Docstoc

Friday July 14_ 1995

Document Sample
Friday July 14_ 1995 Powered By Docstoc
					7–14–95                                Friday
Vol. 60   No. 135                      July 14, 1995
Pages 36203–36338




                    federal register
                                          Briefings on How To Use the Federal Register
                                          For information on briefing in Washington, DC, see
                                          announcement on the inside cover of this issue.




                                                                                               1
II                               Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 135 / Friday, July 14, 1995

                                                                          SUBSCRIPTIONS AND COPIES

                                                                          PUBLIC
                                                                            Subscriptions:
                                                                              Paper or fiche                                     202–512–1800
FEDERAL REGISTER Published daily, Monday through Friday,                      Assistance with public subscriptions                   512–1806
(not published on Saturdays, Sundays, or on official holidays), by          Online:
the Office of the Federal Register, National Archives and Records             Telnet swais.access.gpo.gov, login as newuser <enter>, no
Administration, Washington, DC 20408, under the Federal Register                password <enter>; or use a modem to call (202) 512–1661,
Act (49 Stat. 500, as amended; 44 U.S.C. Ch. 15) and the
regulations of the Administrative Committee of the Federal Register             login as swais, no password <enter>, at the second login as
(1 CFR Ch. I). Distribution is made only by the Superintendent of               newuser <enter>, no password <enter>.
Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, DC                    Assistance with online subscriptions               202–512–1530
20402.                                                                     Single copies/back copies:
The Federal Register provides a uniform system for making                     Paper or fiche                                         512–1800
available to the public regulations and legal notices issued by               Assistance with public single copies                   512–1803
Federal agencies. These include Presidential proclamations and
Executive Orders and Federal agency documents having general              FEDERAL AGENCIES
applicability and legal effect, documents required to be published          Subscriptions:
by act of Congress and other Federal agency documents of public
interest. Documents are on file for public inspection in the Office           Paper or fiche                                                523–5243
of the Federal Register the day before they are published, unless             Assistance with Federal agency subscriptions                  523–5243
earlier filing is requested by the issuing agency.
                                                                              For other telephone numbers, see the Reader Aids section
The seal of the National Archives and Records Administration                  at the end of this issue.
authenticates this issue of the Federal Register as the official serial
publication established under the Federal Register Act. 44 U.S.C.
1507 provides that the contents of the Federal Register shall be
judicially noticed.
The Federal Register is published in paper, 24x microfiche and as                          THE FEDERAL REGISTER
an online database through GPO Access, a service of the U.S.
Government Printing Office. The online database is updated by 6                     WHAT IT IS AND HOW TO USE IT
a.m. each day the Federal Register is published. The database               FOR:     Any person who uses the Federal Register and Code of Federal
includes both text and graphics from Volume 59, Number 1
(January 2, 1994) forward. It is available on a Wide Area                            Regulations.
Information Server (WAIS) through the Internet and via                      WHO:     The Office of the Federal Register.
asynchronous dial-in. The annual subscription fee for a single
workstation is $375. Six-month subscriptions are available for $200         WHAT:    Free public briefings (approximately 3 hours) to present:
and one month of access can be purchased for $35. Discounts are                      1. The regulatory process, with a focus on the Federal Register
available for multiple-workstation subscriptions. To subscribe,                         system and the public’s role in the development of
Internet users should telnet to swais.access.gpo.gov and login as                       regulations.
newuser (all lower case); no password is required. Dial-in users
should use communications software and modem to call (202)                           2. The relationship between the Federal Register and Code of
512–1661 and login as swais (all lower case); no password is                            Federal Regulations.
required; at the second login prompt, login as newuser (all lower                    3. The important elements of typical Federal Register
case); no password is required. Follow the instructions on the                          documents.
screen to register for a subscription for the Federal Register Online                4. An introduction to the finding aids of the FR/CFR system.
via GPO Access. For assistance, contact the GPO Access User
Support Team by sending Internet e-mail to                                  WHY:     To provide the public with access to information necessary to
help@eids05.eids.gpo.gov, or a fax to (202) 512–1262, or by calling                  research Federal agency regulations which directly affect them.
(202) 512–1530 between 7 a.m. and 5 p.m. Eastern time, Monday                        There will be no discussion of specific agency regulations.
through Friday, except Federal holidays.
The annual subscription price for the Federal Register paper
edition is $494, or $544 for a combined Federal Register, Federal
Register Index and List of CFR Sections Affected (LSA)                                           WASHINGTON, DC
subscription; the microfiche edition of the Federal Register                 WHEN:         July 27 at 9:00 am
including the Federal Register Index and LSA is $433. Six month              WHERE:        Office of the Federal Register Conference
subscriptions are available for one-half the annual rate. The charge                       Room, 800 North Capitol Street NW.,
for individual copies in paper form is $8.00 for each issue, or $8.00
for each group of pages as actually bound; or $1.50 for each issue                         Washington, DC (3 blocks north of Union
in microfiche form. All prices include regular domestic postage                            Station Metro)
and handling. International customers please add 25% for foreign             RESERVATIONS: 202–523–4538
handling. Remit check or money order, made payable to the
Superintendent of Documents, or charge to your GPO Deposit
Account, VISA or MasterCard. Mail to: New Orders,
Superintendent of Documents, P.O. Box 371954, Pittsburgh, PA
15250–7954.
There are no restrictions on the republication of material appearing
in the Federal Register.
How To Cite This Publication: Use the volume number and the
page number. Example: 60 FR 12345.




                                                                                                                                                       2
                                                                                                                      III

Contents                                                    Federal Register
                                                            Vol. 60, No. 135

                                                            Friday, July 14, 1995



Agricultural Marketing Service                              Customs Service
RULES                                                       PROPOSED RULES
Peaches grown in—                                           Copyright, trademark, and trade name protection;
  Washington, 36204–36205                                      disclosure of information, 36249–36252
Peanuts, domestically produced, 36205–36208
PROPOSED RULES                                              Defense Department
Milk marketing orders:                                      See Air Force Department
 Middle Atlantic, 36239–36249                               See Army Department
Agriculture Department
See Agricultural Marketing Service                          Drug Enforcement Administration
See Forest Service                                          RULES
                                                            Domestic Chemical Diversion Control Act of 1993;
Air Force Department                                            implementation
RULES                                                         List I chemicals; manufacturers, distributors, importers,
Privacy Act; implementation, 36224                                 and exporters; registration
NOTICES                                                         Correction, 36334
Environmental statements; availability, etc.:
  Andrews Air Force Base, MD; 18-hole golf course, 36266    Employment and Training Administration
                                                            NOTICES
Architectural and Transportation Barriers Compliance        Grants and cooperative agreements; availability, etc.:
    Board                                                     Job Training Partnership Act—
NOTICES                                                         Specialized/targeted dislocated worker services
Meetings:                                                           demonstration program; correction, 36334
 Americans with Disabilities Act Accessibility Guidelines
      Review Advisory Committee, 36258
                                                            Employment Standards Administration
Army Department                                             NOTICES
NOTICES                                                     Minimum wages for Federal and federally-assisted
Meetings:                                                      construction; general wage determination decisions,
 Science Board, 36266–36267                                    36310–36311

Blind or Severely Disabled, Committee for Purchase From     Energy Department
    People Who Are                                          See Energy Information Administration
See Committee for Purchase From People Who Are Blind or     See Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
    Severely Disabled                                       NOTICES
                                                            Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board recommendations:
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention                    Rocky Flats seismic and systems safety, 36267
NOTICES                                                     Grant and cooperative agreement awards:
Grants and cooperative agreements; availability, etc.:        Ecomat, Inc., 36267
  Teen pregnancy prevention; community coalition              Electric Power Research Institute, 36267–36269
      partnership programs, 36286–36290                       Hydrodyne, Inc., 36269
                                                              Northeastern University, 36269
Children and Families Administration                          Oxley Research, Inc., 36269–36270
NOTICES                                                       Watts, John D., 36270
Agency information collection activities under OMB          Meetings:
    review, 36283–36284                                       Environmental Management Site Specific Advisory
Grants and cooperative agreements; availability, etc.:            Board—
  Developmental disabilities—                                   Idaho National Engineering Laboratory, 36270–36271
    State councils and protection and advocacy programs;        Nevada Test Site, 36271
        State allotments, 36284–36286                           Pantex Plant, 36271–36272
Commerce Department
See Foreign-Trade Zones Board                               Energy Information Administration
                                                            NOTICES
See International Trade Administration
See National Institute of Standards and Technology          Agency information collection activities under OMB
See National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration            review, 36272–36273
See Patent and Trademark Office
                                                            Environmental Protection Agency
Committee for Purchase From People Who Are Blind or         RULES
   Severely Disabled                                        Air quality implementation plans; approval and
NOTICES                                                         promulgation; various States:
Procurement list; additions and deletions, 36265–36266        California, 36225–36230
IV                    Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 135 / Friday, July 14, 1995 / Contents


PROPOSED RULES                                                Old National Bancorp, 36281
Air quality implementation plans; approval and                Sarver, Robert G., et al., 36281–36282
    promulgation; various States:                             Wachovia Corp. et al., 36282
  California, 36252–36253
NOTICES                                                     Fish and Wildlife Service
Environmental statements; availability, etc.:               NOTICES
  Agency statements—                                        Environmental statements; availability, etc.:
    Comment availability, 36278–36279                         Incidental take permits—
    Weekly receipts, 36179                                      Washington County, UT; desert tortoises, 36305–36306
Meetings:
  Eastern Columbia Plateau sole source aquifier             Food and Drug Administration
      determination; peer review, 36279                     NOTICES
                                                            Blood establishments quality assurance; guideline
Executive Office of the President                               availability, 36290–36291
See Management and Budget Office                            Human drugs:
                                                              Patent extension; regulatory review period
Family Support Administration                                     determinations—
See Refugee Resettlement Office                                 RENORMAX, 36291–36292

Federal Communications Commission                           Foreign-Trade Zones Board
RULES                                                       NOTICES
Radio stations; table of assignments:                       Applications, hearings, determinations, etc.:
  Arizona, 36230–36231                                       New York, 36258–36259
  Oregon et al., 36230                                         Oneida Ltd.; tableware manufacturing facilities, 36259
  Virginia et al., 36231                                     Texas
NOTICES                                                        ABB Randall Corp.; gas plant modules, 36259–36260
Agency information collection activities under OMB
    review, 36280–36281                                     Forest Service
Rulemaking proceedings; petitions filed, granted, denied,   NOTICES
    etc., 36281                                             Environmental statements; availability, etc.:
                                                              Mt. Baker-Snoqualmie National Forest, WA, 36257–36258
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
NOTICES
                                                            Health and Human Services Department
Electric rate and corporate regulation filings:             See Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
  Southwest Regional Transmission Association et al.,       See Children and Families Administration
       36273                                                See Food and Drug Administration
Natural gas certificate filings:                            See National Institutes of Health
  Northwest Pipeline Corp. et al., 36273–36275              See Refugee Resettlement Office
                                                            RULES
Applications, hearings, determinations, etc.:
                                                            Grants:
  ANR Pipeline Co., 36275
                                                              Low-income home energy assistance program; block grant
  Central Hudson Gas & Electric Corp., 36275
                                                                  programs
  Cincinnati Gas & Electric Co., 36275
                                                                Correction, 36334
  Koch Gateway Pipeline Co., 36275                          NOTICES
  Niagara Mohawk Power Corp., 36275–36276                   Agency information collection activities under OMB
  Northern Border Pipeline Co., 36276                           review, 36282–36283
  Portland General Electric Co., 36276                      Federal claims; interest rates on overdue debts, 36283
  Puget Sound Power & Light Co., 36276                      Organization, functions, and authority delegations:
  Questar Pipeline Co., 36276–36277                           National Institutes of Health, 36299–36300
  Tennessee Gas Pipeline Co., 36277
  Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line Corp., 36277               Housing and Urban Development Department
  Williston Basin Interstate Pipeline Co., 36277–36278      NOTICES
  Wyoming Interstate Co., Ltd., 36278                       Grants and cooperative agreements; availability, etc.:
                                                              Facilities to assist homeless—
Federal Maritime Commission                                     Excess and surplus Federal property, 36300–36301
NOTICES                                                     Meetings:
Casualty and nonperformance certificates:                     Fair housing initiatives program, 36301
  Society Expeditions, Inc., et al., 36281                  Multifamily project mortgage auction; bid packages
                                                                availability, 36336–36338
Federal Railroad Administration                             Organization, functions, and authority delegations:
NOTICES                                                       Multifamily Housing Directors for local field offices;
Exemption petitions; etc.:                                         secondary financing, 36301
  Union Pacific Railroad, 36328
                                                            Inter-American Foundation
Federal Reserve System                                      NOTICES
NOTICES                                                     Meetings; Sunshine Act, 36333
Meetings; Sunshine Act, 36333
Applications, hearings, determinations, etc.:               Interior Department
 Great Southern Bancorp, 36281                              See Fish and Wildlife Service
                       Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 135 / Friday, July 14, 1995 / Contents                              V


See Land Management Bureau                                    PROPOSED RULES
See National Park Service                                     Consumer information:
See Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement Office           Uniform tire quality grading standards
                                                                  Correction, 36255–36256
International Trade Administration                            Motor vehicle safety standards:
NOTICES
                                                                Lamps, Reflective Devices, and Associated Equipment
Antidumping:                                                        Negotiated Rulemaking Committee—
  Fishnetting of man-made fibers from—                            Meetings, 36253–36255
                                                              NOTICES
    Japan, 36261–36262
                                                              Motor vehicle safety standards; exemption petitions, etc.:
Antidumping and countervailing duties:
                                                               Cantab Motors, Ltd., 36328–36329
  Administrative review requests, 36260–36261
Countervailing duties:                                        National Institute of Standards and Technology
  Frozen concentrated orange juice from—                      NOTICES
    Brazil, 36262                                             Meetings:
Export trade certificates of review, 36262–36263               Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Awards—
                                                                 Panel of Judges, 36263
Interstate Commerce Commission
NOTICES                                                       National Institutes of Health
Railroad operation, acquisition, construction, etc.:          NOTICES
  East Penn Railways, Inc., 36306–36307                       Meetings:
  Nolan, John C., 36307                                        National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, 36292
  Wisconsin & Southern Railroad Co., 36307                     National Institute of Mental Health, 36292
Railroad services abandonment:
  Consolidated Rail Corp., 36307–36308                        National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
  CSX Transportation, Inc., 36308–36309                       RULES
                                                              Fishery conservation and management:
Justice Department                                              Gulf of Alaska groundfish, 36236–36237
See Drug Enforcement Administration                             Gulf of Alaska groundfish; correction, 36237
NOTICES
Pollution control; consent judgments:                         National Park Service
  American National Can Co. et al., 36309                     RULES
  Olin Corp., 36309–36310                                     Special regulations:
  Parker, Ike, Jr., et al., 36310                               Appalachian National Scenic Trail, PA; hang gliding
                                                                    activity, 36224–36225
                                                              NOTICES
Labor Department                                              Meetings:
See Employment and Training Administration                     Maine Acadian Culture Preservation Commission, 36306
See Employment Standards Administration
                                                              Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Land Management Bureau                                        NOTICES
NOTICES                                                       Environmental statements; availability, etc.:
Environmental statements; availability, etc.:                   Nebraska Public Power District, 36312–36313
  Mesquite Regional Class III Landfill, CA, 36301–36302       Applications, hearings, determinations, etc.:
Realty actions; sales, leases, etc.:                            Indiana Michigan Power Co., 36313–36314
  Arizona, 36302–36303                                          Virginia Electric & Power Co., 36314–36316
  California, 36303
Resource management plans, etc.:                              Office of Management and Budget
  Eugene District, OR, 36303–36305                            See Management and Budget Office

Management and Budget Office                                  Patent and Trademark Office
                                                              NOTICES
NOTICES
Equipment capitalization threshold waivers for universities   Utility requirement compliance guidelines, 36263–36265
    and non-profit organizations (Circulars A–21 and A–       Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation
    122), 36316                                               RULES
                                                              Multiemployer and single-employer plans:
National Aeronautics and Space Administration                  Late premium payments and employer liability
NOTICES                                                             underpayments and overpayments; interest rates,
Meetings:                                                           36208–36210
 Advisory Council, 36311                                       Valuation of plan benefits, etc.—
 Procurement policies and practices; open forum, 36311–          Interest rates, etc., 36212–36213
      36312                                                   Multiemployer plans:
                                                               Withdrawal liability; notice and collection; interest rates,
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration                      36210–36212
RULES                                                         NOTICES
Motor vehicle theft prevention standard:                      Multiemployer plans:
 High theft lines for 1996 model year; listing, 36231–         Bond/escrow requirement; exemption requests—
      36235                                                      Associated Wholesale Grocers, Inc., 36316–36318
VI                    Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 135 / Friday, July 14, 1995 / Contents


Personnel Management Office                                  Social Security Administration
RULES                                                        NOTICES
Prevailing rate systems, 36203–36204                         Agency information collection activities under OMB
PROPOSED RULES                                                   review, 36326–36327
Prevailing rate systems                                      Social security acquiescence rulings:
  Technical corrections and clarifications, 36238–36239        Rescissions—
NOTICES                                                          Aubrey v. Richardson et al., 36327–36328
Agency information collection activities under OMB
   review, 36316                                             Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement Office
                                                             RULES
                                                             Permanent program and abandoned mine land reclamation
Public Health Service
                                                                 plan submissions:
See Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
                                                               North Dakota, 36213–36224
See Food and Drug Administration
See National Institutes of Health
                                                             Transportation Department
                                                             See Federal Railroad Administration
Refugee Resettlement Office                                  See National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
NOTICES
Grants and cooperative agreements; availability, etc.:       Treasury Department
  Refugee resettlement program—                              See Customs Service
    Refugee social services and former political prisoners   NOTICES
        from Vietnam, 36292–36299                            Agency information collection activities under OMB
                                                                review, 36329–36332

Securities and Exchange Commission
NOTICES                                                      Separate Parts In This Issue
Meetings; Sunshine Act, 36333
Self-regulatory organizations; proposed rule changes:        Part II
  Depository Trust Co., 36318–36320                          Department of Housing and Urban Development, 36336–
  Options Clearing Corp., 36320–36321                            36338
Applications, hearings, determinations, etc.:
  Paxson Communications Corp., 36321
  Public utility holding company filings, 36321–36324        Reader Aids
                                                             Additional information, including a list of public laws,
Small Business Administration                                telephone numbers, and finding aids, appears in the Reader
NOTICES                                                      Aids section at the end of this issue.
Disaster loan areas:
  Florida, 36324–36325
  Missouri, 36325                                            Electronic Bulletin Board
  Ohio, 36325                                                Free Electronic Bulletin Board service for Public Law
Applications, hearings, determinations, etc.:                numbers, Federal Register finding aids, and a list of
  Creditanstalt Small Business Investment Corp., 36325–      documents on public inspection is available on 202–275–
      36326                                                  1538 or 275–0920.
                                    Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 135 / Friday, July 14, 1995 / Contents   VII

CFR PARTS AFFECTED IN THIS ISSUE

A cumulative list of the parts affected this month can be found in the
Reader Aids section at the end of this issue.

5 CFR
532 (3 documents) .........36203,
                           36204
Proposed Rules:
532...................................36238
7 CFR
921...................................36204
998...................................36205
Proposed Rules:
1004.................................36239
19 CFR
Proposed Rules:
133...................................36249
21 CFR
1309.................................36334
1313.................................36334
1316.................................36334
29 CFR
2610.................................36208
2619.................................36210
2622.................................36208
2676.................................36210
2644.................................36212
30 CFR
934...................................36213
32 CFR
806b.................................36224
36 CFR
7.......................................36224
40 CFR
52 (2 documents) ...........36225,
                                        36227
Proposed Rules:
52.....................................36252
45 CFR
96.....................................36334
47 CFR
73 (3 documents) ...........36230,
                                       36231
49 CFR
541...................................36231
Proposed Rules:
571...................................36253
575...................................36255
50 CFR
672 (4 documents) .........36236,
                                      36237
                                                                                                                                    36203

Rules and Regulations                                                                         Federal Register
                                                                                              Vol. 60, No. 135

                                                                                              Friday, July 14, 1995



This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER            because they will affect only Federal         surveys in the area, and is willing to
contains regulatory documents having general    agencies and employees.                       assume responsibility as lead agency for
applicability and legal effect, most of which                                                 the next full-scale wage survey in
are keyed to and codified in the Code of        List of Subjects in 5 CFR Part 532
                                                                                              January 1996.
Federal Regulations, which is published under     Administrative practice and
50 titles pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 1510.           procedure, Freedom of information,            EFFECTIVE DATE:    August 14, 1995.
The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by      Government employees, Reporting and
                                                recordkeeping requirements, Wages.            FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
the Superintendent of Documents. Prices of
new books are listed in the first FEDERAL       Office of Personnel Management.               Angela Graham Humes, (202) 606–2848.
REGISTER issue of each week.                    Lorraine A. Green,                            SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:     On
                                                Deputy Director.                              February 1, 1995, OPM published a
OFFICE OF PERSONNEL                               Accordingly, OPM is amending 5 CFR          proposed rule (60 FR 6041) to transfer
MANAGEMENT                                      part 532 as follows:                          lead agency responsibility for the New
                                                                                              York, New York, FWS wage area from
5 CFR Part 532                                  PART 532—PREVAILING RATE                      the Department of Defense to the
                                                SYSTEMS                                       Department of Veterans Affairs. The
RIN 3206–AG56
                                                  1. The authority citation for part 532      proposed rule provided a 30-day period
Prevailing Rate Systems; Change of              continues to read as follows:                 for public comment. The only comment
Lead Agency Responsibility for                                                                OPM received supported the proposed
                                                  Authority: 5 U.S.C. 5343, 5346; § 532.707
Birmingham, Alabama, Wage Area for              also issued under 5 U.S.C. 552.
                                                                                              rule. Therefore, the proposed rule is
Pay-Setting Purposes                                                                          being adopted as a final rule.
                                                Appendix A to Subpart B [Amended]
AGENCY:  Office of Personnel                                                                  Regulatory Flexibility Act
                                                   2. Appendix A to subpart B is
Management.                                     amended for Birmingham, Alabama, by
ACTION: Final rule.                                                                              I certify that these regulations will not
                                                revising the lead agency listing from
                                                                                              have a significant economic impact on
                                                ‘‘VA’’ to ‘‘DoD.’’
SUMMARY: The Office of Personnel                                                              a substantial number of small entities
Management (OPM) is issuing a final             [FR Doc. 95–17275 Filed 7–13–95; 8:45 am]     because they will affect only Federal
rule to transfer lead agency                    BILLING CODE 6325–01–M                        agencies and employees.
responsibility for the Birmingham,
Alabama, Federal Wage System (FWS)                                                            List of Subjects in 5 CFR Part 532
wage area from the Department of                5 CFR Part 532
Veterans Affairs (VA) to the Department                                                         Administrative practice and
                                                RIN 3206–AG52
of Defense (DOD) for pay-setting                                                              procedure, Freedom of information,
purposes. This change would recognize           Prevailing Rate Systems; Change of            Government employees, Reporting and
the fact that DOD is now the major              Lead Agency Responsibility for New            recordkeeping requirements, Wages.
employer of FWS employees in the                York, New York, Wage Area for Pay-            Office of Personnel Management.
Birmingham, Alabama, FWS wage area              Setting Purposes
and has the capability to assume the                                                          Lorraine A. Green,
responsibility as lead agency for the           AGENCY:  Office of Personnel
                                                                                              Deputy Director.
next full-scale survey in January 1996.         Management.
                                                ACTION: Final rule.                             Accordingly, OPM is amending 5 CFR
EFFECTIVE DATE: August 14, 1995.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
                                                                                              part 532 as follows:
                                                SUMMARY:   The Office of Personnel
Angela Graham Humes, (202) 606–2848.            Management (OPM) is issuing a final
                                                rule to transfer lead agency                  PART 532—PREVAILING RATE
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On
                                                responsibility for the New York, New          SYSTEMS
February 1, 1995, OPM published a
proposed rule (60 FR 6041) to transfer          York, Federal Wage System (FWS) wage
lead agency responsibility for the              area from the Department of Defense             1. The authority citation for part 532
Birmingham, Alabama, FWS wage area              (DOD) to the Department of Veterans           continues to read as follows:
from the Department of Veterans Affairs         Affairs (VA) for pay-setting purposes.          Authority: 5 U.S.C. 5343, 5346; § 532.707
to the Department of Defense. The               FWS employment at Picatinny Arsenal,          also issued under 5 U.S.C. 552.
proposed rule provided a 30-day period          as well as employment within the entire
for public comment. The only comment            wage area, has declined drastically since     Appendix A to Subpart B [Amended]
OPM received supported the proposed             1978. Further, the Picatinny Arsenal is
rule. Therefore, the proposed rule is           slated for realignment in 1997 under the         2. Appendix A to subpart B is
being adopted as a final rule.                  recommendations of the Defense Base           amended for New York, New York, by
                                                Closure and Realignment Commission.           revising the lead agency listing from
Regulatory Flexibility Act                      The VA Medical Center is now the              ‘‘DoD’’ to ‘‘VA.’’
   I certify that these regulations will not    largest single employer of FWS
have a significant economic impact on           employees in the wage area, has the           [FR Doc. 95–17276 Filed 7–13–95; 8:45 am]
a substantial number of small entities          resources to carry out local wage             BILLING CODE 6325–01–M
36204           Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 135 / Friday, July 14, 1995 / Rules and Regulations

5 CFR Part 532                                 DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE                    the order, any provision of the order, or
                                                                                            any obligation imposed in connection
RIN 3206–AG74
                                               Agricultural Marketing Service               with the order is not in accordance with
                                                                                            law and request a modification of the
                                               7 CFR Part 921                               order or to be exempted therefrom. A
Prevailing Rate Systems; Abolishment
of Clinton, NY, Nonappropriated Fund           [Docket No. FV94–921–1FR]                    handler is afforded the opportunity for
Wage Area                                                                                   a hearing of the petition. After the
                                               Termination of Marketing Order 921;          hearing the Secretary would rule on the
AGENCY:Office of Personnel                     Fresh Peaches Grown in Designated            petition. The Act provides that the
Management.                                    Counties in Washington                       district court of the United States in any
                                                                                            district in which the handler is an
ACTION:   Final rule.                          AGENCY:  Agricultural Marketing Service,     inhabitant, or has a principal place of
                                               USDA.                                        business, has jurisdiction in equity to
SUMMARY: The Office of Personnel               ACTION: Termination order.                   review the Secretary’s ruling on the
Management is issuing a final rule to                                                       petition, provided a bill in equity is
abolish the Clinton, NY,                       SUMMARY:   This document terminates the      filed not later than 20 days after date of
nonappropriated fund (NAF) Federal             Federal marketing order for peaches          the entry of the ruling.
                                               grown in designated counties in                 Pursuant to requirements set forth in
Wage System wage area and add Clinton
                                               Washington and the rules and                 the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA), the
County, NY, as an area of application to
                                               regulations issued thereunder. The           Administrator of the Agricultural
the Oneida, NY, NAF wage area for              Secretary of Agriculture has determined      Marketing Service (AMS) has
paysetting purposes.                           that the marketing order no longer tends     considered the economic impact of this
EFFECTIVE DATE:   August 14, 1995.             to effectuate the declared policy of the     action on small entities.
                                               Agricultural Marketing Agreement Act            The purpose of the RFA is to fit
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
                                               of 1937 (Act). Results of a producer         regulatory actions to the scale of
Paul Shields, (202) 606–2848.                  referendum, held to determine the level      business subject to such actions in order
                                               of support for the marketing order,          that small businesses will not be unduly
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:     On March
                                               indicate that continuance is favored by      or disproportionately burdened.
30, 1995, the Office of Personnel
                                               only 14 percent of the producers voting,     Marketing orders issued pursuant to the
Management (OPM) published an                  representing 1.5 percent of the volume       Act, and rules issued thereunder, are
interim rule to abolish the Clinton, NY,       voted. The vote demonstrates a lack of       unique in that they are brought about
nonappropriated fund (NAF) Federal             producer support necessary to                through group action of essentially
Wage System wage area and add Clinton          accomplish the objectives of the Act.        small entities acting on their own
County, NY, as an area of application to                                                    behalf. Thus, both statutes have small
                                               EFFECTIVE DATE: August 14, 1995.
the Oneida, NY, NAF wage area for pay-                                                      entity orientation and compatibility.
                                               FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
setting purposes. The interim rule                                                             There are approximately 65
provided a 30-day period for public            Mark J. Kreaggor, Marketing Order            Washington peach handlers who were
                                               Administration Branch, Fruit and             subject to regulation under the
comment. OPM received no comments
                                               Vegetable Division, AMS, USDA, P.O.          marketing order and approximately 260
during the comment period. Therefore,
                                               Box 96456, Room 2525–S, Washington,          producers within the production area.
the interim rule is being adopted as a         DC 20090–6456, telephone (202) 720–
final rule.                                                                                 Small agricultural producers have been
                                               1755, or Robert Curry, Northwest             defined by the Small Business
Regulatory Flexibility Act                     Marketing Field Office, 1220 SW Third        Administration [13 CFR 121.601] as
                                               Avenue, Room 369, Portland, Oregon           those having annual receipts of less than
   I certify that these regulations will not   97204, telephone (503) 326–2724.             $500,000, and small agricultural service
have a significant economic impact on          SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This rule         firms are defined as those whose annual
a substantial number of small entities         is governed by the provisions of section     receipts are less than $5,000,000. The
because they affect only Federal               608c(16)(A) of the Agricultural              majority of the Washington peach
agencies and employees.                        Marketing Agreement Act of 1937, as          handlers and producers may be
List of Subjects in 5 CFR Part 532             amended [7 U.S.C. 601–674], hereinafter      classified as small entities.
                                               referred to as the Act.                         Prior to its suspension on March 31,
  Administrative practice and                     The Department of Agriculture             1993, Marketing Order No. 921 had been
procedure, Freedom of information,             (Department) is issuing this rule in         in effect since 1960. The marketing
Government employees, Reporting and            conformance with Executive Order             order provided for the establishment of
recordkeeping requirements, Wages.             12866.                                       grade, size, quality, maturity, pack,
                                                  This termination rule has been            container and inspection requirements.
  Accordingly, under the authority of 5        reviewed under Executive Order 12778,        In addition, the order authorized
U.S.C. 5343, the interim rule amending         Civil Justice Reform. This rule is not       marketing research and development
5 CFR part 532 published on March 30,          intended to have retroactive effect. This    projects.
1995 (60 FR 16363), is adopted as final        termination order will not preempt any          The Washington Fresh Peach
without any changes.                           state or local laws, regulations, or         Marketing Committee (committee) met
Office of Personnel Management.                policies, unless they present an             on May 12, 1992, and by an 11 to 1 vote
                                               irreconcilable conflict with this rule.      recommended that the marketing order
Lorraine A. Green,
                                                  The Act provides that administrative      be suspended at the end of the 1992–93
Deputy Director.                               proceedings must be exhausted before         fiscal period. The recommendation was
[FR Doc. 95–17277 Filed 7–13–95; 8:45 am]      parties may file suit in court. Under        made to eliminate the continued
BILLING CODE 6325–01–M                         section 608c(15)(A) of the Act, any          expense of administering the order.
                                               handler subject to an order may file         Since that time, handling requirements
                                               with the Secretary a petition stating that   similar to those under the Federal order
              Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 135 / Friday, July 14, 1995 / Rules and Regulations                          36205

have been promulgated through the               Dated: July 10, 1995.                     Specialist, Marketing Order
Washington State Department of                Patricia Jensen,                            Administration Branch, Fruit and
Agriculture (State) for intrastate            Acting Assistant Secretary, Marketing and   Vegetable Division, AMS, USDA, P.O.
shipments of fresh peaches. Thus, the         Regulatory Programs.                        Box 96456, room 2523–S, Washington,
committee determined that continued           [FR Doc. 95–17281 Filed 7–13–95; 8:45 am]   D.C. 20090–6456; telephone: (202) 720–
funding through the Federal order was         BILLING CODE 3410–02–P                      2170, or FAX: (202) 720–5698.
an unnecessary expense.                                                                   SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This rule
   On January 5, 1993, the Department                                                     is issued under Marketing Agreement
issued an order published in the              7 CFR Part 998                              No. 146 (7 CFR part 998) regulating the
Federal Register [58 FR 220, January 5,                                                   quality of domestically produced
1993] suspending all of the provisions        [Docket No. FV95–998–2IFR]
                                                                                          peanuts, hereinafter referred to as the
of Marketing Order No. 921 effective                                                      agreement. This agreement is effective
                                              Amendment of Requirements
March 31, 1993. The action also                                                           under the Agricultural Marketing
                                              Established Under Marketing
directed that a referendum be conducted                                                   Agreement Act of 1937, as amended (7
                                              Agreement No. 146 Regulating the
during the period November 13 through                                                     U.S.C. 601–674), hereinafter referred to
                                              Quality of Domestically Produced
December 10, 1993, to determine if                                                        as the ‘‘Act.’’
                                              Peanuts for 1995 and Subsequent Crop
affected producers favored continuation                                                      The Department of Agriculture
                                              Years
of the order. The referendum order                                                        (Department) is issuing this rule in
provided that the Secretary would             AGENCY:  Agricultural Marketing Service,    conformance with Executive Order
consider terminating the order if less        USDA.                                       12866.
than two-thirds of the number of              ACTION: Interim final rule with request        This rule has been reviewed under
producers voting, and producers of less       for comments.                               Executive Order 12778, Civil Justice
than two-thirds of the volume of
                                                                                          Reform. This rule is not intended to
peaches represented in the referendum,        SUMMARY:   This rule amends for the 1995    have retroactive effect. This rule will
favored continuance.                          peanut crop and subsequent crop years
   Of the 260 ballots mailed to producers                                                 not preempt any State or local laws,
                                              several provisions of the incoming,         regulations, or policies, unless they
of record, 21 valid votes were cast,          outgoing, and indemnification
representing approximately 8 percent of                                                   present an irreconcilable conflict with
                                              regulations established under Marketing     this rule. There are no administrative
producers. The results of the                 Agreement No. 146. The changes are
referendum indicate that only 14                                                          procedures which must be exhausted
                                              intended to recognize industry              prior to any judicial challenge to the
percent of the growers who voted,             operating practices and reduce the
representing 1.5 percent of the volume                                                    provisions of this rule.
                                              burden on handlers without                     Pursuant to the requirements set forth
voted, favored continuance of the order.      compromising the agreement’s
Thus, the vote failed to meet the                                                         in the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA),
                                              objective. The objective of the             the Administrator of the Agricultural
approval criteria by both number and          agreement is to ensure that only
volume.                                                                                   Marketing Service (AMS) has
                                              wholesome peanuts enter edible market       considered the economic impact of this
   Given the level of producer                channels. This rule was unanimously
participation, as well as the                                                             action on small entities.
                                              recommended by the Peanut                      The purpose of the RFA is to fit
demonstrated lack of producer support         Administrative Committee (Committee),
for the order, these results are a reliable                                               regulatory actions to the scale of
                                              the administrative agency for this          business subject to such actions in order
indicator of industry sentiment, and          wholesomeness assurance program.
clearly demonstrate that a significant                                                    that small businesses will not be unduly
                                              DATES: Effective July 14, 1995.             or disproportionately burdened.
portion of the producers do not favor
continuation of the order.                    Comments received by August 14, 1995           There are about 75 handlers of
   Therefore, based on the foregoing          will be considered prior to issuance of     peanuts subject to regulation under the
considerations, pursuant to section           any final rule.                             agreement, and about 47,000 peanut
608c(16)(A) of the Act and section            ADDRESSES: Interested persons are           producers in the 16 States covered
9231.64 of the order, it is found that        invited to submit written comments          under the program. Small agricultural
Marketing Order No. 921, covering             concerning this interim final rule.         service firms are defined by the Small
peaches grown in designated counties in       Comments must be sent in triplicate to      Business Administration (13 CFR
Washington, does not tend to effectuate       the Docket Clerk, Marketing Order           121.601) as those having annual receipts
the declared policy of the Act and is         Administrative Branch, F&V, AMS,            of less than $5,000,000, and small
hereby terminated.                            USDA, room 2523–S, P.O. Box 96456,          agricultural producers have been
   Section 608c(16)(A) of the Act             Washington, D.C. 20090–6456; FAX:           defined as those having annual receipts
requires the Secretary to notify Congress     (202) 720–5698. Comments should             of less than $500,000. Some of the
60 days in advance of the termination of      reference the docket number, the date,      handlers signatory to the agreement are
a Federal marketing order. Congress was       and page number of this issue of the        small entities, and a majority of the
so notified on March 1, 1994.                 Federal Register. Comments received         producers may be classified as small
                                              will be made available for public           entities.
List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 921
                                              inspection in the Office of the Docket         In 1994, the reported U.S. production,
  Marketing agreements, Peaches,              Clerk during regular business hours.        mostly covered under the agreement,
Reporting and recordkeeping                   FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:            was approximately 4.25 billion pounds
requirements.                                 William G. Pimental, Marketing              of peanuts, a 25 percent increase from
                                              Specialist, Southeast Marketing Field       the short 1993 crop. The preliminary
PART 921—[REMOVED]
                                              Office, Fruit and Vegetable Division,       1994 peanut crop value is $1.23 billion,
  For the reasons set forth in the            AMS, USDA, P.O. Box 2276, Winter            up 19 percent from the 1993 crop value.
preamble, and under the authority of 7        Haven, Florida 33883–2276; telephone:          The objective of the agreement, in
U.S.C. 601–674, 7 CFR Part 921 is             (941) 299–4770, or FAX: (941) 299–          place since 1965, is to ensure that only
removed.                                      5169; or Jim Wendland, Marketing            wholesome peanuts enter edible market
36206         Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 135 / Friday, July 14, 1995 / Rules and Regulations

channels. About 70 percent of U.S.          decay and which are free from visible        lot identified and certified as meeting
shellers (handlers), handling               Aspergillus flavus.                          quality requirements, but such transfer
approximately 95 percent of the crop,          The recommendation is not being           shall be only to points within the same
have voluntarily signed the agreement.      adopted by the Department. The current       production area and ownership shall
Under the agreement, farmers’ stock         standards are rules of general               have been retained by the handler.
peanuts with visible Aspergillus flavus     applicability which apply to all peanuts     Upon any transferred peanuts being
mold (the principal source of aflatoxin)    without regard to any contractual            disposed of for human consumption,
are required to be diverted to non-edible   agreements between individuals. Buyers       they shall meet all the requirements
uses. Each lot of milled peanuts must be    and sellers are free to agree to a variety   applicable to such peanuts’’. Currently,
sampled and the samples chemically          of contractual terms. However, such          § 998.200 (h) Peanuts failing quality
analyzed for aflatoxin contamination.       agreements should not have the effect of     requirements reads ‘‘(1) Handlers may
Signatory handlers who comply with          determining whether peanuts are              sell to or contract with other handlers,
these requirements may be eligible for      Segregation 1 or 2 as those terms are        for further handling, shelled peanuts
indemnification of losses for individual    defined in the regulations.                  (which originated from Segregation 1
lots of their peanuts which test positive      Currently, § 998.100 (i) Shelled          peanuts) that fail to meet the
to aflatoxin. Indemnification and           peanuts reads ‘‘Handlers may acquire         requirements for disposition to human
administrative costs are paid by            from other handlers, for remilling and       consumption outlets heretofore
assessments levied on handlers              subsequent disposition to human              specified in paragraph (a) of this
signatory to the agreement.                 consumption outlets, shelled peanuts         section. Lots of peanuts disposed of in
   The Committee, which is composed of      (which originated from ‘‘Segregation 1       this manner must be accompanied by a
producers and handlers of peanuts,          peanuts’’) that fail to meet the             valid grade inspection certificate, and
meets to review the rules and               requirements specified for human             must be positive lot identified.
regulations effective on a continuous       consumption in paragraph (a) of the          Transactions made in this manner shall
basis for peanuts regulated under the       Outgoing Quality Regulation                  be reported to the Committee by both
agreement. Committee meetings are           (§ 998.200). Any lot of such peanuts         the seller and the buyer on a form
open to the public, and interested          must be accompanied by a valid               provided by the Committee. Any such
                                            inspection certificate for the grade         peanuts acquired by handlers pursuant
persons may express their views at these
                                            factors and must be positive lot             to paragraph (i) of the Incoming Quality
meetings. The Department reviews
                                            identified . . . Peanuts acquired            Regulation (§ 998.100) shall be held and
Committee recommendations and
                                            pursuant to this paragraph shall be held     milled separate and apart from other
information, as well as information from
                                            and milled separate and apart from           receipts or acquisitions of the receiving
other sources, and determines whether
                                            other receipts or acquisitions of the        handler and further disposition shall be
modification, suspension, or
                                            receiving handler, and further               regulated by the requirements specified
termination of the rules and regulations
                                            disposition shall be regulated by            heretofore or pursuant to paragraph
would tend to effectuate the declared
                                            paragraph (h)(1) of the Outgoing Quality     (h)(3) hereinafter’’.
policy of the Act.
                                            Regulation (§ 998.200)’’.                       This high degree of control is no
   The Committee met on March 22 and           This rule revises paragraph (i) of        longer needed. As stated earlier, the
23, 1995, and unanimously                   § 998.100 to allow movement of shelled       peanut industry has changed
recommended several changes to              peanuts, which originated from               dramatically from many small locally
incoming, outgoing, and                     Segregation 1 peanuts, without               owned and operated plants to large or
indemnification regulations for 1995        inspection and positive lot                  multinational corporations with
and subsequent crop peanuts.                identification (PLI), from one handler to    operations located throughout the
   The Committee recommended                another and does not require the             different production areas in the United
amending § 998.100 Incoming quality         receiving handler to hold and mill such      States. Relaxing the regulation will
regulation by revising paragraph (c) to     peanuts separate from other receipts and     allow freer movement of peanuts, more
provide that commercially acquired lots     acquisitions. The high degree of control     efficient use of facilities, and reduced
be designated as Segregation 2 peanuts      currently in place for such transactions     numbers of inspections, resulting in
(rather than Segregation 1) by the          is no longer needed because the peanut       lower costs and a more competitive
Federal or Federal-State Inspection         industry has changed from small locally      industry, without compromising the
Service (Inspection Service) when           owned plants to large corporations. The      program’s objective.
exceeding .50 percent freeze damage         Committee believes that relaxing the            Under paragraph (h) of § 998.200,
and/or 14.49 percent loose shelled          requirements will enable handlers to         peanuts failing quality requirements for
kernels (LSK’s) when the Inspection         reduce processing and storage costs and      disposition to human consumption
Service is notified that a contract         increase movement of peanuts without         outlets can be sent to blanchers for
between the producer and the handler        jeopardizing the objective of the            reconditioning, to domestic crushers, or
specifies these more restrictive            agreement.                                   exported (when peanuts meet
tolerances.                                    Section 998.200 Outgoing quality          fragmented requirements). In § 998.200
   Currently, § 998.100 (b) defines         regulation is being amended by revising      paragraph (h)(2) reads ‘‘Handlers may
Segregation 1 peanuts as farmers’ stock     paragraphs (f) and (h)(1) to allow           blanch or cause to have blanched
peanuts with not more than 2 percent        handlers to transfer peanuts to any          positive lot identified shelled peanuts
damaged kernels nor more than 1.00          handler or to domestic commercial            (which originated from Segregation 1
percent concealed damage caused by          storage without PLI and certification of     peanuts) that fail to meet the
rancidity, mold, or decay and which are     meeting quality requirements when it         requirements of paragraph (a) of this
free from visible Aspergillus flavus.       leaves the first facility. Currently,        section because of excessive damage,
Section 998.100 (c) defines Segregation     § 998.200 (f) Inter-plant transfer reads     minor defects, moisture, or foreign
2 peanuts as farmers’ stock peanuts with    ‘‘Any handler may transfer peanuts from      material or are positive as to aflatoxin:
more than 2 percent damaged kernels or      one plant owned by him to another of         Provided, That such lots of peanuts
more than 1.00 percent concealed            his plants or to commercial storage,         contain not in excess of 8 percent
damage caused by rancidity, mold, or        without having such peanuts positive         damage and minor defects combined or
               Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 135 / Friday, July 14, 1995 / Rules and Regulations                           36207

2 percent foreign material. Prior to          excess of 10 percent total unshelled         Segregation 1 peanuts. In those cases,
movement of such peanuts to a                 peanuts and damaged kernels or 10            the quantity of former Segregation 1
blancher, handlers shall report to the        percent foreign material to Committee        peanuts which were commingled will
Committee, on a form furnished by the         approved blanchers, rather than              be exempt from program assessments.
Committee, and receive authorization          reworking (blanching) at their own              Further, this action amends § 998.300
from the Committee for movement and           facilities. Also, paragraph (h)(4) of        Terms and conditions of
blanching of each such lot. Lots of           § 998.200 is being similarly relaxed to      indemnification by establishing reduced
peanuts which are moved under these           allow individual handlers to move            indemnification values specified in
provisions must be accompanied by a           failing peanuts to Committee approved        paragraphs (h), (i), and (x); and revising
valid grade inspection certificate and        remillers for remilling shelled peanuts      paragraph (z) by specifying a reduced
the title shall be retained by the handler    containing not in excess of 10 percent       ceiling and/or number of claims to
until the peanuts are blanched and            total unshelled peanuts and damaged          ‘‘trigger’’ payments. The
certified by an inspector of the Federal      kernels or 10 percent fall through or 10     indemnification value of rejects and
or Federal-State Inspection Service as        percent foreign material.                    entire lots is reduced to 35 cents per
meeting the requirements for disposal            However, before such peanuts go to        pound from the current 45 cents. This
into human consumption outlets. To be         human consumption outlets, the               action will reduce the problem
eligible for disposal into human              peanuts have to be certified as meeting      encountered by the Committee and the
consumption outlets, such peanuts after       human consumption outlet                     Department on 1993 crop
blanching, must meet specifications for       requirements (must meet minimum              indemnification claims when the
unshelled peanuts, damaged kernels,           requirements specified in ‘‘OTHER            indemnification payment ceiling and
minor defects, moisture, and foreign          EDIBLE QUALITY’’ (NON-                       number of claims was significantly
material as listed in paragraph (a) of this   INDEMNIFIABLE) GRADES—WHOLE                  exceeded and the Department was asked
section and be accompanied by an              KERNELS AND SPLITS table of                  for and approved the authority for the
aflatoxin certificate determined to be        § 998.200 (a) and must also be certified     Committee to spend up to $500,000
negative by the Committee * * *’’             ‘‘negative’’ (not more than 15 parts per     from the indemnification reserve fund
   Paragraph (h)(4) of § 998.200 reads        billion) as to aflatoxin).                   to pay the excess claims. This action is
‘‘Handlers may contract with Committee           The rule recognizes the current           expected to reduce by $2 million the
approved remillers for remilling shelled      generally more efficient, higher             cost to the Committee for
peanuts (which originated from                technology processing capabilities of        indemnification payments, and reduce
Segregation 1 peanuts) that fail to meet      blanchers’ and remillers’ facilities and     the possibility of handlers making
the requirements for disposition to           practices compared with the typical          indemnification, rather than the edible
human consumption outlets heretofore          handler’s facility and is intended to        market, the primary market for peanuts
specified in paragraph (a) of the             provide handlers more reconditioning         when regular market prices are low.
Outgoing Quality Regulation: Provided,        flexibility. This rule will tend to reduce   When the market is weak some handlers
That such lot of peanuts contain not in       limitations on handlers by allowing          may send their peanuts directly to
excess of 8 percent damage and minor          them to use blanchers’ and remillers’        indemnification rather than incur the
defects combined or 10 percent fall           generally more efficient grading and         cost of reworking the peanuts to
through or 2 percent foreign material.        milling facilities to rework such            improve the quality of the lots enough
Prior to movement of such peanuts             peanuts, improve handlers’ competitive       to sell them in the edible market.
under these provisions to a Committee         position, especially with regards to            The unchanged portions of the
approved remiller, handlers shall report      imported peanuts, by better utilizing        incoming, outgoing, and
to the Committee, on a form furnished         peanut supplies and existing facilities      indemnification regulations currently in
by the Committee, and receive                 and increase peanut movement to              effect for 1994 crop peanuts are left in
authorization from the Committee for          higher value markets.                        effect, as is, for 1995 and subsequent
movement and remilling of each such              This action also revises paragraph (j)    crop years.
lot. Lots of peanuts moved under these        of § 998.200 to exempt certain peanuts,         In accordance with the Paperwork
provisions must be accompanied by a           including those of a lower quality than      Reduction Act of 1988 (44 U.S.C.
valid grade inspection certificate and        Segregation 1 for domestic crushing,         Chapter 35), information collection
must be positive lot identified and the       from being assessed to lower the             requirements that are contained in this
title of such peanuts shall be retained by    handlers’ costs for these lower value        rule have been previously approved by
the handler until the peanuts have been       peanuts, as authorized by §§ 998.48          the Office of Management and Budget
remilled and certified by the Federal or      Assessments and 998.31 Incoming              (OMB) and have been assigned OMB
Federal-State Inspection Service as           regulation of the agreement.                 No. 0581–0067.
meeting the requirements for                     The Committee also recommended               Based on the above, the Administrator
disposition to human consumption              that this exemption apply to Segregation     of the AMS has determined that this
outlets specified in paragraph (a), and       1 peanuts for crushing. However, the         interim final rule will not have a
be accompanied by an aflatoxin                recommendation was not adopted by            significant economic impact on a
certificate determined to be negative by      the Department because the agreement         substantial number of small entities.
the Committee. Remilling under these          provides no authority for such an               Written comments, timely received, in
provisions may include composite              exemption and it would require an            response to this action, will be
remilling of more than one such lot of        amendment to the agreement through           considered before finalization of this
peanuts owned by the same handler.            formal rulemaking procedures to add          rule.
However, such peanuts owned by one            such authority. Segregation 1 peanuts           After consideration of all relevant
handler shall be held and remilled            are sometimes commingled with                matter presented, the information and
separate and apart from all other             Segregation 2 or 3 peanuts. In such          recommendations submitted by the
peanuts* * *’’                                cases, the Segregation 1 peanuts take on     Committee, and other information, it is
   Paragraph (h)(2) of § 998.200 is being     the identity of the lower quality            found that the changes set forth below
relaxed to allow individual handlers to       Segregation 2 or 3 peanuts, because it       will tend to effectuate the declared
move failing peanuts containing not in        dilutes the quality of higher quality        policy of the Act.
36208            Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 135 / Friday, July 14, 1995 / Rules and Regulations

   Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553, it is also          (f) Transfer between plants.                4. Section 998.300, is amended by
found and determined, upon good                  Except as otherwise provided in          revising the per pound indemnification
cause, that it is impracticable,              § 998.32 of the agreement, handlers may     value ‘‘45 cents’’ to read ‘‘35 cents’’
unnecessary and contrary to the public        transfer peanuts to any handler or to       everywhere it appears in paragraphs (h),
interest to give preliminary notice prior     domestic commercial storage without         (j), and (x); and the number
to putting this rule into effect, and that    having such peanuts positive lot            ‘‘$9,000,000’’ to read ‘‘$7,000,000’’,
good cause exists for not postponing the      identified and certified as meeting         ‘‘800’’ to read ‘‘461’’, ‘‘1300’’ to read
effective date of this action until 30 days   quality requirements. Upon any              ‘‘616’’, ‘‘2500’’ to read ‘‘853’’, and
after publication in the Federal Register     transferred peanuts being disposed of       ‘‘6,000’’ to read ‘‘3,412’’ everywhere
because: (1) This action relaxes              for human consumption, they shall meet      they appear in paragraph (z) and adding
requirements currently in effect for          all the requirements applicable to such     a new paragraph (z)(6) to read as
peanut handlers, who voluntarily signed       peanuts.                                    follows:
the agreement; (2) this action should be      *       *    *    *     *
in effect as soon as possible, because the       (h) Peanuts failing quality              § 998.300 Terms and conditions of
                                                                                          indemnification for 1995 and subsequent
1995 crop year begins July 1, 1995, and       requirements. (1) Handlers may sell to
                                                                                          crop peanuts.
handlers need to know the regulations         or contract with other handlers, for
applicable to the handling of the 1995        further handling, shelled peanuts           *      *    *     *     *
                                              (which originated from Segregation 1           (z) * * *
crop; and (3) this action provides a 30-
                                              peanuts) that fail to meet the                 (6) Notwithstanding the limits on
day comment period, and any
                                              requirements for disposition to human       numbers of claims filed with the
comments received will be considered
                                              consumption outlets heretofore              Committee by December 31 of the
prior to finalization of this rule.
                                              specified in paragraph (a) of this          current crop year as specified in
List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 998            section. Transactions made in this          paragraphs (z) (2), (3), and (4) of this
  Marketing agreements, Peanuts,              manner shall be reported to the             section; at the time of the Annual
Reporting and recordkeeping                   Committee by both buyer and seller on       Program Meeting of the Committee and
requirements.                                 a form provided by the Committee.           at any subsequent Committee meeting or
                                              Further disposition of any such peanuts     meetings, the Committee shall evaluate
  For the reasons set forth in the
                                              acquired by handlers pursuant to            claims and projections of claims’
preamble, 7 CFR part 998 is amended as
                                              paragraph (i) of § 998.100. Incoming        expenses occurring during the current
follows:
                                              quality regulation shall be regulated by    crop year. If such projections indicate
PART 998—MARKETING AGREEMENT                  the requirements specified heretofore or    that the prescribed limit ($7,000,000 on
REGULATING THE QUALITY OF                     pursuant to paragraph (h)(3) hereinafter.   1995 crop) will not be exceeded, the
DOMESTICALLY PRODUCED                            (2) Handlers may blanch or cause to      Committee shall authorize immediate
PEANUTS                                       have blanched shelled peanuts (which        payment of claims as prescribed in
                                              originated from Segregation 1 peanuts)      paragraph (z) (2) or (3) of this paragraph.
  1. The authority citation for 7 CFR
part 998 continues to read as follows:        that fail to meet the requirements of         Dated: July 11, 1995.
                                              paragraph (a) of this section because of    Sharon Bomer Lauritsen,
    Authority: 7 U.S.C. 601–674.              excessive damage, minor defects,            Deputy Director, Fruit and Vegetable Division.
  2. Section 998.100 is amended by            moisture, or foreign material or are        [FR Doc. 95–17383 Filed 7–13–95; 8:45 am]
revising the section heading and              positive as to aflatoxin: Provided, That    BILLING CODE 3410–02–P
paragraph (i) to read as follows:             such lots of peanuts contain not in
                                              excess of 10 percent total unshelled
§ 998.100 Incoming quality regulation for     peanuts and damaged kernels or 10
1995 and subsequent crop peanuts.                                                         PENSION BENEFIT GUARANTY
                                              percent foreign material. * * *
*      *     *    *     *                                                                 CORPORATION
   (i) Shelled peanuts. Handlers may          *       *    *    *     *
                                                 (4) Handlers may contract with           29 CFR Parts 2610 and 2622
acquire from other handlers, for
                                              Committee approved remillers for
remilling and subsequent disposition to                                                   Late Premium Payments and Employer
                                              remilling shelled peanuts (which
human consumption outlets, shelled                                                        Liability Underpayments and
                                              originated from Segregation 1 peanuts)
peanuts which originated from                                                             Overpayments; Interest Rate for
                                              that fail to meet the requirements for
‘‘Segregation 1 peanuts.’’ Transactions                                                   Determining Variable Rate Premium;
                                              disposition to human consumption
made in this manner shall be reported                                                     Amendments to Interest Rates
                                              outlets heretofore specified in paragraph
to the Committee by both the buyer and
                                              (a) of § 998.200 Outgoing quality
the seller on a form provided by the                                                      AGENCY:  Pension Benefit Guaranty
                                              regulation: Provided, That such lots of
Committee. Further disposition of any                                                     Corporation.
                                              peanuts contain not in excess of 10
such peanuts acquired pursuant to this                                                    ACTION: Final rule.
                                              percent total unshelled peanuts and
paragraph shall be regulated by
                                              damaged kernels or 10 percent fall          SUMMARY:    This document notifies the
paragraph (h)(1) of § 998.200 Outgoing
                                              through or 10 percent foreign               public of the interest rate applicable to
quality regulation.                           material. * * *
*      *     *    *     *                                                                 late premium payments and employer
                                              *       *    *    *     *                   liability underpayments and
   3. Section 998.200 is amended by              (j) Segregation 2 and 3 farmers’ stock
revising paragraphs (f), (h)(1), the first                                                overpayments for the calendar quarter
                                              disposition.                                beginning July 1, 1995. This interest rate
sentence in paragraph (h)(2), the first
sentence in paragraph (h)(4), and adding      *       *    *    *     *                   is established quarterly by the Internal
                                                 (3) Peanuts handled pursuant to the      Revenue Service. This document also
a new paragraph (j)(3) to read as follows:
                                              provisions of paragraphs (j) (1) and (2)    sets forth the interest rates for valuing
§ 998.200 Outgoing quality regulation for     of this section are exempt from § 998.48    unfunded vested benefits for premium
1995 and subsequent crop peanuts.             Assessments.                                purposes for plan years beginning in
*      *     *     *     *                    *       *    *    *     *                   May 1995 through July 1995. These
              Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 135 / Friday, July 14, 1995 / Rules and Regulations                                            36209

interest rates are established pursuant to      The PBGC publishes these monthly           List of Subjects
section 4006 of the Employee                 interest rates in appendix B on a             29 CFR Part 2610
Retirement Income Security Act of 1974,      quarterly basis to coincide with the
as amended. The effect of these              publication of the late payment interest        Employee benefit plans, Penalties,
amendments is to advise plan sponsors        rate set forth in appendix A. (The PBGC       Pension insurance, Pensions, and
and pension practitioners of these new       publishes the appendix A rates every          Reporting and recordkeeping
interest rates.                                                                            requirements.
                                             quarter, regardless of whether the rate
EFFECTIVE DATE: July 1, 1995.                has changed.) Unlike the appendix A           29 CFR Part 2622
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:             rate, which is determined prospectively,         Business and industry, Employee
Harold J. Ashner, Assistant General          the appendix B rate is not know until a       benefit plans, Pension insurance,
Counsel, Office of the General Counsel,      short time after the first of the month for   Pensions, Reporting and recordkeeping
Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation,        which it applies. Accordingly, the PBGC       requirements, and Small businesses.
1200 K Street, NW., Washington, DC           is hereby amending appendix B to part            In consideration of the foregoing, part
20005–4026; telephone 202–326–4024           2610 to add the vested benefits               2610 and part 2622 of chapter XXVI of
(202–326–4179 for TTY and TTD).              valuation rates for plan years beginning      title 29, Code of Federal Regulations, are
These are not toll-free numbers.             in May of 1995 through July of 1995.          hereby amended as follows:
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: As part of
title IV of the Employee Retirement             The appendices to 29 CFR parts 2610        PART 2610—PAYMENT OF PREMIUMS
Income Security Act of 1974, as              and 2622 do not prescribe the interest
                                             rates under these regulations. Under            1. The authority citation for part 2610
amended, the Pension Benefit Guaranty                                                      continues to read as follows:
Corporation collects premiums from           both regulations, the appendix A rates
ongoing plans to support the single-         are the rates determined under section          Authority: 29 U.S.C. 1302(b)(3), 1306,
                                             6601(a) of the Code. The interest rates       1307.
employer and multiemployer insurance
programs. Under the single-employer          in appendix B to part 2610 are                  2. Appendix A to part 2610 is
program, the PBGC also collects              prescribed by ERISA section                   amended by adding a new entry for the
employer liability from those persons        4006(a)(3)(E)(iii)(II) and § 2610.23(b)(1)    quarter beginning July 1, 1995, to read
described in ERISA section 4062(a).          of the regulation. These appendices           as follows. The introductory text is
Under ERISA section 4007 and 29 CFR          merely collect and republish the interest     republished for the convenience of the
§ 2610.7, the interest rate to be charged    rates in a convenient place. Thus, the        reader and remains unchanged.
on unpaid premiums is the rate               interest rates in the appendices are          Appendix A to Part 2610—Late
established under section 6601 of the        informational only. Accordingly, the          Payment Interest Rates
Internal Revenue Code (‘‘Code’’).            PBGC finds that notice of and public
Similarly, under 29 CFR 2622.7, the                                                          The following table lists the late
                                             comment on these amendments would             payment interest rates under § 2610.7(a)
interest rate to be credited or charged      be unnecessary and contrary to the
with respect to overpayments or                                                            for the specified time periods:
                                             public interest. For the above reasons,
underpayments of employer liability is       the PBGC also believes that good cause                                                            Interest
the section 6601 rate. These interest        exists for making these amendments                                                                   rate
rates are published by the PBGC in                                                              From—                    Through—
                                             effective immediately.                                                                              (per-
appendix A to the premium regulation                                                                                                            cent)
and appendix A to the employer                  The PBGC has determined that none
liability regulation.                        of these actions is a ‘‘significant
                                             regulatory action’’ under the criteria set       *         *               *       *                 *
   The Internal Revenue Service has                                                        July 1, 1995 .....       September 30,                 9.00
announced that for the quarter               forth in Executive Order 12866, because                                  1995.
beginning July 1, 1995, the interest         they will not have an annual effect on
charged on the underpayment of taxes         the economy of $100 million or more or          3. Appendix B to part 2610 is
will be at a rate of 9 percent.              adversely affect in a material way the        amended by adding to the table of
Accordingly, the PBGC is amending            economy, a sector of the economy,             interest rates new entries for premium
appendix A to 29 CFR part 2610 and           productivity, competition, jobs, the          payment years beginning in May of 1995
appendix A to 29 CFR part 2622 to set        environment, public health or safety, or      through July of 1995, to read as follows.
forth this rate for the July 1, 1995,        State, local, or tribal governments or        The introductory text is republished for
through September 30, 1995, quarter.         communities; create a serious                 the convenience of the reader and
   Under ERISA section                       inconsistency or otherwise interfere          remains unchanged.
4006(a)(3)(E)(iii)(II), in determining a     with an action taken or planned by
single-employer plan’s unfunded vested                                                     Appendix B to Part 2610—Interest
                                             another agency; materially alter the          Rates for Valuing Vesting Benefits
benefits for premium computation             budgetary impact of entitlements,
purposes, plans must use an interest                                                         The following table lists the required
                                             grants, user fees, or loan programs or the
rate equal to 80% of the annual yield on                                                   interest rates to be used in valuing a
                                             rights and obligations of recipients
30-year Treasury securities for the                                                        plan’s vested benefits under
month preceding the beginning of the         thereof; or raise novel legal or policy       § 2610.23(b) and in calculating a plan’s
plan year for which premiums are being       issues arising out of legal mandates, the     adjusted vested benefits under
paid. Under § 2610.23(b)(1) of the           President’s priorities, or the principles     § 2610.23(c)(1):
premium regulation, this value is            set forth in Executive Order 12866.
determined by reference to 30-year              Because no general notice of proposed                                                        Required
                                                                                                   For premium payment
Treasury constant maturities as reported                                                                                                      interest
                                             rulemaking is required for these                       years beginning in—                        rate 1
in Federal Reserve Statistical Releases      amendments, the Regulatory Flexibility
G.13 and H.15. The PBGC publishes            Act of 1980 does not apply. See 5 U.S.C.
these rates in appendix B to the             601(2).                                         *         *               *               *          *
regulation.                                                                                May 1995 ......................................        5.89
36210                 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 135 / Friday, July 14, 1995 / Rules and Regulations

                                                   Required     Benefits in Single-Employer Plans and          single-employer regulation. Appendix B
        For premium payment
         years beginning in—                        interest    Valuation of Plan Benefits and Plan            to part 2676 sets forth the interest rates
                                                     rate 1     Assets Following Mass Withdrawal. The          and factors under the multiemployer
                                                                former regulation contains the interest        regulation. Because these rates and
June 1995 .....................................         5.56
                                                                assumptions that the PBGC uses to              factors are intend to reflect current
July 1995 ......................................        5.26
                                                                value benefits under terminating single-       conditions in the financial and annuity
  1 The required interest rate listed above is
                                                                employer plans. The latter regulation          markets, it is necessary to update the
equal to 80% of the annual yield for 30-year                    contains the interest assumptions for          rates and factors periodically.
Treasury constant maturities, as reported in                                                                      The PBGC issues two sets of interest
Federal Reserve Statistical Release G.13 and                    valuations of multiemployer plans that
H.15 for the calendar month preceding the cal-                  have undergone mass withdrawal. The            rates and factors, one set to be used for
endar month in which the premium payment                        amendments set out in this final rule          the valuation of benefits to be paid as
year begins.                                                    adopt the interest assumptions                 annuities and one set for the valuation
                                                                applicable to single-employer plans            of benefits to be paid as lump sums. The
PART 2622—EMPLOYER LIABILITY                                                                                   same assumptions apply to terminating
                                                                with termination dates in August 1995,
FOR WITHDRAWALS FROM AND                                                                                       single-employer plans and to
                                                                and to multiemployer plans with
TERMINATIONS OF SINGLE-                                                                                        multiemployer plans that have
                                                                valuation dates in August 1995. The
EMPLOYER PLANS                                                                                                 undergone a mass withdrawal. This
                                                                effect of these amendments is to advise
  4. The authority citation for part 2622                       the public of the adoption of these            amendment adds to appendix B to parts
continues to read as follows:                                   assumptions.                                   2619 and 2676 sets of interest rates and
                                                                EFFECTIVE DATE: August 1, 1995.
                                                                                                               factors for valuing benefits in single-
  Authority: 29 U.S.C. 1302(b)(3), 1362–                                                                       employer plans that have termination
1364, 1367–68.                                                  FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
                                                                                                               dates during August 1995 and
  5. Appendix A to part 2622 is                                 Harold J. Ashner, Assistant General
                                                                                                               multiemployer plans that have
amended by adding a new entry for the                           Counsel, Office of the General Counsel,
                                                                                                               undergone mass withdrawal and have
quarter beginning July 1, 1995, to read                         Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation,
                                                                                                               valuation dates during August 1995.
as follows. The introductory text is                            1200 K Street, NW., Washington, DC                For annuity benefits, the interest rates
republished for the convenience of the                          20005, 202–326–4024 (202–326–4179              will be 6.20% for the first 20 years
reader and remains unchanged.                                   for TTY and TDD).                              following the valuation date and 5.75%
                                                                SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This rule           thereafter. For benefits to be paid as
Appendix A to Part 2622—Late                                    adopts the August 1995 interest                lump sums, the interest assumptions to
Payment and Overpayment Interest                                assumptions to be used under the               be used by the PBGC will be 4.75% for
Rates                                                           Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation’s         the period during which benefits are in
  The following table lists the late                            regulations on Valuation of Plan               pay status and 4.00% during the period
payment and overpayment interest rates                          Benefits in Single-Employer Plans (29          preceding the benefit’s placement in pay
under § 2622.7 for the specified time                           CFR part 2619, the ‘‘single-employer           status. The above annuity interest
periods:                                                        regulation’’) and Valuation of Plan            assumptions represent a decrease (from
                                                                Benefits and Plan Assets Following             those in effect for July 1995) of .10
                                                     Interest   Mass Withdrawal (29 CFR part 2676, the         percent for the first 20 years following
                                                        rate    ‘‘multiemployer regulation’’).
      From—                    Through—                (per-                                                   the valuation date and are otherwise
                                                      cent)
                                                                   Part 2619 sets forth the methods for        unchanged. The lump sum interest
                                                                valuing plan benefits of terminating           assumptions are unchanged (from those
                                                                single-employer plans covered under            in effect for July 1995).
   *         *               *       *                  *       title IV of the Employee Retirement               Generally, the interest rates and
July 1, 1995 .....       September 30,                  9.00    Income Security Act of 1974, as                factors under these regulations are in
                           1995.                                amended. Under ERISA section 4041(c),          effect for at least one month. However,
                                                                all single-employer plans wishing to           the PBGC publishes its interest
  Issued in Washington, DC, this 10th day of                    terminate in a distress termination must       assumptions each month regardless of
July 1995.                                                      value guaranteed benefits and ‘‘benefit        whether they represent a change from
Martin Slate,                                                   liabilities,’’ i.e., all benefits provided     the previous month’s assumptions. The
Executive Director, Pension Benefit Guaranty                    under the plan as of the plan                  assumptions normally will be published
Corporation.                                                    termination date, using the formulas set       in the Federal Register by the 15th of
[FR Doc. 95–17287 Filed 7–13–95; 8:45 am]                       forth in part 2619, subpart C. (Plans          the preceding month or as close to that
BILLING CODE 7708–01–M                                          terminating in a standard termination          date as circumstances permit.
                                                                may, for purposes of the Standard                 The PBGC has determined that notice
                                                                Termination Notice filed with PBGC,            and public comment on these
29 CFR Parts 2619 and 2676                                      use these formulas to value benefit            amendments are impracticable and
                                                                liabilities, although this is not required.)   contrary to the public interest. This
Valuation of Plan Benefits in Single-
                                                                In addition, when the PBGC terminates          finding is based on the need to
Employer Plans; Valuation of Plan
                                                                an underfunded plan involuntarily              determine and issue new interest rates
Benefits and Plan Assets Following
                                                                pursuant to ERISA section 4042(a), it          and factors promptly so that the rates
Mass Withdrawal; Amendments
                                                                uses the subpart C formulas to                 and factors can reflect, as accurately as
Adopting Additional PBGC Rates
                                                                determine the amount of the plan’s             possible, current market conditions.
AGENCY:  Pension Benefit Guaranty                               underfunding. Part 2676 prescribes                Because of the need to provide
Corporation.                                                    rules for valuing benefits and certain         immediate guidance for the valuation of
ACTION: Final rule.                                             assets of multiemployer plans under            benefits in single-employer plans whose
                                                                sections 4219(c)(1)(D) and 4281(b) of          termination dates fall during August
SUMMARY: This final rule amends the                             ERISA.                                         1995, and in multiemployer plans that
Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation’s                             Appendix B to part 2619 sets forth the      have undergone mass withdrawal and
regulations on Valuation of Plan                                interest rates and factors under the           have valuation dates during August
                       Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 135 / Friday, July 14, 1995 / Rules and Regulations                                                                 36211

1995, the PBGC finds that good cause                                  List of Subjects                                            for purposes of applying the formulas set
exists for making the rates and factors                                                                                           forth in § 2619.49 (b) through (i) and in
                                                                      29 CFR Part 2619                                            determining the value of any interest factor
set forth in this amendment effective
less than 30 days after publication.                                    Employee benefit plans, Pension                           used in valuing benefits under this subpart
                                                                      insurance, and Pensions.                                    to be paid as lump sums (including the
   The PBGC has determined that this
                                                                                                                                  return of accumulated employee
action is not a ‘‘significant regulatory                              29 CFR Part 2676                                            contributions upon death), the PBGC shall
action’’ under the criteria set forth in                                 Employee benefit plans and Pensions.                     employ the values of it set out in Table I
Executive Order 12866, because it will                                                                                            hereof as follows:
not have an annual effect on the                                         In consideration of the foregoing,
                                                                      parts 2619 and 2676 of chapter XXVI,                          (1) For benefits for which the participant
economy of $100 million or more or                                                                                                or beneficiary is entitled to be in pay status
                                                                      title 29, Code of Federal Regulations, are
adversely affect in a material way the                                                                                            on the valuation date, the immediate annuity
                                                                      hereby amended as follows:
economy, a sector of the economy,                                                                                                 rate shall apply.
productivity, competition, jobs, the                                  PART 2619—[AMENDED]                                           (2) For benefits for which the deferral
environment, public health or safety, or                                                                                          period is y years (y is an integer and O<y≤n1),
State, local, or tribal governments or                                  1. The authority citation for part 2619                   interest rate i1 shall apply from the valuation
communities; create a serious                                         continues to read as follows:                               date for a period of y years; thereafter the
inconsistency or otherwise interfere                                    Authority: 29 U.S.C. 1301(a), 1302(b)(3),                 immediate annuity rate shall apply.
with an action taken or planned by                                    1341, 1344, 1362.                                             (3) For benefits for which the deferral
another agency; materially alter the                                                                                              period is y years (y is an integer and
                                                                        2. In appendix B, Rate Set 22 is added
budgetary impact of entitlements,                                                                                                 n1<y≤n2+n2), interest rate i2 shall apply from
                                                                      to Table I, and a new entry is added to                     the valuation date for a period of y¥n1 years,
grants, user fees, or loan programs or the                            Table II, as set forth below. The
rights and obligations of recipients                                                                                              interest rate i1 shall apply for the following
                                                                      introductory text of both tables is                         n1 years; thereafter the immediate annuity
thereof; or raise novel legal or policy                               republished for the convenience of the                      rate shall apply.
issues arising out of legal mandates, the                             reader and remains unchanged.                                 (4) For benefits for which the deferral
President’s priorities, or the principles
                                                                      Appendix B to Part 2619—Interest                            period is y years (y is an integer and
set forth in Executive Order 12866.                                                                                               y>n1+n2), interest rate i3 shall apply from the
   Because no general notice of proposed                              Rates Used to Value Lump Sums and
                                                                      Annuities                                                   valuation date for a period of y¥n1¥n2
rulemaking is required for this                                                                                                   years, interest rate i2 shall apply for the
amendment, the Regulatory Flexibility                                 Lump Sum Valuations                                         following n2 years, interest rate i1 shall apply
Act of 1980 does not apply. See 5 U.S.C.                                In determining the value of interest factors              for the following n1 years; thereafter the
601(2).                                                               of the form v0:n (as defined in § 2619.49(b)(1))            immediate annuity rate shall apply.

