leading edge.

This ASB also provides procedures for

modification or replacement of fan

blades with an improved design

configuration that is more resistant to

HCF-induced failures.

Since an unsafe condition has been

identified that is likely to exist or

develop on other products of this same

type design, the proposed AD would

supersede AD 95–12–19 to continue to

require the inspection and maintenance

requirements of that AD, and to add a

requirement to modify or install the

improved design fan blades as

terminating action for those inspections

and maintenance requirements.

The FAA estimates that 1,100 engines

installed on aircraft of U.S. registry

would be affected by this proposed AD,

that it would take approximately 19

work hours per engine to accomplish

the proposed actions, and that the

average labor rate is $60 per work hour.

The FAA also estimates that the parts

modification would cost is $2,720 per

engine, which includes a manufacturer’s

discount of $1,700 per engine. Based on

these figures, the total cost impact of the

proposed AD on U.S. operators is

estimated to be $4,246,000.

The regulations proposed herein

would not have substantial direct effects

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. Therefore,

in accordance with Executive Order

12612, it is determined that this

proposal would not have sufficient

federalism implications to warrant the

preparation of a Federalism Assessment.

For the reasons discussed above, I

certify that this 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) if

promulgated, 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. A copy of the draft

regulatory evaluation prepared for this

action is contained in the Rules Docket.

A copy of it may be obtained by

contacting the Rules Docket at the

location provided under the caption

ADDRESSES.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation

safety, Safety.

The Proposed Amendment

Accordingly, pursuant to the

authority delegated to me by the

Administrator, the Federal Aviation

Administration proposes to amend part

39 of the Federal Aviation Regulations

(14 CFR part 39) as follows:

PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS

DIRECTIVES

1. The authority citation for part 39

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 49 USC 106(g), 40113, 44701.

§ 39.13 [Amended]

2. Section 39.13 is amended by

removing amendment 39–9270 (60 FR

31388, June 15, 1995) and by adding a

new airworthiness directive to read as

follows:

Pratt & Whitney: Docket No. 96–ANE–02.

Supersedes AD 95–12–19, Amendment

39–9270.

Applicability: Pratt & Whitney (PW)

Models JT8D–209, –217, –217A, –217C, and

–219 turbofan engines that have not

incorporated PW Service Bulletin (SB) No.

6193, dated October 31, 1994, or with fan

blade, Part Numbers (P/N’s) 798821, 798821–

001, 808121, 808121–001, 809221, 811821,

851121, 851121–001, 5000021–02,5000021–

022, and 5000021–032 installed. These

engines are installed on but not limited to

McDonnell Douglas MD–80 aircraft.

Note: This AD applies to each engine

identified in the preceding applicability

provision, regardless of whether it has been

modified, altered, or repaired in the area

subject to the requirements of this AD. For

engines that have been modified, altered, or

repaired so that the performance of the

requirements of this AD is affected, the

owner/operator must use the authority

provided in paragraphs (d) and (e) to request

approval from the FAA. This approval may

address either no action, if the current

configuration eliminates the unsafe

condition, or different actions necessary to

address the unsafe condition described in

this AD. Such a request should include an

assessment of the effect of the changed

configuration on the unsafe condition

addressed by this AD. In no case does the

presence of any modification, alteration, or

repair remove any engine from the

applicability of this AD.

Compliance: Required as indicated, unless

accomplished previously.

To prevent fan blade failure, which can

result in damage to the aircraft, accomplish

the following:

(a) Inspect fan blades and shrouds, unlock

fan blade shrouds, lubricate fan blade

shrouds, restore leading edge dimensions,

and modify or install improved design fan

blades in accordance with the schedule and

procedures described in Parts 1, 2, and 3 of

the Accomplishment Instructions of PW

Alert Service Bulletin (ASB) No. A6241,

dated January 25, 1996.

(b) Modification of fan blades to the

improved design configuration or installation

of improved design fan blades in accordance

with Part 3 of the Accomplishment

Instructions of PW ASB No. A6241, dated

January 25, 1996, constitutes terminating

action to the inspections and maintenance

actions described in Parts 1 and 2 of that

ASB.

(c) For the purpose of this AD, the

accomplishment effective date to be used for

determination of compliance intervals, as

required by Section 2 of PW ASB No. A6241,

dated January 25, 1996, is defined as the

effective date of this AD.

