Extension of Port Limits of Columbus, OH, 23133-23134 [E9-11551]

Download as PDF Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 94 / Monday, May 18, 2009 / Proposed Rules This AD requires initial and repetitive visual inspections of propeller blade root outer sleeves for cracks, and removal before further flight of propeller blades with cracked blade root outer sleeves. We are issuing this AD to prevent blade counterweight release, which could result in injury or damage to the airplane. DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY Bureau of Customs and Border Protection Wendy M. Cooper, Office of Field Operations, 202–344–2057. [Docket No. USCBP–2008–0047] Actions and Compliance (e) Unless already done, do the following actions. Extension of Port Limits of Columbus, OH Propeller Blade Root Outer Sleeve Visual Inspections AGENCY: FAA AD Differences (f) None. Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs) (g) The Manager, Boston Aircraft Certification Office, FAA, Engine and Propeller Directorate, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. Related Information (h) Refer to European Aviation Safety Agency AD 2008–0033, dated February 19, 2008, and Dowty Propellers Alert Service Bulletin No. SF340–61–A106, Revision 1, dated March 20, 2008, for related information. (i) Contact Terry Fahr, Aerospace Engineer, Boston Aircraft Certification Office, FAA, Engine and Propeller Directorate, 12 New England Executive Park, Burlington, MA 01803; e-mail: terry.fahr@faa.gov; telephone (781) 238–7155; fax (781) 238–7170, for more information about this AD. Issued in Burlington, Massachusetts, on May 8, 2009. Peter A. White, Assistant Manager, Engine and Propeller Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. [FR Doc. E9–11478 Filed 5–15–09; 8:45 am] cprice-sewell on PRODPC61 with PROPOSALS BILLING CODE 4910–13–P VerDate Nov<24>2008 13:53 May 15, 2009 Jkt 217001 Customs and Border Protection, DHS. (1) At the next 1,600 flight hours (FH) aircraft check after the effective date of this AD, or, after any blade accumulates 15,000 FH time-in-service, whichever occurs later, visually inspect all propeller blade root outer sleeves for cracks. (2) Thereafter, at intervals not to exceed 1,600 FH, visually inspect all propeller blade root outer sleeves for cracks. (3) Before further flight, remove any propeller blades found with cracked root outer sleeves during the visual inspections in paragraphs (e)(1) and (e)(2) of this AD. Notice of proposed rulemaking. SUMMARY: This notice of proposed rulemaking proposes to extend the geographical limits of the port of Columbus, Ohio, to include the Rickenbacker Intermodal Terminal and additional territory that likely will be needed for supporting infrastructure so that it will be within the newly defined port limits. The proposed change would make the boundaries more easily identifiable to the public. The proposed change is part of CBP’s continuing program to more efficiently utilize its personnel, facilities, and resources, and to provide better service to carriers, importers, and the general public. DATES: Comments must be received on or before July 17, 2009. ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, identified by docket number, by one of the following methods: • Federal eRulemaking Portal: https:// www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments via docket number USCBP–2008–0047. • Mail: Border Security Regulations Branch, Office of International Trade, Customs and Border Protection, 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW. (Mint Annex), Washington, DC 20229. Instructions: All submissions received must include the agency name and docket number for this rulemaking. All comments received will be posted without change to https:// www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided. For detailed instructions on submitting comments and additional information on the rulemaking process, see the ‘‘Public Participation’’ heading of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this document. Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or comments received, go to https:// www.regulations.gov. Submitted comments may also be inspected on regular business days between the hours of 9 a.m. and 4:30 p.m. at the Office of International Trade, Customs and Border Protection, 799 9th Street, NW., PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 4702 5th Floor, Washington, DC. Arrangements to inspect submitted comments should be made in advance by calling Mr. Joseph Clark at (202) 325– 0118. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 19 CFR Part 101 ACTION: 23133 Sfmt 4702 SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Public Participation Interested persons are invited to participate in this rulemaking by submitting written data, views, or arguments on all aspects of the notice of proposed rulemaking. DHS also invites comments that relate to the economic, environmental, or federalism effects that might result from this proposal. Comments that will provide the most assistance to the Department in developing these procedures will reference a specific portion of the proposal, explain the reason for any recommended change, and include data, information, or authority that support such recommended change. II. Background As part of its continuing efforts to provide better service to carriers, importers, and the general public, CBP is proposing to extend the port boundaries for the port of entry at Columbus, Ohio. The Columbus Regional Airport Authority has partnered with the Norfolk Southern Corporation to create an intermodal facility immediately adjacent to Rickenbacker International Airport. The creation of the new Rickenbacker Intermodal Terminal is an important part of the Columbus Regional Airport Authority’s plan to address a capacity problem at current facilities in the area. The terminal is located to the south of the current port boundaries. In order to accommodate the new facility and the necessary additional territory for supporting infrastructure so that it falls within the newly defined port limits, CBP is proposing to amend the port limits of the port of Columbus, Ohio. This proposed change will make the port boundaries more easily identifiable to the public. CBP has determined that this proposed change will result in better service that is provided to the public by the port by addressing a capacity problem at current facilities in the area. The proposed change will not require a change in the staffing or workload at the port. E:\FR\FM\18MYP1.SGM 18MYP1 23134 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 94 / Monday, May 18, 2009 / Proposed Rules a substantial number of small entities during the final rule. III. Current Port Limits of Columbus, Ohio The current port limits of Columbus, Ohio, are contained in two separate Treasury Decisions: 82–9 and 96–67. Treasury