Changes in Computing Depreciation; Correction (IRS final

Official source: Federal Register (GovInfo) (https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2004-02-04/pdf/04-2296.pdf), retrieved 2026-10-03. U.S. Government work (17 U.S.C. § 105).

5272 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 23 / Wednesday, February 4, 2004 / Rules and Regulations

exclusions are rules that are clarifying, corrective, or procedural or that do not substantively change the effect of the regulations being amended. This rule is clarifying and procedural in nature and therefore falls under the exceptions. Consequently, no environmental consideration is necessary.

V. Regulatory Flexibility Act

The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (RFA) ⁴² generally requires a description and analysis of final rules that will have significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. The Commission is not required to make such an analysis if a rule would not have such an effect. The Commission certifies that this rule does not have such an impact on small entities.

VI. Document Availability

In addition to publishing the full text of this document in the Federal Register, the Commission provides all interested persons an opportunity to view and/or print the contents of this document via the Internet through the Commission’s Home Page ( http:// www.ferc.gov ) and in the Commission’s Public Reference Room during normal business hours (8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m. eastern time) at 888 First Street, NE., Room 2A, Washington, DC 20426.
From FERC’s home page on the Internet, this information is available in eLibrary. The full text of this document is available in eLibrary in PDF and Microsoft Word format for viewing, printing, and/or downloading. To access this document in eLibrary, type the docket number excluding the last three digits of this document in the docket number field.
User assistance is available for eLibrary and the FERC’s website during normal business hours from our Help line at (202) 502–8222 or the Public Reference Room at (202) 502–8371 Press 0, TTY (202) 502–8659. E-Mail the Public Reference Room at public.referenceroom@ferc.gov.

VII. Effective Date

This order makes no changes to the final rule, which became effective on October 23, 2003. Because no changes were made, the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 801 regarding Congressional review of final rules do not apply to this order.

42 5 U.S.C. 601–612.

By the Commission. Magalie R. Salas, Secretary.

[FR Doc. 04–2223 Filed 2–3–04; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717–01–P

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

21 CFR Part 1271

[Docket No. 97N–484R]

Human Cells, Tissues, and Cellular and Tissue-Based Products; Establishment Registration and Listing; Correction

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Interim final rule; correction

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is correcting an interim final rule that published in the Federal Register on January 27, 2004 (69 FR 3823). The interim final rule excepted human dura mater and human heart valve allografts, currently subject to application or notification requirements under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act from the scope of the definition of ‘‘human cells, tissues, or cellular or tissue-based products (HCT/P’s)’’ subject to the registration and listing requirements contained in 21 CFR Part 1271. That definition became effective on January 21, 2004. The interim final rule published with some errors. This document corrects those errors.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Paula S. McKeever, Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research (HFM–17), Food and Drug Administration, 1401 Rockville Pike, Rockville, MD 20852– 1448, 301–827–6210.

On page 3824, in the DATES section, by removing the sentence ‘‘The compliance date is March 29, 2004.’’
On page 3824, under SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION in the I. Background section, the phrase ‘‘FDA understands that many establishments may have reasonably expected FDA to delay the effective date of this provision again, since the donor suitability and GTP rules are not yet finalized’’ is revised to read:

‘‘FDA understands that many establishments may have reasonably expected FDA to delay the effective date

of this provision again, since the donor suitability and GTP rules are not yet finalized. Accordingly, FDA expects that affected firms will be in compliance with these requirements by March 29, 2004, and not on January 21, 2004, the effective date of the definition regulation.’’

Dated: January 29, 2004. William K. Hubbard, Associate Commissioner for Policy and Planning.

[FR Doc. 04–2312 Filed 1–30–04; 3:49 pm]

BILLING CODE 4160–01–S

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

Internal Revenue Service

26 CFR Part 1

[TD 9105]

RIN 1545–BC17

Changes in Computing Depreciation; Correction

AGENCY: Internal Revenue Service (IRS), Treasury.

ACTION: Correction to final and temporary regulations.

SUMMARY: This document corrects final and temporary regulations (TD 9105) that were published in the Federal Register on January 2, 2004 (69 FR 5). The document contains regulations relating to a change in computing depreciation or amortization as well as a change from a nondepreciable or nonamortizable asset to a depreciable or amortizable asset (or vice versa).

DATES: This correction is effective January 2, 2004.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In the FR Doc. 04–1733, appearing on page 3824 in the Federal Register of Tuesday, January 27, 2004, the following corrections are made:

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sara Logan, (202) 622–3110 (not a toll-free number).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

The final and temporary regulations (TD 9105) that is the subject of this correction is under section 446(e) of the Internal Revenue Code.

Need for Correction

As published, the final and temporary regulations (TD 9105) contain errors that may prove to be misleading and are in need of clarification.

Correction of Publication

Accordingly, the publication of the final and temporary regulations (TD 9105) that was the subject of FR. Doc. 03–31820, are corrected as follows:

On page 6, column 1, in the preamble, paragraph 3, line 3, the

VerDate jul<14>2003 15:18 Feb 03, 2004 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\04FER1.SGM 04FER1

Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 23 / Wednesday, February 4, 2004 / Rules and Regulations 5273

language ‘‘T.C.Memo. 2003–75, the Tax Court’’ is corrected to read ‘‘T.C. Memo. 2003–75, the Tax Court’’.