                                                                                            TABLE I
                                                                                      [Lump Sum Valuations]

                           For plans with a valuation                                                                  Deferred annuities (percent)
                                                                         Immediate
                                     date
   Rate set                                                             annuity rate
                                                                          (percent)              i1               i2                    i3                 n1               n2
                         On or after                Before


             *                             *                             *                        *                      *                             *               *
        22                  8–1–95                  9–1–95                   4.75               4.00             4.00                  4.00                7                8



Annuity valuations                                                    used in valuing annuity benefits under this                 generally as it) assumed to be in effect
  In determining the value of interest factors                        subpart, the plan administrator shall use the               between specified anniversaries of a
                                                                      value of it prescribed in Table II hereof.                  valuation date that occurs within that
of the form v0:n (as defined in § 2619.49(b)(1))
                                                                         The following table tabulates, for each                  calendar month; those anniversaries are
for purposes of applying the formulas set                             calendar month of valuation ending after the                specified in the columns adjacent to the
forth in § 2619.49 (b) through (i) and in                             effective date of this part, the interest rates             rates. The last listed rate is assumed to be in
determining the value of any interest factor                          (denoted by i1, i2, * * *, and referred to                  effect after the last listed anniversary date.

                                                                                           TABLE II
                                                                                       [Annuity Valuations]

                                                                                                                        The values of it are:
         For valuation dates occurring in the month—
                                                                                          it           for t =               it              for t =            it         for t =


        *                              *                                 *                       *                       *                             *               *
August 1995 .......................................................................     .0620          1–20             .0575                 >20              N/A          N/A



PART 2676—[AMENDED]                                                     Authority: 29 U.S.C. 1302(b)(3),                          introductory text of both tables is
                                                                      1399(c)(1)(D), 1441(b)(1).                                  republished for the convenience of the
  3. The authority citation for part 2676                               4. In appendix B, Rate Set 22 is added                    reader and remains unchanged.
continues to read as follows:                                         to Table I, and a new entry is added to
                                                                      Table II, as set forth below. The
36212                  Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 135 / Friday, July 14, 1995 / Rules and Regulations

Appendix B to Part 2676—Interest                                      The interest rates set forth in Table I shall be     n1<y≤n1+n2), interest rate i2 shall apply from
Rates Used to Value Lump Sums and                                     used by the PBGC to calculate benefits               the valuation date for a period of y¥n1 years,
Annuities                                                             payable as lump sum benefits as follows:             interest rate i1 shall apply for the following
                                                                        (1) For benefits for which the participant         n1 years; thereafter the immediate annuity
Lump Sum Valuations                                                   or beneficiary is entitled to be in pay status       rate shall apply.
                                                                      on the valuation date, the immediate annuity
  In determining the value of interest factors                                                                               (4) For benefits for which the deferral
                                                                      rate shall apply.
of the form v0:n (as defined in § 2676.13(b)(1))                                                                           period is y years (y is an integer and
                                                                        (2) For benefits for which the deferral
for purposes of applying the formulas set                             period is y years (y is an integer and 0<y≤n1),      y>n1+n2), interest rate i3 shall apply from the
forth in § 2676.13 (b) through (i) and in                             interest rate i1 shall apply from the valuation      valuation date for a period of y¥n1¥n2
determining the value of any interest factor                          date for a period of y years; thereafter the         years, interest rate i1 shall apply for the
used in valuing benefits under this subpart                           immediate annuity rate shall apply.                  following n2 years, interest rate i1 shall apply
to be paid as lump sums, the PBGC shall use                             (3) For benefits for which the deferral            for the following n2 years; thereafter the
the values of it prescribed in Table I hereof.                        period is y years (y is an integer and               immediate annuity rate shall apply.

                                                                                            TABLE I
                                                                                      [Lump Sum Valuations]

                                               For plans with a valuation                                               Deferred annuities (percent)
                                                                                       Immediate
                                                         date
              Rate set                                                                annuity rate
                                                                                        (percent)          i1        i2               i3               n1             n2
                                               On or after           Before


             *                             *                           *                             *              *                        *                  *
                  22                            8–1–95              9–1–95               4.75            4.00       4.00            4.00               7              8



Annuity Valuations                                                    used in valuing annuity benefits under this          generally as it) assumed to be in effect
  In determining the value of interest factors                        subpart, the plan administrator shall use the        between specified anniversaries of a
                                                                      values of it prescribed in the table below.          valuation date that occurs within that
of the form v0:n (as defined in § 2676.13(b)(1))
                                                                         The following table tabulates, for each           calendar month; those anniversaries are
for purposes of applying the formulas set                             calendar month of valuation ending after the         specified in the columns adjacent to the
forth in § 2676.13 (b) through (i) and in                             effective date of this part, the interest rates      rates. The last listed rate is assumed to be in
determining the value of any interest factor                          (denoted by i1, i1, * * *, and referred to           effect after the last listed anniversary date.

                                                                                            TABLE II
                                                                                        [Annuity Valuations]

                                                                                                                   The values of it are:
         For valuation dates occurring in the month—
                                                                                           it            for t =     it            for t =             it           for t =


        *                              *                                 *                           *              *                        *                  *
August 1995 .......................................................................      .0620           1–20      .0575            >20             N/A              N/A



  Issued in Washington, DC, on this 10th day                          of that regulation a new interest rate to            charged by multiemployer pension
of July 1995.                                                         be effective from July 1, 1995, to                   plans on withdrawal liability payments
Martin Slate,                                                         September 30, 1995. The effect of the                that are overdue or in default, or to be
Executive Director, Pension Benefit Guaranty                          amendment is to advise the public of                 credited by plans on overpayments of
Corporation.                                                          the new rate.                                        withdrawal liability. The regulation
[FR Doc. 95–17288 Filed 7–13–95; 8:45 am]                             EFFECTIVE DATE: July 1, 1995.                        allows plans to set rates, subject to
BILLING CODE 7708–01–M                                                                                                     certain restrictions. Where a plan does
                                                                      FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
                                                                                                                           not set the interest rate, § 2644.3(b) of
                                                                      Harold J. Ashner, Assistant General                  the regulation provides that the rate to
29 CFR Part 2644                                                      Counsel, Office of the General Counsel,              be charged or credited for any calendar
                                                                      Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation,                quarter is the average quoted prime rate
Notice and Collection of Withdrawal                                   1200 K Street NW., Washington, DC                    on short-term commercial loans for the
Liability; Adoption of New Interest Rate                              20005–4026; telephone 202–326–4024                   fifteenth day (or the next business day
                                                                      (202–326–4179 for TTY and TDD).                      if the fifteenth day is not a business day)
AGENCY:  Pension Benefit Guaranty
                                                                      These are not toll-free numbers.                     of the month preceding the beginning of
Corporation.
ACTION: Final rule.                                                   SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Under                     the quarter, as reported by the Board of
                                                                      section 4219(c) of the Employee                      Governors of the Federal Reserve
SUMMARY: This is an amendment to the                                  Retirement Income Security Act of 1974,              System in Statistical Release H. 15
Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation’s                                as amended, the Pension Benefit                      (‘‘Selected Interest Rates’’).
regulation on Notice and Collection of                                Guaranty Corporation promulgated a                      Because the regulation incorporates
Withdrawal Liability. That regulation                                 final regulation on Notice and                       interest rates published in Statistical
incorporates certain interest rates                                   Collection of Withdrawal Liability. That             Release H.15, that release is the
published by another Federal agency.                                  regulation, codified at 29 CFR part 2644,            authoritative source for the rates that are
This amendment adds to the appendix                                   deals with the rate of interest to be                to be applied under the regulation. As
              Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 135 / Friday, July 14, 1995 / Rules and Regulations                                36213

a convenience to persons using the               Authority: 29 U.S.C. 1302(b)(3), 1399(c)(6).   Secretary’s findings, the disposition of
regulation, however, the PBGC collects         2. Appendix A to part 2644 is                    comments, and the conditions of
the applicable rates and republishes         amended by adding to the end of the                approval of the North Dakota program
them in an appendix to part 2644. This       table a new entry to read as follows:              can be found in the December 15, 1980,
amendment adds to this appendix the                                                             Federal Register (45 FR 82214).
interest rate of 9.00 percent, which will    Appendix A to Part 2644—Table of                   Subsequent actions concerning North
be effective from July 1, 1995, through      Interest Rates                                     Dakota’s program and program
September 30, 1995. This rate represents                                                        amendments can be found at 30 CFR
no change from the rate in effect for the    *       *     *     *      *                       934.12, 934.13, 934.15, 934.16, and
second quarter of 1995. This rate is                                                            934.30.
                                                                                      Rate
based on the prime rate in effect on June                                 Date of
                                                  From           To                   (per- II. Proposed Amendment
15, 1995.                                                                quotation    cent)
   The appendix to 29 CFR part 2644                                                            By letter dated February 17, 1994,
does not prescribe interest rates under          *          *       *        *         *    North Dakota, submitted a proposed
the regulation; the rates prescribed in      7/01/95 ........ 9/30/95    6/15/95       9.00 amendment to its program (Amendment
the regulation are those published in                                                       No. XX, administrative record No. ND–
Statistical Release H.15. The appendix          Issued in Washington, DC, on this 10th      U–01) pursuant to SMCRA (30 U.S.C.
merely collects and republishes the          days of July 1995.                             1201 et seq.). North Dakota submitted
rates in a convenient place. Thus, the       Martin Slate,                                  proposed revisions to its policy
interest rates in the appendix are           Executive Director, Pension Benefit Guaranty   document entitled ‘‘Standards for
informational only. Accordingly, the         Corporation.                                   Evaluation of Revegetation Success and
PBGC finds that notice of and public         [FR Doc. 95–17289 Filed 7–13–95; 8:45 am]      Recommended Procedures for Pre- and
comment on this amendment would be           BILLING CODE 7708–01–M
                                                                                            Postmining Vegetation Assessments’’
unnecessary and contrary to the public                                                      (hereinafter, the ‘‘revegetation
interest. For the above reasons, the                                                        document’’) in response to required
PBGC also believes that good cause                                                          program amendments at 30 CFR
                                             DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
exists for making this amendment                                                            934.16(b) through (i), (w), and (x), and
effective immediately.                       Office of Surface Mining Reclamation           at its own initiative.
   The PBGC has determined that this         and Enforcement                                   OSM announced receipt of the
action is not a ‘‘significant regulatory                                                    proposed amendment in the March 14,
action’’ under the criteria set forth in     30 CFR Part 934                                1994, Federal Register (49 FR 11744),
Executive Order 12866, because it will                                                      provided an opportunity for a public
                                             North Dakota Regulatory Program                hearing or meeting on its substantive
not have an annual effect on the
                                                                                            adequacy, and invited public comment
economy of $100 million or more or           AGENCY: Office of Surface Mining
                                                                                            on its adequacy (administrative record
adversely affect in a material way the       Reclamation and Enforcement (OSM),
                                                                                            No. ND–U–05). Because no one
economy, a sector of the economy,            Interior.
                                                                                            requested a public hearing or meeting,
productivity, competition, jobs, the         ACTION: Final rule; approval of                none was held. The public comment
environment, public health or safety, or     amendment.                                     period ended on April 13, 1994.
State, local, or tribal governments or
                                             SUMMARY: OSM is approving, with                   During its review of the amendment,
communities; create a serious
                                             certain exceptions and additional              OSM identified concerns relating to
inconsistency or otherwise interfere
with an action taken or planned by           requirements, a proposed amendment to certain provisions of North Dakota’s
                                             the North Dakota regulatory program            revegetation document. OSM notified
another agency; materially alter the
                                             (hereinafter referred to as the ‘‘North        North Dakota of the concerns by letter
budgetary impact of entitlements,
                                             Dakota program’’) under the Surface            dated September 9, 1994 (administrative
grants, user fees, or loan programs or the
                                             Mining Control and Reclamation Act of          record No. ND–U–10). On September
rights and obligations of recipients
                                             1977 (SMCRA). North Dakota proposed            14, 1994, North Dakota and OSM,
thereof; or raise novel legal or policy
                                             revisions pertaining to its policy             during a telephone conference,
issues arising out of legal mandates, the
                                             document entitled ‘‘Standards for              discussed certain provisions of OSM’s
President’s priorities, or the principles
                                             Evaluation of Revegetation Success and         September 9, 1994, issue letter
set forth in Executive Order 12866.
                                             Recommended Procedures for Pre- and            (administrative record No. ND–U–13).
   Because no general notice of proposed
                                             Postmining Vegetation Assessments.’’           North Dakota responded in a letter
rulemaking is required for this
                                             The amendment is intended to revise            dated December 21, 1994
amendment, the Regulatory Flexibility
                                             this document to be consistent with the        (administrative record No. ND–U–14),
Act of 1980 does not apply. See 5 U.S.C.
                                             Federal regulations and to improve             by submitting a revised amendment and
601(2).
                                             operational efficiency.                        additional explanatory information that
List of Subjects in 29 CFR Part 2644                                                        addressed the concerns identified by
                                             EFFECTIVE DATE: July 14, 1995.
   Employee benefit plans, Pensions.                                                        OSM.
                                             FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Guy              Based upon the revisions to and
   In consideration of the foregoing, part   Pagett, Telephone: (307) 261–5776.             additional explanatory information for
2644 of subchapter F of chapter XXVI of                                                     the proposed program amendment
                                             SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
title 29, Code of Federal Regulations, is                                                   submitted by North Dakota, OSM
amended as follows:                          I. Background on the North Dakota              reopened the public comment period in
                                             Program                                        the January 19, 1995, Federal Register
PART 2644—NOTICE AND
                                                On December 15, 1980, the Secretary         (60 FR 3790; administrative record No.
COLLECTION OF WITHDRAWAL
                                             of the Interior conditionally approved         ND–U–15). The public comment period
LIABILITY
                                             the North Dakota program. General              ended on February 3, 1995.
  1. The authority citation for part 2644    background information on the North               Subsequently, North Dakota requested
continues to read as follows:                Dakota program, including the                  a meeting with OSM to discuss it’s
36214         Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 135 / Friday, July 14, 1995 / Rules and Regulations

December 21, 1994, revisions that were       photos of areas used to develop             fish and wildlife habitat, recreation,
made in response to OSM’s September          standards, (7) submission of maps           shelter belts, or forest products, that at
9, 1994, issue letter. OSM and North         which identify either the locations of      the time of bond release, at least 80
Dakota met on April 11, 1995                 sampling transects or the sampling areas    percent of the trees and shrubs used to
(administrative record No. ND–U–16).         and number of randomly located sample       determine success shall have been in
Thereafter, by letter dated May 11, 1995     units per area, (8) submission of cover     place for 60 percent of the applicable
(administrative record No. ND–U–17),         data in tabular form showing                minimum period of responsibility.
North Dakota submitted, at its own           composition by species, using absolute         The Director finds that North Dakota’s
initiative, additional revisions and         cover values with relative cover            revisions of Chapter II, Section F,
explanatory information to its               submitted to aid in data interpretation,    concerning time in place revegetation
revegetation success document.               (9) submission of production data by        success standards for trees and shrubs
   Based upon the revisions to and           growth form, and (10) clarification that    on land reclaimed for use as woodland,
additional explanatory information for       actual sample means must be used in         are no less effective than the Federal
the proposed program amendment               formulas that determine sample size         regulations at 30 CFR 816.116(b)(3)(ii)
submitted by North Dakota, OSM               when measuring success of revegetation      and 817.116(b)(3)(ii). The Director
reopened the public comment period in        for bond release.                           approves these proposed revisions and
the May 23, 1995, Federal Register (60         The Federal regulations at 30 CFR         removes the required amendment at 30
FR 27246; administrative record No.          816.116(a)(1) and 817.116(a)(1) require     CFR 934.16(b).
ND–U–23). The public comment period          that standards for success of                  b. Chapter II, Sections F and H,
ended on June 7, 1995.                       revegetation and statistically valid        ground cover. At 30 CFR 934.16(c), OSM
                                             sampling techniques for measuring           required that North Dakota revise its
III. Director’s Findings
                                             success of revegetation shall be selected   revegetation document to require that
   As discussed below, the Director, in      by the regulatory authority and included    evaluations of ground cover success be
accordance with SMCRA and 30 CFR             in an approved regulatory program.
732.15 and 732.17, finds, with certain                                                   valid at the 90 percent confidence level
                                               Because the proposed revisions
exceptions and additional requirements,                                                  (Finding No. 3, 54 FR 10141, 10142,
                                             identified above clarify and generally
that the proposed program amendment                                                      March 10, 1989).
                                             improve North Dakota’s revegetation
submitted by North Dakota on February                                                       North Dakota proposed to revise
                                             document, the Director finds that these
17, 1994, and as revised by it and                                                       Chapter II, Section F, concerning
                                             proposed revisions are no less effective
supplemented with additional                                                             reclaimed lands developed for use as
                                             than the Federal regulations at 30 CFR
explanatory information on December                                                      woodland, to require that ground cover
                                             816.116(a)(1) and 817.116(a)(1). The
21, 1994, is no less effective than the                                                  must be equal to or greater than 90
                                             Director approves the proposed
corresponding Federal regulations.                                                       percent of the approved standard with
                                             revisions.
Accordingly, the Director approves the                                                   90 percent statistical confidence. North
proposed amendment.                          2. Substantive Revisions to North           Dakota also proposed to revise Chapter
                                             Dakota’s Revegetation Document              II, Section H, concerning reclaimed
1. General Substantive Revisions to          Proposed in Response to Required            lands developed for use as fish and
North Dakota’s Revegetation Document         Amendments                                  wildlife habitat/grassland, to require
   North Dakota proposed revisions to its       a. Chapter II, Section F, countable      that ground cover must be equal to or
revegetation document that are general       trees and shrubs. At 30 CFR 934.16(b),      greater than that of the approved
in nature in that the revisions are made     OSM required that North Dakota revise       reference area or standard with 90
throughout the document and/or apply         its revegetation document or otherwise      percent statistical confidence.
to most if not all success standards and     amend its program to require that at           The Federal regulations at 30 CFR
sampling techniques for all land uses.       least 80 percent of the trees and shrubs    816.116(a)(2) and 817.116(a)(2) require
These revisions include (1) reference of     counted to determine revegetation           that the sampling techniques for
technical documents used and other           success have been in place for at least     measuring success of revegetation shall
agencies consulted during development        60 percent of the 10-year period of         use a 90 percent statistical confidence
of the revegetation document, (2)            revegetation responsibility (Finding No.    interval (i.e., one-sided test with a 0.10
limiting a permittee’s use of                26.a, 57 FR 807, 821, January 9, 1992).     alpha error).
revegetation success standards and              North Dakota proposed to revise             The Director finds that North Dakota’s
sampling techniques to those approved        Chapter II, Section F, concerning           revisions of Chapter II, Sections F and
in the revegetation document unless          reclaimed lands developed for use as        H, concerning the requirement to
North Dakota and OSM approval is first       woodland, to require for fourth-stage       demonstrate success of ground cover
obtained on a case-by-case basis, (3) use    bond release that the permittee             with 90 percent statistical confidence,
of U.S. Natural Resource Conservation        demonstrate that 80 percent of the total    are no less effective than the Federal
Service (NRCS, formerly the Soil             number of trees and shrubs planted          regulations at 30 CFR 816.116(a)(2) and
Conservation Service) soil mapping           have been in place for 60 percent of the    817.116(a)(2). The Director approves
units and productivity indices               liability period. In addition, North        these proposed revisions and removes
whenever possible, rather than soil          Dakota recommended the use of               the required amendment at 30 CFR
series, to develop technical productivity    permanent quadrats in each woodland         934.16(c).
standards, (4) use of North Dakota           community to document the time in              c. Chapter II, Sections F and G, woody
agricultural annual county cropland          place requirement and required that the     plant stocking. At 30 CFR 934.16(d),
yields to develop a correction factor for    permittee provide documentation to          OSM required that North Dakota revise
climatic variability, (5) use of a county-   verify that not more than 20 percent of     its revegetation document or otherwise
wide correction factor in conjunction        the number of trees and shrubs present      amend its program to require that
with the NRCS yield information to           at year 4 have been replanted.              evaluations of the success of woody
adjust for climatic yield conditions on         The Federal regulations at 30 CFR        plant stocking be valid at the 90 percent
land reclaimed for use as cropland or        816.116(b)(3)(ii) and 817.116(b)(3)(ii)     confidence level (Finding No. 4, 54 FR
prime farmland, (6) submission of aerial     require, for areas to be developed for      10141, 10142, March 10, 1989).
              Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 135 / Friday, July 14, 1995 / Rules and Regulations                             36215

   North Dakota proposed to revise              North Dakota proposed to revise            requirement that the stocking of trees
Chapter II, Section F, concerning            Chapter II, Sections F and H, concerning      and shrubs normally follow current
reclaimed lands developed for use as         reclaimed lands developed for use as,         standards and specifications developed
woodland, to require that the number of      respectively, (1) woodland and (2) fish       by the NRCS for farmstead and field
woody plants must be equal to or greater     and wildlife habitat using annual crops,      windbreaks in North Dakota, but also
than the stocking of live woody plants       to require that revegetation success must     provided for allowance of stocking
of the same life form of the approved        be measured during the last two years,        standards specified by the State Game
standard with 90 percent statistical         rather than the final year, of the            and Fish Department or the State Forest
confidence. North Dakota proposed to         responsibility period.                        Service.
revise Chapter II, Section G, concerning        The Federal regulations at 30 CFR             North Dakota also proposed to revise
reclaimed lands developed for use as         816.116(b)(3)(ii) and 817.116(b)(3)(ii)       Section G to specify that, prior to final
shelterbelts, to require that density and    require that trees and shrubs counted in      bond release, the permittee must
vigor must be equal to or greater than       determining success of revegetation           demonstrate in the last two years of the
that of the approved standard. North         shall have been in place for not less         liability period that density and vigor
Dakota did not revise this section to        than two growing seasons.                     are equal to or greater than that of the
require that density be demonstrated            The Director finds that North Dakota’s     approved standard, erosion is
with 90 percent statistical confidence.      revisions of Chapter II, Sections F and       adequately controlled, and that at least
However, Chapter III, Section D, of          H, concerning the requirement to              80 percent of the trees and shrubs have
North Dakota’s revegetation document         measure revegetation success during the       been in place for at least 60 percent of
requires that density of woody               last two years of the responsibility          the liability period. In addition, North
vegetation be measured either by direct      period, are no less effective than the        Dakota requires an evaluation of the
count of all vegetation or by the density    Federal regulations at 30 CFR                 diversity, seasonality, and regenerative
quadrat sampling method. North Dakota        816.116(b)(3)(ii) and 817.116(b)(3)(ii).      capacity of the shelterbelt based on the
proposed to revise Chapter III, Section      The Director approves these proposed          species stocked and planting
D, to require that, when using the           revisions and removes the required            arrangements. Regarding the time in
quadrat sampling method, enough              amendment at 30 CFR 934.16(e).                place standard, North Dakota proposed
samples must be taken to demonstrate            e. Chapter II, Sections F and G,           to require that the permittee provide a
that the number of woody plants              revegetation success standards for            worksheet of each shelterbelt which
established equals or exceeds the            shelterbelts. At 30 CFR 934.16(f), OSM        lists annual replantings of each species
approved standard with 90 percent            required that North Dakota revise its         and that documentation may be made
statistical confidence. The methods          revegetation document or otherwise            by tagging or marking with paint, by
provided in Chapter III apply to all         amend its program to include tree and         photographic records, or by preservation
demonstrations of woody plant density,       shrub stocking and vegetative ground          of sales receipts from nurseries.
regardless of land use. Therefore, the       cover success standards for all types of         The Federal regulations at 30 CFR
revegetation document requires, for land     shelterbelts and clarify that trees and       816.116(b)(3) (i) through (iii) and
reclaimed for use as shelterbelts,           shrubs must meet time-in-place                817.116(b)(3) (i) through (iii) require, in
verification of woody plant density by       requirements no less than those               part, that success of revegetation of
direct count or by sampling with 90          established in 30 CFR 816.116(b)(3)(ii)       shelterbelts be determined on the basis
percent statistical confidence.              (Finding No. 26.a, 57 FR 807, 821,            of tree and shrub stocking and
   The Federal regulations at 30 CFR         January 9, 1992). As discussed below,         vegetative ground cover and include the
816.116(a)(2) and 817.116(a)(2) require      the Director finds that North Dakota’s        requirements that (1) permit specific or
that the sampling techniques for             proposed revisions to Chapter II,             programwide minimum stocking and
measuring success of revegetation shall      Sections F and G, concerning                  planting arrangements shall be specified
use a 90 percent statistical confidence      revegetation success standards for            by the regulatory authority on the basis
interval (i.e., one-sided test with a 0.10   shelterbelts, are no less effective than      of local and regional conditions and
alpha error).                                the Federal regulations at 30 CFR             after consultation with and approval by
   The Director finds that North Dakota’s    816.116(b)(3) and 817.116(b)(3), and          the State agencies responsible for the
revisions of Chapter II, Section F and       removes the required amendment at 30          administration of forestry and wildlife
Chapter III, Section D, concerning the       CFR 934.16(f).                                programs, (2) trees and shrubs counted
requirement to demonstrate success of           i. Chapter II, Sections F and G,           in determining such success shall be
woody plant density with 90 percent          requirements for determining                  healthy and have been in place for not
statistical confidence, are no less          revegetation success on lands developed       less than two growing seasons, (3) at
effective than the Federal regulations at    for use as shelterbelts. North Dakota         least 80 percent of the trees and shrubs
30 CFR 816.116(a)(2) and 816.116(a)(2).      proposed to revise Chapter II, Section F,     used to determine such success shall
The Director approves these proposed         concerning reclaimed lands developed          have been in place for 60 percent of the
revisions and removes the required           for use as woodland, to delete all            applicable minimum period of
amendment at 30 CFR 934.16(d).               discussion of shelterbelts so that Section    responsibility, and (4) vegetative ground
   d. Chapter II, Sections F and H,          F is applicable only to woodland.             cover shall not be less than that required
Revegetation success measurement             Requirements for determination of             to achieve the approved postmining
period. At 30 CFR 934.16(e), OSM             revegetation success on lands developed       land use.
required that North Dakota revise its        for use as shelterbelts are included in          The Director finds that North Dakota’s
revegetation document or otherwise           Chapter II, Section G.                        revisions of Chapter II, Sections F and
amend its program to require that               North Dakota proposed to revise            G, concerning the requirements to
revegetation success standards for           Chapter II, Section G to define               determine revegetation success on
woodlands and fish and wildlife              shelterbelts as a strip or belt of trees or   reclaimed lands developed for use as
habitats be met for at least the last two    shrubs planted by man in or adjacent to       shelterbelts, are no less effective than
consecutive years of the revegetation        a field or next to a farmstead, feedlot, or   the Federal regulations at 30 CFR
responsibility period (Finding No. 26.b,     road, and synonymous with windbreak.          816.116(b)(3) (i) through (iii) and
57 FR 807, 822, January 9, 1992).            North Dakota proposed to add the              817.116(b)(3) (i) through (iii). The
36216         Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 135 / Friday, July 14, 1995 / Rules and Regulations

Director approves these proposed             reclaimed lands developed for use as         Dakota’s revegetation document. In its
revisions.                                   fish and wildlife habitat according to       response to OSM’s September 9, 1994,
   ii. Chapter II, Section G, replacement    vegetation type, to require that (1) for     issue letter, North Dakota explained that
and nonreplacement shelterbelts. North       woodland and shelterbelts, the               these 1989 concurrence letters are still
Dakota proposed to revise Chapter II,        permittee address the requirements           applicable because, although the
Section G to (1) clarify that the            specified in, respectively, Sections F       original revegetation document
standards in Section G apply to all          and G (Section F requires that ground        included shelterbelts as part of the
shelterbelts that are specified in the       cover on the reclaimed area equal or         woodland section, the stocking and
reclamation plan as a postmining land        exceed 90 percent of the approved            planting arrangements and success
use or as otherwise required as part of      standard; Section G requires that            standards for woodland and fish and
the approved permit, and (2) delete from     density and vigor equal or exceed the        wildlife habitat have not been revised
Section G the discussion of                  approved standard and erosion be             since the letters were obtained. North
‘‘replacement’’ and ‘‘nonreplacement’’       adequately controlled); (2) for grassland,   Dakota refers the permittee to standards
shelterbelts and their associated success    the ground cover must be equal to or         approved by the NRCS for shelterbelts
standards. North Dakota explained in         greater than the approved standard; and      (see Finding No. 2.e.i above for a
the cover letter to its May 11, 1995,        (3) for wetland, vegetation zones and        discussion of the requirements for
revisions, that the intent of the            dominant species must be equal to those      shelterbelts).
provision for shelterbelts otherwise         of the approved standard. North Dakota          The Federal regulations at 30 CFR
required as part of the approved permit      already required in Section H, for           816.116(b)(3)(i) and 817.116(b)(3)(i)
was to give North Dakota the flexibility     annual crops, a demonstration that the       require, for areas to be developed for
to require, by permit condition, that        height of the standing grain crop or         fish and wildlife habitat, recreation,
certain shelterbelts not proposed as part    residual cover is equal to or greater than   shelterbelts, or forest products, that
of the postmining land use may be            the approved standard.                       minimum stocking and planting
required to meet the standards in               The Federal regulations at 30 CFR         arrangements shall be specified by the
Section G.                                   816.116(a)(2) and 817.116(a)(2) require      regulatory authority on the basis of local
   As discussed Finding No. e.i above,       that the standards for success for ground    and regional conditions and after
North Dakota has revised Chapter II,         cover, production, or stocking shall be      consultation with and approval by the
Sections F and G to require revegetation     considered equal to the approved             State agencies responsible for the
success standards for shelterbelts that      success standard when they are not less      administration of forestry and wildlife
are no less effective than the Federal       than 90 percent of the success standard.     programs.
regulations at 30 CFR 816.116(b)(3) and         The Director finds that North Dakota’s       Based on the 1989 letters of
817.116(b)(3).                               revisions of Chapter II, Section H,          concurrence from the North Dakota
   The allowance for North Dakota to         concerning the requirement that success      Forest Service and the North Dakota
require, as a condition of permit            standards for fish and wildlife habitat      Game and Fish Department, the Director
approval, shelterbelts that meet the         equal or exceed at least 90 percent of the   finds that North Dakota’s revegetation
requirements proposed in Chapter II,         approved standards for each vegetation       document is no less effective than the
Section G, has no counterpart in the         type, are no less effective than the         Federal regulations at 30 CFR
Federal regulations. North Dakota’s          Federal regulations at 30 CFR                816.116(b)(3)(i) and 817.116(b)(3)(i), and
proposal to require shelterbelts (with       816.116(a)(2) and 817.116(a)(2). The         removes the required amendment at 30
the requisite performance standards for      Director approves the proposed               CFR 934.16(h).
demonstrating success of revegetation)       revisions and removes the required              h. Appendix A, augmentation
as a condition of permit approval is not     amendment at 30 CFR 934.16(g).               practices. At 30 CFR 934.16(i), OSM
inconsistent with the Federal                   g. Chapter II, Sections F and H,          required that North Dakota revise the
regulations at 30 CFR 773.15(c) and          consultation and approval by State           definition of augmentation practices in
773.17, concerning permit approval and       forestry and wildlife agencies. At 30        its revegetation document to be
permit conditions.                           CFR 934.16(h), OSM required that North       consistent with 30 CFR 816.116(c)(4)
   Because North Dakota has proposed to      Dakota submit documentation that it has      (Finding No. 9, 54 FR 10141, 10143,
require the same success standards for       obtained the concurrence of the              March 10, 1989).
all areas designated with the postmining     appropriate State forestry and wildlife         In Appendix A, North Dakota
land use of shelterbelts, the Director       agencies with the revegetation success       proposed to delete the existing
finds that these proposed revisions in       standards for lands reclaimed to fish        definition of ‘‘augmentation practices’’
Chapter II, Section G are no less            and wildlife habitat, recreation,            (which meant those practices used to
effective than the requirements for          shelterbelt, or woodland uses, or shall      reestablish or replace vegetation or
shelterbelts in the Federal regulations at   submit revisions to its revegetation         make temporary improvements to obtain
30 CFR 816.116(b)(3) and 817.116(b)(3),      document and North Dakota                    bond release) and replace it with a
and approves the proposed revisions.         Administrative Code 69–05.2–22–07 or         definition of ‘‘augmentation practices’’
   f. Chapter II, Section H, revegetation    otherwise amend its program to require       meaning those practices which exceed
success standards for fish and wildlife      such concurrence on a permit specific        the commonly used management
habitat. At 30 CFR 934.16(g), OSM            basis (Finding No. 8, 54 FR 10141,           practices on similar unmined lands in
required that North Dakota revise its        10143, March 10, 1989).                      the surrounding area. North Dakota also
revegetation document or otherwise              North Dakota submitted letters of         revised Appendix A to state that the use
amend its program to require that            concurrence from the North Dakota            of an augmentation practice on
vegetative ground cover on lands             Forest Service and the North Dakota          reclaimed lands will reinitiate the
reclaimed to fish and wildlife habitat       Game and Fish Department, dated,             liability period and to provide examples
equal at least 90 percent of the success     respectively, April 21, and May 19,          of augmentation practices including (1)
standard (Finding No. 7.a, 54 FR 10141,      1989. In these letters, the State agencies   fertilization or irrigation on cropland,
10142, March 10, 1989).                      concurred with the standards for             hayland, and pastureland, that is not
   North Dakota proposed to revise           woodland and fish and wildlife habitat       used as specified in the management
Chapter II, Section H, concerning            in Chapter II, Sections F and H, of North    plan or that is used in excessive
              Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 135 / Friday, July 14, 1995 / Rules and Regulations                           36217

amounts (based on soil tests and historic    outlined in North Dakota’s revegetation      document at Chapter 11, Section C and
use), (2) fertilization or irrigation used   document. The NRCS identified its Soil       North Dakota’s rule at NDAC 69–05.2–
to boost production on native grassland,     Tech Note 2, dated 1987, as the most         22–07(4)(d) require for final or fourth-
or on grasslands in fish and wildlife        current reference guideline concerning       stage (equivalent to the Federal
habitat, (3) reseeding native grasslands,    productivity indexes and agreed that the     program’s phase III) bond release on
pasturelands, or grasslands in fish and      sampling designs are adequate. The           prime farmland that productivity equal
wildlife habitat to reintroduce the          NRCS also stated that the use of small       to or greater than the standard must be
desired species, (4) extensive replanting,   grains to prove production is applicable     demonstrated in each of the last 3
plugging, or addition of soil containing     in the area because corn or other deep       consecutive growing seasons of the
propagules on wetlands, (5) extensive        rooting crops are not generally grown in     responsibility period. In addition, North
replanting in woodlands or shelterbelts,     west and west central North Dakota.          Dakota’s rule at NDAC 69–05.2–26–
(6) any significant surface modifications       The Federal regulation at 30 CFR          05(3)(c) requires that the measurement
which redisturb the topsoil, and (7) any     823.15(b)(2) requires, in part, that prime   period for determining crop production
change in land use that requires a seed      farmland soil productivity shall be          is that specified in NDAC 69–05.2–22–
mix modification to support the              measured using statistically valid           07(4)(d) for fourth-stage bond release on
intended land use.                           sampling techniques that are approved        prime farmland described above).
   The Federal regulations at 30 CFR         by the regulatory authority in                  The Federal regulations at 30 CFR
816.116(c)(4) and 817.116(c)(4) provide      consultation with the NRCS. The              800.40(c)(2) require that no part of a
for the approval of selective husbandry      Federal regulation at 30 CFR                 phase II bond shall be released until soil
practices, excluding augmented seeding,      823.15(b)(6) requires that the reference     productivity for prime farmland has
fertilization, or irrigation, that would     crop on which restoration of soil            returned to the equivalent levels of yield
not extend the period of responsibility      productivity is proven shall be selected     as nonmined land of the same soil type
for revegetation success and bond            from the crops most commonly                 in the surrounding area under
liability, if such practices can be          produced on the surrounding prime            equivalent management practices as
expected to continue as part of the          farmland and that where row crops are        determined from the soil survey
postmining land use or if                    the dominant crops grown on prime            performed pursuant to Section
discontinuance of the practices after the    farmland in the area, the row crop           507(b)(16) of the Act and 30 CFR Part
liability period expires will not reduce     requiring the greatest rooting depth         823. The Federal regulations at 30 CFR
the probability of permanent                 shall be chosen as one of the reference      823.15(b)(3) require that the
revegetation success. Approved               crops. The Federal regulation at 30 CFR      measurement period for determining
practices shall be normal husbandry          823.15(b)(7) requires the NRCS               average annual crop production (yield)
practices within the region for unmined      concurrence regarding the approved           shall be a minimum of 3 crop years
lands having land uses similar to the        methods for determining yield                prior to release of the operator’s
approved postmining land use of the          standards for prime farmlands.               performance bond. The Federal
disturbed area.                                 Based on the December 15, 1994,           regulations at 30 CFR 823.15(b)(5)
   The Director finds that North Dakota’s    NRCS letter to North Dakota, the             require that restoration of soil
proposed definition of augmentation          Director finds that North Dakota’s           productivity shall be considered
practices is consistent with the Federal     revegetation document revisions are no       achieved when the average yield during
regulations concerning normal                less effective than the Federal              the measurement period equals or
husbandry practices at 30 CFR                regulations at (1) 30 CFR 823.15(b),         exceeds the average yield of the
816.116(c)(4) and 817.116(c)(4). The         concerning consultation and                  reference crop established for the same
Director approves the proposed               concurrence with the NRCS for prime          period for nonmined soils of the same
revisions and removes the required           farmlands, and (2) 30 CFR 823.15(b)(6),      or similar texture or slope phase of the
amendment at 30 CFR 934.16(i).               concerning the use of small grains           soil series in the surrounding area under
   i. Chapter II, Section C, NRCS            (spring wheat) rather than corn or other     equivalent management practices.
consultation regarding methods for           deep rooting crops to prove production.      Therefore, the Federal regulations at 30
measuring productivity on prime              The Director removes the required            CFR 800.40, concerning phase II bond
farmlands and approval for yield             amendments at 30 CFR 934.16 (w) and          release on prime farmland, and 30 CFR
determination methods on prime               (x).                                         823.15(b), concerning the measurement
farmlands. At 30 CFR 934.16 (w) and                                                       for success of productivity on prime
(x), OSM required that North Dakota          3. Substantive Revisions to North
                                                                                          farmland prior to bond release, clearly
revise its revegetation document to          Dakota’s Revegetation Document
                                                                                          require a successful demonstration of
submit evidence of, respectively, (1)        Proposed as State Initiatives
                                                                                          productivity using 3 years of data prior
NRCS (formerly the Soil Conservation            a. Chapter II, Section C,                 to phase II bond release (equivalent to
Service) consultation regarding the          demonstration of productivity prior to       North Dakota’s third-stage bond release).
approved methodologies for measuring         bond release on prime farmland. North           North Dakota’s existing rule at NDAC
productivity on prime farmlands and (2)      Dakota proposed to revise Chapter II,        69–05.2–22–07(3)(c) and proposed
NRCS concurrence regarding the               Section C, to require for third-stage        revision in Chapter II, Section C in its
approved methods for determining yield       (equivalent to the Federal program’s         revegetation document require that a
standards for prime farmlands (Finding       phase II) bond release on prime              permittee demonstrate productivity on
Nos. 28.a and b, 57 FR 807, 823, January     farmland, that productivity must be          prime farmland at third-stage bond
9, 1992).                                    equal to or greater than that of the         release. However, North Dakota’s
   North Dakota submitted with its           approved reference area or standard          existing rules at NDAC 69–05.2–22–
revised amendment a December 15,             with 90 percent statistical confidence.      07(4)(d) and 69–05.2–26–05(3)(c) and
1994, letter from the NRCS in which the      This is identical to the requirement for     Chapter II, Section C in its revegetation
NRCS stated that it had reviewed and         third-stage bond release on prime            document require that the 3-year
concurred with standards and sampling        farmland in North Dakota’s rule at North     measurement period for making a
procedures for proving reclamation           Dakota Administrative Code (NDAC)            demonstration of productivity occur
success on prime farmlands that are          69–05.2–22–07(3)(c). The revegetation        prior to fourth-stage bond release. The
36218         Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 135 / Friday, July 14, 1995 / Rules and Regulations

Director finds that North Dakota’s rules     817.116(a) require that the success of        include criteria representative of
at NDAC 69–05.2–26–05(3)(c) and 69–          revegetation shall be judged on the           unmined lands to evaluate the
05.2–22–07(3)(c), and its revegetation       effectiveness of the vegetation for the       appropriate vegetation parameters of
document at Chapter II, Section C,           approved postmining land use, the             ground cover, production, or stocking.
concerning the requirement for third-        extent of cover compared to the cover            In response to OSM’s September 9,
stage bond release on prime farmland, to     occurring in natural vegetation of the        1994, issue letter, North Dakota
the extent that they do not require the      area, and the general requirements of         submitted a December 15, 1994, NRCS
permittee to demonstrate the success of      Section 816.111.                              letter in which the NRCS stated that it
productivity on prime farmland with 3           Because North Dakota proposed that         has recommended estimating
years of data, are less effective than the   only perennial species can be used in         productivity values for soil groups not
Federal regulations at 30 CFR 800.40         determining the success of ground             suited for pasture or hayland by using
and 823.15. The Director approves the        cover, North Dakota has proposed in its       50 percent of the yield of the suitability
revision proposed in Chapter II, Section     revegetation document, in effect, to          group or soil series most similar to the
C of the revegetation document that          require an evaluation of permanence.          unrated one. The NRCS further stated
requires prime farmland productivity to      North Dakota also proposed that all           that most of these areas are steep,
be equal to or greater than that of the      species included in the approved seed         shallow to bedrock, or strongly saline
approved reference area or standard          mixture must be present at the time of        and that there are minimal acreage of
with 90 percent statistical confidence       final bond release. Because the               these areas in the coal mining region.
prior to third-stage bond release.           approved seed mix is designed to attain       Finally, the NRCS stated that although
However, the Director also requires that     the diversity and seasonality required to     it has not compiled data to support
North Dakota further revise Chapter II,      support the approved postmining land          using the 50 percent productivity level,
Section C in the revegetation document       use, North Dakota has proposed in its         it believes that using 50 percent of the
and its rules at NDAC 69–05.2–26–            revegetation document, in effect, to          productivity level of similar nonrated
05(3)(c) and 69–05.2–22–07(3)(c) to          require an evaluation of diversity and        soils adequately describes production
require that the permittee demonstrate       seasonality on land reclaimed for use as      on these sites.
restoration of productivity on prime         tame pastureland. Therefore, although            Based on the December 15, 1994,
farmland using 3 crop years at third-        North Dakota proposed deletion of             NRCS letter to North Dakota, the
stage bond release. OSM recommends           existing discussions concerning               Director finds that North Dakota’s
that North Dakota then revise NDAC 69–       diversity, seasonality, and permanence        proposed method for estimating yields
05.2–22–07(4)(d) to delete the fourth-       on tame pastureland, it also proposed to
                                                                                           on unrated soils reclaimed for use as
stage bond release requirement on prime      include requirements for evaluation of
                                                                                           tame pastureland is no less effective
farmland for successful productivity         diversity, seasonality, and permanence
                                                                                           than the Federal regulations at 30 CFR
during the last 3 consecutive growing        that are consistent with the Federal
                                                                                           816.116(a)(2) and 817.116(a)(2) and
seasons.                                     regulations at 30 CFR 816.111(a)(1) and
                                                                                           approves the proposed revision.
   b. Chapter II, Section E,                 (b)(2), 817.111(a)(1) and (b)(2),
demonstration of diversity, seasonality,     816.116(a), and 817.116(a).                      d. Chapter II, Section H, classification
and permanence prior to fourth-stage            Therefore, the Director finds that         of wetland vegetation on reclaimed
bond release on tame pastureland.            North Dakota’s proposed revisions in          lands developed for use as fish and
North Dakota proposed to revise              Chapter II, Section E of the revegetation     wildlife habitat. North Dakota proposed
Chapter II, Section E, to remove existing    document, concerning the evaluation of        to revise Chapter II, Section H,
discussions concerning the evaluation        diversity, seasonality, and permanence        concerning wetlands on land reclaimed
of reclaimed vegetation for diversity,       on land reclaimed for use as tame             for use as fish and wildlife habitat, to
seasonality, and permanence on areas         pastureland, are no less effective than       delete the State wetland classification
developed for use as tame pastureland.       the Federal regulations at 30 CFR             system of temporary, seasonal, semi-
However, North Dakota also proposed to       816.111 (a)(1) and (b)(2), 817.111 (a)(1)     permanent, and permanent, and to add
revise Chapter II, Section E to require      and (b)(2), 816.116(a), and 817.116(a),       the classification system for premining
that (1) all species used in determining     and approves the proposed revisions.          assessments described by Stewart and
ground cover must be perennial species          c. Chapter II, Section E, development      Kantrud (Classes I through VI). In
not detrimental to the land use and (2)      of a productivity standard on tame            addition, North Dakota proposed to add
all species included in the approved         pastureland using 50 percent of the           the requirement that the total acreage of
seed mixture must be present at the time     yield of a suitability group or soil series   postmine wetland, including Class I and
of final bond release.                       most similar to an unrated soil series.       II’s, prior to final bond release for the
   The Federal regulations at 30 CFR         North Dakota proposed to revise               mine must equal the total premine
816.111(a)(1) and 817.111(a)(1) require      Chapter II, Section E to allow estimated      acreage. North Dakota did not propose
the permittee to establish on regraded       yield values to be used for those soil        to revise any of the standards applicable
areas and on all other disturbed areas       groups that are not suited for pasture or     to evaluating the success of reclaimed
(except water areas and surface areas of     hayland. North Dakota proposed that           wetland vegetation.
roads that are approved as part of the       these yield values be derived using 50           The Federal regulations at 30 CFR
postmining land use) a vegetative cover      percent of the yield of the suitability       816.111, 816.116, 817.111, and 817.116,
that is in accordance with the approved      group or soil series most similar to          concerning requirements for success of
permit and reclamation plan and that is      them. Fifty percent of the yield was          revegetation, including requirements for
diverse, effective, and permanent.           selected, based on NRCS                       revegetation success on land reclaimed
Additionally, the Federal regulations at     recommendations, since these soils are        for use as fish and wildlife habitat, do
30 CFR 816.111(b)(2) and 817.111(b)(2)       rated non-suitable due to machinery           not include requirements specific to
require that the reestablished plant         limitations and erosion rather than           wetland vegetation. North Dakota’s
species have the same seasonal               productivity potential.                       proposed revisions concerning wetland
characteristics of growth as the original       The Federal regulations at 30 CFR          classification and replacement go
vegetation. Finally, the Federal             816.116(a)(2) and 817.116(a)(2) require       beyond the requirements of, and are not
regulations at 30 CFR 816.116(a) and         that revegetation success standards           inconsistent with, the Federal
               Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 135 / Friday, July 14, 1995 / Rules and Regulations                           36219

regulations at 30 CFR 816.111, 816.116,       regulatory authority on the basis of local   ground cover standard, concerning a
817.111, and 817.116.                         and regional conditions and after            recreation land use, proposed in
   Therefore, the Director finds that         consultation with and approval by the        Chapter II, Section I.
North Dakota’s proposed revisions in          State agencies responsible for the              f. Chapter III, Section C, sample
Chapter II, Section H of the revegetation     administration of forestry and wildlife      design and sample size adequacy. North
document, concerning wetlands on land         programs, (2) trees and shrubs counted       Dakota proposed to revise Chapter III,
reclaimed for use as fish and wildlife        in determining such success shall be         Section C, to (1) require that the
habitat, are no less effective than the       healthy and have been in place for not       determination of an adequate sample
Federal regulations at 30 CFR 816.111,        less than two growing seasons, (3) at        size include an initial sampling to
816.116, 817.111, and 817.116, and            least 80 percent of the trees and shrubs     obtain estimates of the mean and
approves the proposed revisions.              used to determine such success shall         variance of each site type or reference
   e. Chapter II, Section I, requirements     have been in place for 60 percent of the     area; (2) specify a minimum number of
for revegetation success on reclaimed         applicable minimum period of                 samples when hand sampling to
lands developed for use as recreation,        responsibility, and (4) vegetative ground    determine (a) total production and cover
residential, industrial, and commercial.      cover shall not be less than that required   on native grassland and tame
North Dakota proposed to revise its           to achieve the approved postmining           pastureland, (b) production on
revegatation document by creating a           land use.                                    cropland, or (c) total cover; and (3)
new Section I in Chapter II. Proposed           The Director finds that proposed           require that the mean and variance
Section I includes the requirements for       Chapter II, Section I in North Dakota’s      derived from the initial sampling be
success of revegatation on lands              revegetation document, with respect to       used to calculate adequate sample size
reclaimed for use as recreation,              areas developed for residential or           using (a) a two-stage sampling
residential, and industrial and               industrial and commercial land uses, is      procedure, (b) a procedure using the
commercial. North Dakota proposed to          no less affective than the Federal           standard error as a percentage of the
require on areas developed for                regulations at 30 CFR 816.116(b)(4) and      mean, or (c) a procedure described for
recreation, residential, and industrial       817.116(b)(4).                               comparing two different populations
and commercial land uses, for both              However, on areas developed for a          (e.g., reference area and reclaimed area).
third and fourth-stage bond release,          recreation land use, neither the North       Each of these procedures for
establishment of vegetation sufficient to     Dakota rule nor its revegetation             determining sample size are based on
control erosion and documentation             document require revegetation success        either a normal or binomial distribution
showing that the areas are not                standards for tree and shrub stocking        of the population when parametric
contributing suspended solids to              and vegetative ground cover based on         statistics are used to evaluate the
streamflow or runoff outside the permit       consultation with and approval from the      revegetation data collected from the
area. North Dakota proposed (1) a             State agencies responsible for the           reclaimed area.
technical standard for establishment of       administration of forestry and wildlife         The Federal regulations at 30 CFR
revegetation, measured with a point           programs. Therefore, with respect to         816.116(a)(2) and 817.116(a)(2) require
frame, of either 73 percent total cover       areas developed for a recreation land        that the sampling techniques for
based on basal hits or 83 percent total       use, the Director finds that the North       measuring revegetation success shall
cover based on first hits, (2) the            Dakota rules at NDAC 69–05.2–22–             use a 90-percent statistical confidence
requirement that live cover included in       07(4)(j) and Chapter II, Section I in the    interval (i.e., one-sided test with a 0.10
the standard must be perennial species        revegetation document are less effective     alpha error).
not detrimental to the land use, and (3)      than the Federal regulations at 30 CFR          North Dakota’s proposed revisions of
that either standard must be achieved         816.116(b)(3) and 817.116(b)(3). With        Chapter III, Section C, concerning
with 90 percent statistical confidence.       the exception that Chapter II, Section I     sample design, are consistent with the
North Dakota’s rules at NDAC 69–05.2–         does not include complete requirements       Federal regulations at 30 CFR
22–07(4)(j) require that within 2 years       for measuring the success of                 816.116(a)(2) and 817.116(a)(2) in that
after completion of grading or soil           revegetation on land reclaimed for use       North Dakota has clearly required that
replacement, the ground cover of living       as recreation, the Director approves the     all sampling techniques shall use a 90
plants must not be less than required to      revegetation success standards and           percent statistical confidence level.
control erosion on areas to be developed      sampling techniques proposed by North           North Dakota also proposed to revise
for recreation, water areas, residential,     Dakota in Chapter II, Section I of its       Chapter III, Section C, concerning
or industrial and commercial uses.            revegetation document for areas              sample design to state that, in some
   For areas developed for residential, or    developed for recreation, residential, or    cases, the sample size derived from a
industrial and commercial land uses,          industrial and commercial land uses.         formula may appear to be unreasonably
the Federal regulations at 30 CFR             With respect to areas developed for a        large due to non-parametric or non-
816.116(b)(4) and 817.116(b)(4) require       recreation land use, the Director            normal distributions and that North
that the vegetative ground cover shall        requires that North Dakota (1) revise its    Dakota will evaluate such cases and
not be less than that required to control     rule at NDAC 69–05.2–22–07(4)(j) and         establish a maximum sample size.
erosion.                                      Chapter II, Section I in its revegetation       The distribution of (1) vegetative
   For areas developed for use as             document to require tree and shrub           cover in the arid west and (2) shrub
recreation, the Federal regulations at 30     stocking standards that (a) have been        density throughout the west often do
CFR 816.116(b)(3) (i) through (iii) and       approved by the State agencies               not exhibit normal or binomial
817.116(b)(3) (i) through (iii) require, in   responsible for forestry and wildlife        characteristics, and the use of non-
part, that success of revegetation be         programs and (b) meet all other              parametric statistics may be appropriate
determined on the basis of tree and           requirements for tree and shrub              for evaluation of the revegetation data
shrub stocking and vegetative ground          standards included in 30 CFR                 collected from these reclaimed
cover and include the requirements that       816.116(b)(3), and (2) provide evidence      environment. Because North Dakota’s
(1) permit specific or programwide            of consultation with and approval from       proposed requirement that all sampling
minimum stocking and planting                 the State agencies responsible for           techniques use a 90 percent statistical
arrangements shall be specified by the        forestry and wildlife programs for the       confidence level applies whether
36220         Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 135 / Friday, July 14, 1995 / Rules and Regulations

parametric or non-parametric statistics      characteristics are adequate to represent       Based on the above discussion, the
are used to evaluate the data collected,     his or her reclaimed land. A map             Director approves the proposed
North Dakota’s provision concerning          showing the location of the strips must      sampling procedures allowed for
non-parametric statistics is consistent      be approved by North Dakota prior to         demonstration of productivity of annual
with the requirements for measuring for      final selection. North Dakota required       crops on cropland and prime farmland
success of revegetation with 90 percent      that the methods used to harvest the         in Chapter III, Section D of North
statistical confidence in the Federal        representative areas must reflect a 90       Dakota’s revegetation document.
regulations at 30 CFR 816.116(a)(2) and      percent statistical confidence interval         h. Chapter III, Section D, sample
817.116(a)(2).                               and recommended that the                     adequacy requirements for
   Therefore, the Director finds that        representative strips be entirely            demonstration of woody plant density.
North Dakota’s proposed revisions of         harvested to obtain a single yield value.    North Dakota proposed to revise
Chapter III, Section C in its revegetation   North Dakota also submitted a NRCS           Chapter III, Section D in its revegetation
document, concerning sampling design,        letter, dated December 15, 1994, which       document to require, when using the
are no less effective than the Federal       documented NRCS consultation                 quadrat sampling method to measure
regulations at 30 CFR 816.116(a)(2) and      regarding the proposed sampling              success of woody plant density, that
817.116(a)(2), and approves the              techniques. The NRCS stated that it          randomly placed quadrats be used to
proposed revisions.                          agreed that the sampling designs were        obtain density counts and to
   g. Chapter III, Section D, the sampling   adequate, but recommended whole-field        recommend that permanent sampling
procedures allowed for demonstration         harvest to eliminate any question of         plots be established within each
of productivity of annual crops on           accuracy.                                    planting. North Dakota proposed to
cropland and prime farmland. North              The Federal regulations at 30 CFR         delete the requirement that sampling of
Dakota proposed to revise Chapter III,       816.116(a) (1) and (2) and 817.116(a) (1)    total density proceed until the
Section D, to provide methods for the        and (2) require that statistically valid     coefficient of variation is less than or
demonstration of production on areas         sampling techniques be included in the       equal to 20 percent, and add the
reclaimed for production of annual           approved program and that the                requirements that enough samples must
crops (cropland and prime farmland).         sampling techniques for measuring            be taken to (1) reflect the population
North Dakota proposed to allow the use       success shall use a 90-percent statistical   mean with 90 percent statistical
of (1) entire field harvest; (2) combined    confidence interval (i.e., one-sided test    confidence and (2) demonstrate that the
sampling, where sampling units or            with a 0.10 alpha error). For prime          number of woody plants established
strips must be distributed throughout        farmland, the Federal regulations at 30      equals or exceeds the approved standard
the entire field and the number of strips    CFR 823.15(b)(2) require that soil           with 90 percent statistical confidence.
needed must be determined using a            productivity be measured on a                   The Federal regulations at 30 CFR
sample adequacy formula that reflects        representative sample or on all of the       816.116(a)(2) and 817.116(a)(2) require,
90 percent statistical confidence; (3)       mined and reclaimed area and that a          in part, that the sampling techniques for
hand sampling, which are limited to          statistically valid sampling technique at    measuring success of stocking shall use
areas where the cropland reference area      a 90-percent or greater statistical          a 90-percent statistical confidence
standard or the NRCS cropland                confidence level shall be used as            interval.
technical standard with a control area       approved by the regulatory authority in         As discussed in Finding No. 2.c
used for climatic correction is used, and    consultation with the NRCS (formerly         above, OSM is approving North Dakota’s
where both the reclaimed and the             the Soil Conservation Service).              proposed requirement that enough
reference or control areas are hand             The Director finds that North Dakota’s    samples must be taken to demonstrate
sampled in the same manner (the              proposed methods for the                     that the number of woody plants
number of samples needed must be             demonstration of production on areas         established equals or exceeds the
determined using a sample adequacy           reclaimed for production of annual           approved standard with 90 percent
formula that reflects 90 percent             crops (cropland and prime farmland),         statistical confidence.
statistical confidence); or (4)              including entire field harvest, combined        The Director finds that the revisions
representative strips.                       sampling, and hand sampling, Chapter         proposed in Chapter III, Section D,
   With respect to the use of                III, Section D are no less effective than    concerning the sampling procedure
representative strips, North Dakota          the requirements of 30 CFR                   used to demonstrate the success of
proposed to require at least three           816.116(a)(2) and 817.116(a)(2).             woody plant density, are no less
representative strips of adequate size          Because North Dakota (1) proposed         effective than the Federal regulations at
must be established which must reflect       criteria for establishment of                30 CFR 816.116(a)(2) and 817.116(a)(2)
the variability in soil redistribution       representative strips within the             and approves the proposed revisions.
thickness, landscape forms, and              reclaimed area that should ensure that          i. Appendix A, reinforcement
reclamation age occurring in the larger      the strips will be representative at a 90-   interseeding on native grassland as a
reclaimed areas they represent. In           percent statistical confidence level of      normal conservation practice. North
addition, each strip must extend across      the total reclaimed prime farmland bond      Dakota proposed to revise Appendix A,
the entire tract they represent and, to      release area (cropland and prime             concerning normal conservation
the extent possible considering the          farmland), and (2) submitted evidence        practices on lands reclaimed for use as
above factors, should be equally spaced      of consultation with the NRCS regarding      native grassland, to allow restricted
across the entire tract. The total acreage   the demonstration of productivity on         reinforcement interseeding, described
of the representative strips which must      prime farmland, the Director finds that      below, to modify species composition or
be cropped each year must, at a              the representative strips method for the     reestablish certain species during
minimum, equal ten percent of the            demonstration of production on areas         establishment of the revegetated stand.
entire reclaimed tract they represent.       reclaimed for production of annual           North Dakota referenced the NRCS July
Separate representative strips must be       crops (cropland and prime farmland) is       14, 1989, Technical Note, ND–12 Rev.,
established for each landowner, unless       no less effective than the requirements      entitled ‘‘Guidelines for Grass/Legume
the landowner agrees that other              of 30 CFR 816.116(a)(2), 817.116(a)(2),      Stand Evaluation,’’ and used this
representative strips having the same        and 823.15(b)(2).                            guideline to develop the requirements
              Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 135 / Friday, July 14, 1995 / Rules and Regulations                               36221

for an evaluation of species                  normal conservation practices in             IV. Summary and Disposition of
establishment and the need for                Appendix A to include the voluntary          Comments
reinforcement interseeding.                   plantings of trees and shrubs on               Following are summaries of all
   North Dakota proposed to require a         agricultural land at the request of the      substantive written comments on the
record of the frequency measurement of        landowner or to enhance fish and
the established plants and that the                                                        proposed amendment that were
                                              wildlife habitat as a normal                 received by OSM, and OSM’s responses
frequency of species seeded must              conservation practice.
indicate that at least 50 percent of the                                                   to them.
                                                 There is no provision in the Federal
seeded species are becoming                   program for the planting of trees and        1. Public Comments
established. A single reinforcement
                                              shrubs on agricultural land at the             OSM invited public comments on the
interseeding may be made prior to year
                                              request of the landowner, as proposed        proposed amendment, but none were
4 of the bond liability period. At year 4,
                                              by North Dakota. The Federal                 received.
the permittee may evaluate the
                                              regulations at 30 CFR 816.97(h) and
establishment of species. If the                                                           2. Federal Agency Comments
                                              817.97(h) and North Dakota’s rule at
permittee can demonstrate that the
                                              NDAC 69–052–13–08(5)(j) require that a         Pursuant to 732.17(h)(11)(i), OSM
revegetated stand has not become
                                              permittee, when the postmining land          solicited comments on the proposed
established, one more reinforcement
                                              use is cropland, and where appropriate       amendment from various Federal
interseeding would be allowed in the
                                              for crop-management practices,               agencies with an actual or potential
spring of year 5. North Dakota proposed
to require that any interseeding after        intersperse the fields with trees, hedges,   interest in the North Dakota program.
year 5 would restart the liability period.    or fence rows throughout the harvested         a. NRCS. On April 14, 1994, the U.S.
   The Federal regulations at 30 CFR          area. The provision for voluntary            NRCS responded with the following
816.116(c)(4) and 817.116(c)(4) allows        planting of trees and shrubs on              comments (administrative record No.
the regulatory authority to select normal     agricultural land either at the              ND–U–09).
husbandry practices if such practices         landowner’s request or to enhance fish         With respect to reference areas used
are expected to continue as part of the       and wildlife habitat is not inconsistent     to demonstrate success of land
postmining land use or if discontinance       with the Federal regulations at 30 CFR       reclaimed for use as native grassland,
of the practices after the liability period   816.97(h) and 817.97(h) and North            the NRCS commented that
expires will not reduce the probability       Dakota’s rule at NDAC 69–052–13–               [l]ong term ungrazed reference areas
of permanent revegetation success. Such       08(5)(j).                                    eventually may lose integrity in representing
practices must be normal husbandry               The Federal regulations at 30 CFR         characteristic native plant communities.
practices within the region.                  816.116(c)(4) and 817.116(c)(4) provide      Such areas eventually tend to become
   In response to OSM’s September 9,          for the approval of selective husbandry      invaded by Kentucky Blue grass, excess litter
1994, issue letter, North Dakota                                                           accumulates, wood or other dominating
                                              practices that would not extend the
submitted a copy of the NRCS July 14,                                                      overstory may increase, and species diversity
                                              period of responsibility for revegetation    decreases. Grazing and/or fire historically
1989, Technical Note, ND–12 Rev. This         success and bond liability, if such          influenced the character of native prairie
document states that, in the case of          practices can be expected to continue as     ecosystems.
weak or spotty stands, reinforcement          part of the postmining land use or if
seeding or spot seeding should be             discontinuance of the practices after the       North Dakota’s rules at NDAC 69–
considered during evaluation of stand         liability period expires will not reduce     05.2–01–02 define a ‘‘reference area’’ to
establishment. As set forth in Chapter II,    the probability of permanent                 mean, in part, a land unit maintained
Section D of North Dakota’s revegetation      revegetation success. The term ‘‘normal      under appropriate management. North
document, the revegetation stand would        conservation practice’’ used by North        Dakota’s revegetation document at
have to meet the revegetation success         Dakota in its revegetation document          Chapter II, Section D includes the
standards for production, cover,              means the same thing as the term             requirements for measuring success of
diversity, seasonality, and performance       ‘‘normal husbandry practice’’ used in        revegetation on areas reclaimed for use
during the last 2 consecutive years of        the Federal regulations.                     as native grassland. North Dakota
the liability period. Therefore, the                                                       requires that the range condition of the
                                                 The use of field windbreaks, or           reference area be similar to that of the
permittee would have to demonstrate
                                              plantings of trees and shrubs on             corresponding premine range site. North
prior to bond release that
                                              agricultural land, is a common               Dakota also recommends that, because
discontinuance of interseeding would
                                              agricultural practice in North Dakota. As    prior to mining disturbance a rancher
not reduce the probability of permanent
                                              discussed above, the planting of trees       may have used the land more
revegetation success.
   Based on the NRCS document and             and shrubs to enhance fish and wildlife      intensively than if the goal had been
North Dakota’s proposal that only one         habitat where appropriate for crop           sustained yields for several years,
interseeding prior to year 4 of the 10        management on areas with a postmining        management practices which will
year liability period and one conditional     land use of cropland is recognized in        maintain or improve the condition of
interseeding in year of the liability         the Federal program as a desirable           the reference area be used during the
period would be allowed, the Director         enhancement of an agricultural land          liability area and that management of
finds that North Dakota’s proposal for        use.                                         the reference area should be equivalent
reinforcement interseeding on reclaimed          For these reasons, the Director finds     to that required for the approved
native grasslands is consistent with the      that North Dakota’s proposed allowance       postmining land use of the permit area.
Federal regulations at 30 CFR                 in Appendix A for the planting of trees      Therefore, because North Dakota’s rules
816.116(c)(4) and 817.116(c)(4) and           and shrubs on agricultural land as a         and revegetation document require
approves it.                                  normal conservation practice is              proper management of the reference
   j. Appendix A, plantings of trees and      consistent with the Federal regulations      area used to demonstrate success of
shrubs on agricultural land as a normal       at 30 CFR 816.97(h), 816.116(c)(4),          revegetation on lands reclaimed for use
conservation practice. North Dakota           817.97(h), and 817.116(c)(4), and            as native grassland, the Director is not
proposed to revise the discussion of          approves it.                                 requiring that North Dakota further
36222           Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 135 / Friday, July 14, 1995 / Rules and Regulations