Decision (T.D.) 82–9, published in the Federal Register (47 FR 1286) on January 12, 1982, specified the limits as follows: which the Secretary of the Treasury has retained sole authority. Accordingly, the notice of proposed rulemaking may be signed by the Secretary of Homeland Security (or his or her delegate). A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review BILLING CODE 9111–14–P The geographical boundaries of the Columbus, Ohio, Customs port of entry include all of the territory within the corporate limits of Columbus, Ohio; all of the territory completely surrounded by the city of Columbus; and, all of the territory enclosed by Interstate Highway 270 (outer belt), which completely surrounds the city. This proposed rule is not considered to be an economically significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866 because it will not result in the expenditure of over $100 million in any one year. The proposed change is intended to expand the geographical boundaries of the Port of Columbus, Ohio, and make it more easily identifiable to the public. There are no new costs to the public associated with this rule. Accordingly, this proposed rule has not been reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under Executive Order 12866. DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY T.D. 96–67, published in the Federal Register (61 FR 49058) on September 18, 1996, expanded the port limits of Columbus, Ohio, to encompass the port limits set forth in T.D. 82–9 as well as the following territory: Beginning at the intersection of Rohr and Lockbourne Roads, then proceeding southerly along Lockbourne Road to Commerce Street, thence easterly along Commerce Street to its intersection with the N & W railroad tracks, then southerly along the N & W railroad tracks to the FranklinPickaway County line, thence easterly along the Franklin-Pickaway County line to its intersection with Pontius Road, then northerly along Pontius Road to its intersection with Rohr Road, thence westerly along Rohr Road to its intersection with Lockbourne Road, the point of beginning, all within the County of Franklin, State of Ohio. IV. Proposed Port Limits of Columbus, Ohio The new port limits of Columbus, Ohio, are proposed as follows: The geographic boundaries of the Columbus, Ohio, port of entry include all of Franklin County, and that part of Pickaway County east of U.S. Route 23 and north of State Route 752, all in the State of Ohio. cprice-sewell on PRODPC61 with PROPOSALS V. Proposed Amendment to the Regulations If the proposed port limits are adopted, CBP will amend the list of CBP ports of entry at 19 CFR 101.3(b)(1), to reflect the new description of the limits of the Columbus, Ohio, port of entry. V. Authority This change is proposed under the authority of 5 U.S.C. 301 and 19 U.S.C. 2, 66 and 1624, and the Homeland Security Act of 2002, Public Law 107– 296 (November 25, 2002). VI. Signing Authority The signing authority for this document falls under 19 CFR 0.2(a) because this port extension is not within the bounds of those regulations for VerDate Nov<24>2008 13:53 May 15, 2009 Jkt 217001 VII. Statutory and Regulatory Reviews. B. Regulatory Flexibility Act The Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.) requires federal agencies to examine the impact a rule would have on small entities. A small entity may be a small business (defined as any independently owned and operated business not dominant in its field that qualifies as a small business per the Small Business Act), a small notfor-profit organization, or a small governmental jurisdiction (locality with fewer than 50,000 people). This proposed rule does not directly regulate small entities. The proposed change is part of CBP’s continuing program to more efficiently utilize its personnel, facilities, and resources, and to provide better service to carriers, importers, and the general public. To the extent that all entities are able to more efficiently or conveniently access the facilities and resources within the proposed expanded geographical area of the new port limits, this proposed rule, if finalized, should confer benefits to CBP, carriers, importers, and the general public. Because this rule does not directly regulate small entities, we do not believe that this rule has a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. However, we welcome comments on that assumption. The most helpful comments are those that can give us specific information or examples of a direct impact on small entities. If we do not receive comments that demonstrate that the rule causes small entities to incur direct costs, we may certify that this action does not have a significant economic impact on PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 Dated: May 12, 2009. Janet Napolitano, Secretary. [FR Doc. E9–11551 Filed 5–15–09; 8:45 am] Internal Revenue Service 26 CFR Part 1 [REG–115699–09] RIN:1545–BI64 Suspension or Reduction of Safe Harbor Nonelective Contributions AGENCY: Internal Revenue Service (IRS), Treasury. ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking and notice of public hearing. SUMMARY: This document contains proposed amendments to the regulations relating to certain cash or deferred arrangements and matching contributions under section 401(k) plans and section 403(b) plans. These regulations affect administrators of, employers maintaining, participants in, and beneficiaries of certain section 401(k) plans and section 403(b) plans. DATES: Written or electronic comments must be received by August 17, 2009. Outlines of the topics to be discussed at the public hearing scheduled for Wednesday, September 23, 2009, at 10 a.m. must be received by August 19, 2009. ADDRESSES: Send submissions to CC:PA:LPD:PR (REG–115699–09), Room 5203, Internal Revenue Service, PO Box 7604, Ben Franklin Station, Washington, DC 20044. Submissions may be handdelivered Monday through Friday between the hours of 8 a.m. and 4 p.m. to CC:PA:LPD:PR (REG–115699–09), Courier’s Desk, Internal Revenue Service, 1111 Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20224 or sent electronically via the Federal eRulemaking Portal at https:// www.regulations.gov (IRS REG–115699– 09). FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Concerning the regulations, R. Lisa Mojiri-Azad, Dana Barry or William D. Gibbs at (202) 622–6060; concerning the submission of comments or to request a public hearing, Richard.A.Hurst@irscounsel.treas.gov, (202) 622–7180 (not toll-free numbers). SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: E:\FR\FM\18MYP1.SGM 18MYP1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 94 (Monday, May 18, 2009)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 23133-23134]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-11551]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Bureau of Customs and Border Protection