(d) For the purpose of this AD, ‘‘repair’’ as

specified in Part 3, Paragraph A.(1)(b) of the

Accomplishment Instructions of PW ASB No.

A6241, dated January 25, 1996, is defined as

the refurbishment of fan blades in accordance

with Part 3, Paragraph C of the

Accomplishment Instructions of PW ASB No.

A6241, dated January 25, 1996.

(e) Alternative methods of compliance that

have been approved for AD 95–12–19 are

applicable for this AD and additional

approval is not required.

(f) An alternative method of compliance or

adjustment of the compliance time that

provides an acceptable level of safety may be

used if approved by the Manager, Engine

Certification Office. The request should be

forwarded through an appropriate FAA

Principal Maintenance Inspector, who may

add comments and then send it to the

Manager, Engine Certification Office.

Note: Information concerning the existence

of approved alternative methods of

compliance with this airworthiness directive,

if any, may be obtained from the Engine

Certification Office.

(g) Special flight permits may be issued in

accordance with sections 21.197 and 21.199

of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR

21.197 and 21.199) to operate the aircraft to

a location where the requirements of this AD

can be accomplished.

Issued in Burlington, Massachusetts, on

April 1, 1996.

Jay J. Pardee,

Manager, Engine and Propeller Directorate,

Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 96–11168 Filed 5–3–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–U
20196 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 88 / Monday, May 6, 1996 / Proposed Rules

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 100

[CGD01–96–015]

RIN 2115–AE46

Special Local Regulation: Swim

Buzzards Bay Day, New Bedford, MA

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to

establish a permanent special local

regulation for a swimming event known

as Swim Buzzards Bay Day. The event

will be held in Buzzards Bay,

Achushnet River, on July 28, 1996, and

annually thereafter on a weekend in July

that has favorable tidal conditions. This

regulation is needed to protect the

participants from vessel traffic during

the swimming event.

DATES: Comments must be received on

or before June 20, 1996.

ADDRESSES: Comments should be

mailed to Commander (b), First Coast

Guard District, Captain John Foster

Williams Federal Building, 408 Atlantic

Ave., Boston, MA 02110–3350, or may

be hand delivered to Room 428 at the

same address, between 8 a.m. and 4

p.m., Monday through Friday, except

federal holidays. Comments will

become part of this docket and will be

available for inspection or copying at

the above address.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Lieutenant (Junior Grade) B.M. Algeo,

Chief, Boating Affairs Branch, First

Coast Guard District, (617) 223–8311.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Request for Comments

The Coast Guard encourages

interested persons to participate in this

rulemaking by submitting written data,

views, or arguments. Persons submitting

comments should include their names

and addresses, identify this notice

(CGD01–96–015), the specific section of

the proposal to which each comment

applies, and give reasons for each

comment. The Coast Guard requests that

all comments and attachments be

submitted in an 81⁄2′′×11′′ unbound

format suitable for copying and

electronic filing. If that is not practical,

a second copy of any bound material is

requested. Persons requesting

acknowledgment of receipt of comments

should enclose a stamped, selfaddressed postcard or envelope.

The Coast Guard will consider all

comments received during the comment

period. It may change this proposal in

view of the comments. The Coast Guard

plans no public hearing. Persons may

request a public hearing by writing to

Commander (b), First Coast Guard

District at the address under ADDRESSES.

The request should include reasons why

a hearing would be beneficial. If it is

determined that the opportunity for oral

presentations will aid this rulemaking,

the Coast Guard will hold a public

hearing at a time and place announced

by a later notice in the Federal Register.

Discussion of Proposed Amendments

The annual Swim Buzzards Bay Day

is a local, traditional event which has

been held for the previous two years on

the Achushnet River, New Bedford/

Fairhaven, MA. In the past, the Coast

Guard has promulgated individual

regulations for the event. Given the

recurring nature of the event, the Coast

Guard desires to establish a permanent

regulation. The proposed regulation will

establish a regulated area in the

Acushnet River for the 1996 event and

will establish a permanent regulation for

following years. This proposal restricts

vessels from approaching within 200

feet of participating swimmers.

The event will consist of

approximately 50 swimmers

transversing the Acushnet River from

Fort Phoenix Beach in Fairhaven, MA,

to Billy Woods Wharf in New Bedford,

MA. There will be one rowing skiff per

participant, along with sponsor

provided vessels on scene to augment a

Coast Guard patrol to alert boating

traffic of the presence of the swimmers.