revise the revegetation document in                On May 22, 1995, the U.S. NRCS           amendment from the SHPO and ACHP
response to this comment.                       responded that it had no comments on        (administrative record No. ND–U–03).
  With respect to production on land            the revised proposed amendment              Neither SHPO nor ACHP responded to
reclaimed for use as native grazingland,        (administrative record No. ND–U–19).        OSM’s request.
the NRCS commented that                            b. Other Federal agencies. The U.S.
                                                                                            V. Director’s Decision
                                                Mine Safety and Health Administration
  [NRCS] production values represent                                                           Based on the above findings, the
potential for given range sites and may not
                                                (MSHA) responded on March 16, 1994,
                                                that the proposed amendment did not         Director approves, with certain
be representative of the actual pre-mined
yields. Range condition would influence         conflict MSHA regulations                   exceptions and additional requirements,
yields on both the reference area and pre-      (administrative record No. ND–U–04).        North Dakota’s proposed amendment as
mined area.                                        The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service       submitted on February 17, 1994, and as
                                                responded on March 29, 1994, and June       revised and supplemental with
   North Dakota’s revegetation document         1, 1995, that (1) the proposed              additional explanatory information on
at Chapter II, Section D requires an            amendment was logical and reasonable        December 21, 1994, and May 11, 1995.
evaluation of the range condition, for all      and (2) it did not anticipate any              With the requirement that North
range sites and the reference area,             significant impacts to fish and wildlife    Dakota further revise its rules and/or the
according to the methodology specified          resources as a result of the proposed       revegetation document, the Director
by the NRCS. And as discussed above,            amendment (administrative record Nos.       approves, as discussed in Finding No.
North Dakota requires proper                    ND–U–07 and ND–U–21).                       3.a, Chapter II, Section C, the
management of the reference area for               The U.S. Bureau of Mines responded       requirements to demonstrate the success
attainment of the postmining land use;          on April 11, 1994, that it had no           of productivity prior to third-stage bond
in addition, the reference area must be         comments on the proposed amendment          release on land reclaimed for use as
representative of the geology, soil, slope,     (administrative record No. ND–U–08).        prime farmland, and Finding No. 3.e,
and vegetation in the permit area. While           The U.S. Rural Economic and              Chapter II, Section I, the requirements to
the permittee may elect to use either           Community Development responded on          demonstrate the success of revegetation
NRCS estimated yield values or actual           May 23, 1994, that it had no comments       on areas developed for recreation,
yield values from the reference area to         on the proposed amendment                   residential, or industrial and
determine a productivity standard,              (administrative record No. ND–U–20).        commercial land uses.
North Dakota requires that the permittee           The U.S. Agricultural Research              The Director approves, as discussed
demonstrate restoration of the                  Service, Northern Great Plains Research     in: Finding No. 1, the proposed
production potential of the soils in the        Laboratory, responded on May 30, 1994,      revisions in the revegetation document
permit area. For these reasons, the             that it had no comments on the              not otherwise specifically discussed,
Director is not requiring that North            proposed amendment (administrative          Finding Nos. 2.a. through 2.i, various
Dakota further revise its revegetation          record No. ND–U–22).                        revisions in the revegetation document
document in response to these                      The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers         made in response to required
comments.                                       responded on June 5, 1995, that it found    amendments; Finding No. 3.b, Chapter
   With respect to NRCS pasture and             the proposed amendment to be                II, Section E, the required evaluation of
hayland yields, NRCS commented that             satisfactory (administrative record No.     reclaimed vegetation for diversity,
                                                ND–U–24).                                   seasonality, and permanence on areas
  [c]urrently, pasture and hayland yields are                                               developed for use as tame pastureland;
under evaluation for revision. Some yields      3. Environmental Protection Agency          Finding No. 3.c, Chapter II, Section E,
are apparently too high. Revisions will be      (EPA) Concurrence and Comments
based on available research data.                                                           the use of estimated yields to develop a
                                                   Pursuant to 30 CFR 732.17(h)(11)(ii),    productivity standard for soils that are
   North Dakota’s revegetation document         OSM is required to solicit the written      not rated for use as pastureland on land
at Chapter II, Section E requires the use       concurrence of EPA with respect to          reclaimed for use as tame pastureland;
of NRCS estimates yield figures for             those provisions of the proposed            Finding No. 3.d, Chapter II, Section H,
setting a technical productivity standard       program amendment that relate to air or     wetland classification and replacement
by which the success of revegetation            water quality standards promulgated         requirements; Finding No. 3.f, Chapter
will be measured on land reclaimed for          under the authority of the Clean Water      III, Section C, sample design and sample
use as pastureland. North Dakota also           Act (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) or the Clean   size adequacy; Finding No. 3.g, Chapter
states in its revegetation document at          Air Act (42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.).           III, Section D, the use of entire field
Chapter II, Section B, concerning data             None of the revisions that North         harvest, combined sampling, hand
sources, that when new data are                 Dakota proposed to make in its              sampling, or representative strips as
published by the NRCS, updated tables           amendment pertain to air or water           procedures for demonstrating
will be forwarded to the mining                 quality standards. Therefore, OSM did       productivity on land reclaimed for use
companies and OSM. The permittee will           not request EPA’s concurrence.              as cropland or prime farmland; Finding
therefore be using the most current                Pursuant to 732.17(h)(11)(i), OSM        No. 3.h, Appendix A, the use of
NRCS estimated yields to determine any          solicited comments on the proposed          restricted interseeding as a normal
technical standards used in                     amendment from EPA (administrative          conservation practice on land reclaimed
demonstrating the success of                    record No. ND–U–03. EPA responded           for use as native grassland; and Finding
productivity on lands reclaimed for use         on March 21, 1994, that it had no           No. 3.i, Appendix A, the voluntary
as tame pastureland. Where the                  comments on the proposed amendment          plantings of trees and shrubs on
permittee elects to use a reference area        (administrative record No. ND–U–06).        agricultural land at the request of the
to determine the productivity standard,                                                     landowner or to enhance fish and
the actual yield measurements will be           4. State Historic Preservation Officer      wildlife habitat as a normal
used. For these reasons, the Director is        (SHPO) and the Advisory Council on          conservation practice.
not requiring that North Dakota further         Historic Preservation (ACHP)                   The Federal regulations at 30 CFR
revise the revegetation document in                Pursuant to 30 CFR 732.17(h)(4), OSM     Part 934, codifying decisions concerning
response to this comment.                       solicited comments on the proposed          the North Dakota Program, are being
              Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 135 / Friday, July 14, 1995 / Rules and Regulations                               36223

amended to implement this decision.         730.11, 732.15, and 732.17(h)(10),          PART 934—North Dakota
This final rule is being made effective     decisions on proposed State regulatory
immediately to expedite the State           programs and program amendments               1. The authority citation for Part 934
program amendment process and to            submitted by the States must be based       continues to read as follows:
encourage States to bring their programs    solely on a determination of whether the        Authority: 30 U.S.C. 1201 et seq.
into conformity with the Federal            submittal is consistent with SMCRA and        2. Section 934.15 is amended by
standards without undue delay.              its implementing Federal regulations        adding paragraph (u) to read as follows:
Consistency of State and Federal            and whether the other requirements of
standards is required by SMCRA.             30 CFR Parts 730, 731, and 732 have         § 934.15 Approval of amendments to the
   In accordance with 30 CFR                been met.                                   North Dakota regulatory program.
732.17(f)(1), the Director is also taking                                               *      *    *      *     *
this opportunity to clarify in the          3. National Environmental Policy Act           (u) With the exceptions of Chapter II,
required amendment section at 30 CFR                                                    Section C, to the extent that it allows the
                                              No environmental impact statement is
934.16 that, within 60 days of the                                                      demonstration of productivity with less
                                            required for this rule since section
publication of this final rule, North                                                   than 3 years of crop data prior to third-
                                            702(d) of SMCRA (30 U.S.C. 1292(d))
Dakota must either submit a proposed                                                    stage bond release on lands reclaimed
                                            provides that agency decisions on
written amendment, or a description of                                                  for use as prime farmland; and Chapter
                                            proposed State regulatory program
an amendment to the proposed that                                                       II, Section I, to the extent that it does not
                                            provisions do not constitute major
meets the requirements of SMCRA and                                                     include complete requirements for
                                            Federal actions within the meaning of       measuring the success of revegetation
30 CFR Chapter VII and a timetable for      section 102(2)(C) of the National
enactment that is consistent with North                                                 on land reclaimed for use as recreation;
                                            Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42        revisions to North Dakota’s policy
Dakota’s established administrative or      U.S.C. 4332(2)(C)).
legislative procedures.                                                                 document entitled ‘‘Standards for
   Section 503 of SMCRA provides that       4. Paperwork Reduction Act                  Evaluation of Revegetation Success and
a State may not exercise jurisdiction                                                   Recommended Procedures for Pre- and
under SMCRA unless the State program          This rule does not contain                Postmining Vegetation Assessments,’’ as
is approved by the Secretary. Similarly,    information collection requirements that    submitted to OSM on February 17, 1994,
30 CFR 732.17(a) requires that any          require approval by OMB under the           and as revised and supplemented with
alteration of an approved State program     Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C.          explanatory information on December
be submitted to OSM for review as a         3507 et seq.).                              21, 1994, and May 11, 1995, are
program amendment. Thus, any changes        5. Regulatory Flexibility Act               approved effective July 14, 1995.
to the State program are not enforceable                                                   3. Section 934.16 is amended by
until approved by OSM. The Federal             The Department of the Interior has       revising the introductory paragraph,
                                            determined that this rule will not have     removing and reserving paragraphs (b)
regulations at 30 CFR 732.17(g) prohibit
                                            a significant economic impact on a          through (i), (w), and (x), and adding
any unilateral changes to approved State
                                            substantial number of small entities        paragraphs (aa) and (bb) to read as
programs. In the oversight of the North
                                            under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5     follows:
Dakota program, the Director will
recognize only the statutes, regulations    U.S.C. 601 et seq.). The State submittal    § 934.16    Required program amendments.
and other materials approved by OSM,        that is the subject of this rule is based      Pursuant to 30 CFR 732.17(f)(1), North
together with any consistent                upon counterpart Federal regulations for    Dakota is required to submit to OSM by
implementing policies, directives and       which an economic analysis was              the specified date the following written,
other materials, and will require the       prepared and certification made that        proposed program amendment, or a
enforcement by North Dakota of only         such regulations would not have a           description of an amendment to be
such provisions.                            significant economic effect upon a          proposed that meets the requirements of
                                            substantial number of small entities.       SMCRA and 30 CFR Chapter VII and a
VI. Procedural Determinations               Accordingly, this rule will ensure that     timetable for enactment that is
1. Executive Order 12866                    existing requirements previously            consistent with North Dakota’s
                                            promulgated by OSM will be                  established administrative or legislative
  This rule is exempted from review by      implemented by the State. In making the
the Office of Management and Budget                                                     procedures.
                                            determination as to whether this rule
(OMB) under Executive Order 12866           would have a significant economic           *       *    *    *    *
(Regulatory Planning and Review).                                                          (aa) By September 12, 1995, North
                                            impact, the Department relied upon the
                                                                                        Dakota shall revise Chapter II, Section C
2. Executive Order 12778                    data and assumptions for the
                                                                                        in its revegatation document and its
                                            counterpart Federal regulations.
  The Department of the Interior has                                                    rules at NDAC 69–05.2–22–07(3)(c) and
conducted the reviews required by           List of Subjects in 30 CFR Part 934         69–05.2–26–05(3)(c) to require that,
section 2 of Executive Order 12778                                                      prior to third-stage bond release on land
(Civil Justice Reform) and has               Intergovernmental relations, Surface       reclaimed for use as prime farmland, the
determined that this rule meets the         mining, Underground mining.                 permittee demonstrate restoration of
applicable standards of subsections (a)       Dated: July 6, 1995.                      productivity using 3 crop years.
and (b) of that section. However, these     Richard J. Seibel,                             (bb) By September 12, 1995, North
standards are not applicable to the         Regional Director, Western Regional         Dakota shall revise Chapter II, Section I
actual language of State regulatory         Coordinating Center.                        it its revegetation document and its rule
programs and program amendments                                                         at NDAC 69–05.2–22–07(4)(j) to require
since each such program is drafted and        For the reasons set out in the            tree and shrub stocking standards that
promulgated by a specific State, not by     preamble, Title 30, Chapter VII,            meet all requirements in 30 CFR
OSM. Under sections 503 and 505 of          Subchapter T of the Code of Federal         816.116(b)(3), including approval by the
SMCRA (30 U.S.C. 1253 and 12550) and        Regulations is amended as set forth         appropriate State agencies, on land
the Federal regulations at 30 CFR           below:                                      reclaimed for use as recreation. North
36224           Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 135 / Friday, July 14, 1995 / Rules and Regulations

Dakota shall also provide                     Paperwork Reduction Act                        December 31, 1995. Written comments
documentation of consultation with and          The Director, Administration and             will be accepted through September 12,
approval from the appropriate State           Management, Office of the Secretary of         1995.
agencies for the ground cover standard        Defense certifies that this Privacy Act        ADDRESSES: Comments should be
in chapter II, Section I on land              rule for the Department of Defense             addressed to: Project Manager,
reclaimed for use as recreation.              imposes no information requirements            Appalachian Trail Project Office,
[FR Doc. 95–17166 Filed 7–13–95; 8:45 am]     beyond the Department of Defense and           National Park Service, c/o Harpers Ferry
BILLING CODE 4310–05–M                        that the information collected within          Center, Harpers Ferry, WV 25425.
                                              the Department of Defense is necessary         FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
                                              and consistent with 5 U.S.C. 552a,             Donald T. King, Project Manager,
                                              known as the Privacy Act of 1974.              Appalachian Trail Project Office,
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE                                                                        National Park Service, c/o Harpers Ferry
                                              List of Subjects in 32 CFR Part 806b           Center, Harpers Ferry, WV 25425.
Department of the Air Force
                                                Privacy.                                     SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
32 CFR Part 806b                                Accordingly, 32 CFR part 806b is
                                                                                             Background
                                              amended as follows:
[Air Force Reg. 37–132]                                                                         The Appalachian National Scenic
                                              PART 806b—AIR FORCE PRIVACY                    Trail (AT) is a north-south hiking trail
Air Force Privacy Act Program                 ACT PROGRAM                                    that stretches nearly 2,200 miles from
AGENCY:   Department of the Air Force,                                                       Maine to Georgia along the crest of the
                                                1. The authority citation for 32 CFR         Appalachian Mountains. The AT is
DOD.                                          part 806b continues to read as follows:
ACTION:   Final rule.                                                                        administered by the Secretary of the
                                                Authority: Pub. L. 93–579, 88 Stat 1896 (5   Interior, National Park Service, as part
SUMMARY:    The Department of the Air         U.S.C. 552a).                                  of the National Trails System.
Force is deleting an exemption rule. The      Appendix C to Part 806b [Amended]
                                                                                                At its inception, the AT traversed
rule was for the system of records notice                                                    mostly private lands. Use of the private
                                                2. Appendix C to part 806b is                lands was enjoyed not only by hikers,
F030 AF LE A, entitled Equal                  amended by removing and reserving
Opportunity in Off-Base Housing. The                                                         but also by other types of outdoor
                                              paragraph (b)(8).                              enthusiasts. In the late 1970’s, hang
notice has already been amended to
                                                Dated: June 27, 1995.                        gliders in the area of Fox Gap,
reflect this change.
                                              Linda M. Bynum,                                Pennsylvania, with the permission of
EFFECTIVE DATE: July 14, 1995.
                                              Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison         the landowner, were launching from the
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms.          Officer, Department of Defense.                ridgetop known as Kirkridge, along the
Anne Turner at (703) 697–3491 or DSN          [FR Doc. 95–17110 Filed 7–13–95; 8:45 am]      Appalachian Mountains. The hang
227–3491.                                     BILLING CODE 5000–04–F                         gliders formally organized and
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Executive                                                         established the WGHGC for the purpose
Order 12866. The Director,                                                                   of promoting the safety of hang gliding
Administration and Management, Office         DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR                     and addressing liability issues.
of the Secretary of Defense has                                                                 Originally, the WGHGC used the area
determined that this Privacy Act rule for     National Park Service                          with the expressed permission of the
the Department of Defense does not                                                           landowner and, after the area was
constitute ‘significant regulatory action’.   36 CFR Part 7                                  acquired by the NPS, the WGHGC
Analysis of the rule indicates that it                                                       requested permission from the NPS and
                                              RIN 1024–AC36
does not have an annual effect on the                                                        was issued a SUP to continue using the
economy of $100 million or more; does         Appalachian National Scenic Trail;             AT area as a launch site. The WGHGC
not create a serious inconsistency or         Revisions to Special Regulations               has proven by past conduct to be a good
otherwise interfere with an action taken                                                     steward of these public lands. The
or planned by another agency; does not        AGENCY:    National Park Service, Interior.    WGHGC has assumed shared
materially alter the budgetary impact of      ACTION:   Interim rule.                        responsibility for maintenance of this
entitlements, grants, user fees, or loan                                                     popular section of the AT along with the
programs or the rights and obligations of     SUMMARY:   The National Park Service           local trail club. The WGHGC has a
recipients thereof; does not raise novel      (NPS) is adopting this interim rule to         published maintenance schedule for its
legal or policy issues arising out of legal   allow the continuation of an existing          individual club members to provide
mandates, the President’s priorities, or      hang gliding activity on the                   trash pick-up in the general area. The
the principles set forth in Executive         Appalachian Trail while the agency             WGHGC works with the local trail club
Order 12866 (1993).                           develops a special regulation to address       to protect the resource qualities of the
                                              the activity through public notice and         area and to ensure the area is safe for
Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980            comment rulemaking. The interim rule           public use by other outdoor enthusiasts.
   The Director, Administration and           will allow the Appalachian Trail Project       The private landowners adjacent to the
Management, Office of the Secretary of        Manager (Project Manager) to renew the         site have endorsed the continued use of
Defense certifies that this Privacy Act       Special Use Permit (SUP) of the Water          the area by the WGHGC. Based upon a
rule for the Department of Defense does       Gap Hang Gliding Club. The Water Gap           review of the past years of use by
not have significant economic impact on       Hang Gliding Club (WGHGC) has been             WGHGC and the experience of others
a substantial number of small entities        undertaking this activity at Kirkridge on      (including the landowners and local
because it is concerned only with the         the AT for over twenty years and the           hiking club) in the area, the NPS has
administration of Privacy Act systems of      WGHGC’s SUP recently expired.                  determined that there are no known
records within the Department of              EFFECTIVE DATE: This rule is effective         adverse impacts caused by the WGHGC
Defense.                                      July 14, 1995 and will expire on               activities.
              Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 135 / Friday, July 14, 1995 / Rules and Regulations                                  36225

   During the review process conducted       Project Office and Michael M. Tiernan,             (c) Powerless flight. The use of
by the NPS for the renewal of the SUP        Office of the Solicitor, Washington, D.C.       devices designed to carry persons
for the WGHGC, the NPS discovered                                                            through the air in powerless flight is
                                             Paperwork Reduction Act
that a 1983 revision to the general                                                          allowed at Kirkridge, located near Fox
regulations found at 36 CFR 2.17 had           This interim rule does not contain            Gap, Pennsylvania, pursuant to a permit
created the requirement of a special         information collection requirements that        issued by the project manager. This
regulation before the NPS could renew        require approval by the Office of               authority shall expire on December 31,
the WGHGC permit. A review of the            Management and Budget under 44                  1995.
1983 rulemaking indicates one of the         U.S.C. 3501 et. seq.                              Dated: July 11, 1995.
reasons for requiring the special            Compliance With Other Laws                      George T. Frampton, Jr.,
regulation process was to have a full
review of potential conflicts before           This rule was not subject to Office of        Assistant Secretary for Fish and Wildlife and
                                             Management and Budget review under              Parks.
making a decision to authorize hang
gliding in a particular area. This interim   Executive Order 12866. The Department           [FR Doc. 95–17369 Filed 7–13–95; 8:45 am]
rule will allow the activity to continue     of the Interior determined that this            BILLING CODE 4310–70–P

while the agency undertakes the              document will not have a significant
required rulemaking to adopt a special       economic effect on a substantial number
regulation for the AT.                       of small entities under the Regulatory          ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
   The NPS is adopting this interim rule     Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et. seq.).        AGENCY
pursuant to the ‘‘good cause’’ exception     The economic effects of this rulemaking
of the Administrative Procedure Act ( 5      are local in nature and negligible in           40 CFR Part 52
U.S.C. 553(b)(B)) from general notice        scope.                                          [CA 144–5–7100c; FRL–5256–5]
and comment rulemaking. As discussed           The NPS has determined that this
above, the NPS believes that this            proposed rulemaking will not have a             Approval and Promulgation of
exception is warranted because of the        significant effect on the quality of the        Implementation Plans; California State
past conduct of the WGHGC while              human environment, health and safety            Implementation Plan Revision; Interim
operating under NPS SUPs and the             because it is not expected to:                  Final Determination That State Has
demonstrated lack of adverse conflicts         (a) Increase public use to the extent of      Corrected the Deficiencies
with other users of the AT. These being      compromising the nature and character
the principal reasons for the general        of the area or causing physical damage          AGENCY:  Environmental Protection
regulation requirement of special            to it;                                          Agency (EPA).
regulations to allow the designation of        (b) Introduce incompatible uses               ACTION: Interim final determination.
locations for this activity, the NPS finds   which compromise the nature and
that notice and comment are                  characteristics of the area or cause            SUMMARY:    Elsewhere in today’s Federal
unnecessary and contrary to the public       physical damage to it;                          Register, EPA published a direct final
interest for this interim rule. The            (c) Conflict with adjacent ownership          rule fully approving revisions to the
interim rule is limited to allowing the      or land uses; or                                California State Implementation Plan
issuance of a SUP to WGHGC for the site        (d) Cause a nuisance to adjacent              (SIP). The revisions concern South
known as Kirkridge, near Fox Gap,            owners or occupants.                            Coast Air Quality Management District’s
Pennsylvania, effective until December         Based on this determination, the              (SCAQMD) Rules 1106, 1107, 1115 and
31, 1995. Furthermore, the NPS is            regulation is categorically excluded            1171 and Santa Barbara County Air
developing and will be publishing soon       from the procedural requirements of the         Pollution Control District’s (SBAPCD)
in the Federal Register a proposed rule      National Environmental Policy Act               Rules 323 and 339. On that date, EPA
requesting public comment on a special       (NEPA) and by Departmental guidelines           also published a proposed rulemaking
regulation to allow the use of powerless     in 516 DM 6 (49 FR 21438). As such,             to provide the public with an
flight devices (hang gliding) on the AT.     neither an Environmental Assessment             opportunity to comment on EPA’s
   The NPS has also determined, in           nor an Environmental Impact Statement           action. If a person submits adverse
accordance with the Administrative           has been prepared.                              comments on EPA’s proposed action
Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3)), that                                                     within 30 days of publication of the
                                             List of Subjects in 36 CFR Part 7               proposed and direct final actions, EPA
the publishing of this interim rule 30
days prior to the rule becoming effective      National parks; Reporting and                 will withdraw its direct final action and
would be counterproductive and               recordkeeping requirements.                     will consider any comments received
unnecessary for the reasons discussed          In consideration of the foregoing, 36         before taking final action on the State’s
above. A 30-day delay would be               CFR Chapter I is amended as follows:            submittal. Based on the proposed full
contrary to the public interest.                                                             approval, EPA is making an interim
   Therefore, under the ‘‘good cause’’       PART 7—SPECIAL REGULATIONS,                     final determination by this action that
exception of the Administrative              AREAS OF THE NATIONAL PARK                      the State has corrected the deficiency
Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3)), it       SYSTEM                                          for which a sanctions clock began on
has been determined that this interim                                                        January 20, 1994. This action will defer
                                               1. The authority citation for Part 7          the application of the offset sanction
rulemaking is excepted from the 30-day
                                             continues to read as follows:                   and defer the application of the highway
delay in the effective date and shall
therefore become effective on the date         Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1, 3, 9a, 460(q),        sanction. Although this action is
published in the Federal Register and        462(k); Sec. 7.96 also issued under D.C. Code   effective upon publication, EPA will
will expire on December 1, 1995.             8–137 (1981) and D.C. Code 40–721 (1981).       take comment. If no comments are
                                               2. Section 7.100 is amended by                received on EPA’s proposed approval of
Drafting Information                                                                         the State’s submittal, the direct final
                                             adding paragraph (c) to read as follows:
  The principal authors of this interim                                                      action published in today’s Federal
rulemaking are Acting Project Manager        § 7.100 Appalachian National Scenic Trail.      Register will also finalize EPA’s
Donald T. King, Appalachian Trail            *     *     *     *     *                       determination that the State has
36226          Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 135 / Friday, July 14, 1995 / Rules and Regulations

corrected the deficiency that started the      section 110(c) of the Act. The State        determines that the State, in fact, did
sanctions clock. If comments are               subsequently submitted a revised            not correct the disapproval deficiency,
received on EPA’s proposed approval            SCAQMD Rule 1106 on February 24,            EPA will also determine that the State
and this interim final action, EPA will        1995, a revised SBAPCD Rule 339 on          did not correct the deficiency and the
publish a final notice taking into             April 13, 1995, a revised SBAPCD Rule       sanctions consequences described in the
consideration any comments received.           323 on May 24, 1995 and SCAQMD              sanctions rule will apply. See 59 FR
DATES: This interim final determination        Rules 1107, 1115 and 1171 on June 16,       39832, to be codified at 40 CFR 52.31.
is effective on July 14, 1995. Comments        1995. EPA has taken direct final action
                                                                                           II. EPA Action
must be received by August 14, 1995.           on these submittals pursuant to its
                                               modified direct final policy set forth at      EPA is taking interim final action
ADDRESSES: Comments should be sent                                                         finding that the State has corrected the
                                               59 FR 24054 (May 10, 1994). In the
to: Daniel A. Meer, Rulemaking Section                                                     disapproval deficiency that started the
                                               Rules section of today’s Federal
(A–5–3), Air and Toxics Division, U.S.                                                     sanctions clock. Based on this action,
                                               Register, EPA issued a direct final full
Environmental Protection Agency,                                                           application of the offset sanction will be
                                               approval of the State of California’s
Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San                                                        deferred and application of the highway
                                               submittal of SCAQMD’s Rule 1106,
Francisco, CA 94105.                           Marine Coating Operations; SCAQMD’s         sanction will be deferred until EPA’s
   The state submittal and EPA’s               Rule 1107, Coating of Metal Parts and       direct final action fully approving the
analysis for that submittal, which are         Products; SCAQMD’s Rule 1115, Motor         State’s submittal becomes effective or
the basis for this action, are available for   Vehicle Assembly Line Coating               until EPA takes action proposing or
public review at the above address and         Operations; SCAQMD’s Rule 1171,             finally disapproving in whole or part
at the following locations:                    Solvent Cleaning Operations and             the State submittal. If EPA’s direct final
Environmental Protection Agency, Air           SBAPCD’s Rule 323, Architectural            action fully approving the State
  Docket (6102) 401 ‘‘M’’ Street, S.W.,        Coatings and SBAPCD’s Rule 339, Motor       submittal becomes effective, at that time
  Washington 20460                             Vehicle and Mobile Equipment Coating        any sanctions clocks will be
California Air Resources Board, Stationary     Operations. In addition, in the Proposed    permanently stopped and any applied,
  Source Division, Rule Evaluation Section,                                                stayed or deferred sanctions will be
                                               Rules section of today’s Federal
  2020 ‘‘L’’ Street, Sacramento, CA 95812–                                                 permanently lifted.
  2815                                         Register, EPA proposed full approval of
                                               the State’s submittal.                         Because EPA has preliminarily
South Coast Air Quality Management
  District, 21865 E. Copley Drive, Diamond        Based on the proposed and direct         determined that the State has an
  Bar, CA 91765–4812                           final approval, EPA believes that it is     approvable plan, relief from sanctions
Santa Barbara County Air Pollution Control     more likely than not that the State has     should be provided as quickly as
  District, 26 Castilian Drive B–23, Goleta,   corrected the original disapproval          possible. Therefore, EPA is invoking the
  CA 93117                                     deficiency. Therefore, EPA is taking this   good cause exception under the
                                               final rulemaking action, effective on       Administrative Procedure Act (APA) in
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
                                               publication, finding that the State has     not providing an opportunity for
Daniel A. Meer, Rulemaking Section (A–
                                               corrected the deficiency. However, EPA      comment before this action takes effect.1
5–3), Air and Toxics Division, U.S.
                                               is also providing the public with an        5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B). EPA believes that
Environmental Protection Agency,
                                               opportunity to comment on this final        notice-and-comment rulemaking before
Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San
                                               action. If, based on any comments on        the effective date of this action is
Francisco, CA 94105, Telephone: (415)
                                               this action and any comments on EPA’s       impracticable and contrary to the public
744–1185.
                                               proposed full approval of the State’s       interest. EPA has reviewed the State’s
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:                     submittal, EPA determines that the          submittal and, through its proposed and
                                               State’s submittal is not fully approvable   direct final action is indicating that it is
I. Background
                                               and this final action was inappropriate,    more likely than not that the State has
   On May 13, 1993, the State submitted        EPA will either propose or take final       corrected the deficiency that started the
SCAQMD’s Rule 1106, Marine Coating             action finding that the State has not       sanctions clock. Therefore, it is not in
Operations and Rule 1107, Coating of           corrected the original disapproval          the public interest to initially impose
Metal Parts and Products; on June 19,          deficiency. As appropriate, EPA will        sanctions or to keep applied sanctions
1992 the State submitted SCAQMD’s              also issue an interim final determination   in place when the State has most likely
Rule 1171, Solvent Cleaning Operations         or a final determination that the           done all that it can to correct the
and SBAPCD’s Rule 339, Motor Vehicle           deficiency has not been corrected. Until    deficiency that triggered the sanctions
and Mobile Equipment Coating                   EPA takes such an action, the               clock. Moreover, it would be
Operations; on December 31, 1990 the           application of sanctions will continue to   impracticable to go through notice-and
State submitted SBCAPCD’s Rule 323,            be deferred and/or stayed.                  comment rulemaking on a finding that
Architectural Coatings and on                     This action does not stop the            the State has corrected the deficiency
September 14, 1992 the State submitted         sanctions clock that started for these      prior to the rulemaking approving the
SCAQMD’s Rule 1115, Motor Vehicle              areas on January 20, 1993. However, this    State’s submittal. Therefore, EPA
Assembly Line Coating Operations. EPA          action will defer the application of the    believes that it is necessary to use the
published a limited disapproval for            offsets sanction and will defer the         interim final rulemaking process to
these rules in the Federal Register on         application of the highway sanction. See    temporarily stay or defer sanctions
December 20, 1993; 58 FR 66282 and 58          59 FR 39832 (Aug. 4, 1994). If EPA’s        while EPA completes its rulemaking
FR 66285 respectively. EPA’s                   direct final action fully approving the     process on the approvability of the
disapproval action started an 18-month         State’s submittal becomes effective,        State’s submittal. Moreover, with
clock for the application of one sanction      such action will permanently stop the       respect to the effective date of this
(followed by a second sanction 6               sanctions clock and will permanently
months later) under section 179 of the         lift any applied, stayed or deferred          1 As previously noted, however, by this action

Clean Air Act (Act) and a 24-month             sanctions. If EPA must withdraw the         EPA is providing the public with a chance to
                                                                                           comment on EPA’s determination after the effective
clock for promulgation of a Federal            direct final action based on adverse        date and EPA will consider any comments received
Implementation Plan (FIP) under                comments and EPA subsequently               in determining whether to reverse such action.
              Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 135 / Friday, July 14, 1995 / Rules and Regulations                              36227

action, EPA is invoking the good cause        requirements, Ozone, Volatile organic        ADDRESSES:   Copies of the rule revisions
exception to the 30-day notice                compounds.                                   and EPA’s evaluation report for each
requirement of the APA because the              Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401–7671q.           rule are available for public inspection
purpose of this notice is to relieve a          Dated: June 27, 1995.                      at EPA’s Region IX office during normal
restriction. See 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(1).                                                       business hours. Copies of the submitted
                                              Felicia Marcus,
Unfunded Mandates                                                                          rule revisions are available for
                                              Regional Administrator.
                                                                                           inspection at the following locations:
   Under Sections 202, 203, and 205 of        [FR Doc. 95–17267 Filed 7–13–95; 8:45 am]
                                                                                           Rulemaking Section (A–5–3), Air and Toxics
the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of           BILLING CODE 6560–50–W
                                                                                             Division, U.S. Environmental Protection
1995 (‘‘Unfunded Mandates Act’’),                                                            Agency, Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street,
signed into law on March 22, 1995, EPA                                                       San Francisco, CA 94105
must undertake various actions in             40 CFR Part 52                               Environmental Protection Agency, Air
association with the proposed or final        [CA 144–5–7100a; FRL–5256–3]                   Docket (6102), 401 ‘‘M’’ Street, S.W.,
rules that include a Federal mandate                                                         Washington, D.C. 20460
that may result in estimated costs of         Approval and Promulgation of                 California Air Resources Board, Stationary
$100 million or more to the private           Implementation Plans; California State         Source Division, Rule Evaluation Section,
sector, or to State, local, or tribal         Implementation Plan Revision, South            2020 ‘‘L’’ Street, Sacramento, CA 95812–
                                                                                             2815
governments in the aggregate.                 Coast Air Quality Management District        South Coast Air Quality Management
   Through submission of this state           and Santa Barbara County Air                   District, 21865 E. Copley Drive, Diamond
implementation plan or plan revision,         Pollution Control District                     Bar, CA 91765–4182
the state and any affected local or tribal                                                 Santa Barbara County Air Pollution Control
governments have elected to adopt the         AGENCY: Environmental Protection
                                                                                             District, 26 Castilian Drive B–23, Goleta,
program provided for under Part D of          Agency (EPA).                                  CA 93117
the Clean Air Act. These rules may bind       ACTION: Direct final rule.
                                                                                           FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
State, local and tribal governments to        SUMMARY:    EPA is taking direct final       Daniel A. Meer, Chief Rulemaking
perform certain actions and also require      action on revisions to the California        Section (A–5–3), Air and Toxics
the private sector to perform certain         State Implementation Plan (SIP). The         Division, U.S. Environmental Protection
duties. To the extent that the rules being    revisions concern rules from the             Agency, Region IX, 75 Hawthorne
approved by this action will impose no        following districts: South Coast Air         Street, San Francisco, CA 94105,
new requirements; such sources are            Quality Management District                  Telephone: (415) 744–1185.
already subject to these regulations          (SCAQMD) and Santa Barbara County
under State law. Accordingly, no                                                           SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
                                              Air Pollution Control District
additional costs to State, local, or tribal   (SBAPCD). This approval action will          Applicability
governments, or to the private sector,        incorporate these rules into the federally
result from this action. EPA has also                                                        The rules being approved into the
                                              approved SIP. The intended effect of         California SIP include: SCAQMD’s Rule
determined that this final action does        approving these rules is to regulate
not include a mandate that may result                                                      1106, Marine Coating Operations; Rule
                                              emissions of volatile organic                1107, Coating of Metal Parts and
in estimated costs of $100 million or         compounds (VOCs) in accordance with
more to State, local, or tribal                                                            Products; Rule 1115, Motor Vehicle
                                              the requirements of the Clean Air Act,       Assembly Line Coating Operations; Rule
governments in the aggregate or to the        as amended in 1990 (CAA or the Act).
private sector.                                                                            1171, Solvent Cleaning Operations and
                                              In addition, the final action on these       SBAPCD’s Rule 323, Architectural
   The Office of Management and Budget
                                              rules serves as a final determination that   Coatings and Rule 339, Motor Vehicle
(OMB) has exempted this action from
                                              the deficiencies in these rules have been    and Mobile Equipment Coating
review under Executive Order 12866.
   Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act,      corrected and that on the effective date     Operations. These rules were submitted
5 U.S.C. 600 et seq., EPA must prepare        of this action, any sanctions or Federal     by the California Air Resources Board
a regulatory flexibility analysis             Implementation Plan (FIP) obligations        (CARB) to EPA on February 24, 1995
assessing the impact of any proposed or       are permanently stopped. The revised         (Rule 1106), April 13, 1995 (Rule 339),
final rule on small entities. 5 U.S.C. 603    rules control VOC emissions from             May 24, 1995 (Rule 323) and June 16,
and 604. Alternatively, EPA may certify       marine coating operations, coating of        1995 (Rules 1107, 1115 and 1171).
that the rule will not have a significant     metal parts and products, motor vehicle
                                              assembly line coating operations,            Background
economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities. Small entities      solvent cleaning operations,                    On March 3, 1978, EPA promulgated
include small businesses, small not-for-      architectural coatings, and motor            a list of ozone nonattainment areas
profit enterprises, and government            vehicle and mobile equipment coating         under the provisions of the Clean Air
entities with jurisdiction over               operations. Thus, EPA is finalizing the      Act, as amended in 1977 (1977 Act or
populations of less than 50,000.              approval of these revisions into the         pre-amended Act), that included the
   This action temporarily relieves           California SIP under provisions of the       South Coast Air Basin and the Santa
sources of an additional burden               CAA regarding EPA action on SIP              Barbara, Santa Maria and Lompoc Area
potentially placed on them by the             submittals, SIPs for national primary        (Santa Barbara County). 43 FR 8964, 40
sanctions provisions of the Act.              and secondary ambient air quality            CFR 81.305. Because these areas were
Therefore, I certify that it does not have    standards and plan requirements for          unable to meet the statutory attainment
an impact on any small entities.              nonattainment areas.                         date of December 31, 1982, California
                                              DATES: This final rule is effective on       requested under section 172(a)(2), and
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52            September 12, 1995 unless adverse or         EPA approved, an extension of the
  Environmental protection, Air               critical comments are received by            attainment date to December 31, 1987.
pollution control, Hydrocarbons,              August 14, 1995. If the effective date is    (40 CFR 52.222). On May 26, 1988, EPA
Intergovernmental regulations,                delayed, a timely notice will be             notified the Governor of California,
Reporting and recordkeeping                   published in the Federal Register.           pursuant to section 110(a)(2)(H) of the
36228            Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 135 / Friday, July 14, 1995 / Rules and Regulations

1977 Act, that the above districts’                   The SBAPCD adopted Rule 323 on                          sources of VOC emissions. This
portions of the California SIP were                   March 16, 1995 and Rule 339 on                          requirement was carried forth from the
inadequate to attain and maintain the                 December 15, 1994. The submitted                        pre-amended Act.
ozone standard and requested that                     SCAQMD’s Rule 1106 was found to be                         For the purpose of assisting state and
deficiencies in the existing SIP be                   complete on March 10, 1995;                             local agencies in developing RACT
corrected (EPA’s SIP-Call). On                        SCAQMD’s Rules 1107, 1115 and 1171                      rules, EPA prepared a series of Control
November 15, 1990, the Clean Air Act                  and SBAPCD’s Rule 323 were found to                     Technique Guideline (CTG) documents.
Amendments of 1990 were enacted.                      be complete on June 23, 1995; and                       The CTGs are based on the underlying
Pub. L. 101–549, 104 Stat. 2399,                      SBAPCD’s Rule 339 was found to be                       requirements of the Act and specify the
codified at 42 U.S.C. 7401–7671q. In                  complete on May 2, 1995 pursuant to                     presumptive norms for what is RACT
amended section 182(a)(2)(A) of the                   EPA’s completeness criteria that are set                for specific source categories. Under the
CAA, Congress statutorily adopted the                 forth in 40 CFR part 51 Appendix V 3                    CAA, Congress ratified EPA’s use of
requirement that nonattainment areas                  and are being finalized for approval into               these documents, as well as other
fix their deficient reasonably available              the SIP.                                                Agency policy, for requiring States to
control technology (RACT) rules for                     SCAQMD’s Rule 1106 controls VOC                       ‘‘fix-up’’ their RACT rules. See section
ozone and established a deadline of May               emissions from the coating of marine                    182(a)(2)(A). The CTG applicable to
15, 1991 for states to submit corrections             vessels and their parts, SCAQMD’s Rule                  SCAQMD’s Rule 1107 is entitled
of those deficiencies.                                1107 controls VOC emissions from the                    Control of Volatile Organic Emissions
   Section 182(a)(2)(A) applies to areas              coating of metal parts and products                     from Existing Stationary Sources—
designated as nonattainment prior to                  except those performed on aerospace                     Volume VI: Surface Coating of
enactment of the amendments and                       assembly, magnet wire, marine craft,                    Miscellaneous Metal Parts and Products,
classified as marginal or above as of the             motor vehicle, metal container, and coil                U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
date of enactment. It requires such areas             coating operations, SCAQMD’s Rule                       Office of Air Quality Planning and
to adopt and correct RACT rules                       1115 limits VOC emissions from coating                  Standards, June 1978, EPA–450/2–78–
pursuant to pre-amended section 172 (b)               operations conducted on assembly lines                  015. The CTG applicable to SCAQMD’s
as interpreted in pre-amendment                       during manufacturing of new motor                       Rule 1115 is entitled Control of Volatile
guidance.1 EPA’s SIP-Call used that                   vehicles, and SCAQMD’s Rule 1171                        Organic Emissions from Existing
guidance to indicate the necessary                    controls VOC emissions from solvent                     Stationary Sources—Volume I: Surface
corrections for specific nonattainment                cleaning operations and activities.                     Coating of Cans, Coils, Paper, Fabrics,
areas. The South Coast Air Basin is                   SBAPCD’s Rule 323 controls emissions                    Automobiles, and Light-Duty Trucks.
classified as extreme, and Santa Barbara              of VOCs from the application of coatings                U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
County is classified as moderate 2;                   to architectural structures and their                   Office of Air Quality and Standards,
therefore, these areas were subject to the            appurtenances, to mobile homes, to                      May 1977, EPA–450/2–77–008.
RACT fix-up requirement and the May                   pavements and to curbs, and SBAPCD’s                    SCAQMD’s Rules 1106 and 1171 and
15, 1991 deadline.                                    Rule 339 limits emissions of VOCs from                  SBAPCD’s Rules 323 and 339 control
   The State of California submitted                                                                          emissions from source categories for
                                                      automotive refinishing operations.
many revised RACT rules for                                                                                   which EPA has not issued a CTG.
                                                      VOCs contribute to the production of
incorporation into its SIP on February                                                                        Accordingly, these rules were evaluated
                                                      ground level ozone and smog. These
24, 1995, April 13, 1995, May 24, 1995                                                                        against the interpretations of EPA policy
                                                      rules were originally adopted as part of
and June 16, 1995, including the rules                                                                        found in the Blue Book, referred to in
                                                      SCAQMD’s and SBAPCD’s effort to
being acted on in this notice. This
                                                      achieve the National Ambient Air                        footnote 1 and against other EPA policy
notice addresses EPA’s direct-final
                                                      Quality Standard (NAAQS) for ozone                      including the EPA Region 9/CARB
action for the SCAQMD’s Rule 1106,
                                                      and in response to EPA’s SIP-Call and                   document entitled: Guidance document
Marine Coating Operations; Rule 1107,
                                                      the section 182(a)(2)(A) CAA                            for correcting VOC rule deficiencies
Coating of Metal Parts and Products;
                                                      requirement. The following is EPA’s                     (April 1991) In general, these guidance
Rule 1115, Motor Vehicle Assembly
                                                      evaluation and final action for this rule.              documents have been set forth to ensure
Line Coating Operations; Rule 1171,
                                                                                                              that VOC rules are fully enforceable and
Solvent Cleaning Operations and for the               EPA Evaluation and Action                               strengthen or maintain the SIP.
SBAPCD’s Rule 323, Architectural
                                                         In determining the approvability of a                   SCAQMD’s submitted Rule 1106,
Coatings, and Rule 339, Motor Vehicle
                                                      VOC rule, EPA must evaluate the rule                    Marine Coating Operations, includes the
and Mobile Equipment Coating
                                                      for consistency with the requirements of                following significant changes from the
Operations. The SCAQMD adopted Rule
                                                      the CAA and EPA regulations, as found                   current SIP:
1106 on January 13, 1995 and Rules                                                                               • Revised statement of rule
                                                      in section 110 and part D of the CAA
1107, 1115, and 1171 on May 12, 1995.                                                                         applicability.
                                                      and 40 CFR part 51 (Requirements for
   1 Among other things, the pre-amendment            Preparation, Adoption, and Submittal of                    • Added definition for aerosol
guidance consists of those portions of the proposed   Implementation Plans). The EPA                          product.
post-1987 ozone and carbon monoxide policy that       interpretation of these requirements,                      • Revised definition of exempt
concern RACT, 52 FR 45044 (November 24, 1987);        which forms the basis for today’s action,               compounds.
‘‘Issues Relating to VOC Regulation Cutpoints,
                                                      appears in the various EPA policy                          • Revised table of VOC content
Deficiencies, and Deviations, Clarification to                                                                standards.
Appendix D of November 24, 1987 Federal Register      guidance documents listed in footnote
Notice’’ (Blue Book) (notice of availability was      1. Among those provisions is the                           • Added control device equivalency
published in the Federal Register on May 25, 1988);   requirement that a VOC rule must, at a                  language.
and the existing control technique guidelines                                                                    • Added test method specification.
(CTGs).
                                                      minimum, provide for the                                   • Added aerosol exemption.
   2 The South Coast Air Basin and Santa Barbara      implementation of RACT for stationary                      SCAQMD’s submitted Rule 1107,
County retained their designation of nonattainment                                                            Coating of Metal Parts and Products,
and were classified by operation of law pursuant to     3 EPA adopted the completeness criteria on

sections 107(d) and 181(a) upon the date of           February 16, 1990 (55 FR 5830) and, pursuant to         includes the following significant
enactment of the CAA. See 55 FR 56694 (November       section 110(k)(1)(A) of the CAA, revised the criteria   changes from the current SIP:
6, 1991).                                             on August 26, 1991 (56 FR 42216).                          • Added rule applicability section.
              Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 135 / Friday, July 14, 1995 / Rules and Regulations                          36229

   • Revised the VOC content limits for         SBAPCD’s submitted Rule 339, Motor       subsequent final rule based on this
coatings covered by this rule.               Vehicle and Mobile Equipment Coating        action serving as a proposed rule. The
   • Removed executive officer               Operations, includes the following          EPA will not institute a second
discretion to choose capture efficiency      significant changes from the current SIP:   comment period on this action. Any
source testing methodology.                     • Deleted spray booth requirement for    parties interested in commenting on this
   • Added EPA method 25 and 25A             undercoating if undercoating contains       action should do so at this time. If no
with respect to determining efficiency of    no lead or chromium compounds and if        such comments are received, the public
add-on control equipment.                    the area covered does not exceed 16         is advised that this action will be
   • Incorporated SCAQMD ‘‘Spray             square feet.                                effective on September 12, 1995.
Equipment Transfer Efficiency Test              • Added definition for multi-stage
Procedure dated May 24, 1989.                topcoat.                                    Regulatory Process
   • Modified exemption for all non-            • Added definition for undercoat.           Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act,
compliant coating use to an aggregate of        • Revised VOC limits and compliance      5 U.S.C. 600 et seq., EPA must prepare
55 gallons per year.                         dates.                                      a regulatory flexibility analysis
   • Added the requirements to keep             • Limits pre-coat usage to no more       assessing the impact of any proposed or
records of key operating parameters of       than 25% of the amount of primer/           final rule on small entities. 5 U.S.C. 603
control equipment.                           primer surfacer monthly usage.              and 604. Alternatively, EPA may certify
   • Added EPA approved test methods            EPA has evaluated the submitted          that the rule will not have a significant
to determine VOC content and exempt          rules and has determined that they are      impact on a substantial number of small
solvent content.                             consistent with the CAA, EPA                entities. Small entities include small
   SCAQMD’s submitted Rule 1115,             regulations, and EPA policy. Therefore,     businesses, small not-for-profit
Motor Vehicle Assembly Line Coating          SCAQMD’s Rule 1106, Marine Coating          enterprises and government entities
Operations, includes the following           Operations; SCAQMD’s Rule 1107,             with jurisdiction over population of less
significant changes from the current SIP:    Coating of Metal Parts and Products;        than 50,000.
   • Added purpose and applicability         SCAQMD’s Rule 1115, Motor Vehicle              SIP approvals under sections 110 and
section.                                     Assembly Line Coating Operations;           301(a) and subchapter I, Part D of the
   • Reduced VOC limits to be in line        SCAQMD’s Rule 1171, Solvent Cleaning        CAA do not create any new
with applicable CTG limits.                  Operations; SBAPCD’s Rule 323,              requirements, but simply approve
   • Added the requirement to use EPAs       Architectural Coatings; and SBAPCD’s        requirements that the State is already
‘‘Protocol for Determining the Daily         Rule 339, Motor Vehicle and Mobile          imposing. Therefore, because the
Volatile Organic Compound Emission           Equipment Coating Operations are being      Federal SIP-approval does not impose
Rate of Automobile and Light-Duty            approved under section 110(k)(3) of the     any new requirements, I certify that it
Truck Topcoat Operation’’.                   CAA as meeting the requirements of          does not have a significant impact on
   • Added specification for EPA             section 110(a) and Part D. The final        any small entities affected. Moreover,
approved capture and control efficiency      action on these rules serves as a final     due to the nature of the Federal-State
source test method.                          determination that the deficiencies in      relationship under the CAA, preparation
   • Included record keeping                 these rules have been corrected.            of a regulatory flexibility analysis would
requirement for emission control             Therefore, if this direct final action is   constitute Federal inquiry into the
systems.                                     not withdrawn, on September 12, 1995,       economic reasonableness of state action.
   SCAQMD’s submitted Rule 1171,
                                             any sanction or FIP clock is stopped.       The CAA forbids EPA to base its actions
Solvent Cleaning Operations, includes           Nothing in this action should be         concerning SIPs on such grounds.
the following significant changes from       construed as permitting or allowing or      Union Electric Co. v. U.S. E.P.A., 427
the current SIP:                             establishing a precedent for any future
   • Added medical device category.                                                      U.S. 246, 256–66 (S. Ct. 1976); 42 U.S.C.
   • Added specialty flexographic            implementation plan. Each request for       7410(a)(2).
printing category.                           revision to the State implementation
                                             plan shall be considered separately in      Unfunded Mandates
   • Modified and supplemented test
method section to correct rule               light of specific technical, economic,        Under Sections 202, 203, and 205 of
deficiencies cited by EPA.                   and environmental factors and in            the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of
   • Added small usage exemption for         relation to relevant statutory and          1995 (‘‘Unfunded Mandates Act’’),
specialty medical device and                 regulatory requirements.                    signed into law on March 22, 1995, EPA
pharmaceutical operations.                      EPA is publishing this notice without    must undertake various actions in
   • Added exemption for cleaning of         prior proposal because the Agency           association with the proposed or final
application equipment used to                views this as a noncontroversial            rules that include a Federal mandate
manufacture transdermal drug delivery        amendment and anticipates no adverse        that may result in estimated costs of
systems.                                     comments. However, in a separate            $100 million or more to the private
   SBAPCD’s submitted Rule 323,              document in this Federal Register           sector, or to State, local, or tribal
Architectural Coatings, includes the         publication, the EPA is proposing to        governments in the aggregate.
following significant changes from the       approve the SIP revision should adverse       Through submission of this state
current SIP:                                 or critical comments be filed. This         implementation plan or plan revision,
   • Clarifies requirements of the rule by   action will be effective on September       the state and any affected local or tribal
moving exemption section to section B.       12, 1995, unless, within 30 days of its     governments have elected to adopt the
   • Added a definition for reactive         publication, adverse or critical            program provided for under Part D of
organic compound (ROC).                      comments are received.                      the Clean Air Act. These rules may bind
   • Removes executive officer                  If the EPA receives such comments,       State, local and tribal governments to
discretion by revising the language in       this action will be withdrawn before the    perform certain actions and also require
the test section.                            effective date by publishing a              the private sector to perform certain
   • Added test method for                   subsequent notice that will withdraw        duties. To the extent that the rules being
determination of exempt solvent              the final action. All public comments       approved by this action will impose no
content.                                     received will then be addressed in a        new requirements; such sources are
36230            Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 135 / Friday, July 14, 1995 / Rules and Regulations

already subject to these regulations            (i) Incorporation by reference.           adopted June 29, 1995, and released July
under State law. Accordingly, no                (A) Santa Barbara County Air              10, 1995. The full text of this
additional costs to State, local, or tribal   Pollution Control District.                 Commission decision is available for
governments, or to the private sector,          (1) Rule 323, adopted March 16, 1995.     inspection and copying during normal
result from this action. EPA has also         *      *    *    *     *                    business hours in the FCC Reference
determined that this final action does          (221) [Reserved]                          Center (Room 239), 1919 M Street, NW.,
not include a mandate that may result           (222) New and amended regulations         Washington, DC. The complete text of
in estimated costs of $100 million or         for the following APCDs were submitted      this decision may also be purchased
more to State, local, or tribal               on June 16, 1995, by the Governor’s         from the Commission’s copy contractor,
governments in the aggregate or to the        designee.                                   International Transcription Service,
private sector.                                 (i) Incorporation by reference.           Inc., (202) 857–3800, 2100 M Street,
  The Office of Management and Budget           (A) South Coast Air Quality               NW., Suite 140, Washington, DC 20037.
(OMB) has exempted this action from           Management District.
review under Executive Order 12866.             (1) Rules 1107, 1115, and 1171            List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 73
                                              adopted on May 12, 1995.                      Radio broadcasting.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
                                              *      *    *    *     *                      Part 73 of title 47 of the Code of
  Environmental protection, Air               [FR Doc. 95–17269 Filed 7–13–95; 8:45 am]   Federal Regulations is amended as
pollution control, Hydrocarbons,                                                          follows:
                                              BILLING CODE 6560–50–W
Incorporation by reference,
Intergovernmental relations, Ozone,                                                       PART 73—[AMENDED]
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Volatile organic                FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS                        1. The authority citation for part 73
compounds.                                    COMMISSION                                  continues to read as follows:
  Note: Incorporation by reference of the                                                   Authority: Secs. 303, 48 Stat., as amended,
                                              47 CFR Part 73
State Implementation Plan for the State of                                                1082; 47 U.S.C. 154, as amended.
California was approved by the Director of    [MM Docket No. 94–86; RM–8497; RM–8548]
                                                                                          § 73.202   [Amended]
the Federal Register on July 1, 1982.
  Dated: June 27, 1995.                       Radio Broadcasting Services; Klamath          2. Section 73.202(b), the Table of FM
                                              Falls, Altamont, Butte Falls, OR, Dorris,   Allotments under Oregon, is amended
Felicia Marcus,
                                              CA                                          by adding Channel 284C1 at Klamath
Regional Administrator.
                                                                                          Falls.
  Part 52, chapter I, title 40 of the Code    AGENCY:  Federal Communications
                                              Commission.                                 Federal Communications Commission.
of Federal Regulations is amended as
                                              ACTION: Final rule.
                                                                                          John A. Karousos,
follows:
                                                                                          Chief, Allocations Branch, Policy and Rules
PART 52—[AMENDED]                             SUMMARY:    The Commission, at the          Division, Mass Media Bureau.
                                              request of Terry A. Cowan, allots           [FR Doc. 95–17239 Filed 7–13–95; 8:45 am]
  1. The authority citation for Part 52       Channel 284C1 to Klamath Falls, OR, as      BILLING CODE 6712–01–F
continues to read as follows:                 the community’s fourth local FM
    Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401–7671q.          service. Channel 284C1 can be allotted
                                              to Klamath Falls in compliance with the     47 CFR Part 73
Subpart F—California                          Commission’s minimum distance               [MM Docket No. 93–69; RM–8106]
   2. Section 52.220 is amended by            separation requirements without the
adding paragraphs (c)(215)(i)(A)(3),          imposition of a site restriction, at        Radio Broadcasting Services; San
(c)(219), (c)(220), and (c)(222) and by       coordinates 42-12-56 North Latitude and     Carlos and Oracle, AZ
adding and reserving paragraph (c)(221)       121–47–56 West Longitude. See 59 FR
                                              38950, August 1, 1994. The Commission       AGENCY:  Federal Communications
to read as follows:                                                                       Commission.
                                              denies the proposal of Western States
§ 52.220   Identification of plan.            Broadcasting, Inc., to substitute Channel   ACTION: Final rule.
*      *    *    *     *                      284C1 for Channel 249C1 at Altamont,
                                                                                          SUMMARY:   This document substitutes
  (c) * * *                                   OR, reallot Channel 249C2 to Butte
  (215) * * *                                                                             Channel 276C2 for Channel 279A at San
                                              Falls, OR, and modify Station
  (i) * * *                                                                               Carlos, Arizona, and modifies the
                                              KCHQ(FM)’s construction permit to
  (A) * * *                                                                               authorization of Station KCDX(FM) to
                                              specify Butte Falls as its community of
  (3) Rule 1106, adopted on January 13,                                                   specify operation on the higher powered
                                              license. The Commission also dismisses
1995.                                                                                     channel, as requested by Desert West
                                              the late-filed counterproposal of
*      *    *    *     *                                                                  Air Ranchers Corporation. Additionally,
                                              Goldrush Broadcasting to allot Channel
  (219) New and amended regulations                                                       in order to accommodate the
                                              284C3 to Dorris, California. With this
for the following APCDs were submitted                                                    modification at San Carlos, Channel
                                              action, this proceeding is terminated.
on April 13, 1995, by the Governor’s                                                      279A is substituted for Channel 276A at
                                              DATES: Effective August 24, 1995. The       Oracle, Arizona, and the license issued
designee.                                     window period for filing applications
  (i) Incorporation by reference.                                                         to Golden State Broadcasting
                                              will open on August 24, 1995, and close     Corporation for Station KLQB(FM) is
  (A) Santa Barbara County Air
                                              on September 25, 1995.                      modified accordingly. See 58 FR 17819,
Pollution Control District.
  (1) Rule 339, adopted December 15,          FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:            April 6, 1993. Coordinates for Channel
1994.                                         Leslie K. Shapiro, Mass Media Bureau,       276C2 at San Carlos are 33–23–13 and
  (220) New and amended regulations           (202) 418–2180.                             110–44–25. Coordinates for Channel
for the following APCDs were submitted        SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a        279A at Oracle are 32–37–07 and 110–
on May 24, 1995, by the Governor’s            synopsis of the Commission’s Report         47–20. As San Carlos and Oracle are
designee.                                     and Order, MM Docket No. 94–86,             located within 320 kilometers (199
                Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 135 / Friday, July 14, 1995 / Rules and Regulations                               36231

miles) of the Mexican border,                   291A at Saltville, Virginia, reallots           DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
concurrence of the Mexican government           Channel 291C3 from Saltville to
in this proposal was obtained. With this        Jefferson, North Carolina, and modifies         National Highway Traffic Safety
action, the proceeding is terminated.           106.1, Inc.’s construction permit               Administration
EFFECTIVE DATE: August 24, 1995.                accordingly. See 56 FR 23260, May 21,
                                                1991. Channel 291C3 can be allotted to          49 CFR Part 541
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Nancy Joyner, Mass Media Bureau, (202)          Jefferson with a site restriction of 8.3        [Docket No. T84–01; Notice 36]
418–2180.                                       kilometers (5.2 miles) northeast to avoid
                                                                                                RIN 2127–AF58
                                                a short-spacing conflict with a
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a
                                                construction permit for Station WLJQ-           Federal Motor Vehicle Theft Prevention
synopsis of the Commission’s Report
                                                FM, Channel 290A, Colonial Heights,             Standard; Final Listing of Model Year
and Order, MM Docket No. 93–69,
                                                Tennessee. With this action, this               1996 High-Theft Car Lines
adopted June 29, 1995, and released July
                                                proceeding is terminated.
10, 1995. The full text of this                                                                 AGENCY:  National Highway Traffic
Commission decision is available for            EFFECTIVE DATE:     August 24, 1995.            Safety Administration (NHTSA),
inspection and copying during normal                                                            Department of Transportation.
business hours in the FCC’s Reference           FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
                                                                                                ACTION: Final rule.
Center (Room 239), 1919 M Street, NW.,          Pamela Blumenthal, Mass Media
Washington, DC. The complete text of            Bureau, (202) 634–6530.                         SUMMARY:    This final rule announces
this decision may also be purchased                                                             NHTSA’s determinations of high-theft
from the Commission’s copy                      SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:      This is a       car lines that are subject to the parts-
contractors, International Transcription        synopsis of the Commission’s Report             marking requirements of the Federal
Service, Inc., (202) 857–3800, located at       and Order, MM Docket No. 91–137,                motor vehicle theft prevention standard,
1919 M Street, NW., Room 246, or 2100           adopted June 30, 1995, and released July        and high-theft car lines that are
M Street, NW., Suite 140, Washington,           10, 1995. The full text of this                 exempted from parts marking because
DC 20037.                                       Commission decision is available for            the vehicles are equipped with agency-
                                                inspection and copying during normal            approved antitheft devices, for model
List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 73
                                                business hours in the FCC Reference             year (MY) 1996, pursuant to the statute
  Radio broadcasting.                           Center (Room 239), 1919 M Street, NW.,          relating to motor vehicle theft
  Part 73 of title 47 of the Code of            Washington, DC. The complete text of            prevention.
Federal Regulations is amended as               this decision may also be purchased
                                                                                                EFFECTIVE DATE: The amendment made
follows:                                        from the Commission’s copy contractor,
                                                                                                by this final rule is effective July 14,
                                                ITS, Inc., (202) 857–3800, 2100 M
                                                                                                1995.
PART 73—[AMENDED]                               Street, NW., Suite 140, Washington, DC
                                                                                                FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms.
                                                20037.
  1. The authority citation for Part 73                                                         Barbara A. Gray, Office of Market
continues to read as follows:                   List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 73              Incentives, NHTSA, 400 Seventh Street
  Authority: Secs. 303, 48 Stat., as amended,                                                   SW., Washington, DC 20590. Ms. Gray’s
1082; 47 U.S.C. 154, as amended.                  Radio broadcasting.                           telephone number is (202) 366–1740.
                                                                                                Her fax number is (202) 366–4329.
§ 73.202   [Amended]                              Part 73 of title 47 of the Code of            SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The
  2. Section 73.202(b), the Table of FM         Federal Regulations is amended as               Federal motor vehicle theft pevention
Allotments under Arizona is amended             follows:                                        standard, 49 CFR Part 541, requires
by removing Channel 279A and adding                                                             motor vehicle manufacturers to inscribe
Channel 276C2 at San Carlos, and by             PART 73—[AMENDED]                               or affix vehicle identification numbers
removing Channel 276A and adding                                                                (VINs) onto covered original equipment
Channel 279A at Oracle.                                                                         major component parts, and to inscribe
                                                  1. The authority citation for part 73         or affix a symbol identifying the
Federal Communications Commission.
                                                continues to read as follows:                   manufacturer and a common symbol
John A. Karousos,
Chief, Allocations Branch, Policy and Rules       Authority: Secs. 303, 48 Stat., as amended,   identifying the replacement component
Division, Mass Media Bureau.                    1082; 47 U.S.C. 154, as amended.                parts for those original equipment parts,
[FR Doc. 95–17240 Filed 7–13–95; 8:45 am]                                                       on all vehicle lines selected as high-
                                                § 73.202   [Amended]                            theft.
BILLING CODE 6712–01–F
                                                                                                   49 U.S.C. 33104(a)(3) specifies that
                                                  2. Section 73.202(b), the Table of FM         NHTSA shall select high-theft vehicle
47 CFR Part 73                                  Allotments under Virginia and North             lines, with the agreement of the
                                                Carolina, is amended by removing                manufacturer, if possible. Section
[MM Docket No. 91–137; RM–7494]                                                                 33104(d) provides that once a line has
                                                Channel 291A at Saltville, Virginia, and
                                                adding Channel 291C3 at Jefferson,              been designated as likely high-theft, it
Radio Broadcasting Services; Saltville,                                                         remains subject to the theft prevention
Virginia, and Jefferson, NC                     North Carolina.
                                                                                                standard unless that line is exempted
AGENCY:  Federal Communications                 Federal Communications Commission.              under Section 33106. Section 33106
Commission.                                                                                     provides that a manufacturer may
                                                John A. Karousos,
ACTION: Final rule.                                                                             petition to have a high-theft line
                                                Chief, Allocations Branch, Policy and Rules     exempted from the requirements of
SUMMARY:   The Commission, at the               Division, Mass Media Bureau.                    Section 33104, if the line is equipped
request of 106.1, Inc., permittee of                                                            with an antitheft device as standard
                                                [FR Doc. 95–17241 Filed 7–13–95; 8:45 am]
Channel 291A, Saltville, Virginia,                                                              equipment. The exemption is granted if
substitutes Channel 291C3 for Channel           BILLING CODE 6712–01–F                          NHTSA determines that the antitheft
36232          Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 135 / Friday, July 14, 1995 / Rules and Regulations

device is likely to be as effective as         considered by the agency in making            2. Regulatory Flexibility Act
compliance with the theft prevention           them. The manufacturer may request the           The agency has also considered the
standard in reducing and deterring             agency to reconsider the preliminary          effects of this listing under the
motor vehicle thefts.                          determinations. Within 60 days of the         Regulatory Flexibility Act. I hereby
   The agency annually publishes the           receipt of these requests, NHTSA makes        certify that this rule will not have a
names of the lines which were                  its final determination. NHTSA informs        significant economic impact on a
previously listed as high-theft, and the       the manufacturer by letter of these           substantial number of small entities. As
lines which are being listed for the first     determinations and its response to the
time and will be subject to the theft                                                        noted above, the effect of this final rule
                                               request for reconsideration. If there is no   is simply to inform the public of those
prevention standard beginning with MY          request for reconsideration, the agency’s
1996. It also identifies those car lines                                                     lines that are subject to the requirements
                                               determination becomes final 45 days           of Part 541 for MY 1996. The agency
that are exempted from the theft               after sending the letter with the
prevention standard for the 1996 model                                                       believes that the listing of this
                                               preliminary determination. Each of the        information will not have any economic
year because of standard equipment             new car lines on the high-theft list was
antitheft devices.                                                                           impact on small entities.
                                               the subject of a final determination.
   For MY 1996, the agency selected                                                          3. Environmental Impacts
three new car lines as likely to be high-         Similarly, the car lines listed as being
theft lines, in accordance with the            exempt from the standard have                   In accordance with the National
procedures published in 49 CFR Part            previously been exempted in                   Environmental Policy Act of 1969, the
542. The newly selected lines are the          accordance with the procedures of 49          agency has considered the
Plymouth Breeze, Honda Acura TL, and           CFR Part 543 and Section 33106.               environmental impacts of this rule, and
the Hyundai Accent. In addition to                                                           determined that it will not have any
                                                  Therefore, NHTSA finds for good
these three car lines, the list of high-                                                     significant impact on the quality of the
                                               cause that notice and opportunity for
theft cars includes all those lines that                                                     human environment.
                                               comment on these listings are
were selected as high-theft and listed for     unnecessary. Further, public comment          4. Federalism
prior model years.                             on the listing of selections and
   The list of lines exempted by the                                                           This action has been analyzed in
                                               exemptions is not contemplated by 49          accordance with the principles and
agency from the parts-marking                  U.S.C. Chapter 331, and is unnecessary
requirements of Part 541 includes high-                                                      criteria contained in Executive Order
                                               since the selections and exemptions           12612, and it has been determined that
theft lines exempted in full, beginning        have previously been made in
with MY 1996, The five car lines                                                             this final rule does not have sufficient
                                               accordance with the statutory criteria        Federalism implications to warrant the
exempted in full are the General Motors        and procedure.
Chevrolet Lumina/Monte Carlo, Buick                                                          preparation of a Federalism Assessment.
Regal, Mercedes-Benz C–Class, Nissan              For the same reasons, since this
                                                                                             5. Civil Justice Reform
Infiniti I, and Volkswagen Golf/GTI.           revised listing only informs the public
Volkswagen also informed the agency            of previous agency actions and does not         This final rule does not have a
that the ‘‘III’’ designation attached to the   impose any additional obligations on          retroactive effect. In accordance with
Jetta car line would be dropped                any party, NHTSA finds for good cause         Section 33118 when the theft
beginning with the 1996 model year.            that the amendment made by this notice        prevention standard is in effect, a State
Additionally, Nissan informed the              should be effective as soon as it is          or political subdivision of a State may
agency that it stopped utilizing the           published in the Federal Register.            not have a different motor vehicle theft
antitheft exemption for the Maxima                                                           prevention standard for a motor vehicle
                                               Regulatory Impacts                            or major replacement part. 49 U.S.C.
beginning with MY 1995, and now
parts-marks the Maxima’s. The updated          1. Costs and Other Impacts                    Section 33117 provides that judicial
list reflects this information.                                                              review of this rule may be obtained
Furthermore, Appendix A–II has been              NHTSA has analyzed this rule and            pursuant to 49 U.S.C. Section 32909.
amended to reflect a name change for           determined that it is not ‘‘significant’’     Section 32909 does not require
the General Motors Cadillac Six-Special.       within the meaning of the Department          submission of a petition for
It was renamed the Concours beginning          of Transportation’s regulatory policies       reconsideration or other administrative
MY 1994.                                       and procedures. The agency has also           proceedings before parties may file suit
   The car lines listed as being subject to    considered this notice under Executive        in court.
the parts-marking standard have                Order 12866. As already noted, the
                                               selections in this final rule have            List of Subjects in 49 CFR Part 541
previously been selected as high-theft
lines in accordance with the procedures        previously been made in accordance              Administrative practice and
set forth in 49 CFR Part 542. Under            with the provisions of 49 U.S.C. Section      procedure, Labeling, Motor vehicles,
these procedures, manufacturers                33104, and the manufacturers of the           Reporting and recordkeeping
evaluate new vehicle lines to conclude         selected lines have already been              requirements.
whether those new lines are likely to be       informed that those lines are subject to        In consideration of the foregoing, 49
high-theft. Manufacturers submit these         the requirements of Part 541 for MY           CFR Part 541 is amended as follows:
evaluations and conclusions to the             1996. Further, this listing does not
agency, which makes an independent             actually exempt lines from the                PART 541—[AMENDED]
evaluation, and, on a preliminary basis,       requirements of Part 541; it only informs       1. The authority citation for Part 541
determines whether the new line should         the general public of all such previously     continues to read as follows:
be subject to the parts-marking                granted exemptions. Since the only
requirements. NHTSA informs the                purpose of this final listing is to inform      Authority: 49 U.S.C. 33102–33104 and
                                               the public of prior agency action for MY      33106; delegation of authority at 49 CFR 1.50.
manufacturer in writing of its
evaluations and determinations,                1996, a full regulatory evaluation has          2. In part 541, Appendices A, A–I,
together with the factual information          not been prepared.                            and A–II are revised to read as follows:
                        Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 135 / Friday, July 14, 1995 / Rules and Regulations                                                36233

                                         Appendix A to Part 541—Lines Subject to the Requirements of This Standard

                                            Manufacturer                                                                                   Subject lines

ALFA ROMEO ...........................................................................................           Milano 161.
                                                                                                                 164.
BMW ..........................................................................................................   3 Car Line.
                                                                                                                 5 Car Line.
                                                                                                                 6 Car Line.
CHRYSLER ...............................................................................................         Chrysler Cirrus.
                                                                                                                 Chrysler Executive.
                                                                                                                 Sedan/Limousine.
                                                                                                                 Chrysler Fifth Avenue/Newport.
                                                                                                                 Chrysler Laser.
                                                                                                                 Chrysler LeBaron/Town & Country.
                                                                                                                 Chrysler LeBaron GTS.
                                                                                                                 Chrysler’s TC.
                                                                                                                 Chrysler New Yorker Fifth Avenue.
                                                                                                                 Chrysler Sebring.
                                                                                                                 Dodge 600.
                                                                                                                 Dodge Aries.
                                                                                                                 Dodge Avenger.
                                                                                                                 Dodge Colt.
                                                                                                                 Dodge Daytona.
                                                                                                                 Dodge Diplomat.
                                                                                                                 Dodge Lancer.
                                                                                                                 Dodge Neon.
                                                                                                                 Dodge Shadow.1
                                                                                                                 Dodge Stratus.
                                                                                                                 Dodge Stealth.
                                                                                                                 Eagle Summit.
                                                                                                                 Eagle Talon.
                                                                                                                 Plymouth Caravelle.
                                                                                                                 Plymouth Colt.
                                                                                                                 Plymouth Laser.
                                                                                                                 Plymouth Gran Fury.
                                                                                                                 Plymouth Neon.
                                                                                                                 Plymouth Reliant.
                                                                                                                 Plymouth Sundance.1
                                                                                                                 Plymouth Breeze.2
CONSULIER .............................................................................................          Consulier GTP.
FERRARI ...................................................................................................      Mondial 8.
                                                                                                                 308.
                                                                                                                 328.
FORD ........................................................................................................    Ford Mustang.
                                                                                                                 Ford Thunderbird.
                                                                                                                 Ford Probe.
                                                                                                                 Mercury Capri.
                                                                                                                 Mercury Cougar.
                                                                                                                 Lincoln Continental.
                                                                                                                 Lincoln Mark.
                                                                                                                 Lincoln Town Car.
                                                                                                                 Merkur Scorpio.
                                                                                                                 Merkur XR4Ti.
GENERAL MOTORS ................................................................................                  Buick Electra.
                                                                                                                 Buick Reatta.
                                                                                                                 Chevrolet Nova.
                                                                                                                 Chevrolet Monte Carlo (MYs 1987–88).
                                                                                                                 Oldsmobile Cutlass Supreme.
                                                                                                                 Pontiac Fiero.
                                                                                                                 Pontiac Grand Prix.
                                                                                                                 Geo Prizm.
                                                                                                                 Geo Storm.
                                                                                                                 Saturn Sports Coupe.
HONDA .....................................................................................................      Acura TL.2
HYUNDAI ..................................................................................................       Accent.2
ISUZU ........................................................................................................   Impulse.
                                                                                                                 Stylus.
JAGUAR ....................................................................................................      XJ.
                                                                                                                 XJ–6.
                                                                                                                 XJ–40.
LOTUS ......................................................................................................     Elan.
MASERATI ................................................................................................        Biturbo.
                                                                                                                 Quattroporte.
                                                                                                                 228.
MAZDA ......................................................................................................     GLC.
36234                   Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 135 / Friday, July 14, 1995 / Rules and Regulations

                                            Manufacturer                                                                                       Subject lines

                                                                                                                 626.
                                                                                                                 MX–6.
                                                                                                                 MX–5 Miata.
                                                                                                                 MX–3.
MERCEDES-BENZ ...................................................................................                190 D.
                                                                                                                 190 E.
                                                                                                                 250D–T.
                                                                                                                 260 E.
                                                                                                                 300 SE.
                                                                                                                 300 TD.
                                                                                                                 300 SDL.
                                                                                                                 300 SEC/500 SEC.
                                                                                                                 300 SEL/500 SEL.
                                                                                                                 420 SEL.
                                                                                                                 560 SEL.
                                                                                                                 560 SEC.
                                                                                                                 560 SL.
MITSUBISHI ..............................................................................................        Cordia.
                                                                                                                 Eclipse.
                                                                                                                 Mirage.
                                                                                                                 Tredia.
                                                                                                                 3000GT.
NISSAN .....................................................................................................     Maxima.3
PEUGEOT .................................................................................................        405.
PORSCHE .................................................................................................        924S.
SUBARU ...................................................................................................       XT.
                                                                                                                 SVX.
                                                                                                                 Legacy.
TOYOTA ....................................................................................................      Avalon.
                                                                                                                 Camry.
                                                                                                                 Celica.
                                                                                                                 Corolla/Corolla Sport.
                                                                                                                 MR2.
                                                                                                                 Starlet.
VOLKSWAGEN .........................................................................................             Audi Quattro.
                                                                                                                 Rabbit.
                                                                                                                 Scirocco.
  1 The MY 1995 Dodge and Plymouth Neon car lines replaced the Dodge Shadow and Plymouth Sundance car lines during MY 1994. The
Shadow and Sundance continued to be subject to Part 541.
  2 Car lines added for MY 1996.
  3 Car line subject to parts-marking beginning with MY 1995.