19 CFR Part 101

[Docket No. USCBP-2008-0047]


Extension of Port Limits of Columbus, OH

AGENCY: Customs and Border Protection, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: This notice of proposed rulemaking proposes to extend the 
geographical limits of the port of Columbus, Ohio, to include the 
Rickenbacker Intermodal Terminal and additional territory that likely 
will be needed for supporting infrastructure so that it will be within 
the newly defined port limits. The proposed change would make the 
boundaries more easily identifiable to the public. The proposed change 
is part of CBP's continuing program to more efficiently utilize its 
personnel, facilities, and resources, and to provide better service to 
carriers, importers, and the general public.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before July 17, 2009.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, identified by docket number, by one 
of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov. 
Follow the instructions for submitting comments via docket number 
USCBP-2008-0047.
     Mail: Border Security Regulations Branch, Office of 
International Trade, Customs and Border Protection, 1300 Pennsylvania 
Avenue, NW. (Mint Annex), Washington, DC 20229.
    Instructions: All submissions received must include the agency name 
and docket number for this rulemaking. All comments received will be 
posted without change to https://www.regulations.gov, including any 
personal information provided. For detailed instructions on submitting 
comments and additional information on the rulemaking process, see the 
``Public Participation'' heading of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION 
section of this document.
    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or 
comments received, go to https://www.regulations.gov. Submitted comments 
may also be inspected on regular business days between the hours of 9 
a.m. and 4:30 p.m. at the Office of International Trade, Customs and 
Border Protection, 799 9th Street, NW., 5th Floor, Washington, DC. 
Arrangements to inspect submitted comments should be made in advance by 
calling Mr. Joseph Clark at (202) 325-0118.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Wendy M. Cooper, Office of Field 
Operations, 202-344-2057.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Public Participation

    Interested persons are invited to participate in this rulemaking by 
submitting written data, views, or arguments on all aspects of the 
notice of proposed rulemaking. DHS also invites comments that relate to 
the economic, environmental, or federalism effects that might result 
from this proposal. Comments that will provide the most assistance to 
the Department in developing these procedures will reference a specific 
portion of the proposal, explain the reason for any recommended change, 
and include data, information, or authority that support such 
recommended change.

II. Background

    As part of its continuing efforts to provide better service to 
carriers, importers, and the general public, CBP is proposing to extend 
the port boundaries for the port of entry at Columbus, Ohio.
    The Columbus Regional Airport Authority has partnered with the 
Norfolk Southern Corporation to create an intermodal facility 
immediately adjacent to Rickenbacker International Airport. The 
creation of the new Rickenbacker Intermodal Terminal is an important 
part of the Columbus Regional Airport Authority's plan to address a 
capacity problem at current facilities in the area. The terminal is 
located to the south of the current port boundaries. In order to 
accommodate the new facility and the necessary additional territory for 
supporting infrastructure so that it falls within the newly defined 
port limits, CBP is proposing to amend the port limits of the port of 
Columbus, Ohio. This proposed change will make the port boundaries more 
easily identifiable to the public. CBP has determined that this 
proposed change will result in better service that is provided to the 
public by the port by addressing a capacity problem at current 
facilities in the area. The proposed change will not require a change 
in the staffing or workload at the port.

