Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 170 / Tuesday, September 2, 2008 / Proposed Rules 51255 

Maintenance Branch has amended one 

SIAP for the Ruby Airport. The 

amended SIAP is the Area Navigation 

(RNAV) Global Positioning System 

(GPS) Runway (RWY) 21, Amendment 

2. Class E controlled airspace extending 

upward from 700 ft. and 1,200 ft. above 

the surface in the Ruby Airport area 

would be revised by this action. The 

proposed airspace is sufficient in size to 

contain aircraft executing the 

instrument procedures at the Ruby 

Airport, Ruby, AK. 

The area would be depicted on 

aeronautical charts for pilot reference. 

The coordinates for this airspace docket 

are based on North American Datum 83. 

The Class E airspace areas designated as 

700/1200 foot transition areas are 

published in paragraph 6005 in FAA 

Order 7400.9R, Airspace Designations 

and Reporting Points, signed August 15, 

2007, and effective September 15, 2007, 

which is incorporated by reference in 14 

CFR 71.1. The Class E airspace 

designations listed in this document 

would be published subsequently in the 

Order. 

The FAA has determined that this 

proposed regulation only involves an 

established body of technical 

regulations for which frequent and 

routine amendments are necessary to 

keep them operationally current. It, 

therefore—(1) Is not a ‘‘significant 

regulatory action’’ under Executive 

Order 12866; (2) is not a ‘‘significant 

rule’’ under DOT Regulatory Policies 

and Procedures (44 FR 11034; February 

26, 1979); and (3) does not warrant 

preparation of a regulatory evaluation as 

the anticipated impact is so minimal. 

Since this is a routine matter that will 

only affect air traffic procedures and air 

navigation, it is certified that this rule, 

when promulgated, will not have a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities 

under the criteria of the Regulatory 

Flexibility Act. 

The FAA’s authority to issue rules 

regarding aviation safety is found in 

Title 49 of the United States Code. 

Subtitle 1, Section 106 describes the 

authority of the FAA Administrator. 

Subtitle VII, Aviation Programs, 

describes in more detail the scope of the 

agency’s authority. 

This rulemaking is promulgated 

under the authority described in 

Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart 1, Section 

40103, Sovereignty and use of airspace. 

Under that section, the FAA is charged 

with prescribing regulations to ensure 

the safe and efficient use of the 

navigable airspace. This regulation is 

within the scope of that authority 

because it proposes to create Class E 

airspace sufficient in size to contain 

aircraft executing instrument 

procedures at the Ruby Airport, AK, and 

represents the FAA’s continuing effort 

to safely and efficiently use the 

navigable airspace. 

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71 

Airspace, Incorporation by reference, 

Navigation (air). 

The Proposed Amendment 

In consideration of the foregoing, the 

Federal Aviation Administration 

proposes to amend 14 CFR part 71 as 

follows: 

PART 71—DESIGNATION OF CLASS A, 

CLASS B, CLASS C, CLASS D, AND 

CLASS E AIRSPACE AREAS; 

AIRWAYS; ROUTES; AND REPORTING 

POINTS 

1. The authority citation for 14 CFR 

part 71 continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40103, 40113, 

40120; E.O. 10854, 24 FR 9565, 3 CFR, 1959–

1963 Comp., p. 389. 

§ 71.1 [Amended] 

2. The incorporation by reference in 

14 CFR 71.1 of Federal Aviation 

Administration Order 7400.9R, Airspace 

Designations and Reporting Points, 

signed August 15, 2007, and effective 

September 15, 2007, is to be amended 

as follows: 

* * * * * 

Paragraph 6005 Class E Airspace Extending 

Upward From 700 Feet or More Above the 

Surface of the Earth. 

* * * * * 

AAL AK E5 Ruby, AK [Revised] 

Ruby, Ruby Airport, AK 

(Lat. 64°43′38′′ N., Long. 155°28′11′′ W.) 

That airspace extending upward from 700 

feet above the surface within a 6.4-mile 

radius of the Ruby Airport, AK, and 8 miles 

either side of the 051°(T)/070°(M) bearing 

from the Ruby Airport, AK, extending from 

the 6.4-mile radius to 20.3 miles northeast of 

the Ruby Airport, AK; and that airspace 

extending upward from 1,200 feet above the 

surface within a 70-mile radius of the Ruby 

Airport, AK. 

* * * * * 

Issued in Anchorage, AK, on August 22, 

2008. 

James Miller, 

Acting Manager, Alaska Flight Services 

Information Area Group. 

[FR Doc. E8–20312 Filed 8–29–08; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

Bureau of Indian Affairs 

25 CFR Part 293 

RIN 1076–AE99 

Class III Tribal State Gaming Compact 

Process 

AGENCY: Bureau of Indian Affairs, 

Interior. 