        Appendix A–I to Part 541—High-Theft Lines With Antitheft Devices Which are Exempted From the Parts-Marking
                                Requirements of This Standard Pursuant to 49 CFR Part 543

                                            Manufacturer                                                                                      Subject Lines

AUSTIN ROVER .......................................................................................             Sterling.1
BMW ..........................................................................................................   7 Car Line.
                                                                                                                 8 Car Line.
CHRYSLER ...............................................................................................         Chrysler Conquest.
                                                                                                                 Imperial.
GENERAL MOTORS ................................................................................                  Buick Regal.1
                                                                                                                 Buick Riviera.
                                                                                                                 Cadillac Allante.
                                                                                                                 Chevrolet Corvette.
                                                                                                                 Chevrolet Lumina/Monte Carlo.1
                                                                                                                 Oldsmobile Aurora.
                                                                                                                 Oldsmobile Toronado.
HONDA .....................................................................................................      Acura NS–X.
                                                                                                                 Acura Legend.
                                                                                                                 Acura Vigor.
ISUZU ........................................................................................................   Impulse (MY’s 1987–1991).
MAZDA ......................................................................................................     929.
                                                                                                                 RX–7.
                                                                                                                 Millenia.
                                                                                                                 Amati 1000.
MERCEDES-BENZ ...................................................................................                124 Carline (the models within this line are):
                                                                                                                 300D.
                                                                                                                 300E.
                                                                                                                 300CE.
                                                                                                                 300TE.
                                                                                                                 400E.
                                                                                                                 500E.
                        Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 135 / Friday, July 14, 1995 / Rules and Regulations                                                                         36235

                                            Manufacturer                                                                                            Subject Lines

MERCEDES-BENZ ...................................................................................                129 Carline (the models within this line are):
                                                                                                                 300SL.
                                                                                                                 500SL.
                                                                                                                 600SL.
                                                                                                                 202 Line.
                                                                                                                 C-Class.1
MITSUBISHI ..............................................................................................        Galant.
                                                                                                                 Starion.
                                                                                                                 Diamante.
NISSAN .....................................................................................................     Maxima.2
                                                                                                                 300 ZX.
                                                                                                                 Infiniti M30.
                                                                                                                 Infiniti Q45.
                                                                                                                 Infiniti J30.
                                                                                                                 Infiniti I.1
PORSCHE .................................................................................................        911.
                                                                                                                 928.
                                                                                                                 968.
SAAB .........................................................................................................   900.
                                                                                                                 9000.
TOYOTA ....................................................................................................      Supra.
                                                                                                                 Cressida.
                                                                                                                 Lexus LS400.
                                                                                                                 Lexus ES250.
                                                                                                                 Lexus SC300.
                                                                                                                 Lexus SC400.
VOLKSWAGEN .........................................................................................             Audi 5000S.
                                                                                                                 Audi 100.
                                                                                                                 Audi 200.
                                                                                                                 Cabriolet.
                                                                                                                 Corrado.
                                                                                                                 Jetta.
                                                                                                                 Golf/GTI.1
   1 Lines    exempted in full from the requirements of Part 541 pursuant to 49 CFR Part 543, beginning with MY 1996.
   2 Exemption    applied for MYs 1987–1994.

        Appendix A–II to Part 541—High-Theft Lines With Antitheft Devices Which are Exempted in Part From the Parts-
                             Marking Requirements of This Standard Pursuant to 49 CFR Part 543

                         Manufacturer                                                                Subject lines                                             Parts to be marked

GENERAL MOTORS ........................................                    Chevrolet Camaro ............................................        Engine,   Transmission.
                                                                           Pontiac Firebird ................................................    Engine,   Transmission.
                                                                           Cadillac Deville .................................................   Engine,   Transmission.
                                                                           Cadillac Eldorado .............................................      Engine,   Transmission.
                                                                           Cadillac Seville .................................................   Engine,   Transmission.
                                                                           Cadillac Sixty Special .......................................       Engine,   Transmission.1
                                                                           Oldsmobile 98 ..................................................     Engine,   Transmission.
                                                                           Buick Park Avenue ...........................................        Engine,   Transmission.
                                                                           Pontiac Bonneville ............................................      Engine,   Transmission.
                                                                           Buick LeSabre ..................................................     Engine,   Transmission.
                                                                           Oldsmobile 88 Royale ......................................          Engine,   Transmission.
   1 Renamed         the Cadillac Concours beginning with MY 1994.
   Issued on: July 6, 1995.
Barry Felrice,
Associate Administrator for Safety Performance Standards.
[FR Doc. 95–17037 Filed 7–13–95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–59–P
36236         Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 135 / Friday, July 14, 1995 / Rules and Regulations

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE                      Classification                                The Director, Alaska Region, NMFS,
                                              This action is taken under § 672.20       has determined, in accordance with
National Oceanic and Atmospheric            and is exempt from review under E.O.        § 672.20(c)(3), that the TAC for the
Administration                              12866.                                      shortraker/rougheye rockfish species
                                                                                        group in the Eastern Regulatory Area of
50 CFR Part 672                               Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.
                                                                                        the GOA has been reached. Therefore,
[Docket No. 950206041–5041–01; I.D.           Dated: July 10, 1995.                     NMFS is requiring that further catches
070795F]                                    Richard W. Surdi,                           of the shortraker/rougheye rockfish
                                            Acting Director, Office of Fisheries        species group in the Eastern Regulatory
Groundfish of the Gulf of Alaska;           Conservation and Management, National       Area of the GOA be treated as
Pacific Ocean Perch in the Eastern          Marine Fisheries Service.                   prohibited species in accordance with
Regulatory Area                             [FR Doc. 95–17270 Filed 7–10–95; 4:52 pm]   § 672.20(e).
                                            BILLING CODE 3510–22–F
AGENCY:  National Marine Fisheries                                                      Classification
Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
                                                                                          This action is taken under 50 CFR
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
                                            50 CFR Part 672                             672.20 and is exempt from review under
Commerce.
                                            [Docket No. 950206041–5041–01; I.D.
                                                                                        E.O. 12866.
ACTION: Closure.
                                            070795D]                                      Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.
SUMMARY:   NMFS is closing the directed                                                   Dated: July 10, 1995.
fishery for Pacific ocean perch (POP) in    Groundfish of the Gulf of Alaska;
                                            Shortraker/Rougheye Rockfish in the         Richard W. Surdi,
the Eastern Regulatory Area of the Gulf
                                            Eastern Gulf of Alaska                      Acting Director, Office of Fisheries
of Alaska (GOA). This action is                                                         Conservation and Management, National
necessary to prevent exceeding the POP      AGENCY:  National Marine Fisheries          Marine Fisheries Service.
total allowable catch (TAC) in the          Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and        [FR Doc. 95–17271 Filed 7–10–95; 4:52 pm]
Eastern Regulatory Area.                    Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),          BILLING CODE 3510–22–F
EFFECTIVE DATE: Effective 12 noon,          Commerce.
Alaska local time (A.l.t.), July 9, 1995,   ACTION: Closure.
until 12 midnight, A.l.t., December 31,                                                 50 CFR Part 672
1995.                                       SUMMARY:   NMFS is prohibiting retention
                                            of the shortraker/rougheye rockfish         [Docket No. 950206041–5041–01; I.D.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
                                            species group in the Eastern Regulatory     070795E]
Michael Sloan, 907–581-2062.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The              Area of the Gulf of Alaska (GOA). NMFS
                                                                                        Groundfish of the Gulf of Alaska;
groundfish fishery in the GOA exclusive     is requiring that catches of the
                                                                                        Northern Rockfish in the Eastern Gulf
economic zone is managed by NMFS            shortraker/rougheye rockfish species
                                                                                        of Alaska
according to the Fishery Management         group in this area be treated in the same
Plan for Groundfish of the Gulf of          manner as prohibited species and            AGENCY:  National Marine Fisheries
Alaska (FMP) prepared by the North          discarded at sea with a minimum of          Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Pacific Fishery Management Council          injury. This action is necessary because    Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
under authority of the Magnuson             the shortraker/rougheye rockfish species    Commerce.
Fishery Conservation and Management         group total allowable catch (TAC) in the    ACTION: Closure.
Act. Fishing by U.S. vessels is governed    Eastern Regulatory Area of the GOA has
                                            been reached.                               SUMMARY:   NMFS is prohibiting retention
by regulations implementing the FMP at                                                  of northern rockfish in the Eastern
50 CFR parts 620 and 672.                   EFFECTIVE DATE: 12 noon, Alaska local
                                            time (A.l.t.), July 9, 1995, until 12       Regulatory Area of the Gulf of Alaska
   In accordance with
                                            midnight A.l.t., December 31, 1995.         (GOA). NMFS is requiring that catches
§ 672.20(c)(1)(ii)(B) the POP TAC for the
                                            FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:            of northern rockfish in this area be
Eastern Regulatory Area was established
                                            Andrew N. Smoker, 907–586-7228.             treated in the same manner as
by the final 1995 harvest specifications
                                                                                        prohibited species and discarded at sea
of groundfish (60 FR 8470, February 14,     SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The
                                                                                        with a minimum of injury. This action
1995) as 1,914 metric tons (mt).            groundfish fishery in the GOA exclusive
   The Director, Alaska Region, NMFS                                                    is necessary because the northern
                                            economic zone is managed by NMFS
(Regional Director), has determined, in     according to the Fishery Management         rockfish total allowable catch (TAC) in
accordance with § 672.20 (c)(2)(ii), that   Plan for the Groundfish Fishery of the      the Eastern Regulatory Area of the GOA
the POP TAC in the Eastern Regulatory       Gulf of Alaska (FMP) prepared by the        has been reached.
Area soon will be reached. Therefore,       North Pacific Fishery Management            EFFECTIVE DATE: 12 noon, Alaska local
the Regional Director has established a     Council under authority of the              time (A.l.t.), July 9, 1995, until 12
directed fishing allowance of 1,614 mt,     Magnuson Fishery Conservation and           midnight A.l.t., December 31, 1995.
with consideration that 300 mt will be      Management Act. Fishing by U.S.             FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
taken as incidental catch in directed       vessels is governed by regulations          Andrew N. Smoker, 907–586-7228.
fishing for other species in the Eastern    implementing the FMP at 50 CFR parts        SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The
Regulatory Area. The Regional Director      620 and 672.                                groundfish fishery in the GOA exclusive
has determined that the directed fishing       In accordance with § 672.20(c)(1)(ii),   economic zone is managed by NMFS
allowance has been reached.                 the TAC for the shortraker/rougheye         according to the Fishery Management
Consequently, NMFS is prohibiting           rockfish species group in the Eastern       Plan for the Groundfish Fishery of the
directed fishing for POP in the Eastern     Regulatory Area of the GOA was              Gulf of Alaska (FMP) prepared by the
Regulatory Area.                            established by the final 1995 harvest       North Pacific Fishery Management
   Directed fishing standards for           specifications of groundfish (60 FR         Council under authority of the
applicable gear types may be found in       8470, February 14, 1995), as 530 metric     Magnuson Fishery Conservation and
the regulations at § 672.20(g).             tons.                                       Management Act. Fishing by U.S.
                Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 135 / Friday, July 14, 1995 / Rules and Regulations                        36237

vessels is governed by regulations          50 CFR Part 672                           recovery rate. However, NMFS
implementing the FMP at 50 CFR parts                                                  inadvertently changed footnote 2 to
620 and 672.                                [I.D. 021695C]
                                                                                      Table 1 to § 672.20 to indicate that the
  In accordance with § 672.20(c)(1)(ii),    RIN 0648–AH40                             second period for the standard pollock
the TAC for northern rockfish in the                                                  surimi rate was the period July through
Eastern Regulatory Area of the GOA was      Groundfish of the Gulf of Alaska;         September. This document corrects
established by the final 1995 harvest       Correction                                footnote 2 to Table 1 to reflect the
specifications of groundfish (60 FR                                                   appropriate period, i.e., July through
8470, February 14, 1995), as 20 metric      AGENCY:  National Marine Fisheries
                                            Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and      December.
tons.
  The Director, Alaska Region, NMFS,        Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),        Correction of Publication
has determined, in accordance with          Commerce.
§ 672.20(c)(3), that the TAC for northern   ACTION: Final rule; correction.             Accordingly, the publication on May
rockfish in the Eastern Regulatory Area                                               10, 1995 (60 FR 24800), of the final
of the GOA has been reached. Therefore,     SUMMARY:    This document contains a      regulations (I.D. 021695C) that were the
NMFS is requiring that further catches      correction to footnote 2 to Table 1       subject of FR Doc. 95–11429, is
of northern rockfish in the Eastern         contained in a final regulation (I.D.     corrected as follows:
Regulatory Area of the GOA be treated       021695C) that was published on
as prohibited species in accordance         Wednesday, May 10, 1994. The              Table 1 to § 672.20 [Corrected]
with § 672.20(e).                           regulation revised the standard product
                                                                                        On page 24801, footnote 2 to Table 1
                                            recovery rate for pollock, deep skin
Classification                                                                        to § 672.20, is revised to read as follows:
                                            fillets, and product code 24. The
  This action is taken under 50 CFR                                                     2 Standard pollock surimi rate during
                                            regulation was necessary to respond to
672.20 and is exempt from review under      new information on the current recovery   July through December.
E.O. 12866.                                 rate achieved by the groundfish             Dated: July 10, 1995.
  Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.         processing industry for this product
                                                                                      Nancy Foster,
                                            type.
  Dated: July 10, 1995.                                                               Deputy Assistant Administrator for Fisheries,
Richard W. Surdi,                           EFFECTIVE DATE: June 9, 1995.
                                                                                      National Marine Fisheries Service.
Acting Director, Office of Fisheries        FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:          [FR Doc. 95–17320 Filed 7–13–95; 8:45 am]
Conservation and Management, National       Catherine Belli, 301-713-2341.
                                                                                      BILLING CODE 3510–22–F
Marine Fisheries Service.                   SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On May
[FR Doc. 95–17272 Filed 7–10–95; 4:52 pm]   10, 1995 (60 FR 24800), NMFS revised
BILLING CODE 3510–22–F                      the pollock deep skin fillet product
36238

Proposed Rules                                                                                  Federal Register
                                                                                                Vol. 60, No. 135

                                                                                                Friday, July 14, 1995



This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER             of a mistakenly deleted Standard                 (c) * * *
contains notices to the public of the proposed   Industrial Classification code in                (1) Surveys shall, at a minimum,
issuance of rules and regulations. The           § 532.267(c)(1).                               include the air transportation and
purpose of these notices is to give interested     The Federal Prevailing Rate Advisory         electronics industries in SIC’s 3571,
persons an opportunity to participate in the     Committee reviewed this                        3572, 3575, 3577, 3663, 3669, 3672,
rule making prior to the adoption of the final
rules.
                                                 recommendation and by consensus                3674, 3679, 3695, 3812, 4512, 4513,
                                                 recommended approval.                          4522, 4581, 5044, and 5045.
                                                 Regulatory Flexibility Act                     *     *    *      *    *
OFFICE OF PERSONNEL
MANAGEMENT                                         I certify that these regulations would       Subpart D—Pay Administration
                                                 not have a significant economic impact
5 CFR Part 532                                   on a substantial number of small entities        4. In § 532.401, the definitions of
                                                 because they would affect only Federal         change to lower grade and promotion
RIN 3206–AG83                                                                                   are revised to read as follows:
                                                 agencies and employees.
Prevailing Rate Systems; Technical               List of Subjects in 5 CFR Part 532             § 532.401   Definitions.
Corrections and Clarifications                                                                  *     *     *     *     *
                                                   Administrative practice and
AGENCY:  Office of Personnel                     procedure, Freedom of information,               Change to lower grade means to
Management.                                      Government employees, Reporting and            change in the position of an employee
ACTION: Proposed rule.                           recordkeeping requirements, Wages.             who, while continuously employed—
                                                                                                  (1) Move from a position in one grade
                                                 Office of Personnel Management.
SUMMARY:    The Office of Personnel                                                             of a prevailing rate schedule established
Management (OPM) is issuing proposed             Lorraine A. Green,                             under this part to a position in a lower
regulations to correct and clarify certain       Deputy Director.                               grade of the same type prevailing rate
matters relating primarily to pay                  Accordingly, OPM proposes to amend           schedule, whether in the same or
administration under the Federal Wage            5 CFR part 532 as follows:                     different wage area;
System (FWS). The proposed                                                                        (2) Moves from a position under a
regulations would correct errors and             PART 532—PREVAILING RATE                       prevailing rate schedule established
eliminate ambiguities in the                     SYSTEMS                                        under this part to a position under a
administration of the system.                                                                   different prevailing rate schedule (e.g.,
                                                   1. The authority citation for part 532
DATES: Comments must be received by              continues to read as follows:                  WL to WG) with a lower representative
August 14, 1995.                                                                                rate; or
                                                   Authority: 5 U.S.C. 5343, 5346; § 532.707      (3) Moves from a position not under
ADDRESSES: Send or deliver comments
                                                 also issued under 5 U.S.C. 552.
to Donald J. Winstead, Assistant                                                                a prevailing rate schedule to a position
Director for Compensation Policy,                Subpart B—Prevailing Rate                      with a lower representative rate under a
Human Resources Systems Service,                 Determinations                                 prevailing rate schedule.
Office of Personnel Management, Room                                                            *     *     *     *     *
6H31, 1900 E Street NW., Washington,               2. Section 532.241 is amended by               Promotion means a change in the
DC 20415.                                        revising paragraph (a)(1) to read as           position of an employee who, while
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:                 follows:                                       continuously employed—
Paul Shields, (202) 606–2848.                    § 532.241   Analysis of usable wage survey       (1) Moves from a position in one
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Federal               data.                                          grade of a prevailing rate schedule
agencies have been instrumental in                  (a)(1) The lead agency shall compute        established under this part to a position
helping OPM to identify the need for             a weighted average rate for each               in a higher grade of the same type
several corrections and clarifications in        appropriated fund survey job having at         prevailing rate schedule, whether in the
FWS regulations. In some cases, errors           least 10 unweighted matches and for            same or different wage area;
were noted. In other instances,                  each nonappropriated fund job having             (2) Moves from a position under a
regulatory provisions were found to be           at least 5 unweighted matches. The             prevailing rate schedule established
ambiguous. Accordingly, the proposed             weighted average rates shall be                under this part to a position under a
changes include the following: (1)               computed using the survey job data             different prevailing rate schedule (e.g.,
Clarification of provisions governing the        collected in accordance with §§ 532.235        WG to WL) with a higher
analysis of usable wage survey data in           and 532.247 and the establishment              representatives rate; or
§ 532.241; (2) clarification of the              weight.                                          (3) Moves from a position not under
definitions of two terms in § 532.401; (3)                                                      a prevailing rate schedule to a position
                                                 *      *     *    *     *
a description of limitations on the use                                                         with a higher representative rate under
                                                    3. In § 532.267, paragraph (c)(1) is
of a rate of pay earned on temporary                                                            a prevailing rate schedule.
                                                 revised to read as follows:
promotion as a ‘‘highest previous rate’’                                                        *     *     *     *     *
in § 532.405; (4) correction for                 § 532.267 Special wage schedules for             5. In § 532.405, paragraph (d) is added
conformance with 5 CFR part 536 of               aircraft, electronic, and optical instrument   to read as follows:
provisions on the application of pay             overhaul and repair positions in Puerto
retention when a wage schedule is                Rico.                                          § 532.405   Use of highest previous rate.
reduced in § 532.415; (5) and insertion          *     *     *     *      *                     *    *      *      *       *
                     Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 135 / Friday, July 14, 1995 / Proposed Rules                         36239

   (d) The highest previous rate may be     A decision on a proposal that would          Secretary’s ruling on the petition,
based upon a rate of pay received during    utilize only a route disposition standard    provided a bill in equity is filed not
a temporary promotion, so long as the       to determine under which Federal order       later than 20 days after the date of the
temporary promotion is for a period of      a plant should be regulated cannot be        entry of the ruling.
not less than 1 year. This limitation       made on the basis of the hearing record.        Prior document in this proceeding:
does not apply upon permanent               DATES: Comments are due on or before            Notice of Hearing: Issued February 25,
placement in a position at the same or      August 14, 1995.                             1994; published March 4, 1994 (59 FR
higher grade.                               ADDRESSES: Comments (six copies)             10326).
   6. In § 532.415, paragraph (c) is        should be filed with the Hearing Clerk,      Preliminary Statement
revised to read as follows:                 Room 1083, South Building, United
                                            States Department of Agriculture,               Notice is hereby given of the filing
§ 532.415 Application of new or revised                                                  with the Hearing Clerk of this
wage schedules.                             Washington, DC 20250.
                                                                                         recommended decision with respect to
*     *     *     *    *                    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
                                                                                         proposed amendments to the tentative
  (c) In applying a new or revised wage     Gino M. Tosi, Marketing Specialist,          marketing agreement and the order
schedule, the scheduled rate of pay of      USDA/AMS/Dairy Division, Order               regulating the handling of milk in the
an employee paid at one of the steps of     Formulation Branch, Room 2971, South         Middle Atlantic marketing area. This
the employee’s grade on an old wage         Building, P.O. Box 96456, Washington,        notice is issued pursuant to the
schedule shall be adjusted upward to        DC 20090–6456, (202) 690–1366.               provisions of the Agricultural Marketing
the newly adjusted rate for the same        SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This              Agreement Act and the applicable rules
numerical step of the grade whenever        administrative action is governed by the     of practice and procedure governing the
there is an increase in rates. Except       provisions of Sections 556 and 557 of        formulation of marketing agreements
when there is a decrease in wage rates      Title 5 of the United States Code and,       and marketing orders (7 CFR Part 900).
because of a statutory reduction in         therefore, is excluded from the                 Interested parties may file written
scheduled rates, the employee is            requirements of Executive Order 12866.       exceptions to this decision with the
entitled to pay retention as provided in       The Regulatory Flexibility Act (5         Hearing Clerk, U.S. Department of
5 CFR 536.104(a)(3).                        U.S.C. 601–612) requires the Agency to       Agriculture, Washington, DC 20250, by
                                            examine the impact of a proposed rule        the 30th day after publication of this
[FR Doc. 95–17278 Filed 7–13–95; 8:45 am]
                                            on small entities. Pursuant to 5 U.S.C.      decision in the Federal Register. Six
BILLING CODE 6325–01–M
                                            605(b), the Administrator of the             copies of the exceptions should be filed.
                                            Agricultural Marketing Service has           All written submissions made pursuant
                                            certified that this proposed rule will not   to this notice will be made available for
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE                   have a significant economic impact on        public inspection at the office of the
                                            a substantial number of small entities.      Hearing Clerk during regular business
Agricultural Marketing Service
                                            The amendments would promote more            hours (7 CFR 1.27(b)).
7 CFR Part 1004                             orderly marketing of milk by producers          The proposed amendments set forth
                                            and regulated handlers.                      below are based on the record of a
[Docket No. AO–160–A71; DA–93–30]              The amendments to the rules               public hearing held at the Holiday Inn-
                                            proposed herein have been reviewed           Independence Mall, 400 Arch Street,
Milk in the Middle Atlantic Marketing       under Executive Order 12778, Civil
Area; Recommended Decision and                                                           Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, on May 3,
                                            Justice Reform. They are not intended to     1994, pursuant to a notice of hearing
Opportunity To File Written Exceptions      have a retroactive effect. If adopted, the
on Proposed Amendments to Tentative                                                      issued February 25, 1994, and published
                                            proposed amendments would not                in the Federal Register, March 4, 1994
Marketing Agreement and to Order            preempt any state or local laws,             (59 FR 10326).
AGENCY:  Agricultural Marketing Service,    regulations, or policies, unless they           The material issues on the record of
USDA.                                       present an irreconcilable conflict with      the hearing relate to:
ACTION: Proposed rule.                      this rule.                                      1. Pool plant definitions and
                                               The Agricultural Marketing                qualifications;
SUMMARY: This document recommends           Agreement Act of 1937, as amended (7            2. Diversions of milk to nonpool
changes in some provisions of the           U.S.C. 601–674), provides that               plants;
Middle Atlantic milk marketing order        administrative proceedings must be              3. Regulation of distributing plants
based on industry proposals considered      exhausted before parties may file suit in    that meet the pooling standards of more
at a public hearing. The changes would      court. Under section 608c(15)(A) of the      than one Federal order.
reduce the standards for regulating         Act, any handler subject to an order may        4. Discretionary authority to revise
distributing plants and cooperative         file with the Secretary a petition stating   pooling standards and producer milk
reserve processing plants and increase      that the order, any provision of the         diversion limits.
the amount of producer milk that can be     order, or any obligation imposed in
diverted to nonpool plants. Additional      connection with the order is not in          Findings and Conclusions
changes would authorize the market          accordance with the law and requesting         The following findings and
administrator to adjust pool plant          a modification of an order or to be          conclusions on the material issues are
qualification standards and producer        exempted from the order. A handler is        based on evidence presented at the
milk diversion limits to reflect changes    afforded the opportunity for a hearing       hearing and the record thereof:
in marketing conditions. Also, the          on the petition. After a hearing, the
decision provides that a pool               Secretary would rule on the petition.        1. Pool Plant Definitions and
distributing plant that meets the pooling   The Act provides that the district court     Qualifications
standards of more than one Federal          of the United States in any district in        Two proposals that would modify the
order should continue to be regulated       which the handler is an inhabitant, or       pool plant definition of the order should
under this order for two months before      has its principal place of business, has     be adopted. One proposal would
regulation can shift to the other order.    jurisdiction in equity to review the         exclude diversions of producer milk
36240             Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 135 / Friday, July 14, 1995 / Proposed Rules

from a pool distributing plant’s receipts    because of the producer definition of the     market while decreasing the
in determining whether or not the plant      order.                                        uneconomic movement of milk.
satisfies the pool plant definition             Cooperatives in Order 4 attempt to            No opposition to excluding diverted
standard. Currently, the order’s pool        market milk, said Pennmarva, in a             milk as a receipt at a distributing plant
plant definition includes diverted           manner that will minimize the overall         for determining pool plant status
producer milk as a receipt at a              transportation costs. Pennmarva said          (Proposal No. 1) was received.
distributing plant in determining            that accounting for diversions at the            Currently, a cooperative must ship a
whether the plant has a sufficient           individual plant level places an              minimum of 30 percent of its member
proportion of its receipts in Class I use    unnecessary and costly burden on              milk to an Order 4 pool distributing
to qualify as a pool plant. The other        cooperatives. Pennmarva also noted that       plant in order for its milk to be pooled.
proposal would reduce the percentage         to a pool handler who buys his/her            Pennmarva proposed to reduce the
of a cooperative association’s member        entire milk supply from a cooperative,        minimum percentage to 25 percent as
milk that must be transferred to pool        there are no market-disruptive                published in the hearing notice as
distributing plants from 30 percent to 25    consequences if milk is over-diverted.        Proposal No. 4. Pennmarva testified that
percent of receipts for a reserve            According to Pennmarva, handlers              this reduction is needed to continue the
processing plant to qualify as a pool        continue to pay the appropriate class         pooling of Order 4 producers
plant.                                       price for the milk when an excess             historically associated with the market
   Pennmarva, a federation of certain        amount of milk is diverted from the           and is preferable to suspension of such
Middle Atlantic marketing area dairy         plant. However, the cooperative               provisions.
                                                                                              Pennmarva testified that this change
cooperatives, and Atlantic Processing,       supplying milk must reduce the volume
                                                                                           is warranted because of recent changes
Inc., an association of cooperatives,        of milk from the pool when it over-
                                                                                           in the market. Pennmarva cited that
proposed the changes to the pool plant       diverts milk shipments so that the plant
                                                                                           between 1990 and 1992, the level of
definition of the order which were           will continue to qualify as a pool plant.
                                                                                           Class I sales has remained unchanged,
published as Proposal No. 1 and                 Additionally, Pennmarva testified that     while producer receipts expanded. The
Proposal No. 4 in the hearing notice.        the lack of complete knowledge of a           expansion of producer receipts caused a
Pennmarva’s members include Atlantic         pool distributing plant’s other milk          reduction of the Class I utilization for
Dairy Cooperative; Dairymen                  supplies makes it unnecessarily difficult     the market, according to published
Incorporated (Middle Atlantic Division);     to effectively operate under the current      statistics. Class I use dropped from 53.1
Maryland and Virginia Milk Producers’        requirements of the pool plant                percent in 1990, to 50.7 percent in 1991,
Cooperative Association; and Valley of       definition. No supplier knows either the      and to 48.0 percent in 1992. Level Class
Virginia Co-operative Milk Producers         total receipts of the distributing plant or   I sales and expanding production in
Association—associations that market         the Class I disposition of the plant, said    Order 4 between 1990 and 1992, said
more than 90 percent of the producer         Pennmarva. Similarly, Pennmarva               Pennmarva, reduced the proportion of
milk associated with the order. Atlantic     testified, suppliers of a pool distributing   Order 4 milk delivered to pool
Processing, Inc., members include            plant have no knowledge of the plant’s        distributing plants by cooperatives
Mount Joy Milk Producers Cooperative         in-area Class I sales. This lack of           operating reserve processing plants.
and Cumberland Valley Milk Producers         knowledge by the supplying cooperative           Pennmarva also testified that in 1993,
Cooperative.                                 is especially important, according to         both Class I and producer receipts
   According to the Pennmarva witness,       Pennmarva, because the ‘‘lock-in’’            declined. According to market
changing the distributing plant pooling      provisions of the pool plant definition       administrator statistics, production
standard (Proposal No. 1) is a more          do not apply to the requirement that 15       decreased by 162.3 million pounds and
comprehensive solution to past informal      percent of the plant’s sales must be          Class I sales fell by 265.6 million
rulemaking actions which suspended           within the marketing area.                    pounds—resulting in a Class I
the requirement that 40 percent of a            Pennmarva testified that deleting          utilization percentage of 45.1 percent.
pool plant’s receipts be disposed of as      diversions from a plant’s receipts in            According to Pennmarva, the
Class I milk during the months of            determining its regulatory status would       reduction of Class I use in Order 4
September through February. These            have limited effects given present            during 1993 was partially attributable to
suspension actions were taken because        marketing conditions within the order.        a shifting of an Order 4-regulated
of the decline of Class I use in the Order   According to Pennmarva, plants that           distributing plant located in Lansdale,
4 marketplace and because of a shift in      meet the 15 percent in-area sales and 40      PA, in November 1992 and another
regulation of two plants that were           percent Class I disposition pooling           distributing plant located in Reading,
regulated under the order.                   standard in the months of September           PA, in January 1993 to regulation under
   Pennmarva testified that a more           through February, and 30 percent Class        another Federal order. Pennmarva said
permanent change to the pool plant           I disposition during the remainder of         this had the effect of reducing the Order
definition is warranted because: (1) the     the year, will continue to be pooled          4 pool plant deliveries required by
Order 4 market is primarily serviced by      under the order. According to                 reserve processing plants to maintain
cooperatives in a system-wide fashion        Pennmarva, diversions from such plants        pool status.
and that accounting for diversions at the    either by a cooperative or by a handler          Pennmarva maintained that the
individual plant level given this            with a non-member supply will                 shifting of regulation of these two plants
cooperatively-supplied nature of the         continue to be regulated through the          has had a dramatic effect. In a one-year
Order 4 market is burdensome; (2) there      producer definition of the order.             period from October 1992 to October
is a lack of complete knowledge by the       Pennmarva also indicated that both the        1993, Atlantic Dairy Cooperative, which
servicing cooperative of the total           producer definition and the pool reserve      operates a pool reserve processing plant,
receipts and Class I sales of the pool       processing plant definition will              delivered 13.3 percent less milk to a
distributing plants from which the           continue to encourage deliveries of           Lansdale, PA, distributing plant.
cooperative diverts milk; and (3)            cooperative and non-member milk               Between December 1992 and December
continued association of diverted milk       supplies to Order 4 pool plants in            1993 Maryland and Virginia Milk
on the order would still be provided for     meeting priority Class I needs of the         Producers Cooperative Association,
                  Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 135 / Friday, July 14, 1995 / Proposed Rules                          36241

which also operates a pool reserve          demands of the Class I market. Such        pounds. Similarly, over the same three-
processing plant, experienced a 14          prevailing marketing conditions have in    year period, the witness also noted the
percent reduction in deliveries to a        the past resulted in the suspension of     annual Class I utilization of the market
Reading, PA, distributing plant.            certain pooling provisions of reserve      fell from 50.7 percent in 1991, to 48
   Pennmarva noted other changes in the     processing plants operated by              percent in 1992, and to 45.1 percent in
Order 4 market, including the closing of    cooperatives so that producer milk         1993. This witness testified that because
a distributing plant in Harrisburg, PA,     normally associated with the Order 4       the market’s Class I use decreased,
and a change in the product mix of two      market would remain pooled under the       diversions to nonpool plants increased.
large Order 4 distributing plants that      order. Proposal No. 4 offers a more        According to Pennmarva, such a
eliminated yogurt and cottage cheese        permanent and reasonable solution to       situation makes it difficult to keep
production. Pennmarva said this loss of     potentially repetitive requests by Order   producers historically associated with
Class II business at distributing plants    4 producers for suspension of such         the market pooled under the order.
caused a reduction in the amount of         pooling standards by easing the               Johanna provided similar testimony
pool-qualifying milk deliveries for the     shipping standard by 5 percentage          and indicated that there is no equitable
cooperative supplying milk to these         points.                                    basis why diversions of nonmember
plants. Additionally, Pennmarva made                                                   milk should not similarly be increased
note of previous suspension actions to      2. Diversions of Milk to Nonpool Plants    from the current 40 percent of receipts
extend the period of automatic pool            Two proposals that would increase       for nonmember milk to a maximum of
plant status for supply and reserve         the permissible percentage of milk         45 percent of receipts. Johanna testified
processing plants.                          deliveries for both cooperative (or        that the producer definition historically
   No opposition to reducing the            federation of cooperative associations)    has offered disparate treatment between
shipping standard (Proposal No. 4) was      and non-cooperative (nonmember) milk       member (cooperative) and nonmember
received.                                   that may be diverted under the producer    milk in terms of the allowable
   Regarding Proposal No. 1, the record     definition of the order should be          percentage of milk that can be diverted
is clear that cooperatives play a           adopted. The proposal for increasing the   to nonpool plants and still be priced
dominant role in servicing the Middle       permissible percentage of cooperative      under the order. Johanna noted that the
Atlantic marketing area, accounting for     milk that can be diverted to nonpool       incremental difference between the two
some 90 percent of milk deliveries to       plants was proposed by Pennmarva and       has consistently been 10 percentage
pool distributing plants. While             was Proposal No. 7 as published in the     points, and that if the allowable
accounting for diversions on an             hearing notice. The proposal for           percentage of member deliveries can be
individual plant basis has merit, good      increasing the permissible percentage of   increased by 5 percentage points,
reason exists to conclude that in this      nonmember milk that can be diverted to     nonmember milk should similarly be
market, retaining individual plant          nonpool plants was proposed by             increased by the same amount.
accounting for the purposes of              Johanna Dairies, Inc. (Johanna), a            Johanna also supported Pennmarva’s
diversions does place a burden and          handler regulated under both the           observations of the market administrator
costs on cooperatives who seek to           Middle Atlantic and New York-New           statistics that show the steadily
deliver milk to where it is needed in the   Jersey marketing orders and was            declining percentage of Class I milk
most economic fashion. This is              Proposal No. 9 as published in the         receipts within the order’s pool. The
especially important and justified due to   hearing notice.                            same statistics, Johanna said, support
the changing marketing conditions of           Another proposal by Pennmarva—          the adoption of their proposal.
declining Class I use in the marketing      intended to more clearly define the           No opposition to the adoption of
area.                                       pooling requirements for producer          Proposals Nos. 7 and 9 was received.
   As indicated by the testimony and in     deliveries to pool plants and the status      Regarding Proposal No. 7, changing
a brief filed by Pennmarva, distributing    of producers whose marketing is            marketing conditions, namely
plants generally have more than one         interrupted by compliance with health      increasing producer receipts and
supplier, and such suppliers generally      regulations under the producer             declining Class I use, provide support
do not know the plant’s total receipts      definition of the order—was abandoned      for adoption of this proposal to increase
and Class I disposition. This makes it      and received no evidence or testimony      the percentage of milk of cooperative
difficult to determine what milk can be     at the hearing. This proposal was          members which may be diverted to non-
diverted from any single pool plant in      Proposal No. 6 as published in the         pool plants during the months of
a given month. Inadvertent over-            hearing notice.                            September through February. This
diversions of milk will result in milk         In Proposal No. 7, Pennmarva            proposal offers a reasonable unopposed
not being eligible for pooling and the      recommended increasing the                 solution for more orderly marketing and
benefits that accrue from such pooling.     permissible percentage of milk that can    to keep milk pooled under the order that
   Part of the Order 4 pooling provisions   be diverted to nonpool plants to a         has historically been associated with the
rests on a 15 percent route disposition     maximum volume of 55 percent of            market.
standard. Adoption of Proposal No. 1        receipts instead of the current 50            Regarding Proposal No. 9, the record
would enable cooperatives supplying         percent maximum. For nonmember             does not reveal any reason to not
the market to more economically move        milk, Johanna proposed increasing the      similarly increase the permissible
milk without undermining this standard      maximum allowable deliveries from the      diversion limit by handlers with non-
or other pool plant definition standards.   current 40 percent to a new maximum        cooperative member milk supplies for
   Regarding Proposal No. 4, changing       of 45 percent.                             the same reasons already indicated
marketing conditions, namely                   Citing statistics prepared by the       regarding Proposal No. 7.
expanding producer receipts and a           market administrator, the Pennmarva
decline in the Class I utilization of the   witness observed that over the three-      3. Regulation of Distributing Plants That
market, provide support for changing        year period of 1991 to 1993, producer      Meet the Pooling Standards of More
the pooling requirements for reserve        receipts under Order 4 increased by        Than One Federal Order
processing plants operated by a             158.8 millions pounds, while Class I          a. A proposal to leave the
cooperative, without negating the           disposition fell by 277.3 million          determination of which order regulates
36242             Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 135 / Friday, July 14, 1995 / Proposed Rules

a plant with pool-qualifying disposition     percent. Pennmarva attributed these          According to Pennmarva, a plant which
in more than one Federal order to the        changes partly to the change in              qualifies as a pool plant in either order
provisions of § 1004.7(f)(1) cannot be       regulation of the already-noted plants.      prior to the adoption of this proposal
decided upon on the basis of the hearing        Pennmarva also testified that the         will continue to qualify as a pool plant.
record. The provisions of § 1004.7(f)(1)     exchange of milk between Orders 2 and           Significant opposition testimony was
requires that if a pool plant qualifies as   4 has historically been equal. However,      received regarding Proposal No. 3.
a pool plant in another order, the plant     according to Pennmarva, this                 Johanna, testified that Proposal No. 3
will be regulated under that order           relationship changed greatly in the past     seems intended to prevent them from
unless the plant has a greater volume of     year. Citing Order 4 market                  pooling the milk from its Lansdale plant
Class I dispositions in the Order 4          administrator published statistics (the      under the New York-New Jersey milk
marketing area. Currently, this order        volume of packaged fluid sales from          order despite the fact that the greater
provision is subordinated by an              Order 2 into the Order 4 marketing area      percentage of such milk ultimately is
additional provision in § 1004.7(f)(2)       in 1993), Pennmarva indicated that           distributed as Class I milk in that area.
that yields a plant’s pool status to         327.3 million pounds of pooled and           To the best of his knowledge, Johanna
another order whenever such plant            priced Order 2 milk was disposed of in       said, Proposal No. 3 would have no
qualifies as a pool plant under the other    the Order 4 marketing area, up by 134.7      effect on any other handler. Moreover,
order. It is this subordinating provision    million pounds from 1992—an increase         the requirement that milk received at
that is proposed to be deleted from the      of 70 percent. However, Order 4 priced       Johanna’s Lansdale plant be pooled in
order (Proposal No. 3 as published in        and pooled milk in the Order 2               Order 4 yields no material benefit to
the hearing notice). In other words,         marketing area over the same time            Order 4 producers.
Proposal No. 3, offered by Pennmarva,        period increased by only 12.1 percent to        According to Johanna, Proposal No. 3
would determine the regulation of a          a total of 238.0 million pounds. This        fails to recognize the close relationship
plant under the order on the basis of        change of the historical balance was         between the Order 2 and Order 4
where the plant has its greatest Class I     attributed by Pennmarva to the shifting      markets and would be
route disposition in the event that a        of regulation of the Lansdale pool plant     counterproductive to the goals of the
plant qualifies as a pool plant under        in November 1992 and the Reading pool        Federal milk marketing scheme.
another order.                               plant in January 1993 to regulation          Johanna contended that milk which is
   According to Pennmarva, the yield         under Order 2. Even though these plants      received and separated at one plant, and
provision contained in § 1004.7(f)(2)        became regulated under the New York-         then shipped as bulk milk for
unnecessarily subordinates the Middle        New Jersey milk order, Pennmarva said,       subsequent packaging and Class I
Atlantic milk order to the provisions of     these plants continued to have               distribution by another plant, is most
another Federal order. Such                  significant Class I route disposition in     clearly associated with the market in
subordination is not needed, said            the Order 4 marketing area.                  which the milk ultimately is distributed
Pennmarva, because the provisions of            Pennmarva also justified using the        on fluid routes. Johanna also asserted
§ 1004.7(f)(1) defines a comprehensive       measure of greatest Class I route sales as   that if more than half of a plant’s
and adequate standard for determining        the basis for deciding where a plant         receipts from producers are regularly
whether a pool plant should be               should be pooled by citing the               shipped to another plant for packaging
regulated under Order 4.                     provisions of nearby orders that provide     and Class I disposition in another order,
   Pennmarva testified that two pool         for this measurement; specifically, the      the plant initially receiving the milk,
plants, one located in Lansdale, PA          Carolina (Order 5) and the Eastern Ohio-     and those farmers who supply such
(Lansdale), and the other located in         Western Pennsylvania (Order 36) milk         milk, should be associated with and
Reading, PA (Reading), have changed          orders. However, noted Pennmarva, the        pooled under the order where those
from being regulated under Order 4 to        New York-New Jersey order provides a         later fluid Class I sales are made.
Order 2. These changes, said                 different measure.                              Johanna testified that its Lansdale
Pennmarva, have had the effect of               Pennmarva noted differences between       plant became pooled under Order 2 for
depressing the Order 4 blend price           Order 4 and Order 2 pooling provisions.      legitimate business reasons and not for
relative to the blend price of Order 2.      Order 2 allows for transfers of bulk fluid   the purpose of circumventing where it
According to Pennmarva, the New York-        milk (classified as Class I-A) between       is regulated. The reason for the switch
New Jersey 1992 average blend price          plants, while Order 4 specifically           in regulation from Order 4 to Order 2
was $0.68 per hundredweight less than        excludes deliveries to a plant, said         was the cessation of milk processing at
the Order 4 blend price for the same         Pennmarva. This difference in order          another Johanna plant located in
time period. Similarly, Pennmarva            provisions may result in a situation         Flemington, New Jersey (Flemington).
indicated that for 1993, the Order 2         where a plant may have a greater in-area     Prior to this plant’s closure, Johanna
blend price was $0.50 per cwt. less than     packaged route disposition in Order 4,       said, the Flemington plant had been
in Order 4.                                  but, testified Pennmarva, because Order      distributing some 677 million pounds of
   Pennmarva testified that between          2 allows for plant transfers of bulk fluid   Class I milk annually in the Order 2
1992 and 1993 there also were changes        milk (milk classified as Class I-A), such    market and had been an Order 2 pool
in Class I receipts and utilization          bulk transfers may cause the plant to        plant for more than 15 years.
between Order 4 and Order 2. During          have greater total Class I assignments in       Upon closing the Flemington plant,
this time period, Class I receipts of        Order 2 than in Order 4. In this event,      Johanna indicated that the greatest
producer milk in Order 4 fell by             said Pennmarva, the subordinating            majority of its milk business was
265,613,000 pounds while in Order 2          language of § 1004.7(f)(2) causes the        relocated to its Lansdale operation, with
they rose by 170,765,660 pounds, said        plant to be regulated as an Order 2 pool     the greatest majority of its Class I sales
Pennmarva. During this same time             plant, even though it may have more          in Order 2. Johanna said there was no
period, the Class I utilization of Order     packaged Class I route distribution in       change in Class I disposition in either
4 shrank by nearly 3 percentage points       the Order 4 marketing area.                  Order 2 or Order 4 by virtue of the
to a total of 45.1 percent, while the           Pennmarva said this proposal would        movement of that milk. Johanna
Order 2 Class I utilization grew by one      not change the pool plant definition of      asserted again that the combining of
percentage point to a total of 40.3          the New York-New Jersey order.               operations of the two plants at Lansdale
                   Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 135 / Friday, July 14, 1995 / Proposed Rules                             36243

was a business decision and not an             should be addressed through proposed        historical uniqueness of Order 2 in
attempt at manipulating order                  amendments to the New York-New              terms of its use of up-country plants to
provisions.                                    Jersey order and not this proceeding,       separate farm milk into skim milk that
   Johanna testified that producers in         said Johanna.                               is shipped hundreds of miles to city
Pennsylvania’s milkshed typically                 Johanna asserted that the 24.5-cent      bottling plants, while leaving the cream
supply large quantities of milk to             location adjustment between the two         fraction of the raw milk in up-country
handlers in both Orders 2 and 4.               zones was properly factored into Order      plants for processing into Class II or
Further, said Johanna, it is unrealistic to    2’s location differential scheme based      Class III products.
view the Pennsylvania milkshed as              upon the historical mechanism of               Opposition testimony was also
somehow geographically linked to the           transporting distant milk to the urban      received from a witness on behalf of
Order 4 market. The overlapping nature         market through the use of receiving         Clover Farms Dairy Company (Clover
of this milkshed between the two               stations. Johanna added that the 24.5-      Farms), located in Reading, PA. Clover
orders, said Johanna, supports Order 2         cent difference equalizes the price, for    Farms testified that adoption of
regulation of a Pennsylvania plant that        competitive purposes, of milk brought       Proposal No. 3 would lead to
distributes the majority of its fluid milk     into the Order 2 market from more           irreconcilable conflict with the
within the Order 2 marketing area.             distant locations. The witness said that    provisions of the New York-New Jersey
   Johanna emphasized that the Lansdale        as milk had to be shipped from more         order.
plant is a ‘‘designated’’ Order 2 pool         distant locations, receiving stations          Clover Farms testified that the most
plant, and therefore is relied upon by         collected the milk from dispersed           basic provisions of any milk marketing
the performance standards of such              producers. At the time the Order 2          order are those that determine which
designation to provide support for Class       location differential applicable to the     plants are to be regulated. These
I sales within the marketing area. The         Lansdale operation was adopted, said        provisions, Clover Farms said, often
presence of such plants, said Johanna,         Johanna, the location adjustment            differ from one order to another because
supports the blend price which                 difference was intended to allow            they are designed to meet the varying
accommodates the large amount of               handlers to recoup the fixed costs          characteristics of the marketing areas
manufacturing milk pooled in the New           associated with the creation and            involved. According to Clover Farms,
York-New Jersey order.                         maintenance of receiving stations. At       because an individual plant serving a
   No appreciable adverse effect on the        the same time, Johanna added, the           diverse market may meet the pooling
Order 4 blend price would result from          location adjustment difference between      requirements of more than one Federal
the inclusion of the Lansdale plant            zones was intended to not affect any        order, each order must specify how such
under Order 2, according to Johanna’s          Order 2 plant then in existence.            a situation is to be resolved. Moreover,
analysis. The effect on the Order 4 blend         A witness from Dairylea Cooperative,     said Clover Farms, the resolution as
price using 1993 averages, said Johanna,       Inc. (Dairylea), of Syracuse, New York,     determined by each order involved must
amounts to about a three-cent reduction.       also testified in opposition to Proposal    lead to the same conclusion, otherwise
Johanna also indicated that pooling the        No. 3. Dairylea is a dairy farmer           no guidance will be given either to the
milk under Order 4 would have had a            cooperative comprised of some 2,200         Department of Agriculture or to the
slightly smaller reduction in the blend        members throughout the northeast of         courts in resolving the conflict.
price received by Order 2 producers.           the United States who produce milk             Clover Farms testified that Proposal
   Johanna concluded that any                  regulated under Federal Orders 1, 2, 4,     No. 3 would eliminate the basis for
justification for adopting Proposal No. 3      and 36. This witness testified Order 4      deciding which order takes precedence
upon a supposed improvement in the             provisions currently recognizes its         when a plant would otherwise be
blend price by pooling the Lansdale            interdependence with Order 2. When          subject to the classification and pricing
plant under Order 4 fails to account for       there is a dispute over which order a       provisions of both Order 4 and another
the effect upon the blend price in Order       particular plant should be pooled under,    Federal order. Leaving the
2. At most, said Johanna, classification       Dairylea said, there is recognition by      determination on which order has the
of the plant’s milk with one order or the      Order 4 provisions of the historical        greater volume of Class I milk disposed
other would represent an insignificant         uniqueness of Order 2 in terms of its use   of on routes in its marketing area from
adjustment in the movement, up or              of up-country plants to separate farm       the plant might work, said Clover
down, of blend prices in either order.         milk into skim milk that is shipped         Farms, provided the other order has a
   Johanna also testified that Proposal        hundreds of miles to city bottling          provision that provides the same
No. 3 seems intended to eliminate the          plants, while leaving the cream fraction    conclusion. This could not work in the
applicable location differential as an         of the raw milk in the up-country plants    case of Order 4 and Order 2, Clover
Order 2 plant. Because of the Lansdale’s       for processing into Class II or Class III   Farms indicated, because the provisions
route distribution in Order 2, the             products. Dairylea said this is part of a   of the New York-New Jersey order bases
existing location differential is fair, said   sound economic system that has              the decision on which order has the
Johanna. Adoption of Proposal No. 3,           developed over many years.                  larger portion of disposition of Class I–
according to Johanna, would place them            According to Dairylea, adoption of       A milk, which includes bulk shipments
at a competitive disadvantage against          Proposal No. 3 would set up a direct        of milk assigned to Class I, in its
other Order 2 handlers competing in the        conflict between Order 4 and Order 2        marketing area. Since Order 4 does not
market for fluid sales. Johanna noted          pooling provisions because adopting it      recognize the role of bulk shipments in
that there is a 24.5-cent difference in the    would tend to amend the application of      its calculation, said Clover Farms,
location differential in Order 2 between       Order 2’s pooling provisions. Dairylea      adoption of Proposal No. 3 would
the Lansdale plant’s applicable zone           was of the opinion that Proposal No. 3      provide no basis upon which to resolve
(the 71–75 mile zone) and the next             appeared to be based solely on the goal     the conflict between the two orders
nearer zone (the 61–70 mile zone). If          of enhancing a single group’s economic      when a plant meets the pooling
Proposal No. 3 is intended to alter the        interest without regard to the potential    provisions of both.
location differentials of Order 2 because      of injury to another order’s system of         The opposition testimony of the
of some perceived unfairness, such             milk sales that developed over many         Clover Farms witness was supported in
changes to the Order 2 pricing structure       years. Dairylea indicated there is a        testimony by a witness who testified on
36244             Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 135 / Friday, July 14, 1995 / Proposed Rules

behalf of Eastern Milk Producers               The Pennmarva brief also challenged       which no changes were made regarding
Cooperative Association, a dairy farmer     the Johanna witness’ assertion that all of   this issue from the recommended
cooperative having some 2,400 members       its transferred milk was ultimately          decision. According to Pennmarva, such
that ship milk to Orders 1, 2, 4, and 36.   distributed on routes in the Order 2         an example speaks to a fundamental
   A brief filed by Pennmarva noted that    marketing area. Pennmarva noted that         intent of milk marketing orders—to
while Johanna agrees that a plant should    transfers were made between Lansdale,        regulate handlers that compete for sales
be pooled under the order in which          PA, and Reddington Farms (an Order 2         within the specific geographic
most Class I sales are made, Johanna        pool plant) and that market                  definition of the marketing area.
provided no evidence to support the         administrator statistics indicate that         A brief filed by Johanna reiterated
claim that fluid milk transfers from the    Reddington Farms enjoyed Class I route       their opposition to the adoption of
Lansdale plant were in fact distributed     disposition in the Order 4 marketing         Proposal No. 3.
on routes in the Order 2 marketing area,    area in every month between 1991 and           Reply briefs filed by both Pennmarva
thereby meeting a defacto route             1994.                                        and Johanna similarly reiterated their
disposition test. Pennmarva argues here        In response to the Clover Farms’          positions given in testimony and in
that if, in fact, the Lansdale plant has    testimony that adoption of Proposal No.      submitted briefs. However, Johanna’s
greater route disposition in Order 2 than   3 would lead to irreconcilable conflict      reply brief takes objection to
it has in Order 4, the adoption of          with Order 2 and that such conflict          Pennmarva’s suggestion that Johanna
Proposal No. 3 will have no effect on the   would need to be addressed by the            should simply effectuate changes in its
plant. Pennmarva further argues that        Dairy Division, Pennmarva cited an           Lansdale operations so as to convert its
even if the plant did not now have          example of how, through administrative       bulk shipments of fluid milk to Order 2
greater route disposition in Order 2,       determination, a pooling issue such as       into route disposition and thereby
operators of the plant could implement      this might be handled. The Pennmarva         preserve the plant as an Order 2 plant
the changes necessary to ensure greater     brief asserted that it is within the         under the strictures of § 1004.7(f)(1).
route sales in Order 2.                     purview of the Act for proponent             According to Johanna, this suggestion
   To illustrate the need for adopting      cooperatives, which represent volumes        does not take into account the
Proposal No. 3, the Pennmarva brief         in excess of 90 percent of the Order 4       impracticality and costs to Johanna of
noted that in 1993, the Lansdale plant      market, to delete provisions which           pooling the Lansdale plant to
had 224 millions pounds of Class I          subjugate the order to all other orders      accommodate the packaging
disposition in Order 4 and 245 million      and to rely on a route disposition test      requirements of multiple wholesale
pounds of Class I disposition in Order      in determining where a plant should be       customers who presently receive bulk
2, for a total of 469 million pounds. Of    pooled when it also qualifies for pooling    shipments from the Lansdale plant for
that 469 million pounds, Pennmarva          under another order.                         packaging and ultimate route
indicated that at least 10 percent (46.9       According to the Pennmarva brief,         disposition in Order 2.
million pounds) of its milk was             orderly marketing within Order 4               Johanna also counters the
transferred in bulk or packaged form        should not be hinged on an                   Pennmarva’s reference to another
from Lansdale to other plants.              accommodation to another order.              rulemaking proceeding and
According to Pennmarva, Lansdale            Pennmarva does concede that the              recommended decision involving a
consequently distributed on routes no       interplay of adjoining markets, such as      pooling issue of a Ultra High
more than 198.1 million pounds in the       Order 2 and 4, must be considered in         Temperature (UHT) plant in another
Order 2 marketing area. Thus,               maintaining orderly marketing but            Federal order. While Pennmarva cited
Pennmarva claims that the Lansdale          indicated there is nothing in the record     this recommended decision as an
plant distributed 198.1 million pounds      which provides a reason why Order 4          example of how administrative
of Class I milk on routes in Order 2        should be subordinated to Order 2 or         intervention could be used to determine
versus 224 million pounds of Class I        any other order. This is important,          where a plant should be regulated,
milk in Order 4, clearly revealing that     according to Pennmarva, because of the       Johanna views this recommended
there is more route disposition under       economic hardship brought about              decision as providing certainty and
Order 4. However, because of the yield      through depressed blend prices.              orderly conditions for the UHT plant
provision contained in § 1004.7(f)(2),      Pennmarva indicates that there is no         and its producer on where it will be
according to Pennmarva, the Lansdale        benefit to Order 4 producers from the        pooled. In this example, Johanna notes
plant is regulated under Order 2.           application of the provisions of             that the route disposition test, as a
   The Pennmarva brief contends that        § 1004.7(f)(2) and that its elimination      single criteria for pooling, is rejected
Johanna’s testimony that the Lansdale       will not change the pooling standards of     because of the unique aspects of the
Class I–A milk transfers were ultimately    any other Federal order.                     marketing conditions faced by the UHT
distributed on routes in Order 2 is in         In defense of the adequacy of using a     plant. Such uniqueness should also be
error. Pennmarva noted that the             route disposition test, the Pennmarva        recognized for the Lansdale plant, said
definition of Class I–A milk under Order    brief cited a recommended decision           Johanna, because it makes Class I bulk
2 is ‘‘as route disposition in an other     applicable to another Federal order in       shipments to an order which does not
order marketing area’’ as delineated in     which a plant that qualifies under more      rely solely on a route distribution
§ 1002.41(a)(1)(ii) of the New York-New     than one order is regulated under the        pooling test.
Jersey order. Thus, according to            order which it enjoys the greatest route       At issue regarding Proposal No. 3 is
Pennmarva, a plant which otherwise          disposition. This recommended                where a plant should be pooled and
qualifies as an Order 2 pool plant can      decision indicated that such application     regulated when it meets the pooling
dispose of milk on routes in the Order      normally assures that all handlers           standards of more than one order. Both
4 marketing area, and such dispositions     having principal sales in a market are       the proponent and opponents to
are classified under Order 2 as Class I–    subject to the same pricing and other        Proposal No. 3 agree that the market in
A. Pennmarva indicated that once            regulatory requirements. Official Notice     which fluid sales distributed on routes
classified as Class I–A, no further         is taken of the Final Decision (59 FR        are greatest is where a plant should be
distinction is made regarding the           26603, published May 23, 1994) for the       regulated. Where a plant should be
ultimate destination of route sales.        Southern Michigan marketing area in          regulated is a most important feature of
                   Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 135 / Friday, July 14, 1995 / Proposed Rules                               36245