§ 1.167(e)–1T [Corrected]

I 2. On page 8, column 1, § 1.167(e)–1T, paragraph (e), last line in the paragraph, the language ‘‘expires on or before January 2, 2007’’ is corrected to read ‘‘expires on or before December 29, 2006’’.

§ 1.446–1T [Corrected]

I 3. On page 12, column 2, § 1.446–1T, paragraph (e)(4)(iii), line 3, the language ‘‘January 2, 2007.’’ is corrected to read ‘‘December 29, 2006.’’.

§ 1.1016–3T [Corrected]

I 4. On page 12, column 3, § 1.1016–3T, paragraph (j)(3), line 2, the language ‘‘expires on or before January 2, 2007.’’ is corrected to read ‘‘expires on or before December 29, 2006.’’.

Cynthia E. Grigsby, Acting Chief, Publications and Regulations Branch, Legal Processing Division, Associate Chief Counsel (Procedures and Administration).

[FR Doc. 04–2296 Filed 2–3–04; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4830–01–P

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

Parole Commission

28 CFR Part 2

Paroling, Recommitting, and Supervising Federal Prisoners: Prisoners Serving Sentences Under the United States and District of Columbia Codes

AGENCY: United States Parole Commission, Justice.

ACTION: Interim rule with request for comments.

SUMMARY: During 2004 the Parole Commission will carry out a pilot project to study the feasibility of conducting parole release hearings through video conferences between an examiner at the Commission’s office and prisoners at selected Bureau of Prisons’s institutions. In order to provide notice of this project, the Commission is promulgating an interim rule that provides that a parole release hearing may be conducted through a video conference with the prisoner. The Commission is also promulgating several conforming rule changes, including an amendment to the rule at 28 CFR 2.72 that eliminates the provision that an initial hearing for a District of Columbia offender is

conducted ‘‘in person’’ before a Commission hearing examiner.

DATES: Effective date: March 5, 2004. Comments must be received by May 4, 2004.

ADDRESSES: Send comments to Office of General Counsel, U.S. Parole Commission, 5550 Friendship Blvd., Chevy Chase, Maryland 20815.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Office of General Counsel, U.S. Parole Commission, 5550 Friendship Blvd., Chevy Chase, Maryland 20815, telephone (301) 492–5959. Questions about this publication are welcome, but inquiries concerning individual cases cannot be answered over the telephone.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Parole Commission’s hearing examiners travel to more than 60 locations of Federal correctional facilities to conduct parole release and revocation hearings. As the number of parole-eligible prisoners drops in the Federal prison system, the Commission is expending considerable resources in conducting hearings for a small number of prisoners at facilities that are difficult to reach. Therefore, the Commission is looking for ways to reduce travel costs and conserve the time of its hearing examiners. Conducting some parole release hearings through video conferences may be one procedure that will enhance the Commission’s ability to make the most efficient use of limited financial and staff resources without detracting from the prisoner’s opportunity for a fair parole hearing. Video conference technology has improved considerably since the Commission last considered holding hearings by video conference, and the Commission expects that the prisoner’s ability to effectively participate in the hearing will not be diminished by the use of this procedure.

The Commission is undertaking a pilot project with the Federal Bureau of Prisons to conduct some parole release hearings through a video conference between a hearing examiner at the Commission’s office in Chevy Chase, Maryland and the prisoner incarcerated in a Bureau facility. During 2004 the Commission intends to use 12 institutions for the project and expects that the number of hearings conducted under the project will not exceed 180 hearings, less than 10% of the parole release hearing caseload. The pilot project will only extend to parole release hearings (including rescission hearings) conducted in Bureau facilities. Under the project, the Commission will not use video conferencing for revocation hearings.

The Commission is promulgating an interim rule on this subject to give

notice of the pilot project and the variance from the agency’s traditional hearing practice, and is providing an extended opportunity for the public to comment on the use of video conferencing for parole hearings. The interim rule is added at 28 CFR 2.25. For most cases under the Commission’s jurisdiction, the Commission could proceed with the project without raising any question concerning compliance with the agency’s current rules. But the present rule at 28 CFR 2.72(a), which states that the prisoner appear ‘‘in person’’ before a Commission hearing examiner, could be interpreted to require the physical presence of the prisoner before the hearing examiner in order to conduct an initial hearing for a D.C. Code offender. Therefore, the Commission is amending this rule to eliminate the provision for an ‘‘in person’’ appearance. A corresponding change is made to the rule at 2.75(d). The Commission is also amending a list of rules for U.S. Code offenders that are implemented for D.C. Code offenders to include the interim rule at § 2.25.

Implementation

The amended rule will take effect March 5, 2004, and will apply to parole determination hearings for Federal and District of Columbia offenders.

Executive Order 12866

The U.S. Parole Commission has determined that this interim rule does not constitute a significant rule within the meaning of Executive Order 12866.

Executive Order 13132

This regulation will 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. Under Executive Order 13132, this rule does not have sufficient federalism implications requiring a Federalism Assessment.

Regulatory Flexibility Act

The interim rule will not have a significant economic impact upon a substantial number of small entities within the meaning of the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 605 (b), and is deemed by the Commission to be a rule of agency practice that does not substantially affect the rights or obligations of non-agency parties pursuant to section 804 (3) (c) of the Congressional Review Act.

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:31 Feb 03, 2004 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00017 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\04FER1.SGM 04FER1