ACTION: Extension of comment period 

for proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: On July 2, 2008, the Bureau 

of Indian Affairs (BIA) proposed a rule 

to establish procedures for Indian tribes 

and States to submit Tribal-State 

compacts and compact amendments, 

governing the conduct of class III 

gaming activities on the tribe’s Indian 

lands located within that State, for 

review and approval by the Secretary of 

the Interior (see 73 FR 37907). This 

notice extends the comment period for 

that proposed rule by 20 days, to 

September 22, 2008. 

DATES: The comment period for the 

proposed rule published on July 2, 2008 

(73 FR 37907) is extended to September 

22, 2008. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments 

on the rule, identified by the number 

1076–AE99, by any of the following 

methods: 

• Federal e-rulemaking portal: 

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

instructions for submitting comments. 

• Fax: (202) 273–3153. 

• Mail: Ms. Paula Hart, Acting 

Director, Office of Indian Gaming, Office 

of the Deputy Assistant Secretary—

Policy and Economic Development, 

1849 C Street, NW., Mail Stop 3657–

MIB, Washington, DC 20240. 

• Hand delivery: Office of Indian 

Gaming, Office of the Deputy Assistant 

Secretary—Policy and Economic 

Development, 1849 C Street, NW., Room 

3657–MIB, Washington, DC, from 9 a.m. 

to 4 p.m., Monday through Friday. 

Note that requests for comments on 

the rule and the information collection 

are separate. Comments on the 

information collection requirements 

should be sent to: Office of Management 

and Budget, Office of Information and 

Regulatory Affairs, Attention: Desk 

Officer for the Department of the 

Interior, by e-mail at http:// 

www.OIRA_DOCKET@omb.eop.gov, or 

by facsimile at (202) 395–6566. 

Please also send a copy of your 

comments on information collection 

requirements to the Office of Indian 

Gaming at the above address. 


erowe on PROD1PC64 with PROPOSALS
51256 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 170 / Tuesday, September 2, 2008 / Proposed Rules 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Paula Hart, Acting Director, Office of 

Indian Gaming, (202) 219–4066. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The 

Indian Gaming Regulatory Act (IGRA), 

25 U.S.C. 2701–2721, was signed into 

law on October 17, 1988. IGRA, 25 

U.S.C. 2710, authorizes class III gaming 

activities on Indian lands when 

authorized by an approved ordinance, 

located in a State that permits such 

gaming and conducted in conformance 

with a Tribal-State compact. IGRA, 25 

U.S.C. 2710(d)(8)(A), (B) and (C), 

authorizes the Secretary to approve, 

disapprove or consider approved a 

Tribal-State compact or compact 

amendment and publish notice of that 

approval or considered approval in the 

Federal Register. The submission 

process for the Tribal-State compact or 

compact amendment is not clear. 

Therefore, BIA published a proposed 

rule on July 2, 2008 (73 FR 37907) to 

establish procedures for submitting 

Tribal-State compacts and compact 

amendments. 

The authority to issue this document 

is vested in the Secretary of the Interior 

by 5 U.S.C. 301 and 25 U.S.C. 2, 9, and 

2710. The Secretary has delegated this 

authority to the Assistant Secretary—

Indian Affairs by part 209 of the 

Departmental Manual. 

Dated: August 26, 2008. 

George T. Skibine, 

Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary for Policy 

and Economic Development—Indian Affairs. 

[FR Doc. E8–20257 Filed 8–29–08; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4310–02–P 

FEDERAL MINE SAFETY AND HEALTH 

REVIEW COMMISSION 

29 CFR Part 2700 

Procedural Rules 

AGENCY: Federal Mine Safety and Health 

Review Commission. 

ACTION: Advanced notice of proposed 

rulemaking. 

SUMMARY: The Federal Mine Safety and 

Health Review Commission (the 

‘‘Commission’’) is an independent 

adjudicatory agency that provides trials 

and appellate review of cases arising 

under the Federal Mine Safety and 

Health Act of 1977 (2000) (the ‘‘Mine 

Act’’). Trials are held before the 

Commission’s Administrative Law 

Judges, and appellate review is provided 

by a five-member Review Commission 

appointed by the President and 

confirmed by the Senate. The 

Commission is seeking suggestions for 

improving its procedures for processing 

requests for relief from default and 

reducing the number of cases in which 

a party seeks relief before the 

Commission after default. 

DATES: Written and electronic comments 

must be submitted on or before 

November 3, 2008. 