all Federal milk orders. The basis upon       if the Lansdale plant may have had            I disposition, but Order 2 and Order 4
which a marketing area is determined is       more route sales in Order 4.                  each rely on different forms of
founded on the basis of where handlers           The Lansdale plant is physically           measuring this outcome. Due
compete with each other for fluid sales.      located within the Order 4 marketing          recognition of the regulatory impact on
An important determinant of handlers          area and until recently had historically      a plant that meets the pooling standards
competing with each other for sales is        been pooled as an Order 4 pool                of the New York-New Jersey order is
generally made through a measurement          distributing plant. Further, the Lansdale     warranted because the plant has met
of the route disposition of fluid milk.       plant is clearly a fluid distributing plant   that order’s standards. At the same time,
For the Middle Atlantic marketing area,       that competes with other handlers for         Order 4 producers are required by their
the order clearly defines route               fluid sales in Order 4. In the New York-      order to yield to the pricing provisions
disposition, and its measurement can be       New Jersey order, it seems to enjoy,          of another order on the terms of
made with exacting precision every            from the testimony of some opponent           measurement that are not its own.
month. However, the New York-New              witnesses, the status of a distributing          This recommended decision agrees
Jersey marketing order differs from           plant while at the same time was              with an opponent witness’ testimony
Order 4 in that it provides for the bulk      inferred to be a ‘‘country’’ plant.           that each marketing order should
transfers of fluid milk between plants        Nevertheless, Order 2 recognizes the          specify how to resolve differences and
that is classified as Class I-A milk. Order   Lansdale plant as a fluid milk                conflicts that arise in the regulation and
4 specifically excludes such transfers        distributing plant with the transferring      pooling of plants. In this regard,
between plants from meeting its route         of milk as a secondary operation. This        opponents to Proposal No. 3 voiced
disposition test.                             distinction is made here because Order        concern that its adoption would lead to
   Opponents of Proposal No. 3 assert, in     2 also recognizes processing plants with      irreconcilable conflict with the
part, that bulk transfers of Class I-A        manufacturing as a secondary operation.       provisions of the New York-New Jersey
between plants are an important feature       Simply put, the Lansdale plant’s              order. Such conflict probably would not
of the Order 2 marketing area because of      primary enterprise is as a fluid              be the case if an identical definition and
the market structure that evolved there       distributing plant.                           standard of measurement, that is route
                                                 The effect of the New York-New             disposition, existed for both orders.
over time. The basis of providing for
                                              Jersey order provision of allowing for           In short, adoption of Proposal No. 3
bulk transfers of Class I-A milk between
                                              bulk transfers of Class I–A milk and its      would leave determination of the
plants recognized the market structure
                                              lack of a route disposition test makes it     regulatory and pool status of the
and conditions in that order. Opponent
                                              difficult to determine precisely where        Lansdale plant solely to the Order 4
witnesses describe ‘‘up-country’’ plants
                                              the majority of Landsdale’s Class I sales     route disposition test. However,
that assemble and separate the skim           take place that includes the bulk             adoption of this proposal has the effect
fraction of producer milk for subsequent      transferred milk. The record reveals, in      of causing a change to the New York-
transfer to ‘‘city’’ bottling plants for      testimony by Johanna, that bulk               New Jersey order which was not open
eventual distribution to retail outlets,      transfers of Class I–A milk end up            or noticed in this proceeding. Adoption
while leaving the cream fraction in           eventually as route disposition,              of Proposal No. 3 provides neither
country plants to be further processed        although the record does not reveal how       clarity nor a basis, at least with respect
into Class II and Class III products, as      much of such milk is distributed on           to the relationship between Order 4 and
a unique characteristic of the Order 2        routes within Order 2 or in another           Order 2, to determine in which order a
marketplace.                                  marketing area. Pennmarva makes a case        plant should be pooled.
   On its face, it is difficult to conclude   from the record evidence that suggests           The apparent intent of Pennmarva’s
that adoption of Proposal No. 3               that there is more route disposition in       Proposal No. 3 seems clear and
somehow threatens the above described         Order 4. In this regard, Johanna’s claim      consistent with how milk is regulated
market structure that Order 2 handlers        that fluid milk transfers from the            and pooled throughout the Federal milk
have relied upon for a long period of         Lansdale plant were in fact distributed       order system. In this regard, Pennmarva
time. Both the proponent and opponents        on routes in Order 2 might not be totally     is asking that milk distributed on routes
of Proposal No. 3 recognize and describe      accurate on basis of the record evidence.     be the sole test for determining where a
similarly the close relationship between      This conclusion is further supported by       plant should be pooled. Proponents and
Order 2 and Order 4. The record reveals       examining the Order 2 provision of            opponents agree that where a plant has
that both orders share, to a significant      what constitutes Class I–A milk,              most of its sales is the most appropriate
extent, a common milkshed. The record         namely, inclusion of milk distributed on      basis for making such a determination.
also reveals that milk movements              routes in another marketing area. This        Unfortunately, Proposal No. 3 falls short
between orders have been historically         decision agrees with Pennmarva that a         of being able to accomplish this without
equal until the Lansdale plant switched       plant which otherwise qualifies as an         causing a change to the New York-New
regulation from Order 4 to Order 2. The       Order 2 pool plant can dispose of milk        Jersey order.
change in the regulatory and pool status      on routes in the Order 4 marketing area          The Johanna witness testified that, in
of the Lansdale plant was due to Order        with such disposition classified as Class     part, the purpose of Proposal No. 3
2 allowing for bulk transfers of Class I-     I–A, and then once so classified, no          appeared intended to eliminate the
A milk as a fluid use which brought the       further distinction as to the ultimate        location differential as an Order 2 plant.
total Class I disposition of the plant to     route disposition is made through the         This would obviously place Johanna at
have more milk associated with the New        transfer chain.                               a competitive disadvantage against other
York-New Jersey marketing area than it           In summary, a conclusion on the basis      Order 2 handlers competing in the
had with the Middle Atlantic marketing        of the record of where the greatest route     market for fluid sales in the Order 2
area. This allowance for bulk transfers       sales of fluid milk are made by               marketing area. The witness observed
under the New York-New Jersey order,          Johanna’s Lansdale plant cannot be            correctly that there is a 24.5-cent
together with the subordinating               determined. This is problematic because       difference in the location adjustment in
language of Order 4, required the             both proponent and opponent witnesses         Order 2 between the Lansdale plant’s
regulatory and pool status of the             indicate that a plant should be pooled        applicable zone (the 71–75 mile zone)
Lansdale plant to shift to Order 2 even       where it enjoys the majority of its Class     and the nearer zone (the 61–70 mile
36246             Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 135 / Friday, July 14, 1995 / Proposed Rules

zone). On this point, an examination of      should similarly be considered with the         In the interest of promoting more
the Class I price at the Lansdale location   view to facilitating more orderly            orderly marketing conditions, Proposal
reveals a disparate price difference         marketing conditions.                        No. 2 has merit because it mitigates a
between being regulated under Order 2           b. A second proposal that would           cooperative’s lack of knowledge of a
or Order 4. Under the provisions of the      eliminate the exemption of a pool            distributing plant’s dispositions. Such
Middle Atlantic order, the Class I price     plant’s regulation under Order 4 when        knowledge is needed in order for the
applicable at Lansdale is $0.345 more        such a plant meets the pool plant            cooperative to know where a plant is
than what the applicable Class I price       definition of another order from the         pooled or when a plant’s pool status
would be if it were regulated under the      pool plant definition of the order should    may change in any given month. It is
New York-New Jersey order.                   be adopted. This was proposed by             reasonable to expect that when a
   This disparate price difference           Pennmarva (Proposal No. 2 as published       distributing plant does change its
suggests that the Class I price, at least    in the hearing notice).                      regulatory status under the order,
at the Lansdale location, could be better       Currently, an Order 4 pool plant can      producers supplying the plant should
aligned. To the extent that a $0.345         continue to be regulated under the order     have the time to make the business
price difference between the pricing         as a pool plant for two succeeding           changes and adjustments they deem
provisions of two adjoining orders may       months after it fails to meet certain        necessary without the loss of the
be sufficient to encourage bulk Class I–     pooling standards, unless it                 certainty of where their milk will be
A milk transfers, that, together with        simultaneously meets the pooling             pooled. The record reveals that advance
other forms of milk disposition in the       provisions of another Federal order.         notification was provided to cooperative
New York-New Jersey order, provides          This feature of the order is commonly        suppliers prior to changes of where
the Lansdale plant the economic              referred to as the ‘‘lock-in’’ provision.    certain plants would be regulated in
incentive to meet the pooling standards         Pennmarva testified that in the recent    some instances. This is commendable
and pricing provisions of Order 2. If the    past, two Order 4 pool distributing          and speaks well to the interactions
Class I price at Lansdale were in better     plants changed their status from being       between cooperative suppliers of milk
alignment, it is reasonable to suppose       regulated under the Middle Atlantic          and handlers. However, such
that Johanna would likely be indifferent     marketing order to the New York-New          notification is clearly voluntary when
on which order they sought pricing and       Jersey marketing order (Order 2). In both    requiring it would offer clear advantages
regulatory status. On the one hand,                                                       without being burdensome. The merit in
                                             cases, Pennmarva said, notice of the
Landsdale is able to attract an adequate                                                  requiring advance notification stems
                                             change of regulation was provided to
supply of fluid milk at a price lower                                                     from the very real and reasonable need
                                             cooperative suppliers in a timely
than what would be applicable if                                                          of cooperatives to have such prior
                                             fashion so that the appropriate logistical
regulated under Order 4. Further,                                                         knowledge of where their milk will be
                                             arrangements could be made. According
adoption of Proposal No. 3 would likely                                                   pooled and priced. Finding out after-
                                             to Pennmarva, an important logistical
cause a shift in the regulatory status of                                                 the-fact that a plant’s regulatory status
                                             item attended to was the reassociation
the Lansdale plant back to Order 4,                                                       has changed is tantamount to denying
                                             of the market’s producers whose last
causing their cost of milk to increase                                                    producers access to an intended market.
                                             shipment to a pool distributing plant
when they meet the pooling standards                                                      For this reason, the objections by the
of another order. On the other hand, if      was to one of these plants. Pennmarva
                                                                                          opposition witness from Dairylea have
the Lansdale plant enjoys its greatest       said accomplishing this task was
                                                                                          little merit. It also places an
route disposition in the Order 4             exacting and time consuming.
                                                                                          unreasonable economic burden on
marketing area, they enjoy a sales              Pennmarva testified that there is no      Order 4 producers because of the order’s
advantage against other Order 4              requirement or certainty for a handler to    requirement to re-associate producer
regulated handlers that pay more for         give adequate notice to its cooperative      milk in the marketing area so that
their milk.                                  suppliers of milk. Further, said             producers may enjoy the benefits from
   It is because of the above discussion     Pennmarva, cooperative suppliers have        being pooled in Order 4.
of this issue that a recommendation for      no independent knowledge that a plant           Because a decision regarding Proposal
or denial of Proposal No. 3 cannot be        may change from regulation under the         No. 3 cannot be made on the basis of
made on the basis of this record.            order to another order. In a worst case      this record, the proposed deletion of
Adoption of Proposal No. 3 would have        scenario, Pennmarva said, a cooperative      § 1004.7(a)(4) as proposed by
the effect of causing a change to another    supplying milk to a handler changing         Pennmarva would not accomplish
order which cannot be accomplished           regulation would not discover this           implementing the intent of this proposal
without a hearing that includes the          change until ten days into the following     (Proposal No. 2). Accordingly, this
other order. Further, the apparent           month. Pennmarva indicated the intent        decision modifies the language of
disparate price difference between the       of this proposed amendment is to             § 1004.7(a)(4) to ensure that the two
pricing provisions of the Middle             enhance orderly marketing rather than        month ‘‘lock-in’’ provisions (as
Atlantic and New York-Jersey orders          keeping a plant pooled permanently           contained in § 1004.7(a)(3)) will apply
suggests that the pooling question at        under Order 4.                               to plants that may, in the future, shift
issue is perhaps a pricing issue. As            Opposition to Proposal No. 2 was          regulation to another Federal order or
such, it is not appropriate to attempt       voiced by Dairylea. According to             become a nonpool plant.
correction of a pricing problem by           Dairylea, Proposal No. 2 has no
changing pooling provisions.                 economic or substantive basis. This          4. Discretionary Authority To Revise
   Notice is given that the Department       witness drew attention to the timely         Pooling Requirements and Producer
expects that interested parties will         notification to suppliers by the two         Milk Diversion Limits
investigate and offer proposals that         plants that shifted regulation to the New       Two proposals offered by Pennmarva
address the Class I price alignment          York-New Jersey order as an indicator of     that would provide discretionary
structure between Order 2 and Order 4.       the well-functioning current provision       authority for the market administrator to
Other features of marketing order            of the order. Thus, Dairylea concluded       revise pooling requirements and
differences, such as that exhibited on       that the order therefore does not require    producer milk diversion limits should
the issue regarding Proposal No. 3,          a modification to address the issue.         be adopted. Proposal No. 5, as
                   Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 135 / Friday, July 14, 1995 / Proposed Rules                              36247

published in the hearing notice, would        received at a plant that meets the Class      administrator no later than the 15th day
provide the market administrator the          I disposition standards.                      of the month prior to the month for
authority to raise or lower the                  The producer definition of Order 4         which the requested revision is desired
applicable pooling standards for              currently provides that dairy farmers         to be effective.
distributing plants, supply plants, and       can be producers under the order even            Pennmarva testified that this
reserve processing plants. Proposal No.       though their milk is moved from the           amendment would provide for more
8, as published in the Notice of Hearing,     farm to nonpool plants for                    timely decisions on factors affecting the
would similarly provide the market            manufacturing purposes rather than to         pool status of dairy farmers. It was
administrator the authority to raise or       plants for fluid use. Diversion limits        Pennmarva’s opinion that the market
lower the applicable diversion limits for     apply to handlers marketing dairy             administrator and staff are fully
cooperative associations, federations of      farmer’s milk such as cooperative             appraised of the market conditions in
cooperative associations, and handlers        associations, federations of                  the Middle Atlantic market. Such
with non-member milk supplies.                cooperatives, and handlers marketing          working knowledge, said Pennmarva,
Adoption of these provisions will             non-member milk. The diversion limit          can decrease the time and expense
provide a procedure for the order to be       for a cooperative association or a            needed to respond to a changing market
modified in a more responsive manner          federation of cooperatives is restricted      and improve regulatory efficiency.
to changes in marketing conditions than       to 50 percent of the volume of milk of           Pennmarva maintains that this
is currently the case. Modification can       all members of a cooperative association      process is superior to the process
be made to encourage the shipment of          or federation delivered to, or diverted       currently used to affect needed changes
additional supplies of milk for fluid use     from, pool plants during the month. The       in pooling standards and diversion
or to prevent the uneconomic shipments        diversion limit for handlers with non-        limitations. Pennmarva noted that the
of milk that are in excess of fluid needs.    member milk supplies is restricted to 40      Department can effectuate suspension
   The order does not currently provide       percent of the total of non-member milk       actions of order provisions that remove
for such discretionary authority for the      for which a pool plant operator is the        regulatory language, thus reducing the
market administrator to change pooling        handler during the month.                     burden on handlers. However, the
                                                 Pennmarva testified that granting the
requirements or diversion limitations.                                                      witness indicated that deletions of
                                              market administrator the authority to
Typically, pooling standards may be                                                         language by informal rulemaking
                                              raise or lower pooling standards and
temporarily revised or suspended                                                            procedures is too limiting to address
                                              diversion limits will enhance orderly
administratively through informal                                                           changes in marketing conditions.
                                              marketing by either encouraging needed
rulemaking by the Department at a                                                           Pennmarva said that providing the
                                              milk shipments or preventing the
petitioner’s request. The Department          uneconomic movement of milk.
                                                                                            market administrator with a procedure
investigates the request and determines       Pennmarva indicated that such                 to make specific percentage changes,
the need to temporarily revise or             administrative authority is granted to        either up or down, would be a more
suspend pooling standards. Permanent          market administrators in other markets,       flexible way of changing shipping
changes or amendments to Federal order        noting for example that the market            requirements or diversion limits.
provisions, as in this proceeding, are        administrator in the Upper Midwest               Opposition testimony was received
accomplished through formal                   marketing area (Order 68) has similar         from Dairylea for granting such
rulemaking procedures based on a              authority.                                    discretionary authority to the market
public hearing.                                  Before making any revision to the          administrator for revising shipping
   The pool plant definition of Order 4       pooling standard or diversion limits          requirements (Proposal No. 5). Dairylea
currently requires that in meeting pool       established by the order, Pennmarva           said that while they have significant
plant qualification status, a plant must      offered specific procedures that would        faith in market administrators, they see
have a Class I disposition of at least 40     govern the conditions under which             no reason to abandon long-term
percent of its receipts in the months of      revisions might be warranted. The             practices of having a public hearing or
September through February and 30             procedure offered specifies that the          meeting to discuss the merits of
percent in the months of March through        market administrator may increase or          changing applicable shipping standards
August. Additionally, at least 15 percent     decrease the applicable percentages of        within an order. Dairylea is of the view
of receipts must be within the marketing      either the pool plant definition section      that Proposal No. 5 does not provide for
area. Any plant that does not meet this       or the producer definition section of the     a public meeting forum but rather
criteria for pool plant status can still be   order (§§ 1004.7 and 1004.12                  simply written arguments almost after
a pool plant if at least a specified          respectively) if a revision is necessary to   the fact. Dairylea indicated that
percentage of its milk receipts is moved      encourage needed shipments or to              shipping standards can have a profound
during the month to a plant(s) that meet      prevent uneconomic shipments of milk.         economic impact on farmers,
the Class I disposition requirements and      Before making such a finding, the order       cooperatives, processors and consumers,
volume of route disposition within the        procedure requires the market                 and, in fact, are the very essence of the
marketing area indicated above. The           administrator to investigate the need for     market order structure. The witness said
applicable percentage for the months of       revision either on the market                 that changing these standards without
September through February is 50              administrator’s own initiative, or at the     public scrutiny in the form of a public
percent of receipts; for the months of        request of interested parties. If the         meeting or hearing should not be
March through August, the applicable          investigation shows that a revision           allowed. The witness feared that a
percentage is 40 percent. A reserve           might be appropriate, the proposed            simple request for a written response
processing plant operated by a                order language requires the market            would leave many people out of the
cooperative association or by a               administrator to issue a notice stating       discussion and decisionmaking process.
federation of cooperative associations is     that a revision is being considered and          A witness for Clover Farms testified
a pool plant provided, in part, that at       invite data, views, and arguments on          in opposition to both Proposal Nos. 5
least 30 percent of the total milk            whether a revision is necessary. The          and 8. Clover Farms opposes these two
receipts of member producers during           procedure also specifies that any request     proposals unless provision is made for
the month is moved to and physically          for revisions be filed with the market        a public forum to aid in the decision
36248             Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 135 / Friday, July 14, 1995 / Proposed Rules

making process of the market                   As the record reveals, such a               (c) The tentative marketing agreement
administrator.                              procedure has been used in the Upper         and the order, as hereby proposed to be
   A witness for Eastern Milk Producers     Midwest Marketing Area since 1990.           amended, will regulate the handling of
Cooperative Association (Eastern) also      Since the record does not reveal any         milk in the same manner as, and will be
testified in opposition to Proposal Nos.    lack of confidence in the ability of         applicable only to persons in the
5 and 8. Eastern indicated that it makes    market administrators (who are               respective classes of industrial and
sense to provide a degree of                entrusted with great responsibility in       commercial activity specified in a
administrative discretion to the market     administering the order) to effectively      marketing agreement upon which a
administrator to resolve the problems       carry out this duty, it is reasonable to     hearing has been held.
that may arise as a result of changes in    conclude that on the basis of the broad
                                                                                         Recommended Marketing Agreement
supply and demand conditions in the         authorities already entrusted to the
                                                                                         and Order Amending the Order
marketplace that would warrant              market administrator to provide for the
adjustment of shipping percentages.         effective administration of the order,         The recommended marketing
Nevertheless, before such discretion is     such discretionary authority that would      agreement is not included in this
exercised, Eastern maintained that there    be granted with the adoption of              decision because the regulatory
be notice to the industry and preferably    Proposals Nos. 5 and 8 are consistent        provisions thereof would be the same as
that there be an opportunity for a public   with those already given. Furthermore,       those contained in the order, as hereby
meeting for interested parties to bring     these two proposals have the broad           proposed to be amended. The following
evidence in aiding the market               support of producers who represent           order amending the order, as amended,
administrator to make a proper decision.    some 90 percent of the milk associated       regulating the handling of milk in the
Eastern noted that the ‘‘call’’ provision   with the market.                             Middle Atlantic marketing area is
of the New York-New Jersey marketing                                                     recommended as the detailed and
                                            Rulings on Proposed Findings and             appropriate means by which the
order, which requires the market            Conclusions
administrator to conduct a public                                                        foregoing conclusions may be carried
meeting in setting performance                Briefs and proposed findings and           out.
standards on handlers to ensure that the    conclusions were filed on behalf of          List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 1004
fluid market needs are adequately           certain interested parties. These briefs,
served, works well. Eastern indicated       proposed findings and conclusions, and         Milk marketing orders.
support for a proposal that would be        the evidence in the record were                For the reasons set forth in the
similar in scope for the Middle Atlantic    considered in making the findings and        preamble, the following provision(s) in
order.                                      conclusions set forth above. To the          Title 7, Part 1004, is amended as
   At issue on the part of those who        extent that the suggested findings and       follows:
oppose granting administrative              conclusions filed by interested parties
discretion to the market administrator in   are inconsistent with the findings and       PART 1004—MILK IN THE MIDDLE
adjusting shipping requirements and         conclusions set forth herein, the            ATLANTIC MARKETING AREA
diversion limitations is the lack of a      requests to make such findings or reach        1. The authority citation for 7 CFR
public meeting. Opponents have firm         such conclusions are denied for the          part 1004 continues to read as follows:
opinions that the public and interested     reasons previously stated in this
                                            decision.                                      Authority: Secs. 1–19, 48 Stat 31, as
parties should have a greater degree of
                                                                                         amended; 7 U.S.C. 601–674.
participation in the decisional process     General Findings
than the proposed administrative                                                           2. Section 1004.7 is amended by
proceeding would require. However,             The findings and determinations           revising paragraphs (a)(1) and (a)(4);
opponents take no issue on the ability,     hereinafter set forth supplement those       revising paragraph (d)(1); and by adding
impartiality or integrity of the market     that were made when the Middle               a new paragraph (g), to read as follows:
administrator to make appropriate           Atlantic order was first issued and when
                                            it was amended. The previous findings        § 1004.7   Pool plant.
administrative decisions regarding
adjustments to shipping requirements        and determinations are hereby ratified       *      *    *      *     *
and diversion limits. The issue here is     and confirmed, except where they may            (a) * * *
one of procedure.                           conflict with those set forth herein.           (1) Milk received at such plant
   The informal rulemaking procedure is        (a) The tentative marketing agreement     directly from dairy farmers (excluding
routinely used for making temporary         and the order, as hereby proposed to be      milk diverted as producer milk pursuant
suspensions or revisions to pool plant      amended, and all of the terms and            to § 1004.12, by either the plant operator
shipping requirements and diversion         conditions thereof, will tend to             or by a cooperative association, and also
limitations. The procedure of public        effectuate the declared policy of the Act;   excluding the milk of dairy farmers for
notice and comment before deciding on          (b) The parity prices of milk as          other markets) and from a cooperative in
the appropriate course of action that is    determined pursuant to section 2 of the      its capacity as a handler pursuant to
proposed in Proposals Nos. 5 and 8          Act are not reasonable in view of the        § 1004.9(c); or
follow in identical fashion the             price of feeds, available supplies of        *      *    *      *     *
procedures followed by the Department.      feeds, and other economic conditions            (4) A plant’s status as an other order
This informal rulemaking procedure          which affect market supply and demand        plant pursuant to paragraph (f) of this
does not include reliance on public         for milk in the marketing area, and the      section will become effective beginning
hearings or meetings because of the         minimum prices specified in the              the third month in which a plant is
need for urgent and expeditious action      tentative marketing agreement and the        subject to the classification and pricing
to address rapidly changing market          order, as hereby proposed to be              provisions of another order.
conditions. Nevertheless, any interested    amended, are such prices as will reflect     *      *    *      *     *
party has the opportunity to have their     the aforesaid factors, insure a sufficient      (d) * * *
views included in the decision making       quantity of pure and wholesome milk,            (1) A reserve processing plant
process.                                    and be in the public interest; and           operated by a cooperative association at
                   Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 135 / Friday, July 14, 1995 / Proposed Rules                             36249

which milk from dairy farmers is                (g) The applicable percentages in          DATES:  Comments must be received on
received if the total of fluid milk          paragraphs (d)(2)(i) and (d)(2)(ii) of this   or before September 12, 1995.
products (except filled milk) transferred    section may be increased or decreased         ADDRESSES: Written comments
from such cooperative association            by the market administrator if the            (preferably in triplicate) may be
plant(s) to, and the milk of member          market administrator finds that such          addressed to the Regulations Branch,
producers physically received at, pool       revision is necessary to encourage            U.S. Customs Service, Franklin Court,
plants pursuant to § 1004.7(a) is not less   needed shipments or to prevent                1301 Constitution Avenue NW.,
than 25 percent of the total milk of         uneconomic shipments. Before making           Washington, DC 20229. Comments
member producers during the month.           such a finding, the market administrator      submitted may be inspected at Franklin
*      *     *    *      *                   shall investigate the need for revision       Court, 1099 14th Street NW—Suite
   (g) The applicable shipping               either on the market administrator’s          4000, Washington, DC.
percentage of paragraphs (a) and (b) or      own initiative or at the request of           FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Karl
(d) of this section may be increased or      interested parties. If the investigation      Wm. Means, Intellectual Property Rights
decreased by the market administrator if     shows that a revision of the diversion        Branch, (202) 482–6957.
the market administrator finds that such     limit percentages might be appropriate,
                                             the market administrator shall issue a        SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
revision is necessary to encourage
needed shipments or to prevent               notice stating that the revision is being     Background
uneconomic shipments. Before making          considered and invite data, views and            On August 23, 1993, the Customs
such a finding, the market administrator     arguments. Any request for revision of        Service published a Notice of Proposed
shall investigate the need for revision      the diversion limit percentages shall be      Rulemaking in the Federal Register (58
either on the market administrator’s         filed with the market administrator no        FR 44476) regarding the disclosure to
own initiative or at the request of          later than the 15th day of the month          intellectual property rights (IPR) owners
interested parties. If the investigation     prior to the month for which the              of sample merchandise and certain
shows that a revision of the shipping        requested revision is desired effective.      identifying information regarding the
percentages might be appropriate, the          Dated: July 10, 1995.                       persons involved with importing
market administrator shall issue a notice    Lon Hatamiya,                                 merchandise that is either detained or
stating that the revision is being           Administrator, Agricultural Marketing         seized for suspected infringement of
considered and invite data, views and        Service.                                      registered copyright, trademark, or trade
arguments. Any request for revision of       [FR Doc. 95–17282 Filed 7–13–95; 8:45 am]     name rights. Thereafter, the United
shipping percentages shall be filed with     BILLING CODE 3410–02–P                        States, Canada, and Mexico entered into
the market administrator no later than                                                     the North American Free-Trade
the 15th day of the month prior to the                                                     Agreement (NAFTA) and, on December
month for which the requested revision                                                     8, 1994, the President signed the
is desired effective.                        DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY                    Uruguay Round Agreements Act
   3. Section 1004.12 is amended by                                                        (URAA) (Pub. L. 103–465, 108 Stat.
revising paragraphs (d)(2)(i) and            Customs Service                               4809), both of which contain provisions
(d)(2)(ii); and by adding a new                                                            pertaining to the protection of IPR.
paragraph (g), to read as follows:           19 CFR Part 133                                  Chapter 17, Article 1718 of the
                                                                                           NAFTA provides for the enforcement of
§ 1004.12   Producer.                        RIN 1515–AB28
                                                                                           IPR at the border and contains a
*       *     *     *    *                                                                 provision concerning notification of
   (d) * * *                                 Copyright/Trademark/Trade Name
                                             Protection; Disclosure of Information         trademark or copyright owners when
   (2) * * *                                                                               Customs suspends the release of
   (i) All of the diversions of milk of      AGENCY:  Customs Service, Department          merchandise for suspected
members of a cooperative association or      of the Treasury.                              infringement. The provisions of Article
a federation of cooperative associations                                                   1718 were not addressed by the North
                                             ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.
to nonpool plants are for the account of                                                   American Free Trade Implementation
such cooperative association or              SUMMARY:   This document proposes to          Act (NAFTA Implementation Act)
federation, and the amount of member         revise a previous proposal to amend the       (December 8, 1993) (Pub. L. 103–182,
milk so diverted does not exceed 55          Customs Regulations to allow Customs          107 Stat. 2057) because, as stated in the
percent of the volume of milk of all         to disclose to intellectual property rights   Statement of Administrative Action
members of such cooperative                  owners sample merchandise and certain         (House Document 103–159, vol. 1, pp.
association or federation delivered to or    information regarding the identity of         637–638, 103d Cong., 1st Sess.), the
diverted from pool plants during the         persons involved with importing               United States was obligated to make
month.                                       merchandise that is detained or seized        changes in statute or regulation in only
   (ii) All of the diversions of milk of     for suspected infringement of registered      five limited areas. The notification
dairy farmers who are not members of         copyright, trademark, or trade name           provision of Article 1718 was not one of
a cooperative association diverting milk     rights. The initial proposal is revised in    those areas. Accordingly, while the
for its own account during the month         response to comments received and to          Customs Service does not consider the
are diversions by a handler in his           make the proposed regulatory                  regulatory changes proposed in this
capacity as the operator of a pool plant     amendments consistent with provisions         document to be specifically mandated
from which the quantity of such              of the North American Free-Trade              by Article 1718 of the NAFTA or by the
nonmember milk so diverted does not          Agreement (NAFTA) and the Uruguay             NAFTA Implementation Act, their
exceed 45 percent of the total of such       Round Agreements Act relating to the          inclusion in this proposal supports the
nonmember milk for which the pool            disclosure of information to intellectual     enforcement principles reflected in
plant operator is the handler during the     property rights owners. This document         Chapter 17 of the NAFTA.
month.                                       solicits comments regarding the revised          The URAA implements the Uruguay
*       *     *     *    *                   proposal.                                     Round multilateral trade agreements
36250             Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 135 / Friday, July 14, 1995 / Proposed Rules

negotiated under the General Agreement       merchandise, and the private litigation      disclosure laws suggest that the
on Tariffs and Trade (GATT)—now the          required to deter such infringement.         importer’s rights against the release of
World Trade Organization (WTO). The          These commenters further noted the           such information make disclosure
GATT Agreement on Trade-Related              lack of information which is provided to     inappropriate. The proposal is
Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights,     IPR owners under the current                 structured to limit the disclosure of
as adopted by Congress (section              regulations, and were in favor of            information in instances of detention in
101(d)(15) of the URAA, 19 U.S.C.            additional information being disclosed       order to protect the rights of importers.
3511), establishes comprehensive             to facilitate private enforcement actions.      Comment: Several commenters
standards for the protection of              Commenters also noted that the               suggested that more information should
intellectual property and the                proposal would facilitate                    be released than was proposed.
enforcement of IPR in signatory              communication between IPR owners             Specifically, various commenters
countries; article 57 of this Agreement      and Customs personnel when the               requested that information pertaining to
confers a right of inspection and            assistance of the IPR owner is required      the country of origin, the identity of the
information on IPR holders.                  to determine whether or not an               shipper, the means of transport, the
   Because the proposed rule of August       imported article is genuine.                 identity of the broker (if any), dates of
23, 1993, did not consider the expanded         Specific qualifications, suggestions      export/import, the port(s) of entry, and
IPR owners notification requirements         and/or concerns are addressed below.         a description of the goods all be made
contained in article 1718 of the NAFTA          Comment: One commenter requested          available.
and article 57 of the GATT Agreement         that in addition to information provided        Response: Regarding country of origin
on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual     when importers deny piracy of a              information, Customs agrees that this
Property Rights, Customs is publishing       recorded copyright (19 CFR 133.43),          information, when available, should be
a revised notice of proposed rulemaking      Customs disclose information when an         disclosed to IPR owners. Accordingly, to
and solicits public comments. As the         importer does not deny piracy.               the extent that country of origin
background information previously               Response: In those cases where an         information is available from the
published in the August 23, 1993,            importer does not deny infringement          documents submitted to Customs in the
proposed rule continues to be                under the procedures provided for in         normal course of business, that
applicable to this revised proposed rule,    § 133.43 of the Customs Regulations (19      information will be disclosed. For the
it is incorporated herein by reference. In   CFR 133.43) the merchandise is seized.       purposes of the proposed regulation,
summary, the background stated that          As set forth in this revised proposal,       country of origin is defined at 19 CFR
certain changes to part 133 of the           § 133.42 would be amended to make            134.1(b). Also, the latter three types of
Customs Regulations (19 CFR part 133)        mandatory the disclosure of the              information (dates of importation, the
were being proposed to codify the rules      requested information to the IPR owner       port of entry, and a description of the
for disclosure of information to certain     in such a seizure circumstance.              merchandise) will be included in every
parties at interest in import transactions      Comment: One commenter was in             detention and seizure notification as a
involving infringement of trademarks         favor of disclosure only when a seizure      matter of course.
and copyrights. Among the reasons            action is indicated, and opposed to             However, regarding the other types of
stated for the proposed rule were the        disclosure when merchandise is merely        information (the identity of the shipper,
current haphazard availability of such       ‘‘suspected’’ of infringement. In            the means of transport, and the date of
information to parties at interest           contrast, another commenter requested        export), in balancing the desires of the
through the lengthy and cumbersome           that an importer’s identity be released      IPR owner against the disclosure
Freedom of Information Act (FOIA)            when goods are detained as well as           limitations of the Freedom of
process; Customs interest in facilitating    seized.                                      Information Act (5 U.S.C. 552) and the
the parties’ private remedies for               Response: Customs only detains that       Trade Secrets Act (18 U.S.C. 1905) and
trademark and copyright infringement;        merchandise for which there are              the potential workload of Customs
and, the disparity among the current         reasonable grounds to believe that an        personnel in providing such additional
regulations for notification in situations   infringement of IPR has occurred, or         information, Customs considers such
of detention or seizure of trademark and     when in the words of the commenter           disclosure inappropriate.
copyright infringing merchandise.            ‘‘firm evidence’’ is present to suspect         Regarding disclosure of the identity of
   In addition to the changes required       infringement. At the time of detention,      the broker (if any), Customs response is
because of provisions contained in the       Customs tries to determine whether           set forth below in the response
NAFTA and GATT Agreement, Customs            sufficient grounds exist to believe that a   regarding the use of the term
has revised the language of the proposed     substantive violation has occurred such      ‘‘importer.’’
regulations in an effort to improve their    that further action is warranted. In many       Comment: One commenter requested
clarity.                                     cases Customs cannot without the             clarification on the timing of notices;
                                             assistance of the IPR owner determine        i.e., when during the entry-detention-
Analysis of Comments                         whether or not the imported article in       and-seizure process the notice would be
   In response to the August 23, 1993        fact bears genuine or infringing marks.      provided.
rulemaking proposal, Customs received        Customs expects that the proposed               Response: Although the IPR
65 comments: 53 in favor of the              regulations will provide Customs             provisions contained in the NAFTA and
proposal, 5 against the proposal, 5 in       personnel with the authority to consult      the GATT do not specify a minimum
favor with a specific qualification or       IPR owners, thereby resulting in more        time frame for notification to IPR
suggestion, and 2 suggested changes to       accurate decisions regarding                 owners, Customs believes that
the proposal without taking a position       infringement. Further, given that, at the    notification within a 30-day time period
either for or against it.                    time of detention, Customs has not yet       provides notice in a manner consistent
   Each of the 53 responses in favor of      determined whether a violation has           with the purpose of these commitments.
the proposal had several elements in         occurred, Customs believes that the             Comment: Several commenters
common. Most commenters noted the            premature release of an importer’s           addressed the condition of sample
losses to private business each year due     identity would be inappropriate. In          merchandise provided under the
to the importation of infringing             addition, the constraints of the             proposed regulations.
                  Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 135 / Friday, July 14, 1995 / Proposed Rules                                36251

   Response: The condition of samples        rights of action with regard to protest      concerning detained and seized
sent to IPR owners will be as allowed        against the exclusion.                       merchandise; to make specific a thirty-
under applicable disclosure laws. Thus,         Comment: Most of the comments in          day time frame within which Customs
where no part of seized or detained          opposition suggested that the                will notify IPR owners of detention and
merchandise comes within an                  information released by Customs will be      seizure activities; and, to allow for the
exemption from disclosure, the sample        used by rights owners to obstruct or         disclosure of country of origin
provided the IPR owner will be as            otherwise interfere with legitimate          information and other items
received by Customs.                         shipments, initiate spurious litigation,     enumerated.
   Comment: Comments were received           restrict legitimate parallel imports, and
with regard to the use of the term           constitute the release of protected          Comments
‘‘importer’’ and the concern that an         business confidential information.
                                                Response: Customs does not intend to         Before adopting this proposal as a
importer may in fact be a broker rather
than ‘‘the party who actually caused the     provide domestic rights owners open          final rule, consideration will be given to
importation.’’ As a result, rights holders   access to the Customs and/or shipping        any written comments timely submitted
could be notified of the identity of a       documents associated with either             to Customs. Comments submitted will
broker acting as importer rather than        detained or seized merchandise. To the       be available for public inspection in
‘‘the party who actually caused the          contrary, the proposed regulation is         accordance with the Freedom of
importation.’’                               intended to define clearly the scope of      Information Act (5 U.S.C. 552), § 1.4 of
   Response: Customs recognizes that         permissible disclosure and to provide        the Treasury Department Regulations
the term ‘‘importer’’ may include a          guidelines for the timely and necessary      (31 CFR 1.4), and § 103.11(b) of the
broker under certain circumstances.          release of information. Customs sees no      Customs Regulations (19 CFR
However, Customs does not intend that        prolonged delays associated with such        103.11(b)), on regular business days
nominal consignees should be included        disclosure. One of Customs purposes in       between the hours of 9 a.m. and 4:30
for the purposes of this regulation.         making such information available is to      p.m. at the Regulations Branch, U.S.
   Comment: One commenter suggested          facilitate rights owners’ pursuit of legal   Customs Service, 1099 14th Street,
that the term ‘‘mark’’ should be defined     remedies for infringement. However,          NW—Suite 4000, Washington, DC.
by specific reference to section 5 of the    rights owners are not expected to
Lanham Act (15 U.S.C. 1127).                                                              The Regulatory Flexibility Act
                                             institute frivolous litigation, nor does
   Response: While this comment is not       Customs expect that legitimate trade, in        Pursuant to the provisions of the
relevant to the proposed regulations,        parallel goods or otherwise, would be        Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601
Customs notes that § 133.1 of the            restricted under the current statutes and    et seq.), it is certified that, if adopted,
Customs Regulations (19 CFR 133.1)           regulations which clearly make               the proposed amendments will not have
provides for the recordation of              provision for such legitimate goods.         a significant economic impact on a
trademarks registered under ‘‘the               Several commenters state that the         substantial number of small entities.
Trademark Act of March 3, 1881, the          effect of the regulatory change would be     The amendments more fully carry out
Trademark Act of February 20, 1905, or       to ‘‘hand over’’ importers of parallel       the intent of the law and confer a benefit
the Trademark Act of 1946 (15 U.S.C.         goods, thereby emasculating the
                                                                                          on IPR owners in the enforcement of
1501, et seq.) except those registered on    regulatory provisions for such goods. To
                                                                                          such rights. Accordingly, the proposed
the supplemental register,’’ and further     the contrary, Customs expects that
                                                                                          amendments are not subject to the
provides that a ‘‘status copy of the         limited, direct contact with IPR owners
certificate of registration’’ shall be                                                    regulatory analysis or other
                                             regarding detained goods will allow the
provided to Customs at the time of                                                        requirements of 5 U.S.C. 603 and 604.
                                             more timely and accurate identification
recordation. Because these various Acts      of parallel imports, and that where the      Executive Order 12866
incorporate the definition of ‘‘mark’’       importation of such goods is allowed,
found at 15 U.S.C. 1127, which is            the goods will be released more rapidly        This document does not meet the
referenced in provisions in Part 133 of      without additional disclosure. All           criteria for a ‘‘significant regulatory
the Customs Regulations, Customs             parties with an interest in the parallel     action’’ as defined in E.O. 12866.
believes that no further change to the       goods issue should be aware that             Drafting Information
proposed regulations is required.            Customs has no intention of allowing
   Comment: One commenter opposed to         disclosure beyond that which is legally        The principal author of this document
the regulations suggested that the           allowed, and no objective other than the     was Gregory R. Vilders, Attorney,
proposal would delay Customs in the          quick and accurate identification of         Regulations Branch. However,
clearing of shipments.                       legitimate goods. When rights owners         personnel from other offices
   Response: Customs disagrees that the      can assist Customs in that task, every       participated in its development.
proposed regulations will result in          effort will be made to avail Customs of
extended periods of detention, given the     the opportunity.                             List of Subjects in 19 CFR Part 133
revised operating requirements
mandated by the Customs                      Conclusion                                     Copyright, Counterfeit goods,
Modernization provisions (Title VI of          Based on the comments received and         Customs duties and inspection, Imports,
the Act, the Mod Act). Because of the        the subsequent entry into force of the       Reporting and recordkeeping
Mod Act, Customs must now provide            NAFTA and GATT provisions regarding          requirements, Restricted merchandise,
for a formal decision and notice of          the notification rights of IPR owners        Trademarks, Trade names.
detention, and for either the subsequent     (article 1718 of the NAFTA and section       Proposed Amendments to the
seizure or release of those goods within     101(d)(15) of the URAA), Customs has         Regulations
a specified time frame. In the event that    decided to revise the amendments to
Customs does not act in accordance           part 133 of the Customs Regulations that       For the reasons stated above, it is
with the statute, the goods are treated as   were initially proposed on August 23,        proposed to amend part 133, Customs
excluded from entry, and importers           1993, as follows: to make mandatory the      Regulations (19 CFR part 133), as set
acquire by operation of law certain          disclosure of certain information            forth below:
36252               Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 135 / Friday, July 14, 1995 / Proposed Rules

PART 133—TRADEMARKS, TRADE                        (6) the name and address of the            notice, the copyright owner files with
NAMES, AND COPYRIGHTS                           importer.                                    the district director: * * *
  1. The general authority citation for           (d) Failure to make appropriate            *     *     *     *     *
part 133 would continue to read as              disposition. * * *                           George J. Weise,
follows:                                        *     *      *    *     *                    Commissioner of Customs.
  Authority: 17 U.S.C. 101, 601, 602, 603; 19                                                  Approved: June 20, 1995.
                                                  4. It is proposed to amend § 133.42 by
U.S.C. 66, 1624; 31 U.S.C. 9701.                                                             John P. Simpson,
                                                adding a new paragraph (d); and by
  2. It is proposed to amend § 133.22 by        redesignating current paragraph (d) as       Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Treasury.
revising the section heading; adding a          new paragraph (e). The revision to read      [FR Doc. 95–17065 Filed 7–13–95; 8:45 am]
new paragraph (b); redesignating current        as follows:                                  BILLING CODE 4820–02–P
paragraphs (b) and (c) as paragraphs (c)
and (d); and revising the heading of new        § 133.42 Infringing copies or
paragraph (c). The addition and revision        phonorecords.
                                                                                             ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
to read as follows:                             *      *     *     *     *                   AGENCY
§ 133.22 Procedure on detention of articles       (d) Disclosure. When merchandise is
subject to restriction.                         seized under this section, Customs           40 CFR Part 52
*     *      *    *     *                       officers shall disclose to the owner of
                                                                                             [CA 144–5–7100b; FRL–5256–4]
  (b) Notice of detention and disclosure        the copyright that merchandise has been
of information. When merchandise is             seized and provide the following             Approval and Promulgation of State
detained, in order to obtain assistance in      information within thirty days,              Implementation Plans; California State
determining whether the item bears an           excluding weekends and holidays, of          Implementation Plan Revision, South
infringing mark, Customs officers shall         the date of seizure:                         Coast Air Quality Management District
disclose to the owner of the trademark            (1) a sample of the piratical copy;        and Santa Barbara County Air
that merchandise has been detained and                                                       Pollution Control District
provide the following information                 (2) the quantity involved;
regarding the detained merchandise, if            (3) the name and address of the            AGENCY:  Environmental Protection
available, within thirty days, excluding        manufacturer;                                Agency (EPA).
weekends and holidays, of the date of             (4) the country of origin of the           ACTION: Proposed rule.
detention:                                      merchandise if known;
  (1) a sample of the item bearing a                                                         SUMMARY:    EPA is proposing to approve
suspected mark;                                   (5) the name and address of the            revisions to the California State
  (2) the quantity involved;                    exporter; and                                Implementation Plan (SIP) which
  (3) the name and address of the                 (6) the name and address of the            concern the control of volatile organic
manufacturer; and                               importer.                                    compound (VOC) emissions from
  (4) the country of origin of the                                                           marine coating operations, coating of
merchandise if known.                           *      *     *     *     *                   metal parts and products, motor vehicle
  (c) Form of notice. * * *                       5. It is proposed to amend paragraph       assembly line coating operations,
*     *      *    *     *                       (b) of § 133.43 by revising the              solvent cleaning operations,
  3. It is proposed to amend § 133.23a          introductory text of paragraph (b); by       architectural coatings, and motor
by adding a new paragraph (c);                  adding new subparagraphs (b)(1)              vehicle and mobile equipment coating
redesignating current paragraph (c) as          through (b)(4); and by redesignating         operations.
paragraph (d); and revising the section         current subparagraphs (b)(1) and (b)(2)         The intended effect of proposing
heading of and removing the first               as (b)(4)(i) and (b)(4)(ii). The addition    approval of these rules is to regulate
sentence in newly designated paragraph          and revision to read as follows:             emissions of VOCs in accordance with
(d). The addition and revision to read as                                                    the requirements of the Clean Air Act,
follows:                                        § 133.43 Procedure on suspicion of           as amended in 1990 (CAA or the Act).
                                                infringing copies.                           In the Final Rules Section of this
§ 133.23a Articles bearing counterfeit
trademarks.                                     *      *    *      *    *                    Federal Register, the EPA is approving
                                                   (b) Notice to copyright owner. If the     the state’s SIP revision as a direct final
*      *     *     *    *
   (c) Notice to trademark owner. When          importer of the suspected infringing         rule without prior proposal because the
merchandise is seized, Customs officers         copies or phonorecords files a denial as     Agency views this as a noncontroversial
shall disclose to the owner of the                                                           revision amendment and anticipates no
                                                provided in paragraph (a) of this
trademark that merchandise has been                                                          adverse comments. A detailed rationale
                                                section, the district director shall
seized and provide the following                                                             for this approval is set forth in the direct
                                                furnish to the copyright owner within
information regarding the seized                                                             final rule. If no adverse comments are
                                                thirty days, excluding weekends and          received in response to this proposed
merchandise within thirty days,                 holidays, of the receipt of the importer’s
excluding weekends and holidays, of                                                          rule, no further activity is contemplated
                                                denial:                                      in relation to this rule. If EPA receives
the date of seizure:
   (1) a sample of the item bearing the            (1) a sample of the suspected piratical   adverse comments, the direct final rule
counterfeit mark;                               item;                                        will be withdrawn and all public
   (2) the quantity involved;                      (2) the quantity involved;                comments received will be addressed in
   (3) the name and address of the                                                           a subsequent final rule based on this
                                                   (3) the name and address of the           proposed rule. The EPA will not
manufacturer;
   (4) the country of origin of the             importer; and                                institute a second comment period on
merchandise if known;                              (4) notice that the imported article      this document. Any parties interested in
   (5) the name and address of the              will be released to the importer unless,     commenting on this action should do so
exporter; and                                   within thirty days from the date of the      at this time.
                     Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 135 / Friday, July 14, 1995 / Proposed Rules                                36253

DATES: Comments on this proposed rule               Dated: June 27, 1995.                     SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
must be received in writing by August             Felicia Marcus,                             I. Background
14, 1995.                                         Regional Administrator.
                                                                                                 On June 9, 1995, the National
ADDRESSES:  Written comments on this              [FR Doc. 95–17268 Filed 7–13–95; 8:45 am]
                                                                                              Highway Traffic Safety Administration
action should be addressed to: Daniel A.          BILLING CODE 6560–50–W
                                                                                              (NHTSA) published a notice of intent to
Meer, Rulemaking Section (A–5–3), Air                                                         establish an advisory committee
and Toxics Division, U.S.                                                                     (Committee) for regulatory negotiation
Environmental Protection Agency,                  DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION                to develop recommended specifications
Region 9, 75 Hawthorne Street, San                                                            for altering the U.S. lower beam pattern
Francisco, CA 94105–3901.                         National Highway Traffic Safety             to be more sharply defined. Such a
  Copies of the rule revisions and EPA’s          Administration                              pattern would facilitate visual
evaluation report of each rule are available                                                  aimability of headlamps and might be
for public inspection at EPA’s Region 9 office    49 CFR Part 571                             the basis for a world-wide lower beam
during normal business hours. Copies of the                                                   pattern (60 FR 30506). The notice
submitted rule revisions are also available for   [Docket No. 95–28; Notice 2]                requested comment on membership, the
inspection at the following locations:                                                        interests affected by the rulemaking, the
                                                  RIN 2127–AF73
Rulemaking Section (A–5–3), Air and Toxics                                                    issues the Committee should address,
  Division, U.S. Environmental Protection
                                                  Lamps, Reflective Devices and               and the procedures it should follow.
  Agency, Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street,                                                     The notice also announced that NHTSA
                                                  Associated Equipment; Advisory
  San Francisco, CA 95105                                                                     had procured the services of the Federal
Environmental Protection Agency, Air              Committee Public Meeting
                                                                                              Mediation and Conciliation Service to
  Docket (6102), 401 ‘‘M’’ Street SW.,            AGENCY:  National Highway Traffic           facilitate the negotiations. The reader is
  Washington, DC 20460                            Safety Administration (NHTSA); DOT.         referred to the notice of June 9, 1995, for
California Air Resources Board, Stationary
                                                  ACTION: Notice of establishment of          further information on these issues.
  Source Divison, Rule Evaluation Section,
                                                  advisory committee for regulatory              NHTSA received nine comments on
  2020 ‘‘L’’ Street, Sacramento, CA 95812–
  2815                                            negotiation and notice of first meeting.    the notice of intent. None of the
South Coast Air Quality Management                                                            comments opposed using regulatory
  District, 21865 E. Copley Drive, Diamond        SUMMARY:    The National Highway Traffic    negotiation for this rulemaking; all
  Bar, CA 91765–4812                              Safety Administration announces the         endorsed the process and seven
Santa Barbara County Air Pollution Control        establishment of a Negotiated               included requests to serve on the
  District, 26 Castilian Drive B–23, Goleta,      Rulemaking Advisory Committee to            Committee. Based on this response and
  CA 93117.                                       develop recommended specifications for      for the reasons stated in the notice of
                                                  altering the U.S. lower headlamp beam       intent, NHTSA has determined that
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:                  pattern to be more sharply defined.         establishing an advisory committee on
Daniel A. Meer, Chief Rulemaking                  Such a pattern would facilitate visual      this subject is necessary and in the
Section (A–5–3), Air and Toxics                   aimability of headlamps and might be        public interest. In accordance with
Division, U.S Environmental Protection            the basis for a world-wide lower beam       Section 9(c) of the Federal Advisory
Agency, Region IX, 75 Hawthorne                   pattern. The Committee will develop its     Committee Act, 5 U.S.C. App. I sec. 9(c),
Street, San Francisco, CA 94105,                  recommendations through a negotiation       NHTSA prepared a Charter for the
Telephone:(415)744–1185                           process. The Committee is composed of       establishment of a Negotiated
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:     This               persons who represent interests that        Rulemaking Advisory Committee. On
document concerns South Coast Air                 would be affected by the rule such as       April 17, 1995, the Office of
Quality Management District’s Rule                domestic and foreign manufacturers of       Management and Budget approved the
1106, Marine Coating Operations,                  motor vehicles, headlamps, headlamp         Department’s Advisory Committee Plan
submitted to EPA by the California Air            aimers, motor vehicle inspection            for FY 1995 which included this
Resources Board on February 24, 1995;             facilities, consumers, State                advisory committee, and on July 6,
Rule 1107, Coating of Metal Parts and             governments, and the Federal                1995, the Secretary approved the
Products, Rule 1115, Motor Vehicle                government. This notice also announces      Charter, authorizing the Committee to
Assembly Line Coating Operations, Rule            the time and place of the first advisory    begin negotiating the recommended
1171, Solvent Cleaning Operations,                committee meeting.                          changes.
submitted to EPA by the California Air            DATES: The first meeting of the advisory    II. Membership
Resources Board on June 16, 1995; and             committee will be held at 9:00 a.m. on
                                                  Tuesday, July 25, 1995 and will                In addition to a representative from
Santa Barbara County Air Pollution
                                                  continue through Thursday, July 27,         NHTSA, the Committee will consist of
Control District’s Rule 323,
                                                  1995.                                       the following members:
Architectural Coatings, submitted by the
California Air Resources Board on May             ADDRESSES: The first meeting of the         American Automobile Manufacturers
24, 1995; and Santa Barbara County Air                                                          Association
                                                  advisory committee will be held at the
                                                                                              Association of International Automobile
Pollution Control District’s Rule 339,            Department of Transportation, Room            Manufacturers, Inc.
Motor Vehicle and Mobile Equipment                2230 Nassif Building, 400 Seventh           Society of Automotive Engineers, Road
Coating Operations, submitted by the              Street, SW, Washington D.C.                   Illumination Devices Subcommittee
California Air Resources Board on April           FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jere       Hopkins Manufacturing Corporation
13, 1995. For further information please          Medlin, Office of Vehicle Safety            Traffic Materials Controls Division, 3M
see the information provided in the                                                             Corporation
                                                  Standards, NHTSA (Phone: 202–366–           Wagner Lighting Division of Cooper
Direct Final action which is located in           5276; FAX: 202–366–4329). Mediator:
the Rules Section of this Federal                                                               Industries
                                                  Lynn Sylvester, Federal Mediation and       Groupe de Travail Brussels
Register.                                         Conciliation Service (phone: 202–606–       Liaison Committee for the Manufacturers of
  Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401–7671q.                9140; FAX: 202–606–3679).                     Automobile Equipment and Spare Parts
36254              Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 135 / Friday, July 14, 1995 / Proposed Rules

Japanese Automobile Standards                 Brussels and the Liaison Committee for      IV. Key Issues for Negotiation
  Internationalization Center                 the Manufacturers of Automotive
American Association of Motor Vehicle                                                        In its notice of intent, NHTSA
                                              Equipment and Spare Parts. To the           tentatively identified major issues that
  Administrators
                                              extent to which their interests are         should be considered in this negotiated
National Automobile Dealers Association
Automotive Service Association                headlamps complying with the beam           rulemaking, and asked for comment
Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety         and aim characteristics of Standard No.     concerning the appropriateness of these
                                              108, their interests will be adequately     issues for consideration and whether
   Requests for representation were           represented by Wagner.
made by Osram Sylvania (‘‘Osram’’),                                                       other issues should be added. These
                                                 Volkswagen requested participation
Hella, Inc., Volkswagen of America, Inc.                                                  issues were:
                                              on behalf of itself, Volkswagen AG and
(‘‘Volkswagen’’), National Committee on                                                      1. Whether NHTSA should be
                                              Audi AG ‘‘as major European
Uniform Traffic Control Devices                                                           involved in specifying headlamp
                                              automobile manufacturers’’ and ‘‘as a
(‘‘NCUTCD’’), Wagner Lighting Division                                                    aimability requirements, or delete
                                              liaison participant on behalf of the
of Cooper Industries (‘‘Wagner’’), 3M         Association of International Automobile     aimability requirements from Federal
Traffic Controls Materials Division           Manufacturers (AIAM).’’ Because AIAM        Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 108
(‘‘3M’’), and the American Association        is a member of the Committee, NHTSA         and leave this subject to be regulated by
of State Highway and Transportation           concludes that Volkswagen’s interests       the States.
Officials (‘‘AASHTO’’).                       are adequately represented and has             There was one commenter on this
   In considering the requests for            denied its request.                         issue. 3M believed that it was more
representation, the task before NHTSA            3M, an applicant who is a                appropriate for NHTSA, rather than the
was to decide whether the requesters are      manufacturer of retroreflective             States, to establish ‘‘a national standard
interests potentially affected by the         materials, believes that ‘‘[m]odification   for headlamp beam patterns and to
proposed rulemaking that are not              of the lower beam pattern may impact        establish standards covering the ability
otherwise adequately represented by the       the effectiveness of retroreflective        to aim headlamps such that the beam
Committee members already chosen.             devices in place on our nation’s            pattern can be maintained.’’ In its view,
Generally, those who responded did not        highways.’’ In reviewing the                ‘‘[i]ndividual states may lack the
understand that NHTSA used the word           composition of the Committee, the           resources required to scientifically
‘‘interest’’ in a broad, categorical sense,   agency discerned that the interests of      research headlamp beam performance
rather than a narrow individual one. For      the reflectorized marking industry were     and establish required performance.’’
example, Wagner, of Hampton, Va.,             not adequately represented.                 Without a national standard, ‘‘the
applied to represent its interests as a       Accordingly, it asked 3M whether it         performance of traffic control devices
manufacturer of both OEM and                  would be willing to serve as the            could be jeopardized.’’
aftermarket lighting products. Upon           representative of that industry for the        2. Whether it is appropriate for
review of the existing committee              negotiated rulemaking. It agreed to do      NHTSA to develop a single approach to
members, NHTSA concluded that the             so, and has been added to the               visual aim or any aim.
interests of domestic headlamp                Committee. NCUTCD, among other                 There were no commenters on this
manufacturers might not be adequately         things, ‘‘provides background               issue.
represented since there is no specific        information and develops proposed              3. Whether motor vehicle inspectors
trade organization that speaks for them,      standards for traffic control devices for   are likely to follow the results of a
and no Committee member already               the Federal Highway Administration.’’ It    negotiated approach.
chosen directly addressed this interest.      applied for membership on the basis of         3M, the sole commenter, considers
Accordingly, NHTSA asked Wagner if it         ‘‘the critical need for adequate            that ‘‘[t]he negotiation process will most
would be willing to represent the             headlamp that provides the light source     likely result in a standard which is as
interests of the domestic OEM and             for sign reflectorization.’’ After          easy to implement as possible while still
replacement headlamp manufacturing            reviewing the composition of the            remaining effective.’’ Implementation of
industry (as compared with its corporate      Committee and NCUTCD’s remarks,             the result will be more successful if ‘‘the
interests), and Wagner agreed to do so.       NHTSA is denying its request. The           reasoning which supports the
Accordingly, NHTSA has added Wagner           group’s interest in headlighting and sign   specification is communicated to those
to the Committee, as shown in the list        reflectorization are adequately             affected. States and inspectors need to
above. Osram described itself as a            represented by existing committee           understand the ‘why’ as well as the
manufacturer of motor vehicle                 members. To the extent that NCUTCD          ‘how’ associated with safe night time
headlamp and headlamp light sources           provides guidance to the Federal            driving.’’
that meet both Standard No. 108 and           Highway Administration (FHWA), its             4. Whether SAE Standard J1735
ECE standards, and offered to provide         interests are adequately represented by     Harmonized Vehicle Headlamp
an employee who is a member of the            NHTSA, which also represents the            Performance Requirement is acceptable
Groupe de Travail Brussels. Hella             FHWA. AASHTO applied because of its         as a starting point from which to begin
described itself as an OEM supplier,          concern ‘‘with regard to the                negotiating the details of a visual aim
knowledgeable about the lighting              illumination of signage and other traffic   provision for Standard No. 108.
technologies of both the United States        control devices having retroreflective         3M agreed without comment.
and Europe. Both Hella and Osram are          characteristics.’’ The agency has           Volkswagen of America agreed that the
the United States subsidiaries of             concluded that AASHTO’s interests are       committee could use the SAE standard
European headlamp manufacturers.              adequately represented by 3M, AAMVA,        as the starting point even though ‘‘a few
After reviewing these requests, NHTSA         and NHTSA, and is denying its request.      photometric points and zonal values
has decided to deny them. To the extent                                                   still need to be discussed and resolved.’’
to which the interest of these companies      III. Participation by Non-Members              5. Other issues.
is headlamps with European beam                  Negotiation sessions will be open to        Commenters raised other issues.
patterns and aiming characteristics,          the public, so that individuals who are     Volkswagen recommended that ‘‘front
their interests will be adequately            not part of the Committee may attend        fog lamps or other front lamps that
represented by Groupe de Travail              and observe, but not participate.           project a beam should also be included
                   Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 135 / Friday, July 14, 1995 / Proposed Rules                              36255

in the negotiated rulemaking even              V. Procedure and Schedule                   has given advance notice of this meeting
though they are optional devices and              Two comments were received on the        to all Committee members and believes
not required by any Standard.’’ In its         Committee procedure regarding               that all members will be present for this
view, ‘‘unregulated fog lamps on some          establishment of a definition of            first and important meeting.
vehicles are actually larger and in some                                                      Title 41 CFR Sec. 101–6.1015 requires
                                               consensus. The American Automobile
cases brighter with more glare,                                                            that establishment notices and notices
                                               Manufacturers Association (AAMA), a
especially if improperly aimed, than the                                                   of advisory committee meetings must be
                                               Committee member, is concerned that
headlamps themselves.’’ It believes that                                                   published at least 15 calendar days
                                               ‘‘if the advisory committee is unable to
any headlamp beam standard that                                                            before the committee charter is filed and
                                               initially agree on the voting rules, that
NHTSA develops ‘‘would be fruitless                                                        at least 15 calendar days prior to a
                                               by default, the voting rules for
and only a partial solution if                                                             meeting. However, that section also
                                               subsequent votes will be required to be
unregulated fog lamps and other                                                            provides that the Secretariat may
                                               unanimous.’’ In its view ‘‘this possible
auxiliary lamps remain uncontrolled                                                        approve less than 15 days for the
                                               occurrence could negate the efforts to
and improperly aimed.’’                                                                    establishment notice when requested by
   In NHTSA’s view, Volkswagen’s               arrive at constructive rulemaking in this
                                                                                           the agency for good cause. In
recommendation does not relate directly        area.’’ It recommends that the ‘‘default
                                                                                           exceptional circumstances, the agency
to the issue of headlamp aimability            voting rules’’ be set for ‘‘substantial
                                                                                           may give less than 15 days notice of a
requirements, which are the focus of the       agreement’’ in order ‘‘to eliminate the
                                                                                           meeting, provided that the reasons for
Committee. The argument made by                potential for one vote to stymie the
                                                                                           doing so are included in the committee
Volkswagen is interesting as it relates to     process.’’ Volkswagen of America
                                                                                           meeting notice published in The
the overall needs of roadway                   expressed the same concern, and
                                                                                           Federal Register. In developing the
illumination for nighttime driving;            recommended that consensus be
                                                                                           schedule for the first meeting, the
however, it would be appropriate to            ‘‘substantial agreement or some defined
                                                                                           agency determined that an early date
address it in a future rulemaking more         plurality such as 2⁄3 of the members
                                                                                           was most convenient for the identified
closely aligned with roadway                   voting acceptance.’’ The voting rules are
                                                                                           interests. The date chosen did not
illumination performance.                      set during the Organization Meeting of
                                                                                           permit the notice of establishment and
   Issues of concern to 3M were ‘‘the          the Committee, and NHTSA will make
                                                                                           first meeting to be published not less
impact of all potential lower headlamp         the Committee aware of the
                                                                                           than 15 days before the charter was filed
beam patterns on the visibility of traffic     recommendations of the commenters.
                                                                                           and the scheduled date for the meeting.
signs and pavement markings, the cost             NHTSA anticipates that all of the
                                                                                           However, representatives of the
of maintaining traffic control devices to      negotiation sessions will take place at
                                                                                           identified interests were informed of the
meet a minimum luminance value of 2.4          DOT headquarters in Washington, D.C.
                                                                                           meeting date well in advance of the 15
candelas per square meter based on the            Consistent with requirements of the
                                                                                           day period.
various beam patterns under                    Federal Advisory Committee Act,
                                               NHTSA will keep a summary record of           Issued: July 12, 1995.
consideration, how the visibility of
pedestrians, joggers, etc. on both sides       all Committee meetings. This record         Barry Felrice,
of the roadway would be affected by the        will be placed in Docket No. 95–28.         Associate Administrator for Safety
proposed beam patterns, the                       The objective of the negotiation, in     Performance Standards.
applicability of beam patterns among           NHTSA’s view, is for the Committee to       [FR Doc. 95–17452 Filed 7–12–95; 12:02 pm]
various vehicle types, the effect of           prepare a report recommending a             BILLING CODE 4910–59–P
changing headlamp patterns on research         regulatory approach for resolving the
completed by the FHWA for minimum              issues discussed above. If consensus is
replacement values for signs and               not obtained on some issues, the report     49 CFR Part 575
pavement markings, the impact of beam          will identify the areas of agreement and    [Docket No. 94–30, Notice 4]
pattern on conspicuity of other vehicles       disagreement, and explanations for any
and legibility of front mounted license        disagreement. NHTSA will issue a            RIN 2127–AF17
plates.’’ These appear to be relevant          notice of proposed rulemaking based on
                                               the approach recommended by the             Consumer Information Regulations
concerns and, as a Committee member,                                                       Uniform Tire Quality Grading
3M may raise them when appropriate.            Committee.
                                                  The negotiation process will proceed     Standards; Correction
   The University of Michigan
Transportation Research Institute              according to a schedule of specific dates   AGENCY:  National Highway Traffic
(‘‘UMTRI’’) expressed concern that the         that the Committee devises at the first     Safety Administration (NHTSA),
driving public was underrepresented on         meeting to be held on July 25–27, 1995.     Department of Transportation (DOT).
the proposed committee. UMTRI did not          NHTSA will publish notices of future        ACTION: Correction to supplemental
request that it be added to the                meetings in the Federal Register. The       notice of proposed rulemaking and
committee, but asked that the committee        first meeting is scheduled to begin at      change in date of public meeting.
keep in mind the needs of older drivers        9:30 a.m. in Room 2230 of the Nassif
as it negotiates. 3M also asked that the       Building, DOT headquarters, 400             SUMMARY:   On July 5 1995, NHTSA
committee consider ‘‘the elderly driver’s      Seventh Street, SW., Washington, D.C.       published a notice announcing a public
response to glare.’’ NCUTCD pointed            This session will commence with an          meeting on the Uniform Tire Quality
out that ‘‘[t]he ability to see and react to   orientation and regulatory negotiation      Grading Standards (UTQGS), and a
traffic control devices is even more           training program conducted by a             supplemental notice of proposed
critical for the older driver.’’ NHTSA         facilitator from the Federal Mediation      rulemaking to amend the UTQGS (See
shares these concerns, and anticipates         and Conciliation Service. An orientation    60 FR 34961). In this document, NHTSA
that a proposal based upon the                 in headlamp aiming will then be             changes the date of the public meeting
recommendations of the committee will          presented. After the training program,      to July 28, 1995, and corrects the
accommodate the needs of older drivers         the Committee will devise its               proposed regulatory text.
in no less a fashion that do current           procedures and calendar, and will then      FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr.
headlighting specifications.                   begin substantive deliberations. NHTSA      Orron Kee, Office of Market Incentives,
36256             Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 135 / Friday, July 14, 1995 / Proposed Rules

Office of the Associate Administrator for   calculate a specific rolling resistance       Building, 400 Seventh Street, SW,
Safety Performance Standards, National      coefficient.                                  Washington, DC.’’
Highway Traffic Safety Administration,                                                       On page 34964, in the third column,
                                            Need for Correction
400 Seventh Street SW., Room 5320,                                                        in the proposed regulatory text to
Washington, DC 20590, telephone (202)         As published, the July 5, 1995              amend 49 CFR part 575.104, under
366–0846.                                   contained an error in the proposed            (Alternative 2 to paragraph (g)),
                                            regulatory text. Correction of the error is   paragraph (g)(3)(ii) should read as
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
                                            necessary to enable the public to make        follows:
Background                                  preparations for attending the public            (ii) Using the numbers in Example No.
  In the July 5, 1995 Federal Register,     meeting and to comment effectively on         2 in paragraph (g)(2) of this section: If
NHTSA published a supplemental              the supplemental proposal.                    Fn = 1,100 lbf, and Fr = 18 lbf, then
notice of proposed rulemaking (SNPRM)
to amend the Uniform Tire Quality           Correction of Publication                                  18
                                                                                               Cr =           = 0.01636
Grading Standards (UTQGS)(49 CFR               Accordingly, the publication on July                   1,100
575.104), extension of comment period       5, 1995, of the supplemental notice of
and notice of public meeting (See 60 FR     proposed rulemaking and notice of                   Fg = ( 0.0150 − 0.01636 ) × 1,333
34961). The July 1995 document was          public meeting, which were the subject
published subsequent to a May 24, 1995      of FR Doc. 95–1462, is changed and                     = ( −0.00136 ) × 1,333
proposal to amend the UTQGS, with a         corrected as follows:
closing date of July 10, 1995 to receive                                                           = −1.82 or 0 percent
public comments.                               On page 34961, in the third column,
                                            under DATES:, the first sentence is             A negative value represents a 0
  The July 1995 document announced                                                        percent increase in fuel economy, and
the extension of the comment closing        changed to read: ‘‘The public meeting
                                            will be held July 28, 1995, beginning at      would be expressed as a fuel economy
date to August 14, 1995, and announced                                                    grade of ‘‘0%’’.
that a public meeting would be held to      9 a.m.’’
supplement the written comments. The           On page 34962, in the first column,          Issued on: July 10, 1995.
July 1995 document also included a          under Requests for Extension of               Barry Felrice,
SNPRM, proposing an additional              Comment Period and for Public                 Associate Administrator for Safety
calculation to supplement the proposed      Meeting, the fourth sentence should           Performance Standards.
rolling resistance regression equation so   read: ‘‘A public meeting will be held on      [FR Doc. 95–17298 Filed 7–13–95; 8:45 am]
that the equation can be used to            July 28, 1995 in Room 2230, Nassif            BILLING CODE 4910–59–P
                                                                                                                                    36257