[[Page 23134]]

III. Current Port Limits of Columbus, Ohio

    The current port limits of Columbus, Ohio, are contained in two 
separate Treasury Decisions: 82-9 and 96-67.
    Treasury Decision (T.D.) 82-9, published in the Federal Register 
(47 FR 1286) on January 12, 1982, specified the limits as follows:

    The geographical boundaries of the Columbus, Ohio, Customs port 
of entry include all of the territory within the corporate limits of 
Columbus, Ohio; all of the territory completely surrounded by the 
city of Columbus; and, all of the territory enclosed by Interstate 
Highway 270 (outer belt), which completely surrounds the city.

    T.D. 96-67, published in the Federal Register (61 FR 49058) on 
September 18, 1996, expanded the port limits of Columbus, Ohio, to 
encompass the port limits set forth in T.D. 82-9 as well as the 
following territory:

    Beginning at the intersection of Rohr and Lockbourne Roads, then 
proceeding southerly along Lockbourne Road to Commerce Street, 
thence easterly along Commerce Street to its intersection with the N 
& W railroad tracks, then southerly along the N & W railroad tracks 
to the Franklin-Pickaway County line, thence easterly along the 
Franklin-Pickaway County line to its intersection with Pontius Road, 
then northerly along Pontius Road to its intersection with Rohr 
Road, thence westerly along Rohr Road to its intersection with 
Lockbourne Road, the point of beginning, all within the County of 
Franklin, State of Ohio.

IV. Proposed Port Limits of Columbus, Ohio

    The new port limits of Columbus, Ohio, are proposed as follows:

    The geographic boundaries of the Columbus, Ohio, port of entry 
include all of Franklin County, and that part of Pickaway County 
east of U.S. Route 23 and north of State Route 752, all in the State 
of Ohio.

V. Proposed Amendment to the Regulations

    If the proposed port limits are adopted, CBP will amend the list of 
CBP ports of entry at 19 CFR 101.3(b)(1), to reflect the new 
description of the limits of the Columbus, Ohio, port of entry.

V. Authority

    This change is proposed under the authority of 5 U.S.C. 301 and 19 
U.S.C. 2, 66 and 1624, and the Homeland Security Act of 2002, Public 
Law 107-296 (November 25, 2002).

VI. Signing Authority

    The signing authority for this document falls under 19 CFR 0.2(a) 
because this port extension is not within the bounds of those 
regulations for which the Secretary of the Treasury has retained sole 
authority. Accordingly, the notice of proposed rulemaking may be signed 
by the Secretary of Homeland Security (or his or her delegate).

VII. Statutory and Regulatory Reviews.

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review

    This proposed rule is not considered to be an economically 
significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866 because it 
will not result in the expenditure of over $100 million in any one 
year. The proposed change is intended to expand the geographical 
boundaries of the Port of Columbus, Ohio, and make it more easily 
identifiable to the public. There are no new costs to the public 
associated with this rule. Accordingly, this proposed rule has not been 
reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under Executive 
Order 12866.

B. Regulatory Flexibility Act

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.) requires 
federal agencies to examine the impact a rule would have on small 
entities. A small entity may be a small business (defined as any 
independently owned and operated business not dominant in its field 
that qualifies as a small business per the Small Business Act), a small 
not-for-profit organization, or a small governmental jurisdiction 
(locality with fewer than 50,000 people).
    This proposed rule does not directly regulate small entities. The 
proposed change is part of CBP's continuing program to more efficiently 
utilize its personnel, facilities, and resources, and to provide better 
service to carriers, importers, and the general public. To the extent 
that all entities are able to more efficiently or conveniently access 
the facilities and resources within the proposed expanded geographical 
area of the new port limits, this proposed rule, if finalized, should 
confer benefits to CBP, carriers, importers, and the general public.
    Because this rule does not directly regulate small entities, we do 
not believe that this rule has a significant economic impact on a 
substantial number of small entities. However, we welcome comments on 
that assumption. The most helpful comments are those that can give us 
specific information or examples of a direct impact on small entities. 
If we do not receive comments that demonstrate that the rule causes 
small entities to incur direct costs, we may certify that this action 
does not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of 
small entities during the final rule.

    Dated: May 12, 2009.
Janet Napolitano,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E9-11551 Filed 5-15-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9111-14-P
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.