The time period for the event is dictated

by tidal conditions. Subject to Coast

Guard approval, the sponsor selects a

weekend in July that most closely

exhibits low tide at a daytime hour

reasonable for holding the event.

Spectator craft are authorized to watch

the race from any area as long as they

remain 200 feet away from any

participating swimmer. In emergency

situations, provisions may be made to

establish safe escort by a Coast Guard or

Coast Guard designated vessel for

vessels requiring transit within 200 feet

of participating swimmers.

Regulatory Evaluation

This proposal is not a significant

regulatory action under section 3(f) of

Executive Order 12866, and does not

require an assessment of potential costs

and benefits under section 6(a)(3) of that

order. It has been exempted from review

by the Office of Management and

Budget under that order. It is not

significant under the regulatory policies

and procedures of the Department of

Transportation (DOT) (44 FR 11040;

February 26, 1979). The Coast Guard

expects the economic impact to be so

minimal that a full Regulatory

Evaluation, under paragraph 10e of the

regulatory policies and procedures of

DOT, is unnecessary. This conclusion is

based on the limited duration of the

event, the extensive advisories that will

be made to the affected maritime

community, and the minimal

restrictions which the regulation places

on vessel traffic.

Small Entities

Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act

(55 U.S.C. 601 et seq.), the Coast Guard

must consider the economic impact on

small entities of a rule for which a

general notice of proposed rulemaking

is required. ‘‘Small entities’’ may

include (1) small businesses and not-forprofit organizations that are

independently owned and operated and

are not dominant in their fields and (2)

governmental jurisdictions with

populations of less than 50,000.

For the reasons discussed in the

Regulatory Evaluation, the Coast Guard

certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this

proposal will not have a significant

economic impact on a substantial

number of small entities.

Collection of Information

This proposal contains no collection

of information requirements under the

Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C.

3501 et seq.).

Federalism

The Coast Guard has analyzed this

proposal under the principles and

criteria contained in Executive Order

12612 and has determined that this

proposal does not have sufficient

federalism implications to warrant the

preparation of a Federalism Assessment.

Environment

The Coast Guard has considered the

environmental impacts of this proposal

and concluded that, under paragraph

2.B.2.e.34(h) of COMDTINST 16475.1B,

(as revised by 61 FR 13563, March 27,

1996) this proposal is a special local

regulation issued in conjunction with a

regatta or marine parade and is

categorically excluded from further

environmental documentation.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 100

Marine safety, Navigation (water),

Reporting and recordkeeping

requirements, Waterways.

Proposed Regulation

For the reasons set out in the

preamble, the Coast Guard proposes to

amend 33 CFR part 100 as follows:

1. The authority citation for part 100

continues to read as follows:
Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 88 / Monday, May 6, 1996 / Proposed Rules 20197

1For large cable systems which retransmit only

local broadcast signals, there is still a minimum

royalty fee which must be paid. This minimum fee

is not applied, however, once the cable system

carries one or more distant signals.

Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1233; 49 CFR 1.46 and

33 CFR 100.35.

2. A permanent section, 100.116, is

added to read as follows:

§ 100.116 Swim Buzzards Bay Day, New

Bedford, MA.

(a) Regulated area. All waters of the

Acushnet River within 200 feet of

participating swimmers.

(b) Special local regulations. (1) The

Coast Guard patrol commander may

delay, modify, or cancel the race as

conditions or circumstances require.

(2) No person or vessel may enter,

transit, or remain in the regulated area

unless participating in the event or

unless authorized by the Coast Guard

patrol commander.

(3) Vessels encountering emergencies

which require transit through the

regulated area should contact the coast

Guard patrol commander on VHF

Channel 16. In the event of an

emergency, the Coast Guard patrol

commander may authorize a vessel to

transit through the regulated area with

a Coast Guard designated escort.

(4) All persons and vessels shall

comply with the instructions of the

Coast Guard on-scene patrol

commander. On-scene patrol personnel

include commissioned, warrant, and

petty officers of the U.S. Coast Guard.

Upon hearing five or more short blasts

from a U.S. Coast Guard vessel, the

operator of a vessel shall proceed as

directed. Members of the Coast Guard

Auxiliary may also be present to inform

vessel operators of this regulation and

other applicable laws.

(c) Effective period. This section is in

effect from 10 a.m. to 12 p.m. on July

28, 1996, and each year thereafter on a

date and times published in the Federal

Register.