Notices                                                                                         Federal Register
                                                                                                Vol. 60, No. 135

                                                                                                Friday, July 14, 1995



This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER              SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:       The Forest   be considered. The EIS will disclose the
contains documents other than rules or            Service proposed action would                 analysis of site-specific mitigation.
proposed rules that are applicable to the         consolidate landownership presently              Comments from the public will
public. Notices of hearings and investigations,   characterized by a ‘‘checkerboard’’           continue to be used to:
committee meetings, agency decisions and          ownership pattern. Consolidation will
rulings, delegations of authority, filing of                                                    —Identify potential issues.
petitions and applications and agency
                                                  enable the Forest Service to: implement       —Identify major issues to be analyzed in
statements of organization and functions are      more effective ecosystem based                   depth.
examples of documents appearing in this           management; better protection of              —Eliminate minor issues or those which
section.                                          wetlands; attainment of long-term                have been covered by a previous
                                                  habitat needs by reducing fragmentation          environmental analysis, such as the
                                                  of forest cover; and reduce recreational         Mt Baker-Snoqualmie LRMP.
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE                         conflict. Lands acquired in the exchange      —Identify alternatives to the proposed
                                                  by the Forest Service will be managed            action.
Forest Service                                    in accord with the LRMP.                      —Identify potential environmental
                                                     The proposed action will exchange             effects of the proposed action and
Huckleberry Land Exchange With                                                                     alternatives (i.e. direct, indirect, and
Weyerhaeuser Company, Mt. Baker-                  lands that are offered to the Forest
                                                  Service which include Weyerhaeuser               cumulative effects).
Snoqualmie National Forest, Skagit,                                                             —Determine potential cooperating
Snohomish, King, Lewis and Pierce                 lands that are: in the Greenwater River
                                                  Basin east of Enumclaw; near the Norse           agencies and task assignments.
Counties, Washington
                                                  Peak Wilderness Area; and next to the            Issues identified as a result of internal
AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.                     Clearwater River Wilderness Area east         and public scoping include: Access and
ACTION:Notice of intent to prepare                of Carbonado. Other Weyerheauser              travel management; threatened,
environmental impact statement.                   lands offered are: between the north and      endangered and sensitive plant and
                                                  middle forks of the Snoqualmie River          animal species; current condition of
SUMMARY: The Forest Service, USDA,                near the Alpine Lakes Wilderness Area;        federal and nonfederal lands; and
will prepare an environmental impact              in the McClellan Butte area near              valuation procedures for Federal and
statement (EIS) on a proposal to                  Snoqualmie Pass and south of U.S.             nonfederal lands.
exchange lands west of the Cascade                Highway 2; and in the South Fork of the          An initial scoping letter was mailed
Crest in the state of Washington. The             Skykomish River Basin near Index. Two         on June 14, 1994. The responses have
exchange would result in the transfer of          smaller Weyerhaeuser parcels are              been compiled and will be incorporated
up to 7,200 acres of National Forest              located in south Skagit County and in         into the process. Public involvement
System (NFS) lands for up to 33,000               Lewis County, in the North fork of the        meetings have been considered but are
acres of Weyerhaeuser lands in                    Stillaquamish drainage.                       not scheduled at this time.
Snohomish, King, Pierce, Yakima,                                                                   Consolidation of checkerboard
                                                     Weyerhaeuser will acquire NFS lands
Skagit, and Kittitas Counties in the state                                                      ownership in the I–90 corridor into
                                                  located generally to the west of the
of Washington. Transfer of these lands                                                          federal control would provide an
                                                  administrative boundary of the Mt.
will result in consolidation of NFS land                                                        opportunity for ecosystem management
                                                  Baker-Snoqualmie National Forest. The
ownership in the Greenwater,                                                                    on a larger scale. It would also support
                                                  area is mostly north of the Greenwater
Snoqualmie (I–90 corridor), and                                                                 the ‘‘Mountains-to-the-Sound’’ goals of a
                                                  River and the community of
Skykomish River Basins.                                                                         continuous greenway between the
   The EIS will be consistent with the            Greenwater.
                                                                                                Cascade Mountains and Puget Sound.
Mt. Baker-Snoqualmie National Forest                 The Mt-Baker-Snoqualmie LRMP (as              The draft EIS is expected to be filed
Land and Resource Management Plan                 amended) provides guidance for land           in November 1995. The comment period
(LRMP) (as amended in April 1994),                exchanged within the potentially              on the draft environmental impact
which provides overall guidance of all            affected area through its goals,              statement will be 45 days from the date
land management activities on the Mt              objectives, standards, guidelines and         the Environmental Protection Agency
Baker-Snoqualmie National Forest.                 management area direction.                    publishes the notice of availability in
   The Forest Service invites written                An environmental document will be          the Federal Register.
comments and suggestions on the issues            produced which will display                      The Forest Service believes it is
and management opportunities for the              alternatives considered, including the        important to give reviewers notice at
area being analyzed.                              proposed action, and an estimation of         this early stage of several court rulings
DATES: Comments concerning the scope              the effects of the alternatives. Based on     related to public participation in the
of the analysis should be received in             the issues identified through scoping,        environmental review process. First,
writing by July 31, 1995.                         all action alternatives will vary in the      reviewers of draft EIS must structure
ADDRESSES: Send written comments to               number of acres to exchange, the              their participation in the environmental
Dennis Bschor, Forest Supervisor, 21905           location of the acres to be exchanged,        review of the proposal so that it is
64th Avenue West, Mountlake Terrace,              and the kind of mitigation measures.          meaningful and alerts an agency to the
Washington 98043.                                    The EIS will analyze the direct,           reviewer’s position and contentions
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:                  indirect, and cumulative environmental        (Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corp.
Jeff Osmundson, Washington Area Land              effects of the alternatives. Past, present,   v. NRDC, 435 U.S. 519, 553 (1978)).
Adjustment Team, Staff Appraiser,                 and projected activities on both private      Also, environmental objections that
Phone: 206–744–3446.                              and National Forest System lands will         could be raised at the draft EIS stage but
36258                     Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 135 / Friday, July 14, 1995 / Notices

that are not raised until after completion    ARCHITECTURAL AND                          established an advisory committee to
of the final EIS may be waived or             TRANSPORTATION BARRIERS                    review the Americans with Disabilities
dismissed by the courts (City of Angoon       COMPLIANCE BOARD                           Act Accessibility Guidelines (ADAAG)
v. Hodel, 803 F.2d 1016, 1022 (9th Cir.                                                  for buildings and facilities. 36 CFR part
1986) and Wisconsin Heritages, Inc. v.        ADAAG Review Advisory Committee;           1191, appendix A. The advisory
Harris, 490 F. Supp. 1334, 1338 (E.D.         Meetings                                   committee will make recommendations
Wis. 1980)). Because of these court                                                      to the Access Board for updating
                                              AGENCY: Architectural and
rulings, it is very important that those                                                 ADAAG to ensure that the guidelines
                                              Transportation Barriers Compliance
interested in this proposed action                                                       remain a state-of-the-art document
                                              Board.
participate by the close of the 45-day                                                   which is generally consistent with
                                              ACTION: Notice of meetings.                technological developments and
comment period so that substantive
comments and objections are made              SUMMARY:   The Architectural and           changes in national standards and
                                              Transportation Barriers Compliance         model codes, and continue to meet the
available to the Forest Service at a time
                                              Board (Access Board) gives notice of the   needs of individuals with disabilities.
when it can meaningfully consider them
                                              dates and locations of subcommittee        The advisory committee is composed of
and respond to them in the final EIS.                                                    organizations representing individuals
                                              meetings at the ADAAG Review
                                              Advisory Committee.                        with disabilities, model code
  To assist the Forest Service in                                                        organizations, professional associations,
identifying and considering issues and        ADATES: The subcommittees of the
                                                                                         State and local governments, building
concerns on the proposed action,              ADAAG Review Advisory Committee            owners and operators, and other
comments on the draft EIS should be as        will meet as follows:                      organizations. The advisory committee
specific as possible. It is also helpful if     Accessible Routes Subcommittee, July     has formed the following subcommittees
comments refer to specific pages or           28, 19, and 30 and August 28, 29, and      to assist in its work: Editorial,
chapters of the draft statement.              30, 1995.                                  Accessible Routes, Communications,
Comments may also address the                   Communications Subcommittee, July        Plumbing, and Special Occupancies.
adequacy of the draft EIS or the merits       31 and August 1 and 2, 1995.               The subcommittees will present their
of the alternatives formulated and              Plumbing Subcommittee, August 24         recommendations to the full advisory
                                              and 25, 1995.                              committee in November 1995. The full
discussed in the statement. (Reviewers
                                                Special Occupancies Subcommittee,        advisory committee will review the
may wish to refer to the Council on
                                              August 9, 10, and 11 and September 25      subcommittee recommendations and
Environmental Quality Regulations for         and 26, 1995.
implementing the procedural provisions                                                   present final recommendations to the
                                                All meetings will be held from 9:00      Access Board by May 1996.
of the National Environmental Policy          a.m. to 5:00 p.m.
Act at 40 CFR 1503.3 in addressing                                                         The Accessible Routes Subcommittee,
                                              ADDRESSES: The Accessible Routes           Communications Subcommittee,
these points.).
                                              Subcommittee meetings will be held at      Plumbing Subcommittee, and Special
                                              the offices of the Paralyzed Veterans of   Occupancies Subcommittee will meet
  The final EIS is scheduled to be            America, 801 18th Street, NW.,             on the dates and at the locations
completed March 1996. In the final EIS,       Washington, DC. The Communications         announced in this notice. The meetings
the Forest Service is required to respond     Subcommittee meetings will be held at      are open to public. The meetings sites
to comments and responses received            the Grand Hyatt, 1000 H Street, NW.,       are accessible to individuals with
during the comment period that pertain        Washington, DC. The Plumbing               disabilities. Individuals with hearing
to the environmental consequences             Subcommittee meetings will be held at      impairments who require sign language
discussed in the draft EIS and                the offices of the National Institute of   interpreters should contact Marsha
applicable laws, regulations, and             Building Sciences. 1201 L Street, NW.,     Mazz at least three full business days
policies considered in making the             Washington, DC. The location of the        prior to the meeting date by calling
decision regarding this proposal. The         Special Occupancies Subcommittee           (202) 272–5434 ext. 21 (voice) or (202)
lead agency is the Forest Service.            meetings has not been determined.          272–5434 ext. 21 (TTY).
Wendy M. Herrett, Director of                 Persons interested in attending the        James J. Raggio,
Recreation, Lands, and Mineral                Special Occupancies Subcommittee           General Counsel.
Resources, Pacific Northwest Region, is       meetings should contact the Access
                                                                                         [FR Doc. 95–17273 Filed 7–13–95; 8:45 am]
the responsible official. As the              Board prior to the date of the meetings.
                                                                                         BILLING CODE 8150–01–M
responsible official she will document        Information on contacting the Access
the decision and reasons for the              Board is listed below.
decision in the Record of Decision. That      FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For
                                                                                         DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
decision will be subject to Forest            further information regarding the
Service appeal regulations (36 CFR Part       meetings, please contact Marsha Mazz,      Foreign-Trade Zones Board
217).                                         Office of Technical and Information
                                              Services, Architectural and                [Docket 36–95]
  Dated: July 10, 1995.                       Transportation Barriers Compliance
                                              Board, 1331 F Street, NW., suite 1000,     Foreign-Trade Zone 141, Monroe
Wendy M. Herrett,                             Washington, DC 20004–1111.                 County, New York; Application for
                                              Telephone (202) 272–5434 ext. 21           Expansion
Director, Recreation, Lands and Mineral       (voice); (202) 272–5449 ext. 21 (TTY).       An application has been submitted to
Resources.                                    This document is available in alternate    the Foreign-Trade Zones Board (the
                                              formats (cassette tape, braille, large     Board) by the County of Monroe, New
[FR Doc. 95–17299 Filed 7–13–95; 8:45 am]     print, or computer disk) upon request.     York, grantee of Foreign-Trade Zone
                                              SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In              141, requesting authority to expand its
BILLING CODE 3410–11–M
                                              September 1994, the Access Board           zone in the Monroe County area, within
                          Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 135 / Friday, July 14, 1995 / Notices                                   36259

the Rochester Customs port of entry.               14th and Pennsylvania Avenue, NW.,           Signed at Washington, DC, this 7th day of
The application was submitted pursuant             Washington, DC 20230                       July 1995.
to the provisions of the Foreign-Trade             Dated: July 6, 1995.                       Susan G. Esserman,
Zones Act, as amended (19 U.S.C. 81a–                                                         Assistant Secretary of Commerce for Import
81u), and the regulations of the Board           Dennis Puccinelli,
                                                                                              Administration, Alternate Chairman, Foreign-
(15 CFR part 400). It was formally filed         Acting Executive Secretary.                  Trade Zones Board.
on July 5, 1995.                                 [FR Doc. 95–17344 Filed 7–13–95; 8:45 am]
                                                                                                Attest:
   FTZ 141 was approved on April 2,              BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P
1987 (Board Order 355, 52 FR 12219, 4/                                                        Dennis Puccinelli,
15/87). The zone project includes 4                                                           Acting Executive Secretary.
general-purpose sites in the Rochester,          [Order No. 754]                              [FR Doc. 95–17351 Filed 7–13–95; 8:45 am]
New York, area: Site 1 (18 acres)—401–                                                        BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P
409 Pixley Road, Gates; Site 2 (8                Grant of Authority for Subzone Status,
acres)—30 Breck Street, Rochester; Site          Oneida Ltd., (Tableware); Sherrill and
3 (19 acres)—10 Carriage Street,                 Oneida, New York                             [Order No. 758]
Honeoye Falls; and, Site 4 (39 acres)—
200 Carlson Road, Rochester.                        Pursuant to its authority under the       Approval of Export Manufacturing
   The applicant is now requesting               Foreign-Trade Zones Act of June 18,          Activity; ABB Randall Corporation
authority to expand the general-purpose          1934, as amended (19 U.S.C. 81a–81u),        (Gas Plant Modules) Within Foreign-
zone to include two new sites in the             the Foreign-Trade Zones Board (the           Trade Zone 155, Calhoun County,
Town of Henrietta (Monroe County)                Board) adopts the following Order:           Texas
(proposed Sites 5 and 6):
                                                    Whereas, by an Act of Congress
  Proposed Site 5: (5 acres)—Diamond
                                                 approved June 18, 1934, an Act ‘‘To             Pursuant to its authority under the
Packaging Company facility, 111 Commerce                                                      Foreign-Trade Zones Act of June 18,
Drive, Henrietta, 5 miles south of the Greater   provide for the establishment...of
                                                 foreign-trade zones in ports of entry of     1934, as amended (19 U.S.C. 81a-81u),
Rochester International Airport; and,
  Proposed Site 6: (3 acres)—Diamond             the United States, to expedite and           the Foreign-Trade Zones Board (the
Packaging Company facility, 10 Thruway           encourage foreign commerce, and for          Board) adopts the following Order:
Park Drive, Henrietta, 7 miles south of the      other purposes,’’ as amended (19 U.S.C.         Whereas, § 400.28(a)(2) of the Board’s
Greater Rochester International Airport.         81a-81u) (the Act), the Foreign-Trade        regulations, requires approval of the
Diamond Packaging provides                       Zones Board (the Board) is authorized to     Board prior to commencement of new
warehousing, inventory management,               grant to qualified corporations the          manufacturing/processing activity
and packaging services to a range of             privilege of establishing foreign-trade      within existing zone facilities;
customers, including companies in the            zones in or adjacent to U.S. Customs            Whereas, the Calhoun-Victoria FTZ,
photographic, electronics,                       ports of entry;                              Inc., grantee of FTZ 155, Calhoun
pharmaceutical and health products                                                            County, Texas, has requested authority
                                                    Whereas, the Board’s regulations (15
industries. It would serve as zone
                                                 CFR Part 400) provide for the                under § 400.32(b)(1) of the Board’s
operator for these two sites.
                                                 establishment of special-purpose             regulations on behalf of ABB Randall
  No specific manufacturing requests
                                                 subzones when existing zone facilities       Corporation, to manufacture gas plant
are being made at this time. Such
requests would be made to the Board on           cannot serve the specific use involved;      modules for export within FTZ 155
a case-by-case basis.                               Whereas, an application from the          (filed 5–8–95, FTZ Docket A(32b1)-7–
  In accordance with the Board’s                 County of Oneida, New York, grantee of       95; Doc. 35–95, assigned 6/29/95);
regulations, a member of the FTZ Staff           Foreign-Trade Zone 172, for authority to        Whereas, pursuant to § 400.32(b)(1),
has been designated examiner to                  establish special-purpose subzone status     the Commerce Department’s Assistant
investigate the application and report to        for the tableware manufacturing              Secretary for Import Administration has
the Board.                                       facilities of Oneida Ltd. at sites in        the authority to act for the Board in
  Public comment on the application is           Sherrill and Oneida, New York, was           making such decisions on new
invited from interested parties.                 filed by the Board on June 7, 1994, and      manufacturing/processing activity
Submissions (original and 3 copies)              notice inviting public comment was           under certain circumstances, including
shall be addressed to the Board’s                given in the Federal Register (FTZ           situations where the proposed activity is
Executive Secretary at the address               Docket 23–94, 59 FR 30910, 6/16/94);         for export only (§ 400.32(b)(1)(ii); and,
below. The closing period for their              and,
receipt is September 12, 1995. Rebuttal                                                          Whereas, the FTZ Staff has reviewed
comments in response to material                    Whereas, the Board has found that the     the proposal, taking into account the
submitted during the foregoing period            requirements of the FTZ Act and              criteria of § 400.31, and the Executive
may be submitted during the subsequent           Board’s regulations are satisfied, and       Secretary has recommended approval;
15-day period (to September 27, 1995).           that approval of the application is in the      Now, therefore, the Assistant
  A copy of the application and                  public interest;                             Secretary for Import Administration,
accompanying exhibits will be available             Now, therefore, the Board hereby          acting for the Board pursuant to
for public inspection at each of the             authorizes the establishment of a            § 400.32(b)(1), concurs in the
following locations:                             subzone (Subzone 172A) at the Oneida         recommendation and hereby approves
U.S. Department of Commerce, District            Ltd. facilities in Sherrill and Oneida,      the request for a period ending
  Office, 111 East Avenue, Suite 220,            New York, at the locations described in      December 31, 1996, subject to the Act
  Rochester, New York 14604                      the application, subject to the FTZ Act      and the Board’s regulations, including
Office of the Executive Secretary,               and the Board’s regulations, including       § 400.28.
  Foreign-Trade Zones Board, Room                § 400.28.
  3716, U.S. Department of Commerce,
36260                                 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 135 / Friday, July 14, 1995 / Notices

  Signed at Washington, DC, this 7th day of                             SUMMARY:    The Department of Commerce                                    administrative reviews of various
July 1995.                                                              (the Department) has received requests                                    antidumping and countervailing duty
Susan G. Esserman,                                                      to conduct administrative reviews of                                      orders and findings with June
Assistant Secretary of Commerce for Import                              various antidumping and countervailing                                    anniversary dates. The Department also
Administration, Chairman, Committee of                                  duty orders and findings with June                                        received timely requests to revoke in
Alternates, Foreign-Trade Zones Board.                                  anniversary dates. In accordance with                                     part the antidumping duty orders on
  Attest:                                                               the Department’s regulations, we are                                      polyethylene terephthalate film from
Dennis Puccinelli,                                                      initiating those administrative reviews.                                  Japan and Korea and the antidumping
Acting Executive Secretary.                                             The Department also received requests                                     finding on oil country tubular goods
[FR Doc. 95–17350 Filed 7–13–95; 8:45 am]                               to revoke two antidumping duty orders                                     from Canada.
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P
                                                                        and one antidumping finding in part.
                                                                        EFFECTIVE DATE: July 14, 1995.                                            Initiation of Reviews
                                                                        FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:                                            In accordance with 19 CFR 353.22(c)
International Trade Administration
                                                                        Holly A. Kuga, Office of Antidumping                                      and 355.22(c), we are initiating
Initiation of Antidumping and                                           Compliance, Import Administration,                                        administrative reviews of the following
Countervailing Duty Administrative                                      International Trade Administration,                                       antidumping and countervailing duty
Reviews and Requests for Revocation                                     U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th                                         orders and findings. The Department is
in Part                                                                 Street and Constitution Avenue, NW.,                                      not initiating an administrative review
                                                                        Washington, DC. 20230, telephone:                                         of any exporters and/or producers who
AGENCY:  Import Administration,                                         (202) 482–4737.                                                           were not named in a review request
International Trade Administration,
                                                                        SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:                                                because such exporters and/or
Department of Commerce.
                                                                                                                                                  producers were not specified as
ACTION: Notice of Initiation of                                         Background                                                                required under § 353.22(a) (19 CFR
Antidumping and Countervailing Duty
                                                                          The Department has received timely                                      353.22(a)). We intend to issue the final
Administrative Reviews and Requests
                                                                        requests, in accordance with 19 CFR                                       results of these reviews not later than
for Revocation in Part.
                                                                        353.22(a) and 355.22(a) (1994), for                                       June 30, 1996.

                                                                                                                                                                                      Period to be reviewed

Antidumping Duty Proceedings:
    Canada:
        Oil Country Tubular Goods A–122–506
        IPSCO, Inc. ...............................................................................................................................................................      06/01/94–05/31/95
    France:
        Calcium Aluminate Flux A–427–812
        LaFarge Fondu International .....................................................................................................................................                06/15/94–05/31/95
        Large Power Transformers A–427–030
        Jeumont Schneider ...................................................................................................................................................            06/01/94–05/31/95
    Germany:
        High-Tenacity Rayon Filament Yarn A–428–810
        Akzo Nobel Faser AG ...............................................................................................................................................              06/01/94–05/31/95
        Sugar A–428–082
        Pfefer & Langen ........................................................................................................................................................         06/01/94–05/31/95
    Japan:
        Polyethylene Terephthalate Film (PET Film) A–588–814
        Toray Industries, Inc. .................................................................................................................................................         06/01/94–05/31/95
    Korea:
        Polyethylene Terephthalate Film (PET Film) A–580–807
        Cheil Synthetics, Inc., Kolon Industries, Inc., SKC Limited, STC .............................................................................                                   06/01/94–05/31/95
    Netherlands:
        Aramid Fiber Formed of Poly Para-Phenylene Terephthalamide (‘‘PPD–T’’) A–421–805
        Aramid Products V.o.F. .............................................................................................................................................             12/16/93–05/31/95
    New Zealand:
        Fresh Kiwifruit A–614–801
        New Zealand Kiwifruit Marketing Board (‘‘NZKMB’’) ................................................................................................                               06/01/94–05/31/95
    The People’s Republic of China:
        Sparklers A–570–804
        Guangxi Native Produce I/E Corporation; Behai Fireworks & Firecrackers Branch ................................................                                                   06/01/94–05/31/95
    Romania:
        Tapered Roller Bearings and Parts Thereof A–485–602
        Tehnoimportexport, S.A. ...........................................................................................................................................              06/01/94–05/31/95
    Taiwan:
        Certain Stainless Steel Butt-Weld Pipe Fittings A–583–816
        Ta Chen Stainless Pipe, Ltd. ....................................................................................................................................                06/01/94–05/31/95
Countervailing Duty Proceedings:
    None.



  Interested parties must submit                                        administrative protective orders in                                       accordance with 19 CFR 353.34(b) and
applications for disclosure under                                                                                                                 355.34(b).
                         Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 135 / Friday, July 14, 1995 / Notices                                                36261

  These initiations and this notice are     Request an Administrative Review’’ of        Foreign Market Value
in accordance with section 751(a) of the    the antidumping finding on fishnetting          In accordance with section 773(a) of
Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (19          from Japan (37 FR 11560, June 9, 1972)       the Act, the Department calculated FMV
U.S.C. 1675(a)) and 19 CFR 353.22(c)(1)     for the period June 1, 1993, through May     for Yamaji based on f.o.b. and delivered
and 355.22(c)(1).                           31, 1994 (59 FR 29411) . We received a       prices to unrelated purchasers in the
  Dated: July 10, 1995.                     timely request for an administrative         home market. We used the invoice date
Roland L. MacDonald,                        review on June 29, 1994, from Yamaji         as the date of sale for these transactions.
Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary for       Fishing Net Company Ltd. (Yamaji). The       Because information from Yamaji
Compliance.                                 Department initiated the review,             indicated that there were no cost
[FR Doc. 95–17352 Filed 7–13–95; 8:45 am]   covering the period June 1, 1993,            differences between the U.S.
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–M
                                            through May 31, 1994, on July 15, 1994       merchandise and similar home market
                                            (59 FR 36160). The Department is now         merchandise, we did not make an
                                            conducting this review in accordance         adjustment to FMV for physical
[A–588–029]                                 with section 751 of the Tariff Act of        differences. We adjusted FMV for the
                                            1930, as amended (the Act).                  differences in packing costs between the
Fishnetting of Man-Made Fibers From                                                      home market and the U.S. market. We
Japan; Preliminary Results of               Scope of the Review                          deducted home market packing costs
Antidumping Duty Administrative                                                          from the home market price and added
Review                                         Imports covered by the review are
                                                                                         U.S. packing costs to the FMV. No other
                                            shipments of fishnetting of man-made
AGENCY:  Import Administration,                                                          adjustments were claimed or allowed.
                                            fibers, not including salmon gill netting,
International Trade Administration,         from Japan. This merchandise is              Preliminary Results of Review
Department of Commerce.                     currently classified under item numbers        As a result of this review, we
ACTION: Notice of Preliminary Results of    5608.11.00, 5608.19.10, and 5608.90.10       preliminarily determine that the
Antidumping Duty Administrative             of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule            following margin exists for the period
Review.                                     (HTS). The HTS subheading is provided        June 1, 1993, through May 31, 1994:
                                            for convenience and for U.S. Customs
SUMMARY: In response to a request from
                                            purposes. The written description                    Manufacturer/Exporter                        Percent
one respondent, the Department of           remains dispositive as to the scope of                                                            margin
Commerce (the Department) is                the product coverage. The period of
conducting an administrative review of      review is June 1, 1993, through May 31,
                                                                                         Yamaji ...........................................       2.58
the antidumping duty order on
                                            1994.                                           The following deposit requirements
fishnetting of man-made fibers from
Japan. The review covers one                United States Price                          will be effective for all shipments of
manufacturer/exporter of the subject                                                     fishnetting of man-made fibers entered,
merchandise to the United States for the       In accordance with section 772(b) of      or withdrawn from warehouse, for
period June 1, 1993, through May 31,        the Act, the Department based USP on         consumption on or after the publication
1994.                                       purchase price, because the                  date of the final results of this
   We have preliminarily determined         merchandise was sold to unrelated U.S.       administrative review, as provided by
that sales have been made below the         purchasers prior to importation.             section 751(a) (1) of the Act: (1) The
foreign market value (FMV). If these        Purchase price was based on c.i.f. U.S.      cash deposit rate for Yamaji will be the
preliminary results are adopted in our      port and packed prices to unrelated          rate established in the final results of
final results of administrative review,     purchasers in the United States. The         this review; (2) For previously reviewed
we will instruct U.S. Customs to assess     contract date was the date that the terms    or investigated companies not listed
antidumping duties equal to the             of sale, quantity, and price were final;     above, the cash deposit rate will
difference between the United States        thus, the Department accepted the            continue to be the company-specific rate
price (USP) and the FMV.                    respondent’s contract date as the date of    published for the most recent period; (3)
   Interested parties are invited to        sale. We made adjustments, where             If the exporter is not a firm covered in
comment on these preliminary results.       applicable, for Japanese and U.S. ocean      this review, a prior review, or in the
Parties who submit argument in this         freight, marine insurance, shipping          original less-than-fair-value
proceeding are requested to submit with     charges, and inland freight. No other        investigation, but the manufacturer is,
the argument (1) a statement of the issue   adjustments were claimed or allowed.         the cash deposit rate will be the rate
and (2) a brief summary of the                                                           established for the most recent period
                                               We reviewed information Yamaji            for the manufacturer of the
argument.                                   submitted regarding product matches
EFFECTIVE DATE: July 14, 1995.
                                                                                         merchandise; and (4) If neither the
                                            and determined product comparisons           exporter nor the manufacturer is a firm
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kim        based on this information. We first          covered in this or any previous review
Moore or Thomas Futtner, Office of          compared products sold in the United         conducted by the Department, the cash
Antidumping Compliance, Import              States to identical products sold in the     deposit rate will be zero percent, the all
Administration, International Trade         home market. For several of the              others rate established in the final
Administration, U.S. Department of          products sold in the United States, we       results of the first administrative review
Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution      did not find a contemporaneous sale of       (49 FR 19339, April 30, 1984).
Avenue, NW, Washington, D.C. 20230,         the identical product in the home               These deposit requirements, when
telephone: (202) 482–0090/3814.             market. To determine similar                 imposed, shall remain in effect until
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:                  merchandise in the home market, we           publication of the final results of the
                                            grouped products according to their          next administrative review.
Background                                  specifications. We then compared U.S.           Interested parties may request
  On June 7, 1994, the Department           sales to these groups, again using these     disclosure within 5 days of the date of
published a notice of ‘‘Opportunity to      specifications as our matching criterion.    publication of this notice, and may
36262                    Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 135 / Friday, July 14, 1995 / Notices

request a hearing within 10 days of the     Agreements Compliance, Import               SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:      Title III of
date of publication. Any hearing, if        Administration, International Trade         the Export Trading Company Act of l982
requested, will be held as early as is      Administration, U.S. Department of          (15 U.S.C. Sections 4001–21) authorizes
convenient for the parties but not later    Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution      the Secretary of Commerce to issue
than 44 days after the date of              Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20230,           Export Trade Certificates of Review. The
publication of this notice or the first     telephone (202) 377–3793 or telefax         regulations implementing Title III are
work day thereafter. Case briefs or other   (202) 377–1388.                             found at 15 CFR part 325 (1993).
written comments from interested                                                          The Office of Export Trading
                                            SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
parties may be submitted not later than                                                 Company Affairs is issuing this notice
30 days after the date of publication of    Background                                  pursuant to 15 CFR 325.6(b), which
this notice. Rebuttal briefs and rebuttal      On April 14, 1995, the Department of     requires the Department of Commerce to
comments, limited to issues in the case     Commerce published in the Federal           publish a summary of a Certificate in
briefs, may be filed not later than 37      Register a notice of initiation of          the Federal Register. Under Section
days after the date of publication. The     administrative review of the suspended      305(a) of the Act and 15 CFR 325.11(a),
Department will publish the final           countervailing duty investigation on        any person aggrieved by the Secretary’s
results of this administrative review,      frozen concentrated orange juice from       determination may, within 30 days of
including the results of its analysis of    Brazil (60 FR 19017) at the request of      the date of this notice, bring an action
issues raised in any such written                       ¸˜
                                            the Associacao Brasileira dos               in any appropriate district court of the
comments.                                                       ´
                                            Exportadores de Cıtricos (‘‘ABECitrus’’)    United States to set aside the
   This notice serves as a preliminary      and its member exporters. This notice       determination on the ground that the
reminder to importers of their              stated that we would review                 determination is erroneous.
responsibility under 19 CFR 353.26 to       information submitted by ABECitrus          Description of Amended Certificate
file a certificate regarding the            and its member exporters for the period
reimbursement of antidumping duties                                                       Export Trade Certificate of Review
                                            January 1, 1994 through December 31,
prior to liquidation of the relevant                                                    No. 92–00001 was issued to Aerospace
                                            1994. ABECitrus and its member
entries during this review period.                                                      Industries of America, Inc. on April 10,
                                            exporters subsequently withdrew their
Failure to comply with this requirement     request for review on June 19, 1995.        1992 (57 FR 13707) and previously
could result in the Secretary’s             Under § 355.22(a)(3) of the Department’s    amended on September 8, 1992 (57 FR
presumption that reimbursement of           regulations, a party requesting a review    41920, September 14, 1992), October 8,
antidumping duties occurred and the         may withdraw that request no later than     1993 (58 FR 53711, October 18, 1993),
subsequent assessment of double             90 days after the date of publication of    and November 17, 1994 (59 FR 60349,
antidumping duties.                         the notice of initiation. Because the       November 23, 1994). AIA seeks to
   This administrative review and notice    withdrawal by ABECitrus and its             amend its Certificate to:
are in accordance with section 751(a) (1)                                                 1. Delete the following companies as
                                            member exporters occurred within the
of the Act (19 U.S.C. 1675(a) (1)) and 19   time frame specified in 19 CFR              ‘‘Members’’ of the Certificate:
CFR 353.22.                                 355.22(a)(3), and no other interested       Aluminum Company of America,
                                            party has requested an administrative       Cleveland, Ohio; Dynamic Engineering
  Dated: July 6, 1995.                                                                  Inc., Newport News, Virginia;
Susan G. Esserman,                          review for this period, the Department
                                            is now terminating this review.             Reflectone, Inc., Tampa, Florida; and
Assistant Secretary for Import                                                          Vought Aircraft Company, Dallas,
                                               This notice is published pursuant to
Administration.                                                                         Texas.
                                            § 355.22(a)(3) of the Department’s
[FR Doc. 95–17348 Filed 7–13–95; 8:45 am]
                                            regulations (19 CFR 355.22(a)(3)).            2. Change the listing of the following
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P                                                                  current ‘‘Members’’ as follows: Change
                                              Dated: July 10, 1995.                     the name of HEICO Corporation to
                                            Roland L. MacDonald,                        HEICO Aerospace Corporation,
[C–351–005]                                 Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary for       Hollywood, California; DuPont
                                            Compliance.                                 Company to E.I. du Pont de Nemours
Frozen Concentrated Orange Juice
                                            [FR Doc. 95–17349 Filed 7–13–95; 8:45 am]   and Company, Wilmington, Delaware;
From Brazil; Termination of
Administrative Review of Suspended          BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P                      Williams International to Williams
Countervailing Duty Investigation                                                       International Corporation, Walled Lake,
                                                                                        Michigan.
AGENCY:  Import Administration,             Export Trade Certificate of Review            3. Change the name and address of
International Trade Administration,         ACTION:Notice of Issuance of an             Aerojet, a Segment of GenCorp, Rancho
Department of Commerce.                     amended Export Trade Certificate of         Cordova, California to Aerojet-General
ACTION: Notice of Termination of            Review, Application No. 92–4A001.           Corporation, Sacramento, California;
Administrative Review of Suspended                                                      AlliedSignal Aerospace Company,
Countervailing Duty Investigation.          SUMMARY:   The Department of Commerce       Torrance, California to AlliedSignal,
                                            has issued an amendment to the Export       Inc., Morristown, New Jersey; Dowty
SUMMARY: On April 14, 1995, the             Trade Certificate of Review granted to      Aerospace Los Angeles, Duarte,
Department of Commerce (‘‘the               the Aerospace Industries Association of     California to Dowty Decoto, Inc.,
Department’’) initiated an                  America, Inc. (‘‘AIA’’) on June 26, 1995.   Yakima, Washington; Lucas Aerospace,
administrative review of the suspended      Notice of the original Certificate was      Inc., Brea, California to Lucas Industries
countervailing duty investigation on        published in the Federal Register on        Inc., Reston, Virginia.
frozen concentrated orange juice from       April 17, 1992 (57 FR 13707).                 4. Change the address of Hexcel
Brazil. The Department is now               FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: W.         Corporation from Dublin, California to
terminating this review.                    Dawn Busby, Director, Office of Export      Pleasanton, California; Digital
EFFECTIVE DATE: July 14, 1995.              Trading Company Affairs, International      Equipment Corporation from Marlboro,
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:            Trade Administration, (202) 482–5131.       Massachusetts to Maynard,
Alain Letort or Linda Ludwig, Office of     This is not a toll-free number.             Massachusetts; ITT Defense and
                         Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 135 / Friday, July 14, 1995 / Notices                               36263

Electronics, Inc. from Arlington,            Judges will be closed pursuant to            of 35 U.S.C. 112, first paragraph, and 35
Virginia to McLean, Virginia; and            Section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory        U.S.C. 101. The Office has amended the
Rockwell International Corporation           Committee Act, 5 U.S.C. app. 2, as           guidelines to provide a clarification
from El Segundo, California to Seal          amended by Section 5(c) of the               consistent with these requests. The
Beach, California.                           Government in the Sunshine Act, P.L.         guidelines now specify that any
   A copy of the amended certificate will    94–409. The meeting, which involves          rejection based on a ‘‘lack of utility’’
be kept in the International Trade           examination of records and discussion        under section 101 should be
Administration’s Freedom of                  of Award applicant data, may be closed       accompanied by a rejection based upon
Information Records Inspection Facility,     to the public in accordance with Section     section 112, first paragraph. The
Room 4102, U.S. Department of                552b(c)(4) of Title 5, United States Code,   guidelines also specify that the
Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution       since the meeting is likely to disclose      procedures for imposition and review of
Avenue, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20230.        trade secrets and commercial or              rejections based on lack of utility under
  Dated: July 11, 1995.                      financial information obtained from a        section 101 shall be followed with
                                             person and privileged or confidential.       respect to the section 112 rejection that
W. Dawn Busby,
                                               Dated: July 7, 1995.                       accompanies the section 101 rejection.
Director, Office of Export Trading Company                                                  A suggestion was made that the
Affairs.                                     Samuel Kramer,
                                                                                          guidelines should be modified to
[FR Doc. 95–17353 Filed 7–13–95; 8:45 am]    Associate Director.                          provide that an application shall be
BILLING CODE 3510–DR–P                       [FR Doc. 95–17316 Filed 7–13–95; 8:45 am]    presumed to be compliant with section
                                             BILLING CODE 3510–13–M                       112, first paragraph, if there is no proper
                                                                                          basis for imposing a section 101
National Institute of Standards and                                                       rejection. This suggestion has not been
Technology                                   Patent and Trademark Office                  followed. Instead, the guidelines specify
                                             [Docket No. 950706172–5172–01]               that section 112, first paragraph,
Judges Panel of the Malcolm Baldrige
                                                                                          deficiencies other than those that are
National Quality Award                       Utility Examination Guidelines               based on a lack of utility be addressed
AGENCY: National Institute of Standards      AGENCY: Patent and Trademark Office,         separately from those based on a lack of
and Technology Department of                                                              utility for the invention.
                                             Commerce.
Commerce.                                                                                   Several individuals suggested that the
                                             ACTION: Notice.                              guidelines address how section 101
ACTION: Notice of closed meeting.
                                             SUMMARY:    The Patent and Trademark         compliance will be reviewed for
SUMMARY:    Pursuant to the Federal          Office (PTO) is publishing the final         products that are either intermediates or
Advisory Committee Act, 5 U.S.C. app.        version of guidelines to be used by          whose ultimate function or use is
2, notice is hereby given that there will    Office personnel in their review of          unknown. The Office has amended the
be a closed meeting of the Judges Panel      patent applications for compliance with      guidelines to clarify how it will
of the Malcolm Baldrige National             the utility requirement. Because these       interpret the ‘‘specific utility’’
Quality Award on Wednesday, August           guidelines govern internal practices,        requirement of section 101.
9, 1995. The Judges Panel is composed        they are exempt from notice and                Some individuals suggested that the
of nine members prominent in the field                                                    guidelines be amended to preclude
                                             comment and delayed effective date
of quality management and appointed                                                       Examiners from requiring that an
                                             rulemaking requirements under 5 U.S.C.
by the Secretary of Commerce. The                                                         applicant delete references made in the
                                             553(b)(A).
purpose of this meeting is to review the                                                  specification to the utility of an
                                             EFFECTIVE DATE: July 14, 1995.
1995 Award applications and to select                                                     invention which are not necessary to
                                             FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jeff        support an asserted utility of the
applications to be considered in the site
                                             Kushan by telephone at (703) 305–9300,       claimed invention. The guidelines have
visit stage of the evaluation. The
                                             by fax at (703) 305–8885, by electronic      been amended consistent with this
applications under review contain trade
                                             mail at kushan@uspto.gov, or by mail         suggestion.
secrets and proprietary commercial
                                             marked to his attention addressed to the       One individual suggested that the
information submitted to the
                                             Commissioner of Patents and                  legal analysis be amended to emphasize
Government in confidence.
                                             Trademarks, Box 4, Washington, DC            that any combination of evidence from
DATES: The meeting will convene              20231.                                       in vitro or in vivo testing can be
August 9, 1995, at 8 a.m. and adjourn
                                             SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:                   sufficient to establish the credibility of
at 5 p.m. on August 9, 1995. The entire
                                                                                          an asserted utility. The legal analysis
meeting will be closed.                      I. Discussion of Public Comments             has been amended consistent with this
ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at          Forty-four comments were received         recommendation.
the National Institute of Standards and      by the Office in response to the request       A number of individuals questioned
Technology, Administration Building,         to public comment on the proposed            the legal status of the guidelines,
Gaithersburg, Maryland 20899.                version of utility guidelines published      particularly with respect to situations
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:             on January 3, 1995 (60 FR 97). All           where an applicant believes that a
Dr. Curt W. Reimann, Director for            comments have been carefully                 particular Examiner has failed to follow
Quality Programs, National Institute of      considered. A number of changes have         the requirements of the guidelines in
Standards and Technology,                    been made to the examining guidelines        imposing a rejection under section 101.
Gaithersburg, Maryland 20899,                and the legal analysis supporting the        The guildeines and the legal analysis
telephone number (301) 975–2036.             guidelines in response to the comments       supporting the guidelines govern the
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The               received.                                    internal operations of the Patent and
Assistant Secretary for Administration,         Many of the individuals responding to     Trademark Office. They are not
with the concurrence of the General          the request for public comments              intended to, nor do they have the force
Counsel, formally determined on March        suggested that the Office address the        and effect of law. As such they are not
3, 1994, that the meeting of the Panel of    relationship between the requirements        substantive rules creating or altering the
36264                   Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 135 / Friday, July 14, 1995 / Notices

rights or obligations of any party.           the Office has amended the guidelines        particular purpose (i.e., a ‘‘specific
Rather, the guidelines define the             to clarify the procedure to be followed      utility’’) and that assertion would be
procedures to be followed by Office           when an applicant has failed to identify     considered credible by a person of
personnel in their review of                  a specific utility or an invention. The      ordinary skill in the art, do not impose
applications for section 101 compliance.      guidelines now provide that where an         a rejection based on lack of utility.
The legal analysis supporting the             applicant has made no assertion as to        Credibility is to be assessed from the
guidelines articulates the basis for the      why an invention is believed useful,         perspective of one of ordinary skill in
procedures established in the                 and it is not immediately apparent why       the art in view of any evidence of record
guidelines. Thus, an applicant who            the invention would be considered            (e.g., data, statements, opinions,
believes his or her application has been      useful, the Office will reject the           references, etc.) that is relevant to the
rejected in a manner that is inconsistent     application as failing to identify any       applicant’s assertions. An applicant
with the guidelines should respond            specific utility for the invention. The      must provide only one credible
substantively to the grounds of the           legal analysis has also been amended to      assertion of specific utility for any
rejection. ‘‘Non-compliance’’ with the        address evaluation of this question.         claimed invention to satisfy the utility
guidelines will not be a petitionable or                                                   requirement.
                                              II. Guidelines for Examination of
appealable action.                                                                            (b) If the invention has a well-
   Some individuals suggested that the        Applications for Compliance With the
                                              Utility Requirement                          established utility, regardless of any
guidelines and legal analysis be                                                           assertion made by the applicant, do not
amended to specify that the Office will       A. Introduction                              impose a rejection based on lack of
reject an application for lacking utility        The following guidelines establish the    utility. An invention has a well-
only in those situations where the            policies and procedures to be followed       established utility if a person of
asserted utility is ‘‘incredible.’’ This      by Office personnel in the evaluation of     ordinary skill in the art would
suggestion has not been adopted. The          any application for compliance with the      immediately appreciate why the
Office has carefully reviewed the legal       utility requirements of 35 U.S.C. 101        invention is useful based on the
precedent governing application of the        and 112. The guidelines also address         characteristics of the invention (e.g.,
utility requirement. Based on that            issues that may arise during                 properties of a product or obvious
review, the Office has chosen to focus        examination of applications claiming         application of a process).
the review for compliance with Section        protection for inventions in the field of       (c) If the applicant has not asserted
101 and Section 112, first paragraph, on      biotechnology and human therapy. The         any specific utility for the claimed
the ‘‘credibility’’ of an asserted utility.   guidelines are accompanied by an             invention and it does not have a well-
   Some individuals suggested that the                                                     established utility, impose a rejection
                                              overview of applicable legal precedent
guidelines be amended to address how                                                       under section 101, emphasizing that the
                                              governing the utility requirement. The
a generic claim that covers many                                                           applicant has not disclosed a specific
                                              guidelines have been promulgated to
discrete species will be assessed with                                                     utility for the invention. Also impose a
                                              assist Office personnel in their review of
regard to the ‘‘useful invention’’                                                         separate rejection under section 112,
                                              applications for compliance with the
requirements of sections 101 and 112                                                       first paragraph, on the basis that the
                                              utility requirement. The guidelines and
when one or more, but not all, species                                                     applicant has not shown how to use the
                                              the legal analysis do not alter the
within the genus do not have a credible                                                    invention due to lack of disclosure of a
                                              substantive requirements of 35 U.S.C.
utility. The guidelines have been                                                          specific utility. The sections 101 and
                                              101 and 112, nor are they designed to
amended to clarify how the Office will                                                     112, rejections should shift the burden
                                              obviate review of applications for
address applications in which genus
                                              compliance with this statutory               to the applicant to:
claims are presented that encompass
                                              requirement.                                 —Explicityly identify a specific utility
species for which an asserted utility is
not credible. The legal analysis makes        B. Examination Guidelines for the               for the claimed invention, and
clear that any rejection of any claimed       Utility Requirement                          —Indicate where support for the
subject matter based on lack of utility                                                       asserted utility can be found in the
                                                 Office personnel shall adhere to the         specification.
must adhere to the standards imposed          following procedures when reviewing
by these guidelines. This is true                                                             Review the subsequently asserted
                                              applications for compliance with the
regardless of whether the claim defines                                                    utility by the applicant using the
                                              ‘‘useful invention’’ (‘‘utility’’)
only a single embodiment of the                                                            standard outlined in paragraph (2)(a)
                                              requirement of 35 U.S.C. 101 and 35
invention, multiple discrete                                                               above, and ensure that it is fully
                                              U.S.C. 112, first paragraph.
embodiments of the invention, or a               1. Read the specification, including      supported by the original disclosure.
genus encompassing many                       the claims, to:                                 3. If no assertion of specific utility for
embodiments of the invention. As cast            (a) Determine what the applicant has      the claimed invention made by the
in the legal analysis and the guidelines,     invented, noting any specific                applicant is credible, and the claimed
the focus of examination is the               embodiments of the invention;                invention does not have a well-
invention as it has been defined in the          (b) Ensure that the claims define         established utility, reject the claim(s)
claims.                                       statutory subject matter (e.g., a process,   under section 101 on the grounds that
   Some individuals questioned whether        machine, manufacture, or composition         the invention as claimed lacks utility.
the guidelines and the legal analysis         of matter);                                  Also reject the claims under section 112,
govern actions taken by Examining                (c) Note is applicant has disclosed any   first paragraph, on the basis that the
Groups other than Group 1800 or the           specific reasons why the invention is        disclosure fails to teach how to use the
Board of Patent Appeals and                   believed to be ‘‘useful.’’                   invention as claimed. The section 112,
Interferences. The guidelines apply to           2. Review the specification and claims    first paragraph, rejection imposed in
all Office personnel, and to the review       to determine if the applicant has            conjunction with a section 101 rejection
of all applications, regardless of field of   asserted any credible utility for the        should incorporate by reference the
technology.                                   claimed invention:                           grounds of the corresponding section
   In addition to the changes made in            (a) If the applicant has asserted that    101 rejection and should be set out as
response to comments from the public,         the claimed invention is useful for any      a rejection distinct from any other
                        Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 135 / Friday, July 14, 1995 / Notices                                   36265

rejection under section 112, first            consider and respond to each                  1735 Jefferson Davis Highway,
paragraph, not based on lack of utility       substantive element of any response to        Arlington, Virginia 22202–3461.
for the claimed invention.                    a rejection based on lack of utility. Only
                                                                                            FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
   To be considered appropriate by the        where the totality of the record
                                                                                            Beverly Milkman (703) 603–7740.
Office, any rejection based on lack of        continues to show that the asserted
utility must include the following            utility is not credible should a rejection    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:       On July
elements:                                     based on lack of utility be maintained.       22, 1994, April 28, May 12 and 19, 1995,
   (a) A prima facie showing that the            If the applicant satisfactorily rebuts a   the Committee for Purchase From
claimed invention has no utility.             prima facie rejection based on lack of        People Who Are Blind or Severely
   A prima facie showing of no utility        utility under section 101, withdraw the       Disabled published notices (59 FR
must establish that it is more likely than    section 101 rejection and the                 37466, 60 FR 20971, 25695 and 26876)
not that a person skilled in the art          corresponding rejection imposed under         of proposed additions to the
would not consider credible any               section 112, first paragraph, per             Procurement List.
specific utility asserted by the applicant    paragraph (3) above.                             After consideration of the material
for the claimed invention. A prima facie         Office personnel are reminded that         presented to it concerning capability of
showing must contain the following            they must treat as true a statement of        qualified nonprofit agencies to provide
elements:                                     fact made by an applicant in relation to      the services, fair market price, and
   (i) A well-reasoned statement that         an asserted utility, unless countervailing    impact of the additions on the current
clearly sets forth the reasoning used in      evidence can be provided that shows           or most recent contractors, the
concluding that the asserted utility is       that one of ordinary skill in the art         Committee has determined that the
not credible;                                 would have a legitimate basis to doubt
   (ii) Support for factual findings relied                                                 services listed below are suitable for
                                              the credibility of such a statement.          procurement by the Federal Government
upon in reaching this conclusion; and         Similarly, Office personnel must accept
   (iii) Support for any conclusions                                                        under 41 U.S.C. 46–48c and 41 CFR 51–
                                              an opinion from a qualified expert that       2.4.
regarding evidence provided by the            is based upon relevant facts whose
applicant in support of an asserted                                                            I certify that the following action will
                                              accuracy is not being questioned; it is       not have a significant impact on a
utility.                                      improper to disregard the opinion solely
   (b) Specific evidence that supports                                                      substantial number of small entities.
                                              because of a disagreement over the            The major factors considered for this
any fact-based assertions needed to
                                              significance or meaning of the facts          certification were:
establish the prima facie showing.
   Whenever possible, Office personnel        offered.
                                                                                               1. The action will not result in any
must provide documentary evidence             III. Additional Information                   additional reporting, recordkeeping or
(e.g., scientific or technical journals,                                                    other compliance requirements for small
                                                The PTO has prepared an analysis of
excerpts from treatises or books, or U.S.                                                   entities other than the small
                                              the law governing the utility
or foreign patents) as the form of                                                          organizations that will furnish the
                                              requirement to support the guidelines
support used in establishing the factual                                                    services to the Government.
                                              outlined above. Copies of the legal
basis of a prima facie showing of no
                                              analysis can be obtained from Jeff               2. The action does not appear to have
utility according to items (a)(ii) and
                                              Kushan, who can be reached using the          a severe economic impact on current
(a)(iii) above. If documentary evidence
                                              information indicated above.                  contractors for the services.
is not available, Office personnel shall
note this fact and specifically explain         Dated: July 3, 1995.                           3. The action will result in
the scientific basis for the factual          Bruce A. Lehman,                              authorizing small entities to furnish the
conclusions relied on in sections (a)(ii)     Assistant Secretary of Commerce and           services to the Government.
and (a)(iii).                                 Commissioner of Patents and Trademarks.          4. There are no known regulatory
   4. A rejection based on lack of utility    [FR Doc. 95–17304 Filed 7–13–95; 8:45 am]     alternatives which would accomplish
should not be maintained if an asserted       BILLING CODE 3510–16–M                        the objectives of the Javits-Wagner-
utility for he claimed invention would                                                      O’Day Act (41 U.S.C. 46–48c) in
be considered credible by a person of                                                       connection with the services proposed
ordinary skill in the art in view of all      COMMITTEE FOR PURCHASE FROM                   for addition to the Procurement List.
evidence of record.                           PEOPLE WHO ARE BLIND OR                          Accordingly, the following services
   Once a prima facie showing of no           SEVERELY DISABLED                             are hereby added to the Procurement
utility has been properly established,                                                      List:
the applicant bears the burden of             Procurement List; Additions
rebutting it. The applicant can do this                                                     Administrative Services for the following
by amending the claims, by providing          AGENCY: Committee for Purchase From                locations:
                                              People Who Are Blind or Severely                Fleet and Industrial Supply Center, San
reasoning or arguments, or by providing                                                          Diego, California
evidence in the form of a declaration         Disabled.
                                                                                              Fleet and Industrial Supply Center, Long
under 37 CFR 1.132 or a printed               ACTION: Additions to the Procurement               Beach, California
publication, that rebuts the basis or         List.                                         Janitorial/Custodial for the following
logic of the prima facie showing. If the                                                         locations:
applicant responds to the prima facie         SUMMARY:  This action adds to the               Federal Building, 525 Water Street, Port
rejection, Office personnel shall review      Procurement List services to be                    Huron, MI
the original disclosure, any evidence         furnished by nonprofit agencies                 Social Security Administration Building,
relied upon in establishing the prima         employing persons who are blind or                 142 Auburn Street, Pontiac, MI
                                              have other severe disabilities.               Janitorial/Custodial, Carl Albert Federal
facie showing, any claim amendments                                                              Building and U.S. Courthouse, 301 E.
and any new reasoning or evidence             EFFECTIVE DATE: August 14, 1995.
                                                                                                 Carl Albert Parkway, McAlester,
provided by the applicant in support of       ADDRESSES: Committee for Purchase                  Oklahoma
an asserted utility. It is essential for      From People Who Are Blind or Severely         Janitorial/Custodial, IRS Service Center
Office personnel to recognize, fully          Disabled, Crystal Square 3, Suite 403,             Complex, Memphis, Tennessee
36266                    Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 135 / Friday, July 14, 1995 / Notices

Parts Sorting, Defense Reutilization and          3. The action will result in                  DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
    Marketing Office, Barstow, California      authorizing small entities to furnish the
Parts Sorting, Defense Reutilization and       commodities and services to the                  Department of the Air Force
    Marketing Office, Robins Air Force Base,
    Georgia                                    Government.
                                                                                                Notice of Availability of a Finding of No
  This action does not affect current             4. There are no known regulatory              Significant Impact (FONSI) for the
contracts awarded prior to the effective       alternatives which would accomplish              Construction of an 18-hole Golf Course
date of this addition or options               the objectives of the Javits-Wagner-             at Andrews Air Force Base, Maryland
exercised under those contracts.               O’Day Act (41 U.S.C. 46–48c) in
                                               connection with the commodities and                The U.S. Air Force (USAF) is
Beverly L. Milkman,
                                               services proposed for addition to the            proposing the construction of an 18-hole
Executive Director.                                                                             golf course in accordance with the
[FR Doc. 95–17315 Filed 7–13–95; 8:45 am]      Procurement List.
                                                                                                National Environmental Policy Act
BILLING CODE 6820–33–P                            Comments on this certification are            (NEPA) the Council on Environmental
                                               invited. Commenters should identify the          Quality regulations implementing
                                               statement(s) underlying the certification        NEPA, the Department of Defense
Procurement List; Proposed Additions           on which they are providing additional           Directive (DOD) 6050.1, and Air Force
AGENCY:  Committee for Purchase From           information.                                     Instruction 32–7061. These directives
People Who Are Blind or Severely                  The following commodities and                 require the USAF to consider
Disabled.                                      services have been proposed for                  environmental consequences when
ACTION: Proposed Additions to                  addition to Procurement List for                 authorizing or approving federal
Procurement List.                              production by the nonprofit agencies             actions.
                                               listed:                                            The USAF has prepared an
SUMMARY: The Committee has received                                                             Environmental Assessment (EA)
proposals to add to the Procurement List       Commodities                                      analyzing the potential environmental
commodities and services to be                 Trap, Animal                                     consequences of the proposed golf
furnished by nonprofit agencies                                                                 course construction.
employing persons who are blind or               3740–00–531–3905
                                                                                                  On the basis of the EA, we conclude
have other severe disabilities.                NPA: ACT Corporation, Daytona Beach,             the implementation of the proposed
COMMENTS MUST BE RECEIVED ON OR                   Florida                                       action will not have a significant effect
BEFORE: August 14, 1995.                       Lancet, Finger Bleeding                          on the quality of the environment at
ADDRESSES:     Committee for Purchase                                                           Andrews Air Force Base and, as a result,
                                                 Special Item #B–11
From People Who Are Blind or Severely                                                           an Environmental Impact Statement is
Disabled, Crystal Square 3, Suite 403,         NPA: Lincoln Training Center and                 not warranted.
1735 Jefferson Davis Highway,                     Rehabilitation Workshop, South El               Comments on this FONSI must be
Arlington, Virginia 22202–3461.                   Monte, California                             received on or before 16 Aug 95 and
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:               Services                                         may be addressed to Lt Col Michael
Beverly Milkman (703) 603–7740.                                                                 Newberry, 89 CES/CEV, 3465 North
                                               Janitorial/Custodial, Defense Logistics
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This                     Agency, Defense Fuel Region West,           Carolina St, Andrews AFB, MD, 20331–
notice is published pursuant to 41                  Building 100, San Pedro, California         4803, Telephone (301) 981–2579.
U.S.C. 47(a) (2) and 41 CFR 51–2.3. Its                                                           Documents are available for public
                                               NPA: Social Vocational Services, Inc.,
purpose is to provide interested persons            Torrance, California                        review at Oxon Hill Public Library, 6200
an opportunity to submit comments on                                                            Oxon Hill Rd, Oxon Hill, MD,
                                               Janitorial/Custodial, Pentagon Building,
the possible impact of the proposed                                                             Telephone (301) 839–2400.
                                                    (First Floor, All Stairs and Stairwells,
actions.                                            Elevators, Escalators, Defense Protective   Patsy J. Conner,
   If the Committee approves the                    Service Structures and Corps of             Air Force Federal Register Liaison Officer.
proposed additions, all entities of the             Engineers Modular Buildings),               [FR Doc. 95–17286 Filed 7–13–95; 8:45 am]
Federal Government (except as                       Washington, DC                              BILLING CODE 3910–01–P
otherwise indicated) will be required to       NPA: Didlake, Inc., Manassas, Virginia
procure the commodities and services           Janitorial/Custodial, Basewide, McGuire Air
listed below from nonprofit agencies                Force Base, New Jersey                      Department of the Army
employing persons who are blind or             NPA: Occupational Training Center of
have other severe disabilities.                     Burlington County, Mt. Holly, New           Army Science Board, Notice of Closed
   I certify that the following action will         Jersey                                      Meeting
not have a significant impact on a             Laundry Service, Medical Center, Wright-           In accordance with Section 10(a)(2) of
substantial number of small entities.             Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio                the Federal Advisory Committee Act
The major factors considered for this
                                               NPA: Greene, Inc., Xenia, Ohio                   (P.L. 92–463), announcement is made of
certification were:
   1. The action will not result in any                                                         the following Committee Meeting:
                                               Mailroom Operation, Internal Revenue
additional reporting, recordkeeping or             Service, 55 Market Street, San Jose,           Name of Committee: Army Science Board
other compliance requirements for small            California                                   (ASB).
entities other than the small                                                                     Date of Meeting: 19 July 1995.
                                               NPA: VTF Services, Palo Alto, California           Time of Meeting: 0800–1700.
organizations that will furnish the
                                               Beverly L. Milkman,                                Place: Pentagon—Washington, DC.
commodities and services to the                                                                   Agenda: The Army Science Board’s Ad
Government.                                                                                     Hoc Study on ‘‘ASB Space and Missile
                                               Executive Director.
   2. The action does not appear to have                                                        Defense Organization’’ will have its 7th
a severe economic impact on current            [FR Doc. 95–17314 Filed 7–13–95; 8:45 am]        meeting at the Pentagon. This meeting will be
contractors for the commodities and                                                             closed to the public in accordance with
                                               BILLING CODE 6820–33–P
services.                                                                                       Section 552b(c) of Title 5, U.S.C., specifically
                          Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 135 / Friday, July 14, 1995 / Notices                                         36267

subparagraph (1) thereof, and Title 5, U.S.C.,   Recommendation 94–3, Rocky Flats Seismic          those of the Hoppmann Corporation, for
Appendix 2, subsection 10(d). The classified     and Systems Safety. The enclosed plan             designing, constructing, and operating
and unclassified matters to be discussed are     utilizes the approach identified in a letter to   the production prototype unit. The
so inextricably intertwined so as to preclude    you dated April 12, 1995, from the Assistant
                                                 Secretary for Environmental Management.
                                                                                                   proposed project is not eligible for
opening any portion of these meetings. For
further information, please contact Michelle     This approach was developed in close              financial assistance under a recent,
Diaz at (703) 695–0781                           coordination with your staff. At the              current, or planned solicitation because
Karen Blystone,                                  completion of the planned review of seismic       the funding program, the Energy-Related
                                                 safety and storage options, we will inform        Inventions Program (ERIP), has been
Acting Administrative Officer, Army Science      you of the decision regarding interim storage
Board.
                                                                                                   structured since its beginning in 1975 to
                                                 of the plutonium at Rocky Flats.                  operate without competitive
[FR Doc. 95–17334 Filed 7–13–95; 8:45 am]          This document is unclassified and suitable      solicitations because the authorizing
BILLING CODE 3710–08–M                           for placement in the public reading room.
                                                                                                   legislation directs ERIP to provide
                                                        Sincerely,                                 support for worthy ideas submitted by
                                                 Hazel R. O’Leary.                                 the public. The program has never
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY                             Enclosure                                         issued and has no plans to issue a
                                                 [FR Doc. 95–17354 Filed 7–13–95; 8:45 am]         competitive solicitation. This award
DOE Implementation Plan for
                                                 BILLING CODE 6450–01–P                            will be made 14 calendar days after
Recommendation 94–3 of the Defense
                                                                                                   publication to allow for public
Nuclear Facilities Safety Board, Rocky
                                                                                                   comment.
Flats Seismic and Systems Safety                 Financial Assistance Award: Ecomat,
                                                                                                   FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
AGENCY: Department of Energy.                    Inc.
                                                                                                   Please write the U.S. Department of
ACTION: Notice.                                  AGENCY:   Department of Energy.                   Energy, Office of Placement and
                                                 ACTION:   Notice of intent.                       Administration, ATTN: Rose Mason,
SUMMARY:   The Defense Nuclear
                                                                                                   HR–531.21, 1000 Independence Avenue
Facilities Safety Board published                SUMMARY:    The U.S. Department of                SW., Washington, DC 20585.
Recommendation 94–3, concerning                  Energy announces that pursuant to 10
Rocky Flats Seismic and Systems Safety                                                                The anticipated term of the proposed
                                                 CFR 600.6(a)(2) it is making a financial          grant is 18 months from the date of the
in the Federal Register on October 4,            assistance award under Grant Number
1994 (59 FR 50581). Section 315(e) of                                                              award.
                                                 DE–FG01–95EE15631 to Ecomat, Inc.
the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as                                                                  Lynn Warner,
                                                 The proposed grant will provide
amended, 42 U.S.C. 2286d(e) requires             funding in the estimated amount of                Contracting Officer, Office of Placement and
the Department of Energy to transmit an                                                            Administration.
                                                 $98,900 by the Department of Energy for
implementation plan to the Defense               the purpose of saving energy through              [FR Doc. 95–17357 Filed 7–13–95; 8:45 am]
Nuclear Facilities Safety Board after            development of the inventor’s ‘‘Foamed            BILLING CODE 6450–01–P
acceptance of the Recommendation by              Recyclables.’’
the Secretary. The Department’s                  SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The
implementation plan was sent to the                                                                Notice of Prototype Spent Nuclear Fuel
                                                 Department of Energy has determined in            Dry Transfer System Project
Safety Board on June 30, 1995, and is            accordance with 10 CFR 600.14(e)(1)
available for review in the Department           that the unsolicited application for              AGENCY: Office of Civilian Radioactive
of Energy Public Reading Rooms.                  financial assistance submitted by                 Waste Management, DOE.
DATES: Comments, data, views, or                 Ecomat, Inc., is meritorious based on the
arguments concerning the                                                                           ACTION: Notice to interested sources.
                                                 general evaluation required by 10 CFR
Implementation Plan are due on or                600.14(d) and that the proposed project
before August 14, 1995.                                                                            SUMMARY:    The U.S. Department of
                                                 represents a unique idea that would not           Energy is currently engaged in a
ADDRESSES: Send comments, data,                  be eligible for financial assistance under        cooperative agreement with the Electric
views, or arguments concerning the               a recent, current or planned solicitation.        Power Research Institute (EPRI) to
implementation plan to: Department of            The new technology is a process to                design a spent nuclear fuel dry transfer
Energy, 1000 Independence Avenue                 develop environmentally safe synthetic            system. The design for this system is
SW., Washington, DC 20585.                       building materials, such as siding, slate,        being developed by Transnuclear, Inc.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:                 and lumber, composed of dual polymers             under a subcontract from EPRI. The
RADM Richard Guimond, Principal                  and industrial waste filler. The use of           system will enable the transfer of
Deputy Assistant Secretary for                   fly ash or red mud fillers halves the             individual spent nuclear fuel assemblies
Environmental Management,                        amount of needed polymers, which are              from a conventional top loading transfer
Department of Energy, 1000                       petroleum-based, energy intensive                 cask to a multi-purpose canister (MPC)
Independence Avenue SW.,                         materials. Moreover, the invention’s              in a shielded overpack, or accommodate
Washington, DC 20585.                            light weight will lower transportation            spent nuclear fuel transfers between two
  Issued in Washington, D.C., on July 6,         fuel expenditures compared to                     conventional casks. DOE is inviting
1995.                                            conventional building materials, and              letters of interest from potential sources
Mark B. Whitaker,                                reduce buttressing requirements of                to fabricate, demonstrate and/or license
Departmental Representative to the Defense
                                                 houses, leading to lower overall                  this system.
Nuclear Facilities Safety Board.                 building costs. The inventor and
                                                 principal investigator, John N.                   DATES: Letters of interest must be
June 30, 1995.                                                                                     received no later than August 30, 1995.
                                                 Mushovic, Ph.D., is the executive vice-
The Honorable John T. Conway,
Chairman, Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety
                                                 president of Ecomat, Inc. He holds six            ADDRESSES: Letters of interest should be
     Board, 625 Indiana Avenue NW., Suite        patents and has over 25 years                     sent to the U.S. Department of Energy,
     700, Washington, DC 20004                   experience in commercializing plastics            Attn: Michelle Miskinis, HR–561.21,
  Dear Mr. Chairman: This letter provides        technologies. Ecomat, Inc., will utilize          1615 M Street NW., Washington, DC
the Department’s Implementation Plan for         its engineering facilities, as well as            20036.
36268                  Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 135 / Friday, July 14, 1995 / Notices