ADDRESSES: Written comments should 

be mailed to Michael A. McCord, 

General Counsel, Office of the General 

Counsel, Federal Mine Safety and 

Health Review Commission, 601 New 

Jersey Avenue, NW., Suite 9500, 

Washington, DC 20001. Persons 

submitting written comments shall 

provide an original and three copies of 

their comments. Electronic comments 

should state ‘‘Comments on Advanced 

Notice of Proposed Rulemaking’’ in the 

subject line and be sent to 

mmccord@fmshrc.gov. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Michael A. McCord, General Counsel, 

Office of the General Counsel, 601 New 

Jersey Avenue, NW., Suite 9500, 

Washington, DC 20001, telephone 202–

434–9935; FAX: 202–434–9944. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Mine 

Act sets forth dual filing requirements 

for parties’ contests of citations and 

orders and their associated proposed 

civil penalties. 30 U.S.C. 815(a), (d). The 

Commission has implemented these 

requirements in 29 CFR part 2700 

subparts B and C. Subpart B sets forth 

the manner in which a party may 

contest a citation or order before the 

Secretary has proposed a civil penalty 

for the alleged violation described in the 

citation or order. Subpart C sets forth 

the manner in which a party may 

contest a civil penalty after a proposed 

penalty assessment has been issued. If a 

party chooses not to file a contest of a 

citation or order under subpart B, it may 

nonetheless contest the proposed 

penalty assessment under subpart C. In 

such circumstances, in addition to 

contesting the proposed penalty 

assessment, the party may challenge the 

fact of violation and any special 

findings alleged in the citation or order. 

See 29 CFR 2700.21(b) (‘‘An operator’s 

failure to file a notice of contest of a 

citation or order * * * shall not 

preclude the operator from challenging, 

in a penalty proceeding, the fact of 

violation or any special findings 

* * *.’’); Quinland Coals, Inc., 9 

FMSHRC 1614, 1621–23 (Sept. 1987) 

(holding that fact of violation and 

special findings may be placed in issue 

by the operator in a civil penalty 

proceeding regardless of whether the 

operator has availed itself of the 

opportunity to file a contest proceeding 

under subpart B). However, if a party 

files a contest of a citation or order 

under subpart B, it must also file 

additional pleadings under subpart C in 

order to challenge the proposed penalty 

assessment related to the citation or 

order. 

The Mine Act’s dual filing 

requirements have often led to 

confusion by parties who may fail to 

timely file required documents and have 

their cases result in default. The 

Commission receives requests for relief 

from default that generally fall into two 

categories. Requests in the first category 

involve circumstances in which a party 

has failed to file a timely contest of a 

proposed penalty assessment and the 

proposed penalty thereby becomes a 

final order of the Commission by 

operation of section 105(a) of the Mine 

Act, 30 U.S.C. 815(a). Requests in the 

second category involve circumstances 

in which a Commission Administrative 

Law Judge issues a default order 

because a party has failed to file an 

answer to a petition for assessment of 

penalty filed by the Secretary of Labor. 

Currently, the large majority of requests 

for relief received by the Commission 

fall within the first category. 

Under the Commission’s present 

practice, requests for relief from default 

are directed to the Review Commission. 

In evaluating requests for relief from 

default, the Review Commission finds 

guidance in Rule 60(b) of the Federal 

Rules of Civil Procedure (‘‘Rule 60(b)’’). 

See 29 CFR 2700.1(b) (‘‘the Commission 

and its Judges shall be guided so far as 

practicable by the Federal Rules of Civil 

Procedure’’); Jim Walter Res., Inc., 15 

FMSHRC 782, 787 (May 1993). The 

Review Commission has recognized that 

Rule 60(b) ‘‘is a tool which * * * courts 

are to use sparingly * * *.’’ Id. at 789 

(citation omitted); Atlanta Sand and 

Supply Co., 30 FMSHRCl, slip op. at 

4, No. SE 2008–327–M (July 16, 2008). 

The Review Commission has also 

observed that default is a harsh remedy 

and that, if the defaulting party can 

make a showing of good cause for a 

failure to timely respond, the case may 

be reopened and appropriate 

proceedings on the merits permitted. 

See Coal Prep. Servs., Inc., 17 FMSHRC 

1529, 1530 (Sept. 1995). 

Upon application of this standard, if 

the Review Commission concludes that 

a request for relief is potentially 

sufficient on its face to support 

reopening, but cannot conclusively 

determine from the record whether 

relief should be granted, it remands the 

matter to the Chief Administrative Law 

Judge. The Chief Administrative Law 

Judge exercises his discretion to engage 

in any further fact-finding and 

determines whether good cause exists 

for a failure to timely respond. If the 


erowe on PROD1PC64 with PROPOSALS