Dated: April 23, 1996.

J.L. Linnon,

Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard Commander,

First Coast Guard District.

[FR Doc. 96–11237 Filed 5–3–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–14–M

LIBRARY OF CONGRESS

Copyright Office

37 CFR Ch. II

[Docket No. 96–2]

Eligibility for the Cable Compulsory

License

AGENCY: Copyright Office, Library of

Congress.

ACTION: Notice of inquiry.

SUMMARY: The Copyright Office of the

Library of Congress is opening a

rulemaking proceeding to consider the

eligibility for the cable compulsory

license of open video systems of

telephone companies which retransmit

broadcast signals. The Office requests

interested parties to submit comments

as to whether, and what extent, open

video systems may make use of the

cable compulsory license.

DATES: Comments should be received on

or before July 5, 1996. Reply comments

are due on or before June 5, 1996.

ADDRESSES: If delivered BY MAIL,

fifteen copies of written comments

should be addressed to Office of the

General Counsel, Copyright GC/I&R, PO

Box 70400, Southwest Station,

Washington, DC 20024. If delivered BY

HAND, fifteen copies of written

comments should be brought to: Office

of the General Counsel, Copyright

Office, James Madison Memorial

Building, Room LM–407, First and

Independence Avenue, SE.,

Washington, DC 20540.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Marilyn J. Kretsinger, Acting General

Counsel, or William Roberts, Senior

Attorney for Compulsory Licenses,

Telephone (202) 707–8380 or Telefax

(202) 707–8366.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

Section 111 of the Copyright Act, 17

U.S.C., grants a compulsory copyright

license to cable television systems for

the retransmission of over-the-air

broadcast stations to their subscribers.

In exchange for the license, cable

operators submit royalty payments,

along with statements of account

detailing their retransmissions, to the

Copyright Office on a semi-annual basis,

which deposits the royalties with the

United States Treasury in interest

bearing accounts for later distribution to

copyright owners of non-network

broadcast programming.

Cable systems determine their royalty

payments according to a calculation

formula devised by Congress in 1976. 17

U.S.C. 111(d). Payments are made based

upon a cable system’s gross receipts

from subscribers for the retransmission

of broadcast signals. The statute

subdivides cable systems, based on their

gross receipts totals, into three

categories: Small, medium and large.

Small systems pay a fixed amount

without regard to the number of

broadcast signals they retransmit, while

medium-sized systems pay a royalty

within a specified range, with a

maximum amount, based on the number

of signals they retransmit.

Large cable systems, which pay over

ninety percent of royalties submitted by

cable systems, calculate their royalties

according to the number of distant

broadcast signals which they retransmit

to their subscribers.1 These cable

systems pay a percentage of their gross

receipts for each distant signal they

retransmit, and different royalty rates

apply to different signals, depending

upon the total number of distant signals

carried. Determining when a broadcast

signal is distant, what rate must be

applied to it, and the royalty due for the

signal is, for the most part, determined

by reference to the rules and regulations

of the Federal Communications

Commission governing cable systems

that were in effect on April 15, 1976.

Copyright payments under section 111

of the Copyright Act today are,

therefore, dependent upon the manner

in which the cable television industry

was regulated in 1976.

Section 111(f) defines a ‘‘cable

system’’ as follows:

A ‘‘cable system’’ is a facility, located in

any State, Territory, Trust Territory, or

Possession, that in whole or in part receives

signals transmitted or programs broadcast by

one or more television broadcast stations

licensed by the Federal Communications

Commission, and makes secondary

transmissions of such signals or programs by

wires, cables, microwave, or other

communications channels to subscribing

members of the public who pay for such

service. For purposes of determining the

royalty fee under subsection (d)(1), two or

more cable systems in contiguous

communities under common ownership or

control or operating from one head-end shall

be considered as one system.

17 U.S.C. 111(f).

At the time of passage of the

Copyright Act, the only type of

retransmission system serving

subscribers with broadcast programming

was traditional wired cable systems

regulated as such by the FCC.

Consequently, it was generally well

understood in 1976 what was meant by

‘‘cable system’’ for purposes of section

111. However, beginning in the early to

mid-1980’s, retransmission services

other than traditional wired cable

systems came into existence. Like

traditional wired cable systems, these

other services were capable of

delivering broadcast signals to their

subscribers, and they sought eligibility

for the section 111 license.

The addition of new retransmission

providers significantly altered the