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:             shielding during spent nuclear fuel          Confinement Area. When the spent fuel
Michelle Miskinis, (202) 634–4413.           transfer operations. Appropriate             transfer tube is aligned with the
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: A dry             operations and support systems are           receiving cask, the device opens and
transfer system has several significant      included. Key operational systems, e.g.,     any accumulated crud falls into the
applications and could benefit the           the spent fuel handling and transfer         receiving cask, e.g., the MPC. There will
Federal waste management system and          subsystems, are being designed by SGN        be two monitoring systems in the
utilities in a number of ways. It has the    (Societe Generale pour les Techniques        facility to ensure proper grappling of the
potential to:                                Nouvelles) under a subcontract with          fuel: (1) A video monitor and (2) a series
   (1) Allow recovery operations at          Transnuclear, Inc. and incorporate           of switches, to assure that the operator
shutdown reactor sites with                  technology and experiences from              knows the position of the fuel at all
independent spent nuclear fuel storage       French dry spent fuel transfer               times. The fuel handling machine can
installations.                               operations at La Hague. Spent fuel           be operated manually from the facility
   (2) Provide a means for utilities that    handling experiences at Federal and          catwalks for off-normal recovery.
can presently handle only a truck cask       commercial facilities in the United
                                                                                             A unique feature of the dry transfer
to utilize a rail cask.                      States also have been factored into the
                                                                                          system is that all major components are
   (3) Permit the deployment of the          design.
                                                The base dimensions of the facility       transportable, except the concrete cell.
larger capacity 125 ton MPC at reactor                                                    The spent fuel handling equipment, for
sites that would otherwise be limited to     will be approximately 40×60 feet with a
                                             height of approximately 45–50 feet. It       example, as well as the floors and roof
the 75 ton MPC.                                                                           are designed to be lowered-in and
   (4) Allow transfers of spent nuclear      consists of a Preparation Area, a Lower
                                             Access Area and a Transfer                   raised-out through the top of the cell.
fuel from existing utility on-site storage
                                             Confinement Area. The Preparation            This feature is economically attractive
casks/canisters into MPCs without
                                             Area is a sheet metal building where         because it enables the same dry transfer
returning to the reactor storage pool.
   (5) Support existing or future            casks are prepared for unloading,            system equipment to be used at different
Department of Energy and Office of           loading or shipment. The Lower Access        locations.
Civilian Radioactive Waste Management        Area and Transfer Confinement Area are       Letters of Interest
spent nuclear fuel management                the first and second floor, respectively,
activities.                                  of a concrete cell which has walls              Sources may indicate an interest in
   The Draft Project Design Report for       approximately 3 feet thick. The sheet        one or all phases of the project, i.e.,
the dry transfer system is expected to be    metal building abuts the concrete cell       prototype fabrication, demonstration
completed by August 1, 1995. It will         which allows casks to be moved into the      and site specific licensing.
contain cost estimates for an operational    Lower Access Area from the Cask                 Sources interested in being
system. The Topical Safety Analysis          Preparation Area. A large shield door        considered for participation in this
Report will be submitted to the Nuclear      separates the Preparation Area from the      effort should forward a letter of interest
Regulatory Commission in early 1996.         Lower Access Area. The Lower Access          referencing this Federal Register notice
Upon approval, the topical report is         Area and the Transfer Confinement Area       to the address shown above. Letters of
expected to be referenced in subsequent      are separated by a floor containing two      interest must include the following
site specific licensing applications for     portals in which the casks are aligned.      information pertaining to the offeror’s
use of the dry transfer system in at-        The fuel handling machine is located in      ability to perform: (1) Previous
reactor applications and independent         the Transfer Confinement Area and            experience in the fabrication,
spent fuel storage installations.            moves fuel assemblies from one cask to       construction or licensing of equipment
   The DOE desires that a Nuclear            the other. On the roof of the Transfer       and facilities in accordance with ASME
Regulatory Commission approved dry           Confinement Area is a crane dedicated        NQA–1 or Nuclear Regulatory
transfer system be available by 1998 to      to handling cask shield plugs and lids.      Commission requirements, and
support potential program needs.             The crane can be operated manually for       experience in the management of spent
Therefore, we are requesting electric        off-normal recovery. The heating,            nuclear fuel, (2) relevant professional
utility companies and other private and      ventilation and air conditioning (HVAC)      qualifications and specific experience of
public entities to provide us with           systems are balanced to ensure airflow       any key personnel who may be assigned
information regarding their interest in      from the Preparation Area                    to the project, (3) availability and
participating with the DOE in a              (uncontaminated) to the Lower Access         description of special facilities that may
cooperative project for prototype            Area, to the Transfer Confinement Area       be required in the fabrication or
fabrication and demonstration of a dry       (potentially contaminated). The control
                                                                                          demonstration of the system, and (4)
transfer system that is based on the         room and HVAC systems are separate
                                                                                          any additional pertinent information
DOE/EPRI design. Because site specific       from the facility and are envisioned to
                                                                                          concerning the offeror’s qualifications to
use of the system will require approval      be portable, i.e., housed in a trailer or
                                                                                          perform the work. Letters of interest
by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission,        van. The transfer operations are
                                                                                          should not be submitted by companies
the licensing phase of the project may       performed remotely, however,
                                                                                          which do not possess the capabilities
be pursued independent of prototype          maintenance on the facility equipment
                                                                                          required for the appropriate project
fabrication and demonstration activities.    is manual.
                                                The fuel handling machine includes a      phase or phases. Letters of interest
   This project is contingent upon the                                                    should not exceed 10 pages.
availability of appropriated funds.          single fail safe crane and a transfer tube
   A summary description of the dry          that contains the spent nuclear fuel            Additional information may be
transfer system is provided below.           assembly during the transfer operations.     requested by the Department of Energy
                                             At the bottom of the transfer tube is a      following receipt of any letter of
Description of DOE/EPRI Dry Transfer         ‘‘crud catcher’’ which closes when the       interest. This notice should not be
System                                       spent fuel assembly is in the transfer       construed as a commitment by the
  The DOE/EPRI designed dry transfer         tube. The device catches crud during         Department of Energy to enter into any
system consists of a facility to perform     transfer and prevents the spreading of       agreement, nor is it a Request for
cask preparatory activities and provide      contamination in the Transfer                Proposal.
                         Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 135 / Friday, July 14, 1995 / Notices                                    36269

  Issued in Washington, DC on July 7, 1995.   The program has never issued and has           patents and one patent-pending for the
Lake Barrett,                                 no plans to issue a competitive                subject invention, and has written about
Deputy Director, Office of Civilian           solicitation. This award will be made 14       70 periodical publications. Northeastern
Radioactive Waste Management.                 calendar days after publication to allow       University will use its laboratory
[FR Doc. 95–17360 Filed 7–13–95; 8:45 am]     for public comment.                            facilities for prototype development,
BILLING CODE 6450–01–P                        FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:               testing, and optimization. The proposed
                                              Please write the U.S. Department of            project is not eligible for financial
                                              Energy, Office of Placement and                assistance under a recent, current or
Financial Assistance Award:                   Administration, ATTN: Rose Mason,              planned solicitation because the
Hydrodyne, Inc.                               HR–531.21, 1000 Independence                   funding program, the Energy Related
                                              Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20585.             Invention Program (ERIP), has been
AGENCY:   Department of Energy.                                                              structured since its beginning in 1975 to
                                                The anticipated term of the proposed
ACTION:   Notice of intent.                   grant is 24 months from the date of            operate without competitive
SUMMARY: The U.S. Department of               award.                                         solicitations because the authorizing
Energy announces that pursuant to 10          Lynn Warner,                                   legislation directs ERIP to provide
CFR 600.6(a)(2) it is making a financial      Contracting Officer, Office of Placement and   support for worthy ideas submitted by
assistance award under Grant Number           Administration.                                the public. The program has never
DE–FG01–95CE15646 to Hydrodyne,               [FR Doc. 95–17359 Filed 7–13–95; 8:45 am]      issued and has no plans to issue a
Inc. The proposed grant will provide          BILLING CODE 6450–01–P
                                                                                             competitive solicitation. This award
funding in the estimated amount of                                                           will be made 14 calendar days after
$99,925 by the Department of Energy for                                                      publication to allow for public
the purpose of saving energy through          Financial Assistance Award:                    comment.
development of the applicants’s               Northeastern University                        FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
patented ‘‘Hydrodyne Process for                                                             Please write the U.S. Department of
                                              AGENCY:   Department of Energy.                Energy, Office of Placement and
Tenderizing Meat.’’
                                              ACTION:   Notice of intent.                    Administration, ATTN: Rose Mason,
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The
Department of Energy has determined in        SUMMARY:   The U.S. Department of              HR–531.21, 1000 Independence Avenue
accordance with 10 CFR 600.14(e)(1)           Energy announces that pursuant to 10           SW., Washington, DC 20585.
that the unsolicited application for          CFR 600.6(a)(2) it is making a financial          The anticipated term of the proposed
financial assistance submitted by             assistance award under Grant Number            grant is 24 months from the date of
Hydrodyne, Inc. is meritorious based on       DE–FG01–95EE15645 to Northeastern              award.
the general evaluation required by 10         University. The proposed grant will            Lynn Warner,
CFR 600.14(d) and the proposed project        provide funding in the estimated               Contracting Officer, Office of Placement and
represents a unique idea that would not       amount of $99,928 by the Department of         Administration.
be eligible for financial assistance under    Energy for the purpose of saving energy        [FR Doc. 95–17356 Filed 7–13–95; 8:45 am]
a recent, current or planned solicitation.    through development of the inventor’s          BILLING CODE 6450–01–P
The new technology is expected to             ‘‘Hydro-Pneumatic Apparatus for
eliminate the long process times, costs,      Harnessing Ultra Low-Head
and energy associated with the aging          Hydropower.’’                                  Financial Assistance Award: Oxley
process that the meat processing              SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The
                                                                                             Research, Inc.
industry uses to tenderize meat. This         Department of Energy has determined in         AGENCY:   Department of Energy.
technology is also expected to save           accordance with 10 CFR 600.14(e)(1)            ACTION:   Notice of intent.
energy by reducing feedlot fattening of       that the unsolicited application for
cattle and reducing cooking time for          financial assistance submitted by              SUMMARY:   The U.S. Department of
certain cuts of beef. Mr. John B. Long,       Northeastern University is meritorious         Energy announces that pursuant to 10
the inventor and principal investigator,      based on the general evaluation required       CFR 600.6(a)(2) it is making a financial
has been active in mechanical                 by 10 CFR 600.14(d) and the proposed           assistance award under Grant Number
engineering, nuclear and radioactive          project represents a unique idea that          DE–FG01–95CE15650 to Oxley
chemistry, and metallurgy throughout          would not be eligible for financial            Research, Inc. The proposed grant will
his career. Allied Engineering and            assistance under a recent, current or          provide funding in the estimated
Production, Inc., will help design and        planned solicitation. The new                  amount of $99,996 by the Department of
fabricate the prototype equipment. The        technology is expected to enable the           Energy for the purpose of saving energy
U.S. Agricultural Research Service            multitude of low-head hydro sites              and reducing chemical wastes through
(ARS) will provide a site for the             throughout the United States to produce        development of the inventor’s
equipment’s installation, testing,            economically feasible renewable energy.        ‘‘Electrolytic Regeneration of Acid
explosive charge optimization,                The inventor and principal investigator,       Cupric Chloride Printed Circuit Board
demonstration, and analyze meat tissues       Dr. Alexander Gorlov, is the Director of       Etchant.’’
for tenderness. The proposed project is       the Hydro-Pneumatic Power Laboratory           SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The
not eligible for financial assistance         at Northeastern University. His                Department of Energy has determined in
under a recent, current or planned            professional experience includes design        accordance with 10 CFR 600.14(e)(1)
solicitation because the funding              engineering and construction positions         that the unsolicited application for
program, the Energy-Related Invention         related to large-scale projects in the         financial assistance submitted by Oxley
Program (ERIP), has been structured           former Soviet Union with hydro power           Research, Inc., is meritorious based on
since its beginning in 1975 to operate        plants, dams; railroad and highway             the general evaluation required by 10
without competitive solicitations             bridges; tunnels; and subway systems.          CFR 600.14(d) and the proposed project
because the authorizing legislation           He also holds 10 U.S. patents in the           represents a unique idea that would not
directs ERIP to provide support for           areas of power generation and                  be eligible for financial assistance under
worthy ideas submitted by the public.         mechanical systems, including two              a recent, current or planned solicitation.
36270                    Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 135 / Friday, July 14, 1995 / Notices

The new technology is expected to              $96,976 by the Department of Energy for        Advisory Committee meeting:
eliminate the costs and energy                 the purpose of saving energy through           Environmental Management Site
associated with transporting and               development of the inventor’s ‘‘Full-          Specific Advisory Board (EM SSAB),
disposal of wastes from circuit board          Strength Flush-Joint Pipe Connection.’’        Idaho National Engineering Laboratory.
etching processes, as well as recover          SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The                 DATES: Tuesday, August 1, 1995 from
market-grade copper. James Oxley               Department of Energy has determined in         8:00 a.m. Mountain Standard Time
obtained his B.S. and Ph.D. in Physical        accordance with 10 CFR 600.14(e)(1)            (MST) until 6:00 pm PST and
Chemistry from Imperial College,               that the unsolicited application for           Wednesday, August 2, 1995 from 8:00
London University in 1961. Throughout          financial assistance submitted by Mr.          a.m. MST until 5:00 p.m. MST. There
his industrial career he has been active       John D. Watts is meritorious based on          will be a public comment availability
in applied electrochemistry, with              the general evaluation required by 10          session Tuesday, August 1, 1995 from
particular experience in the areas of          CFR 600.14(d) and the proposed project         5:00 to 6:00 p.m. MST.
advanced batteries, fuel cells,                represents a unique idea that would not        ADDRESSES: Shilo Inn, 780 Lindsay
electrochemical capacitors, and                be eligible for financial assistance under     Blvd., Idaho Falls, ID 83402, (208) 523–
electrolytic processing. Oxley Research,       a recent, current or planned solicitation.     1818.
Inc., will provide further process and         The new technology reduces the casing          FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
materials validation and optimization to       weight 27 percent and is expected              Idaho National Engineering Laboratory
support the design and construction of         reduce the volume of dirt and mud from         Information 1–800–708–2680 or Marsha
an engineering prototype by using a pre-       drilling operations by 52 percent. The         Hardy, Jason Associates Corporation
prototype electrolytic regenerator to          inventor and principal investigator,           Staff Support 1–208–522–1662.
define the system operating conditions         John Watts, has patented about 50
to develop initial components designs          technologies and has created joining           SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
and system layout for construction of an       configurations for high pressure               Purpose of the Committee
industrial-scale test regenerator. The         applications, oil field drilling, and
proposed project is not eligible for           cryogenic lines from space vehicles and          The Board will be developing a
financial assistance under a recent,           nuclear reactors.                              recommendation on the EM Integration
current or planned solicitation because           The proposed project is not eligible        Strategy for the Idaho National
the funding program, the Energy Related        for financial assistance under a recent,       Engineering Laboratory and on the CFA
Invention Program (ERIP), has been             current or planned solicitation because        Landfill and SL–1/BORAX Burial sites.
structured since its beginning in 1975 to      the funding program, the Energy Related        They will also be initiating their study
operate without competitive                    Invention Program (ERIP), has been             of the Comprehensive Facility and Land
solicitations because the authorizing          structured since its beginning in 1975 to      Use Plan and hearing a presentation on
legislation directs ERIP to provide            operate without competitive                    the Federal Facilities Compliance Act
support for worthy ideas submitted by          solicitations because the authorizing          (FFCA).
the public. The program has never              legislation directs ERIP to provide            Tentative Agenda
issued and has no plans to issue a             support for worthy ideas submitted by
competitive solicitation. This award           the public. The program has never              August 1, 1995
will be made 14 calendar days after            issued and has no plans to issue a             7:30 a.m. Sign-in and Registration
publication to allow for public                competitive solicitation. This award           8:00 a.m. Miscellaneous Business:
comment.                                       will be made 14 calendar days after              Old Business
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:               publication to allow for public                  • DDFO Report
Please write the U.S. Department of            comment.                                         • Chair Report
Energy, Office of Placement and                FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:               Member Reports
Administration, ATTN: Rose Mason,              Please write the U.S. Department of
                                                                                              Standing Committee Reports
HR–531.21, 1000 Independence Avenue            Energy, Office of Placement and
SW., Washington, DC 20585.                     Administration, ATTN: Rose Mason,                • Public Communications
   The anticipated term of the proposed        HR–531.21, 1000 Independence Ave.,               • Budget
grant is 15 months from the date of            S.W., Washington, D.C. 20585.                    • Proposed Member Selection
award.                                            The anticipated term of the proposed        10:00 am Break
                                                                                              10:45 am FFCA Presentation
Lynn Warner,                                   grant is 24 months from the date of
                                                                                              12:00 noon Lunch
Contracting Officer, Office of Placement and   award.                                         1:00 pm EM Integration Strategy—INEL
Administration.                                Lynn Warner,                                   3:00 pm Break
[FR Doc. 95–17355 Filed 7–13–95; 8:45 am]      Contracting Officer, Office of Placement and   3:15 pm EM Integration Strategy—INEL
BILLING CODE 6450–01–P                         Administration.                                5:00 p.m. Public Comment Availability
                                               [FR Doc. 95–17358 Filed 7–13–95; 8:45 am]      6:00 p.m. Adjourn
                                               BILLING CODE 6450–01–P
                                                                                              Wednesday, August 2, 1995
Financial Assistance Award: John D.
Watts                                                                                         7:30 am Sign-In and Registration
                                               Environmental Management Site                  8:00 am Miscellaneous Business
AGENCY: Department of Energy.                                                                 8:30 am EM Integration Strategy
                                               Specific Advisory Board, Idaho
ACTION: Notice of intent.                      National Engineering Laboratory                10:00 am Break
                                                                                              10:15 am Comprehensive Facility and
SUMMARY: The U.S. Department of                AGENCY:   Department of Energy.                    Land Use Plan
Energy announces that pursuant to 10           ACTION:   Notice of open meeting.              12:00 noon Lunch
CFR 600.6(a)(2) it is making a financial                                                      1:00 pm Comprehensive Facility and
assistance award under Grant Number            SUMMARY:   Pursuant to the provisions of           Land Use Plan
DE–FG01–95CE15608 to Mr. John D.               the Federal Advisory Committee Act             2:30 pm Environmental Restoration:
Watts. The proposed grant will provide         (Public Law 92–463, 86 Stat. 770) notice           CFA Landfill and SL1/BORAX
funding in the estimated amount of             is hereby given of the following                   Burial Sites
                         Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 135 / Friday, July 14, 1995 / Notices                                36271

3:30 pm Break                                  Advisory Committee meeting:                Minutes
3:45 pm Transportation/Haz Mat                 Environmental Management Site                 The minutes of this meeting will be
    Outreach Program Development               Specific Advisory Board (EM SSAB),         available for public review and copying
4:30 pm Meeting Evaluation                     Nevada Test Site.                          at the Freedom of Information Public
5:00 p.m. Adjourn.                             DATES: Wednesday, August 2, 1995: 5:30     Reading Room, 1E–190, Forrestal
  A final agenda will be available at the      p.m.–9:30 p.m.                             Building, 1000 Independence Avenue
meeting.                                       ADDRESSES: Community College of            SW., Washington, DC 20585 between
Public Comment Availability                    Southern Nevada, Cheyenne Campus,          9:00 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday-Friday,
  The two-day meeting is open to the           Highdesert Conference and Training         except Federal holidays.
public, with a Public Comment                  Center, Room 1422, Las Vegas, NV.            Issued at Washington, DC on July 11, 1995.
Availability session scheduled for             FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:           Rachel M. Samuel,
Tuesday, August 1, 1995 from 5:00 p.m.         Kevin Rohrer, U.S. DOE, Nevada             Acting Deputy Advisory Committee
to 6:00 p.m. MST. The Board will be            Operations Office, AMEM, P.O. Box          Management Officer.
available during this time period to hear      98518, Las Vegas, NV 89193–8518, ph.       [FR Doc. 95–17362 Filed 7–13–95; 8:45 am]
verbal public comments or to review            702–295–0197 fax 702–295–1810.             BILLING CODE 6450–01–P
any written public comments. If there          SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
are no members of the public wishing to
comment or no written comments to              Purpose of the Committee                   Environmental Management Site
review, the board will continue with it’s         The EM SSAB provides input and          Specific Advisory Board, Pantex Plant
current discussion. Written statements         recommendations to the Department of
                                                                                          AGENCY:   Department of Energy.
may be filed with the Committee either         Energy on Environmental Management
                                               strategic decisions that impact future     ACTION:   Notice of open meeting.
before or after the meeting. Individuals
who wish to make oral statements               use, risk management, economic             SUMMARY:   Pursuant to the provisions of
pertaining to agenda items should              development, and budget prioritization     the Federal Advisory Committee Act
contact the Idaho National Engineering         activities.                                (Public Law 92–463, 86 Stat. 770) notice
Laboratory Information line or Marsha          Tentative Agenda                           is hereby given of the following
Hardy, Jason Associates, at the                                                           Advisory Committee meeting:
addresses or telephone numbers listed          Wednesday, August 2, 1995                  Environmental Management Site
above. Requests must be received 5 days        5:30 p.m. Call to Order                    Specific Advisory Board (EM SSAB),
prior to the meeting and reasonable              Review Agenda                            Pantex Plant.
provision will be made to include the            Minutes Acceptance                       DATE AND TIME: Tuesday, July 25, 1995:
presentation in the agenda. The                  Financial Report                         1:30 pm—5:30 pm.
Designated Federal Official is                   Correspondence                           ADDRESSES: Amarillo Association of
empowered to conduct the meeting in a            Reports from Committees, Delegates       Realtors 5601 Enterprise Circle
fashion that will facilitate the orderly            and Representatives                   Amarillo, Texas.
conduct of business. Each individual             Unfinished Business
                                                 New Business                             FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tom
wishing to make public comment will                                                       Williams, Program Manager,
be provided a maximum of 5 minutes to            Evaluation of Board and
                                                    Environmental Restoration and         Department of Energy, Amarillo Area
present their comments.                                                                   Office, P.O. Box 30030, Amarillo, TX
                                                    Waste Management Programs
Minutes                                          Announcements                            79120 (806)477–3121.
   The minutes of this meeting will be         10:00 p.m. Adjournment.                    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
available for public review and copying          If needed, time will be allotted after
                                                                                          Purpose of the Committee
at the Freedom of Information Public           public comments for old business, new
Reading Room, 1E–190, Forrestal                business, items added to the agenda,         The Pantex Plant Citizens’ Advisory
Building, 1000 Independence Avenue,            and administrative details. A final        Board provides input to the Department
SW, Washington, DC 20585 between               agenda will be available at the meeting    of Energy on Environmental
9:00 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday–Friday,           Wednesday, August 2, 1995.                 Management strategic decisions that
except Federal holidays.                                                                  impact future use, risk management,
                                               Public Participation                       economic development, and budget
  Issued at Washington, DC on July 11, 1995.                                              prioritization activities.
                                                  The meeting is open to the public.
Rachel M. Samuel,                              Written statements may be filed with
Acting Deputy Advisory Committee                                                          Tentative Agenda
                                               the Committee either before or after the
Management Officer.                            meeting. Individuals who wish to make      1:30 pm Welcome—Agenda Review—
[FR Doc. 95–17363 Filed 7–13–95; 8:45 am]      oral statements pertaining to agenda           Introductions
BILLING CODE 6450–01–P                         items should contact Kevin Rohrer’s        1:40 pm Co-Chairs’ Comments
                                               office at the address or telephone           Report on Task Force Formation
                                                                                          2:00 pm Task Force Reports—
                                               number listed above. Requests must be
Environmental Management Site                                                                 Discussion
                                               received 5 days prior to the meeting and     Public Participation/Public
Specific Advisory Board, Nevada Test           reasonable provision will be made to
Site                                                                                          Information
                                               include the presentation in the agenda.      Environmental Restoration
AGENCY:   Department of Energy.                The Designated Federal Official is           Sitewide Environmental Impact
ACTION:   Notice of open meeting.              empowered to conduct the meeting in a          Statements
                                               fashion that will facilitate the orderly     Future of the Nuclear Complex
SUMMARY: Pursuant to the provisions of         conduct of business. Each individual         Waste Management
the Federal Advisory Committee Act             wishing to make public comment will        3:00 pm Waste Management and Air
(Public Law 92–463, 86 Stat. 770) notice       be provided a maximum of 5 minutes to          Emissions Control—Texas Dept. of
is hereby given of the following               present their comments.                        Health, Bureau of Radiation Control
36272                  Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 135 / Friday, July 14, 1995 / Notices

4:00 pm Updates                              Issued at Washington, DC on July 11, 1995.   Affairs, Office of Management and
  Occurrence Reports—DOE                   Rachel M. Samuel,                              Budget, 726 Jackson Place N.W.,
                                           Acting Deputy Advisory Committee               Washington, D.C. 20503. (Comments
  Agreement in Principle—Roger             Management Officer.                            should also be addressed to the Office
    Mulder, Office of the Governor                                                        of Statistical Standards at the address
                                           [FR Doc. 95–17361 Filed 7–13–95; 8:45 am]
4:30 pm Subcommittee Reports               BILLING CODE 6450–01–P                         below.)
  • Budget and Finance                                                                    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
  • Policy and Personnel                                                                  Requests for additional information or
                                           Energy Information Administration              copies of the forms and instructions
  • Program and Training                                                                  should be directed to Norma White,
  • Community Outreach                     Agency Information Collections Under           Office of Statistical Standards, (EI–73),
                                           Review by the Office of Management             Forrestal Building, U.S. Department of
5:30 pm Adjourn.                           and Budget                                     Energy, Washington, D.C. 20585. Ms.
  Public comment will be taken                                                            White may be telephoned at (202) 254–
                                           AGENCY: Energy Information
periodically throughout the meeting.                                                      5327.
                                           Administration, Department of Energy.
Public Participation                       ACTION: Notice of requests submitted for       SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The first
                                           review by the Office of Management and         energy information collection submitted
  The meeting is open to the public.       Budget.                                        to OMB for review was:
Written statements may be filed with
                                                                                          1. Federal Energy Regulatory
the Committee either before or after the   SUMMARY:    The Energy Information
                                                                                             Commission
meeting. Written comments will be          Administration (EIA) has submitted the         2. FERC–521
accepted at the address above for 15       energy information collections listed at       3. 1902–0087
days after the date of the meeting.        the end of this notice to the Office of        4. Payments for Benefits from
Individuals who wish to make oral          Management and Budget (OMB) for                   Headwater Improvements
statements pertaining to agenda items      review under provisions of the                 5. Extension
should contact Tom Williams’ office at     Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. The           6. Required to obtain or retain benefits
the address or telephone number listed     listing does not include collections of        7. Individuals or households; business
above. Requests must be received 5 days    information contained in new or revised           or other for-profit; not-for-profit
prior to the meeting and reasonable        regulations which are to be submitted             institutions; farms, Federal
provision will be made to include the      under section 3507 (d)(1)(A) of the               Government; and State, Local or
presentation in the agenda. The            Paperwork Reduction Act, nor                      Tribal Government
Designated Federal Official is             management and procurement                     8. 25 respondents
empowered to conduct the meeting in a      assistance requirements collected by the       9. 1 response
fashion that will facilitate the orderly   Department of Energy (DOE).                    10. 33.6 hours per response
conduct of business. Each individual          Each entry contains the following           11. 840 hours
wishing to make public comment will        information: (1) The sponsor of the            12. This survey carries out the
be provided a maximum of 5 minutes to      collection (the DOE component or                  legislative requirements of the Federal
present their comments. This notice is     Federal Energy Regulatory Commission              Power Act, Section 10(f) which
being published less than 15 days before   (FERC)); (2) Collection number(s); (3)            directs the Commission to determine
the date of the meeting, due to            Current OMB docket number (if                     the benefits that have been received
programmatic issues that had to be         applicable); (4) Collection title; (5) Type       by downstream parties from the
resolved prior to publication.             of request, e.g., new, revision, extension,       operation or storage reservoir(s) or
                                           or reinstatement; (6) Response                    other headwater improvement(s), and
Minutes
                                           obligation, i.e., mandatory, voluntary, or        to assess the downstream
   The minutes of this meeting will be     required to obtain or retain benefit; (7)         beneficiaries for a part of the annual
available for public review and copying    Affected public; (8) An estimate of the           charges for interest, maintenance and
at the Pantex Public Reading Rooms         number of respondents per report                  depreciation.
located at the Amarillo College Lynn       period; (9) An estimate of the number of          The second energy information
Library and Learning Center, 2201          responses per respondent annually; (10)        collection submitted to OMB for review
South Washington, Amarillo, TX phone       An estimate of the average hours per           was:
(806)371–5400. Hours of operation are      response; (11) The estimated total
                                           annual respondent burden; and (12) A           1. Fossil Energy
from 7:45 am to 10:00 pm, Monday                                                          2. FE–329R
through Thursday; 7:45 am to 5:00 pm       brief abstract describing the proposed
                                                                                          3. 1901–0297
on Friday; 8:30 am to 12:00 noon on        collection and the respondents.
                                                                                          4. Powerplant and Industrial Fuel Use
Saturday; and 2:00 pm to 6:00 pm on        DATES: Comments must be filed on or               Act of 1978; Final Rule
Sunday, except for Federal holidays.       before August 14, 1995. If you anticipate      5. Extension
Additionally, there is a Public Reading    that you will be submitting comments           6. Mandatory
Room located at the Carson County          but find it difficult to do so within the      7. Business or other for profit
Public Library, 401 Main Street,           time allowed by this notice, you should        8. 30 respondents
Panhandle, TX phone (806)537–3742.         advise the OMB DOE Desk Officer listed         9. 30 responses
Hours of operation are from 9:00 am to     below of your intention to do so as soon       10. 20 hours per response
7:00 pm on Monday; 9:00 am to 5:00         as possible. The Desk Officer may be           11. 600 hours
pm, Tuesday through Friday; and closed     telephoned at (202) 395–3084. (Also,           12. FE–329R Final Rule (1) incorporates
Saturday and Sunday as well as Federal     please notify the EIA contact listed              Pub. L. 100–42 FUA amendments into
Holidays. Minutes will also be available   below.)                                           regulations, (2) revises and updates
by writing or calling Tom Williams at      ADDRESSES: Address comments to the                cost test fuel price and inflation
the address or telephone number listed     Department of Energy Desk Officer,                indices, (3) clarifies how to claculate
above.                                     Office of Information and Regulatory              fuel price when using natural gas, and
                         Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 135 / Friday, July 14, 1995 / Notices                                  36273

  (4) revises and updates oil/gas savings       Federal Energy Regulatory                   5. Cleveland Public Power v. Centerior
  estimates for cogenerators.                   Commission                                  Energy Corporation
  The third energy information                                                              [Docket No. TX95–6–000]
collection submitted to OMB for review          [Docket No. ER94–1381–001, et al.]             Take notice that on June 30, 1995,
was:                                                                                        Cleveland Public Power (CPP) tendered
                                                Southwest Regional Transmission             for filing an application for an order
1. Nonproliferation and National                Association, et al.; Electric Rate and
   Security                                                                                 directing Centerior Energy Corporation
                                                Corporate Regulation Filings                (Centerior) to provide transmission
2. NN–417R                                                                                  services to CPP. CPP requests that the
                                                July 7, 1995.
3. 1901–0288                                                                                Commission order Centerior to file a
                                                  Take notice that the following filings
4. Power System Emergency Reporting                                                         tariff or service agreement setting forth
                                                have been made with the Commission:
   Procedures                                                                               the rates, terms and conditions for
5. Extension                                    1. Southwest Regional Transmission          point-to-point transmission service,
6. Mandatory                                    Association                                 which CPP referred to as Transaction
                                                                                            Delivery Service in its good faith request
7. Business or other for profit                 [Docket No. ER94–1381–001]
                                                                                            to Centerior.
8. 40 respondents                                  Take notice that on June 26, 1995, the      Comment date: August 4, 1995, in
9. 1 response                                   Southwest Regional Transmission             accordance with Standard Paragraph E
10. 3.25 hours per response                     Association (SWRTA) tendered for filing     at the end of this notice.
                                                on behalf of its members, and pursuant
11. 130 hours                                   to Section 205 of the Federal Power Act     Standard Paragraph
12. NN–417R will provide the DOE with           and Part 35 of the Commission’s               E. Any person desiring to be heard or
   information regarding the location of        Regulations, the Bylaws of SWRTA.           to protest said filing should file a
   where emergency electric power                  Comment date: July 21, 1995, in          motion to intervene or protest with the
   supply situations exist on an                accordance with Standard Paragraph E        Federal Energy Regulatory Commission,
   electrical power system or on a              at the end of this notice.                  825 North Capitol Street, N.E.,
   regional electric system. The data also                                                  Washington, D.C. 20426, in accordance
   provide DOE with a basis for                 2. American Electric Power Service          with Rules 211 and 214 of the
   determining the appropriate Federal          Corporation                                 Commission’s Rules of Practice and
   action to relieve an electrical energy       [Docket No. ER95–713–000]                   Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 18 CFR
   supply emergency. Respondents are                                                        385.214). All such motions or protests
                                                   Take notice that on June 15, 1995, the
   electric utilities.                                                                      should be filed on or before the
                                                American Electric Power Service
  The fourth energy information                 Corporation (AEPSC) amended its filing      comment date. Protests will be
collection submitted to OMB for review          in the above-referenced docket to           considered by the Commission in
was:                                            modify the method by which AEPSC            determining the appropriate action to be
                                                will determine the cost of emission         taken, but will not serve to make
1. Federal Energy Regulatory                                                                protestants parties to the proceeding.
   Commission                                   allowances.
                                                                                            Any person wishing to become a party
2. FERC–550                                        A copy of the filing was served upon
                                                                                            must file a motion to intervene. Copies
                                                the parties affected by the amendment
3. 1902–0089                                                                                of this filing are on file with the
                                                and the affected state regulatory
4. Oil Pipeline Rates: Tariff Filings                                                       Commission and are available for public
                                                commissions.
5. Extension                                                                                inspection.
                                                   Comment date: July 21, 1995, in
                                                                                            Lois D. Cashell,
6. Mandatory                                    accordance with Standard Paragraph E
                                                                                            Secretary.
7. Business or other for-profit                 at the end of this notice.
                                                                                            [FR Doc. 95–17247 Filed 7–13–95; 8:45 am]
8. 150 respondents                              3. Wisconsin Power & Light Company          BILLING CODE 6717–01–P
9. 3.58 responses                               [Docket No. ER95–736–000]
10. 10.91 hours per response                       Take notice that on June 28, 1995,       [Docket No. CP95–594–000, et al.]
11. 5,860 hours                                 Wisconsin Power and Light Company
12. The data is collected to ensure that        submitted an amended filing in the          Northwest Pipeline Corporation, et al.;
   the Commission has timely rate/tariff        above-referenced docket, as ordered by      Natural Gas Certificate Filings
   information available to determine           the Commission in Ordering Paragraph        July 7, 1995.
   whether or not proposed oil pipeline         (A) on Order dated June 2, 1995.              Take notice that the following filings
   rates are just and reasonable and to            Comment date: July 21, 1995, in          have been made with the Commission:
   help ‘‘streamline’’ the ratemaking           accordance with Standard Paragraph E
   process both for industry and the            at the end of this notice.                  1. Northwest Pipeline Corporation
   Commission staff.                                                                        [Docket No. CP95–594–000]
                                                4. Entergy Power, Inc.
  Statutory Authority: Section 3506 (c)(2)(A)                                                 Take notice that on June 30, 1995,
of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995          [Docket No. ER95–1284–000]                  Northwest Pipeline Corporation
(Pub. L. No. 104–13).                              Take notice that on June 28, 1995,       (Northwest), 295 Chipeta Way, Salt Lake
  Issued in Washington, D.C., July 7, 1995.     Entergy Power, Inc. tendered for filing a   City, Utah 84108, filed in Docket No.
John Gross,                                     Purchase and Sale Agreement between         CP95–594–000 a request pursuant to
Acting Director, Office of Statistical          InterCoast Power Marketing Company          Sections 157.205, 157.211 and 157.216
Standards, Energy Information                   and Entergy Power, Inc.                     of the Commission’s Regulations under
Administration.                                    Comment date: July 21, 1995, in          the Natural Gas Act (18 CFR 157.205,
[FR Doc. 95–17364 Filed 7–13–95; 8:45 am]       accordance with Standard Paragraph E        157.211 and 157.216) for authorization
BILLING CODE 6450–01–P                          at the end of this notice.                  to replace obsolete facilities at the
36274                        Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 135 / Friday, July 14, 1995 / Notices

Lynden Meter Station in Whatcom                Commission and open for public               Company under firm transportation
County, Washington, under Northwest’s          inspection.                                  agreements. These agreements
blanket certificate issued in Docket No.          Northwest states that upgraded            constitute Texas Eastern Rate Schedules
CP82–433–000 pursuant to Section 7 of          facilities are needed to better              X–88, X–89, X–90, and X–91.
the Natural Gas Act, all as more fully set     accommodate its existing firm                   Comment date: July 28, 1995, in
forth in the request that is on file with      maximum daily delivery obligations at        accordance with Standard Paragraph F
the Commission and open to public              this delivery point to The Washington        at the end of this notice.
inspection.                                    Water Power Company (WWP).
                                               Northwest proposes to upgrade the            Standard Paragraphs
   Northwest proposes to abandon a 3-
                                               Goldendale Meter Station by replacing           F. Any person desiring to be heard or
inch meter and a 2-inch meter and
                                               the existing obsolete 2-inch positive        to make any protest with reference to
appurtenances and to construct and
                                               displacement meter with two 2-inch           said application should on or before the
operate a single 3-inch turbine meter to
                                               turbine meters. The proposed facility        comment date, file with the Federal
replace those being abandoned.
                                               upgrade will increase the maximum            Energy Regulatory Commission,
Northwest states that the replacement is
                                               design delivery capacity of this station     Washington, D.C. 20426, a motion to
necessary because the meters, which
                                               from 1,033 Dth per day to                    intervene or a protest in accordance
were installed in 1960, are obsolete and
                                               approximately 1,336 Dth per day at a         with the requirements of the
unable to accommodate Northwest’s              delivery pressure of 150 psig. Northwest     Commission’s Rules of Practice and
existing delivery obligations to Cascade       further states that the total cost of the    Procedure (18 CFR 385.214 or 385.211)
Natural Gas Corporation (Cascade) at           project is estimated to be approximately     and the Regulations under the Natural
this location. It is asserted that             $57,780. Since this expenditure is           Gas Act (18 CFR 157.10). All protests
Northwest has firm obligations to              necessary to replace obsolete equipment      filed with the Commission will be
deliver up to 2,293 Dt equivalent of gas       and to allow Northwest to accommodate        considered by it in determining the
per day to Cascade at this location. It is     existing delivery obligations at the         appropriate action to be taken but will
explained that the replacement of              Goldendale Meter Station, Northwest          not serve to make the protestants parties
facilities would permit an increase in         will not require any cost reimbursement      to the proceeding. Any person wishing
the maximum daily design capacity              from WWP.                                    to become a party to a proceeding or to
from 2,167 Dt equivalent to 3,000 Dt              Northwest states that the total           participate as a party in any hearing
equivalent. Northwest states that the          volumes to be delivered to the customer      therein must file a motion to intervene
deliveries made at the modified delivery       after the request do not exceed the total    in accordance with the Commission’s
point would be within Cascade’s (or            volumes authorized prior to the request.     Rules.
other shippers’) certificated entitlement      Northwest holds a blanket                       Take further notice that, pursuant to
from Northwest. It is further asserted         transportation certificate pursuant to       the authority contained in and subject to
that there would be no loss of service         Part 284 of the Commission’s                 the jurisdiction conferred upon the
resulting from the proposed                    Regulations issued in Docket No. CP86–       Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
abandonment and that the proposed              578–000.3 Northwest states that              by Sections 7 and 15 of the Natural Gas
deliveries would have no impact on             construction of the proposed delivery        Act and the Commission’s Rules of
Northwest’s system peak day or annual          point is not prohibited by its existing      Practice and Procedure, a hearing will
deliveries. Northwest states that its tariff   tariff and that it has sufficient capacity   be held without further notice before the
does not prohibit the proposed                 to deliver the requested gas volumes         Commission or its designee on this
replacement of facilities. The cost of the     without detriment or disadvantage to         application if no motion to intervene is
abandonment and construction is                it’s other customers.                        filed within the time required herein, if
estimated at $40,942.                             Comment date: August 21, 1995, in
                                                                                            the Commission on its own review of
   Comment date: August 21, 1995, in           accordance with Standard Paragraph G
                                                                                            the matter finds that a grant of the
accordance with Standard Paragraph G           at the end of this notice.
                                                                                            certificate and/or permission and
at the end of this notice.                     3. Texas Eastern Transmission                approval for the proposed abandonment
2. Northwest Pipeline Corporation              Corporation                                  are required by the public convenience
                                               [Docket No. CP95–598–000]                    and necessity. If a motion for leave to
[Docket No. CP95–596–000]                                                                   intervene is timely filed, or if the
                                                  Take notice that on July 3, 1995,
   Take notice that on July 3, 1995,                                                        Commission on its own motion believes
                                               Texas Eastern Transmission Corporation
Northwest Pipeline Corporation                                                              that a formal hearing is required, further
                                               (Texas Eastern), 5400 Westheimer Court,
(Northwest), P.O. Box 58900, Salt Lake                                                      notice of such hearing will be duly
                                               P.O. Box 1642, Houston, Texas 77251–
City, Utah 84158–0900, filed in Docket                                                      given.
                                               1642, filed in Docket No. CP95–598–000
No. CP95–596–000 a request pursuant to         an application pursuant to Section 7(b)         Under the procedure herein provided
Sections 157.205, 157.216 and 157.211          of the Natural Gas Act for permission        for, unless otherwise advised, it will be
of the Commission’s Regulations under          and approval to abandon firm                 unnecessary for applicant to appear or
the Natural Gas Act for authorization to       transportation service that Texas Eastern    be represented at the hearing.
abandon certain obsolete facilities at the     renders for Amoco Production Company            G. Any person or the Commission’s
Goldendale Meter Station in Klickitat          which was authorized in Docket No.           staff may, within 45 days after issuance
County, Washington 1 and to construct          CP78–189–000, all as more fully set          of the instant notice by the Commission,
and operate replacement facilities at this     forth in the application on file with the    file pursuant to Rule 214 of the
station, under its blanket certificate         Commission and open to public                Commission’s Procedural Rules (18 CFR
issued in Docket No. CP82–433–000,2            inspection.                                  385.214) a motion to intervene or notice
all as more fully set forth in the request        Texas Eastern proposes to abandon         of intervention and pursuant to Section
for authorization on file with the             firm transportation service Texas            157.205 of the Regulations under the
                                               Eastern renders for Amoco Production         Natural Gas Act (18 CFR 157.205) a
 1 See,   Docket No. G–17769 (21 FPC 626).                                                  protest to the request. If no protest is
 2 See,   20 FERC ¶ 62,412 (1982).              3 See,   42 FERC ¶ 61,019 (1988).           filed within the time allowed therefor,
                         Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 135 / Friday, July 14, 1995 / Notices                              36275

the proposed activity shall be deemed to     Original Volume 1 (‘‘Power Sales            [Docket No. GT95–40–001]
be authorized effective the day after the    Tariff’’) accepted by the Commission in
time allowed for filing a protest. If a      Docket No. ER94–1662. CHG&E also has        Koch Gateway Pipeline Company;
protest is filed and not withdrawn           requested waiver of the Commission’s        Notice of Filing
within 30 days after the time allowed        notice requirements.                        July 10, 1995.
for filing a protest, the instant request      A copy of this filing has been served
shall be treated as an application for       on the Public Service Commission of the        Take notice that on July 6, 1995, Koch
authorization pursuant to Section 7 of       State of New York.                          Gateway Pipeline Company (Koch
the Natural Gas Act.                           Any person desiring to be heard or to     Gateway) tendered for filing as part of
Lois D. Cashell,                             protest said filing should file a motion    its FERC Gas Tariff, Fifth Revised
Secretary.                                   to intervene or protest with the Federal    Volume No. 1, the following tariff sheets
[FR Doc. 95–17248 Filed 7–13–95; 8:45 am]    Energy Regulatory Commission, 825           to be effective June 24, 1995.
BILLING CODE 6717–01–P                       North Capitol Street, N.E., Washington,     Substitute Second Sheet Revised No.
                                             D.C. 20426, in accordance with Rules           5302
                                             211 and 214 of the Commission’s Rules         Koch Gateway states that although the
[Docket No. RP89–161–033]                    of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR           tariff sheets filed in this proceeding
                                             385.211 and 18 CFR 385.214). All such       were accepted to be effective June 24,
ANR Pipeline Co.; Notice of Refund
                                             motions or protests should be filed on      1995 in the June 14, 1995, Office of
Report
                                             or before July 24, 1995. Protests will be   Pipeline Regulation Letter Order, Koch
July 10, 1995.                               considered by the Commission in             Gateway is submitting the above-
   Take notice that on April 28, 1995,       determining the appropriate action to be    mentioned tariff sheets to revise its
ANR Pipeline Company (ANR) tendered          taken, but will not serve to make           Index of Purchasers. Koch Gateway
for filing with the Federal Energy           protestants parties to the proceeding.      states that one of its Customers is listed
Regulatory Commission (Commission) a         Any person wishing to become a party        three times in the Index of Purchasers,
report summarizing refunds disbursed         must file a motion to intervene. Copies     but should only have been listed twice.
on March 29, 1995. These refunds             of this filing are on file with the         Koch Gateway is revising Tariff Sheet
represent an overcollection on its Gas       Commission and are available for public     No. 5302 to make the appropriate
Inventory Charge of $45,131,941, plus        inspection.                                 deletion.
$4,433,988 in interest. The Commission       Lois D. Cashell,
previously approved the principle            Secretary.
                                                                                           Koch Gateway states that the tariff
amount and its allocation among                                                          sheet is being mailed to all parties on
                                             [FR Doc. 95–17259 Filed 7–13–95; 8:45 am]
customers. ANR Pipeline Company, 70                                                      the official service list in this
                                             BILLING CODE 6717–01–M
FERC ¶ 61,236 (1995).                                                                    proceeding.
   Any person desiring to protest said                                                      Any person desiring to protest said
filing should file a protest with the        [Docket No. ER95–625–001]                   filing should file a protest with the
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission,                                                    Federal Energy Regulatory Commission,
825 North Capitol Street, N.E.,              Cincinnati Gas and Electric Company;        825 North Capitol Street, NE.,
Washington, D.C. 20426, in accordance        Notice of Filing                            Washington, DC 20426, in accordance
with Rule 211 of the Commission’s                                                        with Section 385.211 of the
Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR      July 10, 1995.
                                                                                         Commission’s regulations. All such
385.211). All such protests should be          Take notice that on May 26, 1995,         protests should be filed on or before July
filed on or before July 17, 1995. Protests   Cincinnati Gas and Electric Company         17, 1995. Protests will be considered by
will be considered by the Commission         tendered for filing revised tariff sheets   the Commission in determining
in determining the appropriate action to     in the above-referenced docket.             appropriate action to be taken, but will
be taken, but will not serve to make           Any person desiring to be heard or to     not serve to make protestants parties to
protestants parties to the proceeding.       protest said filing should file a motion    the proceedings. Copies of this filing are
Copies of this filing are on file with the   to intervene or protest with the Federal    on file with the Commission and are
Commission and are available for public      Energy Regulatory Commission, 825           available for public inspection.
inspection.                                  North Capitol Street NE., Washington,
Lois D. Cashell,                             DC 20426, in accordance with Rules 211      Lois D. Cashell,
Secretary.                                   and 214 of the Commission’s Rules of
                                             Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211      Secretary.
[FR Doc. 95–17255 Filed 7–13–95; 8:45 am]
                                             and 18 CFR 385.214). All such motions
BILLING CODE 6717–01–M                                                                   [FR Doc. 95–17257 Filed 7–13–95; 8:45 am]
                                             or protests should be filed on or before
                                             July 18, 1995. Protests will be             BILLING CODE 6717–01–M
[Docket No. ER95–1279–000]                   considered by the Commission in
                                             determining the appropriate action to be
Central Hudson Gas and Electric              taken, but will not serve to make           [Docket No. ER95–1280–000]
Corporation; Notice of Filing                protestants parties to the proceeding.
July 10, 1995.                               Any person wishing to become a party        Niagara Mohawk Power Corp.; Notice
  Take notice that Central Hudson Gas        must file a motion to intervene. Copies     of Filing
and Electric Corporation (CHG&E), on         of this filing are on file with the
                                             Commission and are available for public     July 10, 1995.
June 28, 1995, tendered for filing a
Service Agreement between CHG&E and          inspection.                                   Take notice that Niagara Mohawk
Engelhard Power Marketing, Inc. The          Lois D. Cashell,                            Power Corporation (Niagara Mohawk)
terms and conditions of services under       Secretary.                                  on June 28, 1995, tendered for filing an
this Agreement are made pursuant to          [FR Doc. 95–17262 Filed 7–13–95; 8:45 am]   agreement between Niagara Mohawk
CHG&E’s FERC Electric Rate Schedule,         BILLING CODE 6717–01–M                      and CMEX Energy Inc. (CMEX) dated
36276                    Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 135 / Friday, July 14, 1995 / Notices

June 19, 1995 providing for certain          Copies of this filing are on file and          Any person desiring to be heard or to
transmission services to CMEX.               available for public inspection.             protest said filing should file a motion
   Copies of this filing were served upon    Lois D. Cashell,                             to intervene or protest with the Federal
CMEX and the New York State Public           Secretary.                                   Energy Regulatory Commission, 825
Service Commission.                          [FR Doc. 95–17252 Filed 7–13–95; 8:45 am]    North Capitol Street NE., Washington,
                                             BILLING CODE 6717–01–M
                                                                                          DC 20426, in accordance with Rules 211
   Any person desiring to be heard or to                                                  and 214 of the Commission’s Rules of
protest said filing should file a motion                                                  Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211
to intervene or protest with the Federal     [Docket No. ER95–1275–000]                   and 18 CFR 385.214). All such motions
Energy Regulatory Commission, 825                                                         or protests should be filed on or before
North Capitol Street NE., Washington,        Portland General Electric Company;           July 24, 1995. Protests will be
DC 20426, in accordance with Rules 211       Notice of Filing                             considered by the Commission in
and 214 of the Commission’s Rules of         July 10, 1995.                               determining the appropriate action to be
Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211         Take notice that on June 27, 1995,         taken, but will not serve to make
and 18 CFR 385.214). All such motions        Portland General Electric Company            protestants parties to the proceeding.
or protests should be filed on or before     (PGE), tendered for filing a Scheduling      Any person wishing to become a party
July 24, 1995. Protests will be              Services Agreement with Coastal              must file a motion to intervene. Copies
considered by the Commission in              Electric Services Company.                   of this filing are on file with the
determining the appropriate action to be       Any person desiring to be heard or to      Commission and are available for public
taken, but will not serve to make            protest said filing should file a motion     inspection.
protestants parties to the proceeding.       to intervene or protest with the Federal     Lois D. Cashell,
Any person wishing to become a party         Energy Regulatory Commission, 825            Secretary.
must file a motion to intervene. Copies      North Capitol Street NE., Washington,        [FR Doc. 95–17260 Filed 7–13–95; 8:45 am]
of this filing are on file with the          DC 20426, in accordance with Rules 211       BILLING CODE 6717–01–M
Commission and are available for public      and 214 of the Commission’s Rules of
inspection.                                  Practice and Procedures (18 CFR
                                             385.211 and 18 CFR 385.214). All such        [Docket No. GT95–46–000]
Lois D. Cashell,                             motions or protests should be filed on
Secretary.                                   or before July 21, 1995. Protests will be    Questar Pipeline Co.; Notice of Tariff
[FR Doc. 95–17258 Filed 7–13–95; 8:45 am]    considered by the Commission in              Filing
BILLING CODE 6717–01–M                       determining the appropriate action to be     July 10, 1995.
                                             taken, but will not serve to make               Take notice that on July 6, 1995,
                                             protestants parties to the proceeding.       Questar Pipeline Company, tendered for
[Docket No. RP95–294–001]                    Any person wishing to become a party         filing to become part of its FERC Gas
                                             must file a motion to intervene. Copies      Tariff, First Revised Volume No. 1,
Northern Border Pipeline Company;            of this filing are on file with the          Third Revised Sheet No. 8 and Second
Notice of Tariff Filing                      Commission and are available for public      Revised Sheet No. 8C, to be effective
                                             inspection.                                  July 1, 1995.
July 10, 1995.                               Lois D. Cashell,                                Questar states that this filing updates
   Take notice that on July 6, 1995,         Secretary.                                   its Index of Shippers by (1) reflecting
Northern Border Pipeline Company             [FR Doc. 95–17261 Filed 7–13–95; 8:45 am]    information regarding firm
(Northern Border) tendered for filing to     BILLING CODE 6717–01–M                       transportation service agreements that
become part of its FERC Gas Tariff, First                                                 were executed subsequent to Questar’s
Revised Volume No. 1, Substitute First                                                    February 17, 1995, filing in Docket No.
                                             [Docket No. ER95–1277–000]                   GT95–23–000 and (2) correcting certain
Revised Sheet Number 277.
                                             Puget Sound Power & Light Company;           information applicable to Questar’s
   Northern Border states that the filing                                                 storage customers.
is in compliance with the Commission’s       Notice of Filing
                                                                                             Questar states further that a copy of
order, issued June 28, 1995, in the          July 10, 1995.                               this filing has been served upon its
above-referenced docket. Northern               Take notice that on June 28, 1995,        jurisdictional customers as well as the
Border further states that the June 28       Puget Sound Power & Light Company            Utah and Wyoming public service
Order required Northern Border to            (Puget) tendered for filing as an initial    commissions.
revise its tariff language to conform with   rate schedule a Transmission Agreement          Any person desiring to be heard or to
Order 577–A.                                 and a Construction Agreement (together,      protest said filing should file a motion
   Any person desiring to protest said       the ‘‘Agreements’’) between Puget and        to intervene or protest with the Federal
filing should file a protest with the        The City of Seattle acting by and            Energy Regulatory Commission, 825
                                             through its City Light Department            North Capitol Street, N.E., Washington,
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission,
                                             (Seattle). A copy of the filing was served   D.C. 20426, in accordance with Rules
825 North Capitol Street NE.,
                                             upon Seattle.                                385.211 and 385.214 of the
Washington, DC 20426, in accordance
                                                Puget states that the Agreement           Commission’s Rules of Practice and
with Section 211 of the Commission’s         provides for the interconnection of          Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and
Rules of Practice and Procedure, 18 CFR      Seattle’s South Fork Told River              385.214). All such motions or protests
385.211. All such protests should be         hydroelectric project, FERC Project No.      should be filed on or before July 17,
filed on or before July 17, 1995. Protests   2959 (the Project) with Puget’s              1995. Protests will be considered by the
will be considered by the Commission         transmission system and for wheeling of      Commission in determining the
in determining the appropriate action to     the net electrical output of the Project     appropriate action to be taken, but will
be taken, but will not serve to make         over Puget’s transmission system to          not serve to make protestants parties to
protestants parties to the proceeding.       Seattle’s system.                            the proceeding. Copies of this filing are
                         Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 135 / Friday, July 14, 1995 / Notices                                36277

on file with the Commission and are          Commission and are available for public       on May 31, 1995, in the amount of
available for public inspection.             inspection in the public reference room.      $7,041,267.61. Transco states that these
                                             Lois D. Cashell,                              refunds, including interest and
Lois D. Cashell,
                                             Secretary.                                    principal, were made in compliance
Secretary.                                   [FR Doc. 95–17249 Filed 7–13–95; 8:45 am]     with an order issued by the Commission
                                             BILLING CODE 6717–01–M
                                                                                           on May 1, 1995. That order denied
[FR Doc. 95–17256 Filed 7–13–95; 8:45 am]
                                                                                           rehearing of the Commission’s February
BILLING CODE 6717–01–M                                                                     13, 1995, order in Docket Nos. RP92–
                                             [Docket No. RP95–380–000]                     149–001, 002, and 003. The May 1 order
                                                                                           directed Transco to refund to Columbia
                                             Tennessee Gas Pipeline Company;               Gas Transmission Corporation
[Docket No. RP95–381–000]                    Notice of Reconciliation Report               (Columbia) Order 94 costs that Transco
Tennessee Gas Pipeline Company;              July 10, 1995.                                has collected from Columbia, plus
Notice of Filing of Petition for                Take notice that on July 5, 1995,          interest from March 15, 1995.
Clarification                                Tennessee Gas Pipeline Company                   Any person desiring to protest said
                                             (Tennessee) tendered for filing a             filing should file a protest with the
July 10, 1995.                                                                             Federal Energy Regulatory Commission,
                                             Reconciliation Report in accordance
   Take notice that on July 5, 1995,         with Article I, Section 4, of the             825 North Capitol Street NE.,
Tennessee Gas Pipeline Company               ‘‘Stipulation and Agreement’’ approved        Washington, DC 20426, in accordance
(Tennessee) filed a petition for             by the Commission in Tennessee Gas            with Rule 211 of the Commission’s
clarification requesting that the            Pipeline Co., 69 FERC ¶ 61,203 (1994),        Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR
Commission clarify that Tennessee is         reh’g denied, 71 FERC ¶ 61,021 (1995).        385.211). All such protests should be
authorized to retain, among others, two         Tennessee states that the purpose of       filed on or before July 17, 1995. Protests
case-specific upstream transportation        this filing is to report adjustments to the   will be considered by the Commission
service agreements necessary to              revenues and costs recorded in                in determining the appropriate action to
continue post-restructuring                  Tennessee’s Account No. 191 during the        be taken, but will not serve to make
transportation service to its ‘‘NOREX’’      period from March 1, 1994 through May         protestants parties to the proceeding.
and Boundary Gas, Inc. (Boundary)            31, 1995. Tennessee reports that it has       Copies of this filing are on file with the
customers. The two upstream                  underrecovered its Account No. 191            Commission and are available for public
transportation agreements are Rate           balance as of May 31, 1995 by                 information.
Schedule X–48 with Consolidated Gas          $20,332,420.                                  Lois D. Cashell,
Supply Corporation for service to the           Any person desiring to be heard or to      Secretary.
Boundary customers, and Rate Schedule        protest said filing should file a motion      [FR Doc. 95–17254 Filed 7–13–95; 8:45 am]
X–81 with Consolidated Natural Gas           to intervene or protest with the Federal
                                                                                           BILLING CODE 6717–01–M
Transmission Company for service to          Energy Regulatory Commission, 825
the NOREX customers.                         North Capitol Street NE., Washington,
                                             DC 20426, in accordance with 18 CFR           [Docket No. RP95–193–003]
   Tennessee states that it is clear from
                                             385.214 and 385.211 of the
the orders issued in Docket Nos. RS92–
                                             Commission’s Rules and Regulations.           Williston Basin Interstate Pipeline
23, et al. that the Commission intended
                                             All such motions or protests should be        Company; Notice of Compliance Filing
to allow Tennessee to retain these
                                             filed on or before July 17, 1995. Protests
upstream services post-restructuring                                                       July 10, 1995.
                                             will be considered by the Commission
but, due to inadvertent error, the actual
                                             in determining the appropriate action to         Take notice that on July 6, 1995,
rate schedules were mislabeled in
                                             be taken, but will not serve to make          Williston Basin Interstate Pipeline
Tennessee’s filings, and consequently in
                                             protestants parties to the proceeding.        Company (Williston Basin), tendered for
the Commission’s orders.
                                             Any person wishing to become a party          filing to become part of its FERC Gas
   Tennessee states that copies of the       must file a motion to intervene. Copies       Tariff, Second Revised Volume No. 1,
filing have been mailed on all parties       of this filing are on file with the           revised tariff sheets.
listed on the official service list          Commission and are available in the
compiled by the Secretary in this            public reference room.                          Williston Basin states that, in
proceeding.                                                                                accordance with the Commission’s June
                                             Lois D. Cashell,                              21, 1995 Order, the revised tariff sheets
   Any person desiring to be heard or to
                                             Secretary.                                    modify the time allowed for a shipper
protest said filing should file a motion
                                             [FR Doc. 95–17250 Filed 7–13–95; 8:45 am]     to execute a Service Agreement once it
to intervene or protest with the Federal
                                                                                           has been tendered to such shipper by
Energy Regulatory Commission, 825            BILLING CODE 6717–01–M
                                                                                           Williston Basin.
North Capitol Street NE., Washington,
DC 20426, in accordance with 18 CFR                                                           Any person desiring to protest said
                                             [Docket No. RP92–149–006]
385.214 and 385.211 of the                                                                 filing should file a protest with the
Commission’s Rules and Regulations.          Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line Corp.;         Federal Energy Regulatory Commission,
All such motions or protests should be       Notice of Refund Report                       825 North Capitol Street NE.,
filed on or before July 17, 1995. Protests                                                 Washington, DC 20426, in accordance
will be considered by the Commission         July 10, 1995.                                with Rule 211 of the Commission’s
in determining the appropriate action to        Take notice that on June 14, 1995,         Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR
be taken, but will not serve to make         Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line                385.211). All such protests should be
protestants parties to the proceeding.       Corporation (Transco) tendered for            filed on or before July 17, 1995. Protests
Any person wishing to become a party         filing with the Federal Energy                will be considered by the Commission
must file a motion to intervene. Copies      Regulatory Commission (Commission) a          in determining the appropriate action to
of this filing are on file with the          report summarizing refunds disbursed          be taken, but will not serve to make
36278                    Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 135 / Friday, July 14, 1995 / Notices

protestants parties to the proceeding.       ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION                     ERP No. D-AFS-L65238–WA Rating
Copies of this filing are on file with the   AGENCY                                     EC2, Thunder Mountain Fire Recovery
Commission and are available for public                                                 and Salvage Project, Implementation,
inspection.                                  [ER–FRL–4724–9]                            Okanogan National Forest, Tonasket and
Lois D. Cashell,                                                                        Methow Valley Ranger Districts,
                                             Environmental Impact Statements and        Okanogan County, WA.
Secretary.                                   Regulations; Availability of EPA             Summary: EPA expressed
[FR Doc. 95–17253 Filed 7–13–95; 8:45 am]    Comments                                   environmental concerns regarding the
BILLING CODE 6717–01–M                         Availability of EPA comments             existing conditions in the Chewuch
                                             prepared June 05, 1995 Through June        River, Thirtymile Creek, Dog Creek,
                                             09, 1995 pursuant to the Environmental     Windy Creek and Smarty Creek within
                                             Review Process (ERP), under Section        the proposed project area and whether
[Docket No. RP95–329–001]                                                               the proposed action will meet water
                                             309 of the Clean Air Act and Section
                                             102(2)(c) of the National Environmental    quality standards.
Wyoming Interstate Company, Ltd.;                                                         ERP No. D–UAF–K11061–GU Rating
Notice of Tariff Compliance Filing           Policy Act as amended. Requests for
                                             copies of EPA comments can be directed     EO2, Andersen Air Force Base (AFB)
July 10, 1995.                               to the Office of Federal Activities at     Solid Waste Management Facility,
                                             (202) 260–5076.                            Construction, Island of Guam, GU.
  Take notice that on July 5, 1995,                                                       Summary: EPA expressed
Wyoming Interstate Company, Ltd.               An explanation of the ratings assigned
                                                                                        environmental objections because the
(WIC), tendered for filing revised tariff    to draft environmental impact
                                                                                        DEIS does not support statements
                                             statements (EISs) was published in FR
sheets, to its FERC Gas Tariffs, First                                                  regarding landfill location, unstable
                                             dated April 14, 1995 (60 FR 19047).
Revised Volume No. 1, and FERC Gas                                                      areas and monitorability of the
Tariff, Second Revised Volume No. 2.         Draft EISs                                 groundwater. EPA has requested
The new tariff sheets are filed in             ERP No. D–AFS–A65161–00 Rating           additional information including storm
accordance with the letter order issued      EC2, Gypsy Moth Management in the          water permitting and air emissions.
June 21, 1995, in Docket No. PR95–329–                                                    ERP No. DS–DOE–L08050–WA Rating
                                             United States: A Cooperative Approach,
000. In the June 21 order, the                                                          EC2, Puget Power Northwest
                                             Implementation, US.
Commission conditioned acceptance of                                                    Washington Electric Transmission
                                               Summary: EPA expressed
WIC’s June 1, 1995 filing on a                                                          Project, Updated Information,
                                             environmental concerns about potential
compliance filing by WIC to conform                                                     Construction and Operation, Whatcon
                                             habitat and water quality impacts and
                                                                                        and Skagit Counties, WA.
with Order No. 577–A. WIC has filed          insufficient information to predict
                                                                                          Summary: EPA expressed
revisions to Sheet No. 26 of its Volume      project effects on nontarget species.
                                                                                        environmental concerns based on the
No. 1 Tariff, and Sheet No. 55 of its          ERP No. D-AFS-G65062–NM Rating
                                                                                        project’s impact on water quality.
Volume No. 2 Tariff.                         LO, Agua/Caballos Timber Sale,
                                             Harvesting Timber and Managing             Final EISs
   Accordingly, WIC submitted for filing     Existing Vegetation, Implementation,          ERP No. F–AFS–J65224–MT, Running
Fourth Revised Sheet No. 26 of its           Carson National Forest, El Rito Ranger     Wolf Timber Sales, Implementation,
Volume No. 1 Tariff and Fourth Revised       District, Taos County, NM.                 Lewis and Clark National Forest, Judith
Sheet No. 55 of its Volume No. 2 Tariff        Summary: EPA has no objections to        Ranger District, Stanford, Judith Basin
to become effective July 10, 1995, the       the proposed project. However, EPA         County, MT.
effective date of Order No. 577–A.           requests that additional information on       Summary: EPA expressed
                                             cumulative impacts and environmental       environmental concerns regarding water
   Any person desiring to protest said       justice be included in the final EIS.      quality impacts, the adequacy of the
filing should file a protest with the          ERP No. D–AFS–J65230–WY Rating           water quality monitoring program and
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission,        EO2, Tie Hack Dam and Reservoir            believes additional information is
825 North Capitol Street NE.,                Construction, Special-Use-Permit,          needed to fully assess all potential
Washington, DC 20426, in accordance          NPDES and COE Section 404 Permits,         impacts of the proposed action.
with Section 385.211 of the                  Bighorn National Forest, Buffalo Ranger       ERP No. F–FHW–D40238–MD, US 29
Commission’s Rules of Practice and           District, City of Buffalo, WY.             Improvements, Sligo Creek Parkway to
Procedure (18 CFR 385.211). All such           Summary: EPA expressed                   the Patuxent River Bridge, Funding and
protests should be filed on or before July   environmental objections to the            COE Section 404 Permit Issuance,
17, 1995. Protests will be considered by     proposed alternative due to potential      Montgomery County, MD.
the Commission in determining the            adverse impacts to wetlands. EPA              Summary: EPA expressed
appropriate action to be taken, but will     suggests that the final EIS explore        environmental concern regarding the
not serve to make protestants parties to     additional alternatives of hydropower      mass transit HOV options and the use of
the proceeding. Copies of this filing are    production. EPA believes that the          old traffic data.
on file with the commission and are          conservation alternative could show           ERP No. F–FHW–E40742–NC, I–85
available for public inspection in the       greater water savings and would be         Greensboro Bypass Study Area
public reference room.                       more effective in meeting the purpose      Transportation Improvement, I–85
                                             and need than stated in the draft EIS.     South of Greensboro to I–40/85 east of
Lois D. Cashell,                               ERP No. D–AFS–J65232–UT Rating           Greensboro, Funding, Possible COE
                                             LO, Brian Head Recovery Project,           Section 404 Permit, City of Greensboro,
Secretary.
                                             Timber Harvest, Implementation, Dixie      Guilford County, NC.
[FR Doc. 95–17251 Filed 7–13–95; 8:45 am]    National Forest, Cadar City Ranger            Summary: EPA continued to believe
                                             District, Iron County, UT.                 that the Grand/85 alternative would be
BILLING CODE 6717–01–M
                                               Summary: EPA expressed lack of           the most environmental sound build
                                             objections to the proposed project.        alternative for meeting the project’s
                         Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 135 / Friday, July 14, 1995 / Notices                              36279

transportation objective. Although we       EIS No. 950301, Final EIS, FRC, VA,         about the peer review, contact Pam
still have concerns, instituting the          Gaston and Roanoke Rapids Project         Pentz, U.S. EPA (8501), 401 M Street,
identified environmental controls for         (FERC-No. 2009–003), Nonpoint Use         SW, Washington, DC 20460, Telephone:
construction and long term operation          of Project Lands and Water for the        (202) 260–6600.
would make the proposed project               City of Virginia Beach Water Supply
acceptable.                                   Project, License Issuance, Brunswick      SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:      On August
                                              County, VA, Due: August 14, 1995,         26, 1994, EPA proposed that the Eastern
   Dated: July 11, 1995.
                                              Contact: Steve Edmondson (202) 219–       Columbia Plateau Aquifer System be
William D. Dickerson,                                                                   designated as a sole source aquifer. EPA
                                              2653.
Director, NCD Compliance Division, Office                                               proposed the action in response to a
of Federal Activities.                      Amended Notices                             January 1993 petition from the Palouse-
[FR Doc. 95–17342 Filed 7–13–95; 8:45 am]   EIS No. 950277, Draft EIS, FAA, WI,         Clearwater Environmental Institute of
BILLING CODE 6560–50–U                        Dane County Regional Airport, Air         Moscow, Idaho. The petition requests
                                              Carrier Runway 3–21 Construction          EPA to make a determination under
[ER–FRL–4724–8]                               and Operation and Associated              Section 1424(e) of the Safe Drinking
                                              Actions, Airport Layout Plan              Water Act that the aquifer system is the
Environmental Impact Statements;              Approval and Funding, Dane County,        sole or principal source of drinking
Notice of Availability                        WI, Due: August 14, 1995, Contact:        water for the area and which, if
                                              William J. Flanagan (612) 725–4463.       contaminated, would create a significant
  Responsible Agency: Office of Federal
Activities, General Information (202)         Published 6–30–95 Correction to           hazard to public health.
260–5076 OR (202) 260–5075. Weekly          Document status from Final to Draft EIS.       The original comment period was to
receipt of Environmental Impact                Dated: July 11, 1995.                    close on October 14, 1994, but in
Statements Filed July 03, 1995 Through      William D. Dickerson,                       response to public requests EPA
July 07, 1995 Pursuant to 40 CFR            Director, NCD Compliance Division, Office   extended the comment period twice:
1506.9.                                     of Federal Activities.                      first until January 17, 1995, and then
EIS No. 950295, Draft EIS, SFW, UT,         [FR Doc. 95–17343 Filed 7–13–95; 8:45 am]   until February 17, 1995. Four public
  Washington County Habitat                 BILLING CODE 6560–50–U                      hearings were held throughout the
  Conservation Plan, Issuance of a                                                      proposed area (September 18,
  Permit for Incidental Take of Mojave                                                  September 19, November 15, and
  Desert Tortoise (Gopherus Agassizii),     [FRL-S257–7]
                                                                                        November 16).
  Upper Virgin River Recovery Unit,
                                            Peer Review Meeting on Eastern                 EPA received extensive comments,
  Washington County, UT, Due: August
                                            Columbia Plateau Sole Source Aquifer        including many that cited technical
  28, 1995, Contact: Robert D. Williams
                                            Determination                               grounds for taking issue with the
  (801) 524–5001.
EIS No. 950296, Draft EIS, GSA, OH,         AGENCY: Environmental Protection            vertical and lateral boundaries of the
  Cleveland United States Courthouse,       Agency.                                     proposed area. On April 13, 1995, the
  Site Selection, Construction and                                                      Regional Administrator for Region 10,
                                            ACTION: Notice of meeting.
  Operation, Cuyahoga County, OH,                                                       announced that EPA would undertake a
  Due: August 28, 1995, Contact:            SUMMARY:    This notice announces a peer    peer review of technical information
  Jennifer Enyart (312) 886–5574.           review meeting sponsored by the U.S.        underlying the sole source aquifer
EIS No. 950297, Final EIS, BLM, CA,         Environmental Protection Agency’s           designation in the Eastern Columbia
  Mesquite Regional Landfill Project,       (EPA’s) Science Policy Council (SPC).       Plateau aquifer system. EPA is asking
  Implementation, Federal Land              This meeting is a peer review of            the peer reviewers, who are experts in
  Exchange, Right-of-Way Approval,          scientific information underlying the       hydrogeology to evaluate EPA’s
  Conditional-Use-Permit and General        sole source aquifer determination for the   technical analysis of certain issues
  Plan Amendment, Imperial County,          Eastern Columbia Plateau that will be       relating to the Eastern Columbia Plateau
  CA, Due: August 14, 1995, Contact:        made by the Regional Administrator of       aquifer system. Specifically, EPA is
  Thomas Zale (619) 337–4400.               EPA’s Region 10.                            asking the peer reviewers to provide
EIS No. 950298, Draft EIS, NOA,
                                            DATES: The meeting will held on July        expert comment on the boundaries of
  Programmatic EIS—Coastal Nonpoint
                                            26–27, 1995. Members of the public may      the aquifer system, the vertical flow
  Pollution Control Program,
                                            attend as observers.                        between the basalt units, and the
  Implementation, Approval for 29
  States and Territories Coastal            ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at      applicability of the documents that EPA
  Nonpoint Program, Due: August 28,         the Sheraton Tacoma Hotel in Tacoma,        used in the development of its technical
  1995, Contact: W. Stanley Wilson          Washington. Eastern Research Group,         analysis. Following this meeting, EPA
  (301) 713–3074.                           Inc., an EPA contractor, is providing       will use information and analyses
EIS No. 950299, Draft EIS, USN, TX,         logistical support for the meeting. To      developed by the peer reviewers, along
  Dallas Naval Air Station Disposal and     attend the meeting as an observer,          with other considerations, to make a
  Reuse, Implementation, City of Dallas,    contact Laurie Nutter, Eastern Research     determination as to the sole source
  TX, Due: August 28, 1995, Contact:        Group, Inc., 110 Hartwell Avenue,           aquifer designation for the Eastern
  Darrell Molzan (803) 743–0796.            Lexington, Massachusetts, 02173–3198,       Columbia Plateau.
EIS No. 950300, Final EIS, AFS, CA, OR,     Tel: 617/674–7320, Fax: 617/674–2906
                                            by July 17, 1995. Space is limited.           Dated: June 30, 1995.
  Klamath National Forest Land and
  Resource Management Plan,                 FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For
                                                                                        Joseph K. Alexander,
  Implementation, Siskiyou Co., CA and      technical inquiries, contact Martha         Acting Assistant Administrator for Research
  Jackson Co., OR, Due: August 14,          Sabol, U.S. EPA, Region 10, 1200 Sixth      and Development.
  1995, Contact: Barbara Holder (916)       Avenue, Seattle, WA 98101, Telephone        [FR Doc. 95–17319 Filed 7–13–95; 8:45 am]
  842–6131.                                 (206) 553–1593. For other information       BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
36280                 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 135 / Friday, July 14, 1995 / Notices

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS                       entities will only include small             Commission an FCC Form 304–A,
COMMISSION                                   businesses. Due to the differing             certifying that the facilities as
                                             criteria for establishing designated         authorized have been completed and
Public Information Collection                entity status the Commission is              that the station is now operational
Requirements Submitted to the Office         creating a new FCC Form 175–M. This          and ready to provide service to the
of Management and Budget for Review          form will be similar to the current          public. The conditional license shall
                                             FCC Form 175 (3060–0600). The new            be automatically forfeited upon the
July 7, 1995.
                                             FCC Form 175–M will be tailored for          expiration of the construction period
  The Federal Communications
                                             use by MDS applicants only. The FCC          specified in the license unless within
Commission has submitted the
                                             Form 175–S, Application to                   5 days after the date an FCC Form
following information collection
                                             Participate in an FCC Auction—               304–A has been filed with the
requirements to OMB for review and
                                             Supplemental Form (3060–0600) will           Commission.
clearance under the Paperwork
                                             be used as a continuation sheet. The       OMB Number: None
Reduction act of 1980 (44 U.S.C. 3507).
                                             information will be used by FCC staff      Title: Application for a Multipoint
  Copies of these submissions may be
                                             to determine whether the applicant is        Distribution Service Authorization
purchased from the Commission’s copy
                                             legally, technically, and otherwise        Form Number: FCC Form 304
contractor, International Transcription
                                             qualified to participate in the auction.   Action: New collection
Service, Inc., 2100 M Street, NW., Suite
                                             The rules and requirements are also        Respondents: Businesses or other for-
140, Washington, DC 20037, (202) 857–
                                             designed to ensure that the                  profit
3800. For further information on these
                                             competitive bidding process is limited     Frequency of Response: On occasion
submissions contact Judy Boley, Federal
                                             to serious, qualified applicants and to      reporting requirement
Communications Commission, (202)
                                             deter possible abuses of the bidding       Estimated Annual Burden: 300
418–0214. Persons wishing to comment
                                             and licensing processes.                     responses; 55 hours average burden
on these information collections should
contact Timothy Fain, Office of            OMB Number: None                               per response; 16,500 hours total
Management and Budget, Room 10214          Title: Certification of Completion of          annual burden
NEOB, Washington, DC 20503, (202)            Construction for a Multipoint              Needs and Uses: On 6/15/95, the
395–3561.                                    Distribution Service                         Commission adopted a Report and
OMB Number: None                           Form Number: FCC Form 304–A                    Order in MM Docket No. 94–131 and
Title: Application to Participate in an    Action: New collection                         PP Docket No. 93–253, Amendment of
  FCC MDS Auction                          Respondents: Businesses or other for-          Parts 21 and 74 of the Commission’s
Form Number: FCC Form 175–M                  profit                                       Rules with Regard to Filing
Action: New collection                     Frequency of Response: On occasion             Procedures in the Multipoint
Respondents: Businesses or other for-        reporting requirement                        Distribution Service (MDS) and in the
  profit                                   Estmated Annual Burden: 100                    Instructional Television Fixed Service
Frequency of Response: On occasion           responses, 0.5 hours average burden          (ITFS) and Implementation of Section
  reporting requirement                      per response, 50 hours total annual          309(j) of the Communications Act—
Estmated Annual Burden: 1,600                burden                                       Competitive Bidding. This Report and
  responses, .50 hours average burden      Needs and Uses: On 6/15/95, the                Order will streamline the procedures
  per response, 775 hours total annual       Commission adopted a Report and              for filing MDS applications and
  burden                                     Order in MM Docket No. 94–131 and            facilitate the development and rapid
Needs and Uses: On 6/15/95, the              PP Docket No. 93–253, Amendment of           deployment of wireless cable services.
  Commission adopted a Report and            Parts 21 and 74 of the Commission’s          Among other things, this Report and
  Order in MM Docket No. 94–131 and          Rules with Regard to Filing                  Order adopted a new FCC Form 304,
  PP Docket No. 93–253, Amendment of         Procedures in the Multipoint                 Application for a Multipoint
  Parts 21 and 74 of the Commission’s        Distribution Service (MDS) and in the        Distribution Service Authorization
  Rules with Regard to Filing                Instructional Television Fixed Service       referred to in the Report and Order as
  Procedures in the Multipoint               (ITFS) and Implementation of Section         the long-form application. This new
  Distribution Service (MDS) and in the      309(j) of the Communications Act—            form will incorporate information
  Instructional Television Fixed Service     Competitive Bidding. This Report and         currently on the FCC Form 494,
  (ITFS) and Implementation of Section       Order will streamline the procedures         Application for a New or Modified
  309(j) of the Communications Act—          for filing MDS applications and              Microwave Radio Station License
  Competitive Bidding. This Report and       facilitate the development and rapid         Under Part 21 (OMB Control No.
  Order will streamline the procedures       deployment of wireless cable services.       3060–0402) and will add new data
  for filing MDS applications and            Among other things, this Report and          elements needed to expedite
  facilitate the development and rapid       Order adopted a new FCC Form 304.            processing under the new filing
  deployment of wireless cable services.     This new FCC Form 304–A is a                 procedures adopted in the Report and
  Among other things, this Report and        component of the FCC Form 304. This          Order. The FCC Form 304 will be
  Order establishes competitive bidding      new form will incorporate                    used by existing MDS operators to
  rules and procedures for the               information currently on the FCC             modify their stations or to add a
  Multipoint Distribution Service. The       Form 494–A, Certification of                 signal booster station. It will also be
  Commission has determined that             Completion of Construction (3060–            used by some winning bidders in the
  simultaneous multiple round bidding        0403) and limit the form to only MDS         competitive bidding process to
  will be used in the MDS auctions.          applicants. All other services               propose facilities to provide wireless
  This auction method has been               currently on the FCC Form 494–A              cable service over any usable MDS
  employed successfully in the               will remain. Each licensee will              channels within their Basic Trading
  broadband and narrowband PCS               specify as a condition that upon the         Area (BTA). All other services
  auctions. For the MDS auctions, we         completion of construction, the              currently using the FCC Form 494
  have determined that designated            licensee must file with the                  will continue to do so. This collection
                         Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 135 / Friday, July 14, 1995 / Notices                                 36281

  of information will also include the       FEDERAL MARITIME COMMISSION                      The application is available for
  burden for the technical rules                                                           immediate inspection at the Federal
  involving the interference or              Security for the Protection of the            Reserve Bank indicated. Once the
  engineering analysis requirements          Public Financial Responsibility to Meet       application has been accepted for
  under Sections 21.902, 21.913 and          Liability Incurred for Death or Injury to     processing, it will also be available for
  21.938. These analyses will not be         Passengers or Other Persons on                inspection at the offices of the Board of
  submitted with the application but         Voyages; Issuance of Certificate              Governors. Interested persons may
  will be retained by the operator and       (Casualty)                                    express their views in writing to the
  must be made available to the                                                            Reserve Bank indicated for that
                                               Notice is hereby given that the
  Commission upon request. The data                                                        application or to the offices of the Board
                                             following have been issued a Certificate
  will be used by FCC staff to ensure                                                      of Governors. Any comment on an
                                             of Financial Responsibility to Meet
  that the applicant is legally,                                                           application that requests a hearing must
                                             Liability Incurred for Death or Injury to
  technically and otherwise qualified to                                                   include a statement of why a written
                                             Passengers or Other Persons on Voyages
  become a Commission licensee. MDS/                                                       presentation would not suffice in lieu of
                                             pursuant to the provisions of section 2,
  ITFS applicants/licensees will need                                                      a hearing, identifying specifically any
                                             Pub. L. 89–777 (46 U.S.C. 817(d)) and
  this information to perform the                                                          questions of fact that are in dispute and
                                             the Federal Maritime Commission’s
  necessary analyses of the potential for                                                  summarizing the evidence that would
                                             implementing regulations at 46 CFR part
  harmful interference to their facility.                                                  be presented at a hearing.
                                             540, as amended:
                                                                                              Comments regarding this application
Federal Communications Commission.           Society Expeditions, Inc., Discoverer         must be received not later than August
William F. Caton,                              Reederei GmbH and Adventurer                7, 1995.
Acting Secretary.                              Cruises, Inc., 2001 Western Avenue,            A. Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
[FR Doc. 95–17242 Filed 7–13–95; 8:45 am]      Suite 300, Seattle, Washington 98121        (Randall C. Sumner, Vice President) 411
                                             Vessel: WORLD DISCOVERER                      Locust Street, St. Louis, Missouri 63166:
BILLING CODE 6712–01–M
                                               Dated: July 10, 1995.                          1. Old National Bancorp, Evansville,
                                             Joseph C. Polking,                            Indiana; to merge with Shawnee
[Report No. 2084]                            Secretary.                                    Bancorp, Inc., Harrisburg, Illinois, and
                                             [FR Doc. 95–17245 Filed 7–13–95; 8:45 am]     thereby indirectly acquire The Bank of
Petition for Reconsideration of Actions      BILLING CODE 6730–01–M
                                                                                           Harrisburg, Harrisburg, Illinois.
in Rulemaking Proceedings                                                                    Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve
                                                                                           System, July 10, 1995.
July 11, 1995.                                                                             Jennifer J. Johnson,
                                             FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM
   Petition for reconsideration have been                                                  Deputy Secretary of the Board.
filed in the Commission rulemaking           Great Southern Bancorp; Change in             [FR Doc. 95–17291 Filed 7–13–95; 8:45 am]
proceedings listed in this Public Notice     Bank Control Notices; Acquisitions of         BILLING CODE 6210–01–F
and published pursuant to 47 CFR             Shares of Banks or Bank Holding
1.429(e). The full text of this document     Companies; Correction
are available for viewing and copying in                                                   Robert G. Sarver, et al.; Change in
Room 239, 1919 M Street, NW.,                  This notice corrects a notice (FR Doc.      Bank Control Notices; Acquisitions of
Washington, DC or may be purchased           95-16690) published on page 35404 of          Shares of Banks or Bank Holding
from the Commission’s copy contractor        the issue for Friday, July 7, 1995.           Companies
ITS, Inc. (202) 857–3800. Opposition to        Under the Federal Reserve Bank of
this petition must be filed July 31, 1995.   Atlanta, the entry for Great Southern           The notificants listed below have
See Section 1.4(b)(1) of the                 Bancorp, West Palm Beach, Florida             applied under the Change in Bank
Commission’s rules (47 CFR 1.4(b)(1)).       should be deleted.                            Control Act (12 U.S.C. 1817(j)) and §
Replies to an opposition must be filed         Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve   225.41 of the Board’s Regulation Y (12
within 10 days after the time for filing     System, July 10, 1995.                        CFR 225.41) to acquire a bank or bank
oppositions has expired.                     Jennifer J. Johnson,                          holding company. The factors that are
                                             Deputy Secretary of the Board.
                                                                                           considered in acting on the notices are
Subject: Rules and Policies Regarding                                                      set forth in paragraph 7 of the Act (12
  Calling Number Identification              [FR Doc. 95–17291 Filed 7–13–95; 8:45 am]
                                                                                           U.S.C. 1817(j)(7)).
  Service—Caller ID. (CC Docket No.          BILLING CODE 6210–01–F
                                                                                             The notices are available for
  91–281)                                                                                  immediate inspection at the Federal
Number of Petitions Filed: 2                 Old National Bancorp; Formation of,           Reserve Bank indicated. Once the
                                             Acquisition by, or Merger of Bank             notices have been accepted for
Subject: Local Exchange Carriers’ Rates                                                    processing, they will also be available
  Terms, and Conditions for Expanded         Holding Companies
                                                                                           for inspection at the offices of the Board
  Interconnection Through Virtual              The company listed in this notice has       of Governors. Interested persons may
  Collocation for Special Access and         applied for the Board’s approval under        express their views in writing to the
  Switch Transport. (CC Docket 94–97,        section 3 of the Bank Holding Company         Reserve Bank indicated for that notice
  Phase I)                                   Act (12 U.S.C. 1842) and § 225.14 of the      or to the offices of the Board of
Number of Petitions Filed: 2                 Board’s Regulation Y (12 CFR 225.14) to       Governors. Comments must be received
Federal Communications Commission.           become a bank holding company or to           not later than July 28, 1995.
                                             acquire a bank or bank holding                  A. Federal Reserve Bank of San
William F. Caton,
                                             company. The factors that are                 Francisco (Kenneth R. Binning,
Acting Secretary.                            considered in acting on the applications      Director, Bank Holding Company) 101
[FR Doc. 95–17303 Filed 7–13–95; 8:45 am]    are set forth in section 3(c) of the Act      Market Street, San Francisco, California
BILLING CODE 6712–01–M                       (12 U.S.C. 1842(c)).                          94105:
36282                    Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 135 / Friday, July 14, 1995 / Notices

   1. Robert G. Sarver, Scottsdale,              Each application is available for             Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve
Arizona; to acquire a total of 14.4           immediate inspection at the Federal            System, July 10, 1995.
percent; Keefe Bruyette & Woods, New          Reserve Bank indicated. Once the               Jennifer J. Johnson,
York, New York, to acquire a total of 9.9     application has been accepted for              Deputy Secretary of the Board.
percent; Simmons Family, Inc., Salt           processing, it will also be available for      [FR Doc. 95–17293 Filed 7–13–95; 8:45 am]
Lake City, Utah, to acquire a total of 9.9    inspection at the offices of the Board of      BILLING CODE 6210–01–F
percent; Robert H. McKee, Phoenix,            Governors. Interested persons may
Arizona, to acquire a total of 9.9            express their views in writing on the
percent; Paul L. Baker, Tucson, Arizona,      question whether consummation of the
to acquire a total of 8.5 percent; Bell       proposal can ‘‘reasonably be expected to       DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND
Family Trust, Glen W. Bell, Jr., Trustee,     produce benefits to the public, such as        HUMAN SERVICES
Rancho Santa Fe, California, to acquire       greater convenience, increased
a total of 7.5 percent; Millard R.                                                           Office of the Secretary
                                              competition, or gains in efficiency, that
Sheldin, Omaha, Nebraska, to acquire a
                                              outweigh possible adverse effects, such
total of 6 percent; Lawrence B.                                                              Agency Forms Submitted to the Office
Robinson, La Jolla, California, to acquire    as undue concentration of resources,
                                              decreased or unfair competition,               of Management and Budget for
a total of 6 percent; Larry Korman, Atco,                                                    Clearance
New Jersey, to acquire a total of 5           conflicts of interests, or unsound
percent; Zions Bancorporation, Salt           banking practices.’’ Any request for a
                                                                                               On Fridays, the Department of Health
Lake City, Utah, to acquire a total of 4.9    hearing on this question must be
                                                                                             and Human Services, Office of the
percent; Par Holdings, Inc., Scottsdale,      accompanied by a statement of the
                                                                                             Secretary publishes a list of information
Arizona, to acquire a total of 4 percent;     reasons a written presentation would
                                                                                             collections it has submitted to the Office
R Capital Corporation, Cleveland, Ohio,       not suffice in lieu of a hearing,
                                                                                             of Management and Budget (OMB) for
to acquire a total of 3 percent; Albert L.    identifying specifically any questions of
                                                                                             clearance in compliance with the
Feldman, Omaha, Nebraska, to acquire a        fact that are in dispute, summarizing the
                                                                                             Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C.
total of 3 percent; Thomas W. Rogers,         evidence that would be presented at a
                                                                                             Chapter 35). The following are those
Tucson, Arizona, to acquire a total of 2      hearing, and indicating how the party
                                                                                             information collections recently
percent; Donald R. Rogers, Tucson,            commenting would be aggrieved by
                                                                                             submitted to OMB.
Arizona, to acquire a total of 2 percent;     approval of the proposal.
Carol L. Hudson, Tucson, Arizona, to                                                           1. 1995 Short-term, General, and
                                                 Unless otherwise noted, comments
acquire a total of 2 percent; Allan W.                                                       Other Special Hospital Civil Rights
                                              regarding the applications must be
Severson, La Mesa, California, to                                                            Compliance report—Short-term, general,
                                              received at the Reserve Bank indicated
acquire a total of 1 percent; and                                                            and other special hospitals that are
                                              or the offices of the Board of Governors       recipients of HHS funds are being
Christopher L. Skillern, La Mesa,
California, to acquire a total of 1           not later than July 28, 1995.                  requested to file a report providing
percent, of the voting shares of                 A. Federal Reserve Bank of                  information on their compliance with
Bancomer Holding Company, Los                 Richmond (Lloyd W. Bostian, Jr., Senior        civil rights requirements. Those
Angeles, California, and thereby              Vice President) 701 East Byrd Street,          hospitals that received Hill-Burton
indirectly acquire Grossmont Bank, La         Richmond, Virginia 23261:                      assistance will simultaneously fulfill the
Mesa, California.                                1. Wachovia Corporation, Winston-           current triennial community service
  Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve   Salem, North Carolina; to engage de            reporting requirements by filing this
System, July 10, 1995.                        novo through its subsidiary, Wachovia          report. The Public Health Service Act
Jennifer J. Johnson,                          Capital Markets, Inc., Winston-Salem,          (Titles VI and XVI) requires that this
Deputy Secretary of the Board.                North Carolina, in acting as investment        information be obtained periodically to
[FR Doc. 95–17292 Filed 7–13–95; 8:45 am]     or financial adviser, pursuant to §            enable assessment of the compliance of
BILLING CODE 6210–01–F                        225.25(b)(4) of the Board’s Regulation Y;      recipient Hill-Burton health facilities
                                              providing foreign exchange advisory            with their community services
                                              and transactional services, pursuant to §      assurances. Respondents: State or local
Wachovia Corporation, et al.; Notice of       225.25(b)(17) of the Board’s Regulation        governments, business or other for-
Applications to Engage de novo in             Y; and acting as intermediary for the          profit, non-profit institutions; Total
Permissible Nonbanking Activities             financing of commercial or industrial          Number of Respondents: 4975;
                                              income-producing real estate by                Frequency of Response: once every
  The companies listed in this notice                                                        three years; Average Burden per
have filed an application under §             arranging for the transfer of title, control
                                              and risk of such real estate project to        Response: 32.5 hours; Estimated Annual
225.23(a)(1) of the Board’s Regulation Y                                                     Burden: 53,918 hours. OMB Desk
(12 CFR 225.23(a)(1)) for the Board’s         one or more investors, pursuant to §
                                              225.25(b)(14) of the Board’s Regulation        Officer: Allison Eydt.
approval under section 4(c)(8) of the
Bank Holding Company Act (12 U.S.C.           Y.                                               Copies of the information collection
1843(c)(8)) and § 225.21(a) of Regulation        B. Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago          packages listed above can be obtained
Y (12 CFR 225.21(a)) to commence or to        (James A. Bluemle, Vice President) 230         by calling the OS Reports Clearance
engage de novo, either directly or            South LaSalle Street, Chicago, Illinois        Officer on (202) 619–1053. Written
through a subsidiary, in a nonbanking         60690:                                         comments and recommendations for the
activity that is listed in § 225.25 of                                                       proposed information collection should
Regulation Y as closely related to               1. Garrett Bancshares, Ltd.,                be sent directly to the OMB desk officer
banking and permissible for bank              Bloomfield, Iowa; to engage de novo in         designated above at the following
holding companies. Unless otherwise           making and servicing loans, pursuant to        address: OMB Reports Management
noted, such activities will be conducted      § 225.25(b)(1) of the Board’s Regulation       Branch, New Executive Office Building,
throughout the United States.                 Y.                                             Room 3208, Washington, D.C. 20503.
                                       Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 135 / Friday, July 14, 1995 / Notices                                                                                     36283

  Dated: July 3, 1995.                                                    will remain in effect until such time as                                   is necessary for the proper performance
Dennis P. Williams,                                                       the Secretary of the Treasury notifies                                     of the functions of the agency, including
Deputy Assistant Secretary, Budget.                                       HHS of any change.                                                         whether the information shall have
[FR Doc. 95–17307 Filed 7–13–95; 8:45 am]                                   Dated: July 6, 1995.                                                     practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the
BILLING CODE 4150–04–M                                                    George Strader,                                                            agency’s estimate of the burden of the
                                                                          Deputy Assistant Secretary, Finance.
                                                                                                                                                     proposed collection of information; (c)
                                                                                                                                                     ways to enhance the quality, utility, and
                                                                          [FR Doc. 95–17309 Filed 7–13–95; 8:45 am]
Notice of Interest Rate on Overdue                                                                                                                   clarity of the information to be
                                                                          BILLING CODE 4150–04–M
Debts                                                                                                                                                collected; and (d) ways to minimize the
                                                                                                                                                     burden of the collection of information
  Section 30.13 of the Department of                                                                                                                 on respondents, including through the
Health and Human Services’ claims                                         Administration for Children and
                                                                          Families                                                                   use of automated collection techniques
collection regulations (45 CFR part 30)                                                                                                              or other forms of information
provides that the Secretary shall charge                                  Agency Information Collection Under                                        technology. Consideration will be given
an annual rate of interest as fixed by the                                OMB Review                                                                 to comments and suggestions submitted
Secretary of the Treasury after taking                                                                                                               within 60 days of this publication.
into consideration private consumer                                       Proposed Data Collections Submitted
rates of interest prevailing on the date                                  for Public Comment and                                                     Proposed Project(s)
that HHS becomes entitled to recovery.                                    Recommendations                                                            Title: Applications and Discontinuances
The rate generally cannot be lower than                                     In compliance with the requirements                                        for Aid to Families with Dependent
the Department of Treasury’s current                                      of Section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the                                              Children (AFDC)
value of funds rate or the applicable rate                                Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 for
determined from the ‘‘Schedule of                                                                                                                    OMB No.: 0970–0003
                                                                          opportunity for public comment on
Certified Interest Rates with Range of                                    proposed data collection projects, the                                     Description: The information collected
Maturities.’’ This rate may be revised                                    Administration for Children and                                              by Form ACF–3800 is needed to
quarterly by the Secretary of the                                         Families (ACF) is publishing the                                             properly administer and monitor the
Treasury and shall be published                                           following summary(ies). To request                                           Aid to Families with Dependent
quarterly by the Department of Health                                     copies of the proposed collection of                                         Children (AFDC) program. The
and Human Services in the Federal                                         information and the related instructions,                                    affected public is comprised of State
Register.                                                                 call the ACF Reports Clearance Officer                                       agencies administering and
  The Secretary of the Treasury has                                       on (202) 401–6465.                                                           supervising the administration of the
certified a rate of 14% for the quarter                                     Comments are invited on: (a) Whether                                       AFDC program.
ended June 30, 1995. This interest rate                                   the proposed collection of information                                     Respondents: State governments

                                                                                                                                                                            Number
                                                                                                                                                                    Num-                Aver-
                                                                                                                                                                              of re-
                                                                                                                                                                   ber of                age
                                                                                                                                                                            sponses
                                                                            Title                                                                                    re-               burden    Burden
                                                                                                                                                                             per re-
                                                                                                                                                                   spond-              per re-
                                                                                                                                                                             spond-
                                                                                                                                                                    ents               sponse
                                                                                                                                                                               ent

ACF–3800 .......................................................................................................................................................       54         4         4       864
Estimated Total Annual Burden: 864.



  Dated: July 7, 1995.                                                    Families (ACF) is publishing the                                           or other forms of information
Roberta Katson,                                                           following summary(ies). To request                                         technology. Consideration will be given
Acting Director, Office of Information                                    copies of the proposed collection of                                       to comments and suggestions submitted
Resource Management.                                                      information and the related instructions,                                  within 60 days of this publication.
[FR Doc. 95–17335 Filed 7–13–95; 8:45 am]                                 call the ACF Reports Clearance Officer
                                                                                                                                                     Proposed Project(s)
BILLING CODE 4184–01–M                                                    on (202) 401–6465.
                                                                             Comments are invited on: (a) Whether                                    Title: Statistical Report on Recipients
                                                                          the proposed collection of information                                       Under Public Assistance
Agency Information Collection Under                                       is necessary for the proper performance                                    OMB No.: 0970–0008
OMB Review                                                                of the functions of the agency, including                                  Description: The information collected
                                                                          whether the information shall have                                           by Form ACF–3637 is needed to
Proposed Data Collections Submitted                                       practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the                                   properly administer and monitor the
for Public Comment and                                                    agency’s estimate of the burden of the                                       Aid to Families with Dependent
Recommendations                                                           proposed collection of information; (c)                                      Children program by providing
  In compliance with the requirements                                     ways to enhance the quality, utility, and                                    information on a quarterly basis on
of Section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the                                           clarity of the information to be                                             recipients and families in the AFDC
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 for                                       collected; and (d) ways to minimize the                                      and Adult Programs. This data is used
opportunity for public comment on                                         burden of the collection of information                                      by Congress, Federal agencies, and
proposed data collection projects, the                                    on respondents, including through the                                        others.
Administration for Children and                                           use of automated collection techniques                                     Respondents: State governments
36284                                   Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 135 / Friday, July 14, 1995 / Notices

                                                                                                                                                                                        Number
                                                                                                                                                                          Num-                        Aver-
                                                                                                                                                                                          of re-
                                                                                                                                                                         ber of                        age
                                                                                                                                                                                        sponses
                                                                               Title                                                                                       re-                       burden     Burden
                                                                                                                                                                                         per re-
                                                                                                                                                                         spond-                      per re-
                                                                                                                                                                                         spond-
                                                                                                                                                                          ents                       sponse
                                                                                                                                                                                           ent

ACF–3637 .......................................................................................................................................................                 216          4          35       7,560
Estimated Total Annual Burden: 7,560.



  Dated: July 7, 1995.                                                       levels, and are contingent upon                                              grant programs. The data elements used
Roberta Katson,                                                              Congressional appropriations for Fiscal                                      in the update are:
Acting Director, Office of Information                                       Year 1996. If Congress enacts and the                                           A. The number of beneficiaries in
Resource Management.                                                         President approves an amount different                                       each State and Territory under the
[FR Doc. 95–17336 Filed 7–13–95; 8:45 am]                                    from the Fiscal Year 1995 appropriation,                                     Childhood Disabilities Beneficiary
BILLING CODE 4184–01–M                                                       the allotments will be adjusted                                              Program, December 1993, are from Table
                                                                             accordingly. These allotments reflect the                                    5.J10 of the ‘‘Social Security Bulletin:
                                                                             appropriated funds allocated to the                                          Annual Statistical Supplement 1994’’
Revised Federal Allotments to State                                          States based on the most recent data                                         issued by the Social Security
Developmental Disabilities Councils                                          available for population, extent of need                                     Administration, U.S. Department of
and Protection and Advocacy Formula                                          for services for persons with                                                Health and Human Services. The
Grant Programs for Fiscal Year 1996                                          developmental disabilities, and the                                          numbers for the Northern Mariana
AGENCY: Administration on                                                    financial need of the States.                                                Islands and the Trust Territories of the
Developmental Disabilities,                                                  EFFECTIVE DATE: October 1, 1995.                                             Pacific Islands, were obtained from the
Administration for Children and                                              FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:                                             Social Security Administration;
Families, Department of Health and                                           Bettye J. Mobley, Chief, Family Support                                         B. State data on Average Per Capita
Human Services.                                                              Branch, Office of Financial                                                  Income, 1989–93, are from Table 2 of
ACTION: Notification of Revised Fiscal                                       Management, Administration for                                               the ‘‘Survey of Current Business,’’
Year 1996 Federal Allotments to State                                        Children and Families, Department of                                         September 1994, issued by the Bureau
Developmental Disabilities Councils                                          Health and Human Services, 370                                               of Economic Analysis, U.S. Department
and Protection and Advocacy Formula                                          L’Enfant Promenade SW., Washington,                                          of Commerce; comparable data for the
Grant Programs.                                                              DC 20447, Telephone (202) 401–6955.                                          Territories also were obtained from that
                                                                             SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Section                                           Bureau; and
SUMMARY: This notice sets forth the
revised Fiscal Year 1996 individual                                          125(a)(2) of the Act requires that                                              C. State data on Total Population and
allotments and percentages to States                                         adjustments in the amounts of State                                          Working Population (ages 18–64) as of
administering the State Developmental                                        allotments may be made not more often                                        July 1, 1993, are from ‘‘Current
Disabilities Councils and Protection and                                     than annually and that States are to be                                      Population Reports: Population
Advocacy programs, pursuant to Section                                       notified not less than six (6) months                                        Estimates and Projections, Series P–25,
125 and Section 142 of the                                                   before the beginning of any fiscal year                                      Number 1010, issued by the Bureau of
Developmental Disabilities Assistance                                        of any adjustments to take effect in that                                    the Census, U.S. Department of
and Bill of Rights Act (Act). This                                           fiscal year. It should be noted that, as                                     Commerce. Estimates for the Territories
revision is required because the input of                                    required, Palau’s allotment has been                                         are no longer available, therefore, the
the population data for one of the States                                    adjusted to seventy-five percent of its                                      Territories population data are from the
was in error. The revised amounts                                            Fiscal Year 1995 allotment.                                                  1990 Census Population Counts. The
published herein supersede those                                                The Administration on                                                     Territories’ working populations were
published in the Federal Register on                                         Developmental Disabilities has updated                                       issued in the Bureau of Census report,
March 21, 1995, (54 FR 14943).                                               the data elements for issuance of Fiscal                                     ‘‘General Characteristics Report: 1980,’’
   The amounts published herein are                                          Year 1996 allotments for the                                                 which includes the most recent data
based upon Fiscal Year 1995 funding                                          Developmental Disabilities formula                                           available from the Bureau.

                                            FY 1996 ALLOTMENT—ADMINISTRATION ON DEVELOPMENTAL DISABILITIES
                                                                                                                                                                                   State devel-
                                                                                                                                                                                  opmental dis-         Percentage
                                                                                                                                                                                  abilities coun-
                                                                                                                                                                                         cils

          Total ..............................................................................................................................................................         $70,438,000        100.000000

Alabama ...................................................................................................................................................................              1,350,256             1.916943
Alaska ......................................................................................................................................................................              420,475              .596943
Arizona .....................................................................................................................................................................            1,005,402             1.427357
Arkansas ..................................................................................................................................................................                768,612             1.091189
California ..................................................................................................................................................................            6,494,502             9.220168
Colorado ...................................................................................................................................................................               787,772             1.118391
Connecticut ..............................................................................................................................................................                 698,526              .991689
Delaware ..................................................................................................................................................................                420,475              .596943
District of Columbia ..................................................................................................................................................                    420,475              .596943
Florida ......................................................................................................................................................................           3,117,398             4.425733
                                         Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 135 / Friday, July 14, 1995 / Notices                                                                                            36285

                                FY 1996 ALLOTMENT—ADMINISTRATION ON DEVELOPMENTAL DISABILITIES—Continued
                                                                                                                                                                                     State devel-
                                                                                                                                                                                    opmental dis-     Percentage
                                                                                                                                                                                    abilities coun-
                                                                                                                                                                                           cils

Georgia ....................................................................................................................................................................            1,728,262        2.453593
Hawaii ......................................................................................................................................................................             420,475         .596943
Idaho ........................................................................................................................................................................            420,475         .596943
Illinois .......................................................................................................................................................................        2,705,735        3.841300
Indiana .....................................................................................................................................................................           1,474,214        2.092924
Iowa ..........................................................................................................................................................................           804,511        1.142155
Kansas .....................................................................................................................................................................              615,811         .874260
Kentucky ..................................................................................................................................................................             1,248,946        1.773114
Louisiana ..................................................................................................................................................................            1,432,280        2.033391
Maine .......................................................................................................................................................................             420,475         .596943
Maryland ..................................................................................................................................................................               979,617        1.390751
Massachusetts .........................................................................................................................................................                 1,344,089        1.908187
Michigan ...................................................................................................................................................................            2,480,119        3.520996
Minnesota .................................................................................................................................................................             1,034,766        1.469045
Mississippi ................................................................................................................................................................              949,468        1.347949
Missouri ....................................................................................................................................................................           1,341,411        1.904385
Montana ...................................................................................................................................................................               420,475         .596943
Nebraska ..................................................................................................................................................................               425,955         .604723
Nevada .....................................................................................................................................................................              420,475         .596943
New Hampshire .......................................................................................................................................................                     420,475         .596943
New Jersey ..............................................................................................................................................................               1,523,184        2.162446
New Mexico .............................................................................................................................................................                  479,429         .680640
New York .................................................................................................................................................................              4,330,605        6.148109
North Carolina ..........................................................................................................................................................               1,822,621        2.587554
North Dakota ............................................................................................................................................................                 420,475         .596943
Ohio ..........................................................................................................................................................................         2,950,353        4.188581
Oklahoma .................................................................................................................................................................                921,778        1.308637
Oregon .....................................................................................................................................................................              746,859        1.060307
Pennsylvania ............................................................................................................................................................               3,189,640        4.528294
Rhode Island ............................................................................................................................................................                 420,475         .596943
South Carolina .........................................................................................................................................................                1,059,457        1.504099
South Dakota ...........................................................................................................................................................                  420,475         .596943
Tennessee ...............................................................................................................................................................               1,473,381        2.091742
Texas .......................................................................................................................................................................           4,519,278        6.415966
Utah ..........................................................................................................................................................................           549,665         .780353
Vermont ....................................................................................................................................................................              420,475         .596943
Virginia .....................................................................................................................................................................          1,440,243        2.044696
Washington ..............................................................................................................................................................               1,145,208        1.625838
West Virginia ............................................................................................................................................................                813,508        1.154928
Wisconsin .................................................................................................................................................................             1,321,045        1.875472
Wyoming ..................................................................................................................................................................                420,475         .596943
American Samoa .....................................................................................................................................................                      220,750         .313396
Guam .......................................................................................................................................................................              220,750         .313396
Northern Mariana Islands ........................................................................................................................................                         220,750         .313396
Puerto Rico ..............................................................................................................................................................              2,428,881        3.448254
Palau ........................................................................................................................................................................            165,563         .235048
Virgin Islands ...........................................................................................................................................................                220,750         .313396


                                             FY 1996 ALLOTMENT—ADMINISTRATION ON DEVELOPMENTAL DISABILITIES
                                                                                                                                                                                   Protection and     Percentage
                                                                                                                                                                                     advocacy

        Total ..........................................................................................................................................................             1 $25,911,318     100.000000
Alabama ...............................................................................................................................................................                   439,900        1.697714
Alaska ..................................................................................................................................................................                 254,508         .982227
Arizona .................................................................................................................................................................                 337,130        1.301092
Arkansas ..............................................................................................................................................................                   256,076         .988279
California ..............................................................................................................................................................               2,304,146        8.892431
Colorado ...............................................................................................................................................................                  272,686        1.052382
Connecticut ..........................................................................................................................................................                    258,379         .997167
Delaware ..............................................................................................................................................................                   254,508         .982227
District of Columbia ..............................................................................................................................................                       254,508         .982227
Florida ..................................................................................................................................................................              1,048,692        4.047235
Georgia ................................................................................................................................................................                  596,126        2.300639
Hawaii ..................................................................................................................................................................                 254,508         .982227
Idaho ....................................................................................................................................................................                254,508         .982227
Illinois ...................................................................................................................................................................              904,717        3.491590
Indiana .................................................................................................................................................................                 510,086        1.968584
36286                                    Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 135 / Friday, July 14, 1995 / Notices

                                FY 1996 ALLOTMENT—ADMINISTRATION ON DEVELOPMENTAL DISABILITIES—Continued
                                                                                                                                                                              Protection and   Percentage
                                                                                                                                                                                advocacy

Iowa ......................................................................................................................................................................          264,641      1.021334
Kansas .................................................................................................................................................................             254,508       .982227
Kentucky ..............................................................................................................................................................              403,708      1.558037
Louisiana ..............................................................................................................................................................             465,263      1.795598
Maine ...................................................................................................................................................................            254,508       .982227
Maryland ..............................................................................................................................................................              334,983      1.292806
Massachusetts .....................................................................................................................................................                  441,992      1.705787
Michigan ...............................................................................................................................................................             836,270      3.227431
Minnesota .............................................................................................................................................................              354,899      1.369668
Mississippi ............................................................................................................................................................             315,378      1.217144
Missouri ................................................................................................................................................................            458,338      1.768872
Montana ...............................................................................................................................................................              254,508       .982227
Nebraska ..............................................................................................................................................................              254,508       .982227
Nevada .................................................................................................................................................................             254,508       .982227
New Hampshire ...................................................................................................................................................                    254,508       .982227
New Jersey ..........................................................................................................................................................                504,403      1.946651
New Mexico .........................................................................................................................................................                 254,508       .982227
New York .............................................................................................................................................................             1,379,169      5.322651
North Carolina ......................................................................................................................................................                630,628      2.433794
North Dakota ........................................................................................................................................................                254,508       .982227
Ohio ......................................................................................................................................................................          998,081      3.851911
Oklahoma .............................................................................................................................................................               304,757      1.176154
Oregon .................................................................................................................................................................             261,963      1.010998
Pennsylvania ........................................................................................................................................................              1,037,225      4.002980
Rhode Island ........................................................................................................................................................                254,508       .982227
South Carolina .....................................................................................................................................................                 365,671      1.411240
South Dakota .......................................................................................................................................................                 254,508       .982227
Tennessee ...........................................................................................................................................................                491,491      1.896820
Texas ...................................................................................................................................................................          1,492,807      5.761216
Utah ......................................................................................................................................................................          254,508       .982227
Vermont ................................................................................................................................................................             254,508       .982227
Virginia .................................................................................................................................................................           498,317      1.923163
Washington ..........................................................................................................................................................                382,580      1.476498
West Virginia ........................................................................................................................................................               276,040      1.065326
Wisconsin .............................................................................................................................................................              447,725      1.727913
Wyoming ..............................................................................................................................................................               254,508       .982227
American Samoa .................................................................................................................................................                     136,161       .525489
Guam ...................................................................................................................................................................             136,161       .525489
Northern Mariana Islands ....................................................................................................................................                        136,161       .525489
Puerto Rico ..........................................................................................................................................................               809,142      3.122736
Palau ....................................................................................................................................................................           102,121       .394117
Virgin Islands .......................................................................................................................................................               136,161       .525489
  1 This amount is $806,682 less than the 1995 appropriation level. These funds are set aside for funding technical assistance and American In-
dian Consortiums. Public Law 103–230 authorizes spending up to two percent (2%) of the amount appropriated under Section 143 to fund tech-
nical assistance. American Indian Consortiums are eligible to receive the minimum amount under Section 142(c)(1)(A)(i). Unused funds will be
reallotted in accordance with Section 142(c)(1) of the Act.


  Dated: July 7, 1995.                                                       Centers for Disease Control and                                               These cooperative agreements will
Bob Williams,                                                                Prevention                                                                    support demonstration projects to plan
Commissioner, Administration on                                                                                                                            for the implementation of appropriate
                                                                             [Announcement 547]                                                            and effective prevention intervention
Developmental Disabilities.
[FR Doc. 95–17337 Filed 7–13–95; 8:45 am]                                    RIN 0905-ZA94                                                                 strategies for reaching the greatest
                                                                                                                                                           proportion of teenagers in communities
BILLING CODE 4184–01–P
                                                                             Community Coalition Partnership                                               with high rates of teen pregnancy.
                                                                             Programs for the Prevention of Teen                                           ‘‘Hub’’ organizations are also
                                                                             Pregnancy                                                                     encouraged, to the extent that it is
                                                                                                                                                           feasible and desirable within their
                                                                             Introduction                                                                  communities, to establish linkages with
                                                                               The Centers for Disease Control and                                         and participate in existing community-
                                                                             Prevention (CDC) announces the                                                based efforts funded by the Federal
                                                                             availability of fiscal year (FY) 1995                                         government or others to prevent HIV/
                                                                             funds for cooperative agreements to                                           AIDS, sexually transmitted diseases,
                                                                             support the efforts of ‘‘hub’’                                                and first and repeat pregnancies among
                                                                             organizations to strengthen and evaluate                                      teenagers.
                                                                             the effectiveness of their community                                             The Public Health Service (PHS) is
                                                                             program to prevent initial and repeat                                         committed to achieving the health
                                                                             teen pregnancies and related problems.                                        promotion and disease prevention
                       Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 135 / Friday, July 14, 1995 / Notices                                36287

objectives of ‘‘Healthy People 2000,’’ a   organizations. The applicant must              Program Requirements
PHS-led national activity to reduce        provide copies of formal agreements               ‘‘Hub’’ organizations should seek to
morbidity and mortality and improve        that document a history of collaboration       involve all relevant organizations in the
the quality of life. This announcement     to provide services, assistance, and           community to work in partnership to
directly addresses national objectives     opportunities to teens who live, study,        prevent teen pregnancies. The
related to the priority areas of Family    and/or work in the community for the           community coalition partnership
Planning and Educational and               purpose of preventing initial and repeat       program should seek to reach the
Community-Based Programs. Changes in       pregnancies. (Copies of the formal             greatest proportion of teens within the
the teen sexual behaviors will also have   agreements must be attached with the           community, giving emphasis to those
a positive impact on the achievement of    Executive Summary.)                            teens who are in high risk situations.
HIV Infection and Sexually Transmitted       3. A community is a specific area            ‘‘Hub’’ organizations are encouraged, to
Diseases national objectives. (For         within which the ‘‘hub’’ organization          the extent that it is feasible and
ordering a copy of ‘‘Healthy People        and its partners will focus their efforts      desirable within their communities, to
2000,’’ see the section Where To Obtain    to help prevent teen pregnancies. This         establish linkages, and to work in
Additional Information.)                   area must be defined by one or more            concert with existing community-based
                                           contiguous neighborhoods, school               efforts funded by the Federal
Authority                                  districts, zip codes, or census tracks.        government or others to prevent HIV/
  This program is authorized under         The definition and/or description of the       AIDS, sexually transmitted diseases,
Section 317(k)(2) of the Public Health     community must be provided with the            and first and repeat pregnancies among
Service Act, as amended [42 U.S.C.         Executive Summary section.                     teenagers, as a means to strengthen the
247b(k)(2)]. Applicable program              4. Eligibility characteristics must be       program to prevent teen pregnancy.
regulations are found in 42 CFR Part       clearly specified in the Executive                ‘‘Hub’’ organizations will work with
51b—Project Grants for Preventive          Summary section of the application.            current and/or new partner
Health Services.                           Availability of Funds                          organizations to enhance the
Smoke-Free Workplace                                                                      effectiveness of their teen pregnancy
                                              $3.25 million to $4.5 million is            prevention efforts, and to increase the
   PHS strongly encourages all grant       available in FY 1995 to fund                   number of teens reached. Programs will
recipients to provide a smoke-free         approximately 12 demonstration                 involve teens in community service, job
workplace and promote the non-use of       projects for the development of                skills development, and other
all tobacco products, and Public Law       Community Coalition Partnerships. It is        opportunities that build their self-
103–227, the Pro-Children Act of 1994,     expected that the average award will be        esteem, self-sufficiency, and belief in
which prohibits smoking in certain         $270,000, ranging from $150,000 to             themselves and their futures. In so
facilities that receive Federal funds in   $300,000. It is expected the awards will       doing, programs should strive to
which education, library, day care,        begin on or about September 30, 1995,          provide teens who are not yet sexually
health care and early childhood            and will be made for a 12-month budget         experienced with a strong incentive to
development services are provided to       period within a project period of up to        remain abstinent, and teens who are
children.                                  2 years. Funding estimates may vary            sexually experienced with a strong
                                           and are subject to change.                     incentive to delay pregnancies and
Eligible Applicants                           Funds may be used to facilitate the         childbearing until they are ready and
   Applications may be submitted by        strengthening and expansion of existing        able to assume the role and
‘‘Hub’’ organizations which are local      partnership coalitions; the planning and       responsibilities of parents. For those
public and nonprofit private social        coordination of coalition program              teens who are sexually active, programs
service, professional, or voluntary        activities; and the documentation and          will promote the consistent and
organizations that serve youth; and        evaluation of progress. This may               effective use of appropriate
among others may include local             include paying for staff time. Funds may       contraceptives, and will facilitate family
affiliates of national organizations,      not be used for facilities, direct services,   planning counseling and services.
hospitals, or local health, education,     or research.                                      In conducting activities to achieve the
social service, mental health, or other       Continuation awards within the              purpose of this program, the recipient
local public service agencies, including   project period will be made on the basis       will be responsible for the activities
local councils of Indian Tribes.           of satisfactory progress and the               under A. (Recipient Activities), and
   Eligible ‘‘Hub’’ organizations must     availability of funds. CDC anticipates a       CDC will be responsible for the
have the following characteristics:        new, competitive program                       activities listed under B. (CDC
   1. Serve communities (1) of at least    announcement for the availability of           Activities).
200,000 people and have (2) teen birth     funds during FY 1997 to support the
rates that are at least 50 percent above   implementation of community coalition          A. Recipient Activities
the national average of 62.1 births per    partnership programs for the prevention          The ‘‘hub’’ organization will
1,000 women 15–19 years of age—that        of teen pregnancy.                             coordinate the efforts of coalition
is, communities that have birth rates of                                                  members and facilitate the development
93 births per 1000 among women who         Purpose
                                                                                          of partnerships among members in
are 15–19 years of age, or higher. These      These cooperative agreement awards          support of the community teen
data must be documented by a letter        are to support the efforts of ‘‘hub’’          pregnancy prevention program. During
from the local health department that is   organizations to enhance their capacity        the first year, each ‘‘hub’’ organization,
attached with the Executive Summary        to strengthen and evaluate the                 will work with partner organizations
section of the application.                effectiveness of coalition partnership         and involve teens in a meaningful way,
   2. The eligible ‘‘Hub’’ organization    programs; and, to develop ‘‘Community          to:
must be the lead organization for an       Action Plans’’ for the implementation of         1. Plan for the implementation of the
existing teen pregnancy prevention         comprehensive community programs for           general approach described above by:
community coalition of three or more       the prevention of initial and repeat teen        a. Conducting a needs assessment to
private nonprofit and/or local public      pregnancies and related problems.              determine (1) the numbers and rates of
36288                   Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 135 / Friday, July 14, 1995 / Notices

teen pregnancies and associated               indicators of program effectiveness in       activities; and demonstrates a long-term
demographic and economic                      collaboration with CDC.                      commitment to the existing program.
characteristics; (2) why some teens are          5. Share information about program
                                                                                           C. Leadership Capability, Capacity, and
getting pregnant and others are not;          design, implementation, and
                                                                                           Experience of the ‘‘Hub’’ Organization
   (3) the perceived needs of teens; (4)      effectiveness with other recipients,
                                                                                           (10 points)
the extent to which these needs are met       other communities, and CDC and its
in the community, or the extent to            national partners through site visits;          The extent to which the applicant
which program gaps exist; (5) the extent      demonstration, training, and                 demonstrates sufficient leadership
to which social norms support                 dissemination workshops; and other           capability and capacity to efficiently
postponing teen pregnancy; and (6) the        means.                                       and effectively use the resources
extent to which teen services,                   6. Participate in at least two            requested.
assistance, and opportunities are             workshops with other recipients, CDC,           D. Proposed Goals, Objectives,
appealing, accessible, affordable,            and CDC’s national partners for the          Activities, and Evaluation (30 points)
sufficiently intense, are in sufficient       purposes of supporting the development          The extent to which the applicant has
quantity and duration, provide for            of recipient community coalition             submitted specific, measurable,
adequate continuity in ‘‘care providers’’,    partnership programs and developing          realistic, goals and objectives that utilize
and are known to teens throughout the         strategies for nationwide replication of     a systematic approach to reaching a
community.                                    effective programs.                          large proportion of teenagers in the
                                                                                           community. Activities appear likely to
   b. Identifying effective intervention      B. CDC Activities                            lead to the accomplishment of goals and
methods and adapting them for use with
                                                 1. Provide consultation and technical     objectives; proposed indicators of
diverse groups of teens who live, study,
                                              assistance to recipients with respect to     program progress and effectiveness
and/or work in the program’s
                                              program activities.                          appear implementable, incorporate the
community such that they build on the
                                                 2. Facilitate the development of a        use of baseline information, and
cultures of the teens; and preparing for
                                              national partnership between private         represent accepted approaches to
the use of these interventions in a
                                              and public sector organizations in           program evaluation; the operational
variety of community settings that might
                                              support of community coalition               plan provides ample opportunity for the
include, but are not limited to schools,
                                              partnership programs to prevent teen         involvement of coalition partners,
after-school programs, youth clubs or
                                              pregnancy and related problems.              including teen councils and other teen
organizations, clinical or social service
                                                 3. Coordinate the planning and            groups, and proposes other appropriate
settings, local media, communities of
                                              support of at least two planning,            means of obtaining input from teens
faith, work-sites that employ teens, and
                                              progress evaluation, demonstration,          into the design and development of the
community volunteer service programs.
                                              training, and/or dissemination               Community Action Plan and program;
   c. Specifying criteria that will be used
                                              workshops together with recipients and       there is evidence that proposed
to identify teens who are at greatest risk
                                              national partners.                           intervention components are effective,
of becoming pregnant or getting
                                                 4. Promote and collaborate in the         and that they are well matched to the
someone pregnant, and a systematic
                                              transfer and dissemination of                diverse groups of teens targeted in the
approach to using these criteria as a
                                              information, methods, and findings           proposal; and efforts are proposed to
means of linking teens to appropriate
                                              developed as part of this program.           extend the use of effective small scale
prevention services, assistance, and/or
                                                                                           intervention approaches to a broader
opportunities.                                Evaluation Criteria (Total of 100 Points)
                                                                                           scale.
   d. Field testing intervention                Applications will be reviewed and
components and modifying the                  evaluated according to the following         E. Program Management and Staffing
components based on the results.              criteria:                                    Plan (5 points)
   e. Prioritizing the gaps in services,                                                     The extent to which the roles,
assistance, opportunities, and social         A. Define Teen Pregnancy Problem and
                                                                                           responsibilities, lines of authority, and
norms that need to be addressed, as well      Current Prevention Efforts (25 points)
                                                                                           approach to managing the coalition
as the groups of teens most in need.          The extent to which the applicant
                                                                                           partners are described; staffing, job
   f. Developing a community action           substantiates the community’s teen
                                                                                           descriptions, organizational chart, and
plan that establishes realistic objectives,   pregnancy problem and identifies target
                                                                                           resumes for proposed and current staff
partner roles, sources of sustainable         populations of teens to be reached
                                                                                           indicate an ability to carry out the
funding, coordination mechanisms,             according to the level of risk of
                                                                                           proposed program.
approaches to targeting resources and         pregnancy that is associated with their
services, schedules for accomplishing         living situation. The extent to which the    F. Evidence of Partner Support (15
tasks and a delineation of                    applicant identifies gaps in current         points)
responsibilities, and plans for               intervention components and                    The extent to which partners stipulate
evaluating progress and indicators of         demonstrates tangible, realistic potential   in written letters of support and
effectiveness.                                that the existing interventions can be       agreement the delineation of
   2. Provide a full-time position with       effectively strengthened or improved.        responsibilities, commitment of
the responsibility, authority,                   B. Existing Coalition Program to          resources, and a time frame for the
professional training, and experience         Prevent Teen Pregnancy (10 points)           support of the coalition partnership
needed for leadership and coordination           The extent to which the existing          program. These letters of support and
of program activities among coalition         coalition has a unified, well organized      agreement should further describe the
partners.                                     effort that is focused on clear goals,       leadership role played by the ‘‘hub’’
   3. Serve as liaison between the            objectives, and activities related to the    organization in the past and present
coalition and its community partners,         prevention of teen pregnancies;              with respect to forging agreed upon
and CDC and its national partners.            represents the combined efforts of three     goals, objectives, and operational plans;
   4. Assess and document progress            or more community organizations;             providing direction and oversight to the
made, and plan for the evaluation of          provides appropriate support for current     implementation of operational plans;
                       Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 135 / Friday, July 14, 1995 / Notices                                 36289

mobilizing community resources; and          Number and Program Title should be             review panel such as the one created by
serving as the public relations              referenced on the document. The                the State health department’s HIV/AIDS
representative for the coalition.            granting agency does not guarantee to          prevention program. If the recipient
                                             ‘‘accommodate or explain’’ for State or        forms its own program review panel, at
G. Sharing of Experience and
                                             tribal process recommendations it              least one member must be an employee
Information (5 points)
                                             receives after that date.                      (or a designated representative) of a
  Provide a written statement agreeing                                                      government health department
to share written program descriptions,       Public Health Systems Reporting
                                                                                            consistent with the content guidelines.
intervention protocols, evaluation           Requirements
                                                                                            The names of the review panel members
protocols, coalition management                 This program is subject to the Public       must be listed on the Assurance of
methods, training materials, and other       Health System Reporting Requirements.          Compliance Form CDC 0.1113, which is
useful tools and information through         Under these requirements, all                  also included in the application kit. The
CDC-sponsored workshops and other            community-based nongovernmental                recipient must submit the program
approaches to dissemination, with other      applicants must prepare and submit the         review panel’s report that indicates all
cooperative agreement recipients, CDC        items identified below to the head of the      materials have been reviewed and
and its national partners, and other         appropriate State and/or local health          approved, this includes conference
communities seeking to develop their         agency(s) in the program area(s) that          agendas. Before funds can be used to
own teen pregnancy prevention                may be impacted by the proposed                obtain HIV/AIDS-related materials,
partnership programs.                        project no later than the receipt date of      determine whether suitable materials
H. Budget and Accompanying                   the Federal application. The appropriate       are already available at the CDC
Justification (Not Weighted)                 State and/or local health agency is            National AIDS Clearinghouse.
                                             determined by the applicant. The
  The extent to which the applicant          following information must be                  Application Submission and Deadline
provides a detailed, itemized budget,        provided:                                        The original and two copies of the
with accompanying justification, that is        a. A copy of the face page of the           application PHS Form 5161–1 (Revised
consistent with the stated objectives and    application (SF 424).                          7/92, OMB Control Number 0937–0189)
planned program activities.                     b. A summary of the project that            must be submitted to Clara M. Jenkins,
Executive Order 12372 Review                 should be titled ‘‘Public Health System        Grants Management Officer, Grants
                                             Impact Statement’’ (PHSIS), not exceed         Management Branch, Procurement and
   Applications are subject to               one page, and include the following:
Intergovernmental Review of Federal                                                         Grants Office, Centers for Disease
                                                (1) A description of the population to      Control and Prevention (CDC), 255 East
Programs as governed by Executive            be served;
Order (E.O.) 12372. E.O. 12372 sets up                                                      Paces Ferry Road, NE., Room 314, Mail
                                                (2) A summary of the services to be         Stop E–18, Atlanta, GA 30305, on or
a system for State and local government      provided;
review of proposed Federal assistance                                                       before August 21, 1995.
                                                (3) A description of the coordination         1. Deadline: Applications shall be
applications. Applicants (other than         plans with the appropriate State and/or        considered as meeting the deadline if
federally recognized Indian tribal           local health agencies.                         they are either:
governments) should contact their State         If the State and/or local health official     (a) Received on or before the deadline
Single Point of Contact (SPOC) as early      should desire a copy of the entire             date; or
as possible to alert them to the             application, it may be obtained from the         (b) Sent on or before the deadline date
prospective applications and receive         State Single Point of Contact (SPOC) or        and received in time for submission to
any necessary instructions on the State      directly from the applicant.                   the objective review group. (Applicants
process. For proposed projects serving                                                      must request a legibly dated U.S. Postal
more than one State, the applicant is        Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance
                                             Number                                         Service postmark or obtain a legibly
advised to contact the SPOC for each                                                        dated receipt from a commercial carrier
affected State. A current list of SPOCs        The Catalog of Federal Domestic              or U.S. Postal Service. Private metered
is included in the application kit. Indian   Assistance Number is 93.283.                   postmarks shall not be acceptable as
tribes are strongly encouraged to request    Other Requirements                             proof of timely mailing.)
tribal government review of the                                                               2. Late Applications: Applications
proposed application. If SPOCs or tribal     Paperwork Reduction Act                        which do not meet the criteria in 1.(a)
governments have any process                   Projects that involve the collection of      or 1.(b) above are considered late
recommendations on applications              information from 10 or more individuals        applications. Late applications will not
submitted to CDC, they should forward        and funded by the cooperative                  be considered in the current
them to Clara M. Jenkins, Grants             agreement will be subject to review by         competition and will be returned to the
Management Officer, Grants                   the Office of Management and Budget            applicant.
Management Branch, Procurement and           (OMB) under the Paperwork Reduction
Grants Office, Centers for Disease           Act.                                           Where to Obtain Additional
Control and Prevention(CDC), 255 East                                                       Information
Paces Ferry Road, NE., Atlanta, GA           HIV/AIDS Requirements                            To receive additional written
30305. The due date for state process           Recipients must comply with the             information call (404) 332–4561. You
recommendations is 30 days after the         document entitled ‘‘Content of AIDS-           will be asked to leave your name,
application deadline date for new            Related Written Materials, Pictorials,         address, and phone number and will
awards [the appropriation for these          Audiovisuals, Questionnaires, Survey           need to refer to Announcement Number
awards was received late in the fiscal       Instruments, and Educational Sessions’’        547. You will receive a complete
year and would not allow for an              (June 15, 1992), a copy of which is            program description, information on
application receipt date which would         included in the application kit. In            application procedures, and application
accommodate the 60 day State                 complying with the requirements for a          forms.
recommendation process within FY             program review panel, recipients are             If you have questions after reviewing
1995]. The Program Announcement              encouraged to use an existing program          the contents of all documents, business
36290                    Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 135 / Friday, July 14, 1995 / Notices

management technical assistance may           1993, and provides general information     and received comments are available for
be obtained from Locke Thompson,              on procedures and practices that may be    public examination in the Dockets
Grants Management Specialist, Grants          useful to blood establishments in          Management Branch (address above)
Management Branch, Procurement and            developing and administering a QA          between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday
Grants Office, Centers for Disease            program.                                   through Friday.
Control and Prevention (CDC), 255 East        DATES: Written comments may be             FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Paces Ferry Road, NE., Room 314, Mail         submitted at any time.                     Sharon A. Carayiannis, Center for
Stop E–18, Atlanta, GA 30305,                 ADDRESSES: Submit written requests for     Biologics Evaluation and Research
telephone (404) 842–6595.                     single copies of the ‘‘Guideline for       (HFM–635), Food and Drug
Programmatic technical assistance may         Quality Assurance in Blood                 Administration, 1401 Rockville Pike,
be obtained from Michael E. Dalmat,           Establishments’’ to the Congressional      Rockville, MD 20852, 301–594–3074.
Dr.P.H., Division of Reproductive             and Consumer Affairs Branch (HFM–          SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On
Health, National Center for Chronic           12), Center for Biologics Evaluation and   January 21 through 22, 1992, FDA
Disease Prevention and Health                 Research, Food and Drug                    sponsored a public workshop on QA in
Promotion, Centers for Disease Control        Administration, 1401 Rockville Pike,       the manufacture of blood and blood
and Prevention (CDC), 4770 Buford             suite 200 North, Rockville, MD 20852–      products and provided a background
Highway, NE., Mail Stop K–20, Atlanta,        1448, 301–594–1800. Send two self-         information document on quality
GA 30341–3724, telephone (404) 488–           addressed adhesive labels to assist that   assurance to all registrants. That
5136.                                         office in processing your requests.        workshop was announced in the
   Please refer to Announcement               Persons with access to the INTERNET        Federal Register on December 13, 1991
Number 547 when requesting                    may request the guideline be sent by       (56 FR 65094). FDA developed the
information and submitting an                 return E-mail by sending a message to      ‘‘Draft Guideline for Quality Assurance
application.                                  ‘‘GDE—QA@A1.CBER.FDA.GOV’’. The            in Blood Establishments,’’ dated June
   Potential applicants may obtain a          guideline may also be obtained through     17, 1993, following the meeting, after
copy of ‘‘Healthy People 2000’’ (Full         INTERNET via File Transfer Protocol        considering the discussions at the
Report, Stock No. 017–001–00474–0) or         (FTP). Requestors should connect to the    workshop and comments received. FDA
‘‘Healthy People 2000’’ (Summary              Center for Drug Evaluation and Research    announced the availability of the draft
Report, Stock No. 017–001–00473–1)            (CDER) FTP using the FTP. The Center       guideline in the Federal Register on
referenced in the ‘‘Introduction’’            for Biologics Evaluation and Research      July 2, 1993 (58 FR 35959), and solicited
through the Superintendent of                 (CBER) documents are maintained in a       comments. FDA has revised the draft
Documents, Government Printing                subdirectory called CBER on the server,    guideline in response to public
Office, Washington, DC 20402–9325,            ‘‘CDV2.CBER.FDA.GOV’’. The                 comment. The revisions are minor and
telephone (202) 512–1800.                     ‘‘READ.ME’’ file in that subdirectory      intended to clarify the document. This
  Dated: July 10, 1995.                       describes the available documents,         guideline, dated July 14, 1995, provides
Arthur C. Jackson,                            which may be available as an ASCII text    general information on procedures and
Associate Director for Management and         file (*.TXT), or a WordPerfect 5.1         practices and may be useful to blood
Operations, Centers for Disease Control And   document (*.w51), or both. A sample        establishments in developing and
Prevention (CDC).                             dialogue for obtaining the READ.ME file    administering a QA program.
[FR Doc. 95–17415 Filed 7–13–95; 8:45 am]     with a test based FTP program would           To ensure the continued safety of the
BILLING CODE 4163–18–P                        be:                                        nation’s blood supply, it is essential that
                                              FTP CDV2.CBER.FDA.GOV                      blood establishments implement
                                              LOGIN ANONYMOUS                            effective control over manufacturing
Food and Drug Administration                  <ANY PASSWORD>                             processes and systems. FDA believes
                                              BINARY                                     that this can be accomplished by each
[Docket No. 91N–0450]                         CD CBER                                    blood establishment developing a well
Guideline for Quality Assurance in            GET READ.ME                                planned, written, and managed QA
                                              EXIT                                       program designed to recognize and
Blood Establishments; Availability
                                              The guideline may also be obtained by      prevent the causes of recurrent
AGENCY:   Food and Drug Administration,       calling the CBER FAX Information           deficiencies in blood establishment
HHS.                                          System (FAX—ON—DEMAND) at 301–             performance. The emphasis of such a
ACTION:   Notice.                             594–1939 from a FAX machine with a         QA program is on preventing errors
                                              touch tone phone attached or built-in.     rather than detecting them
SUMMARY: The Food and Drug                    Submit written comments on this            retrospectively. The potential public
Administration (FDA) is announcing the        guideline to the Dockets Management        health consequences require that all
availability of a guideline entitled          Branch (HFA–305), Food and Drug            establishments, regardless of size, invest
‘‘Guideline for Quality Assurance in          Administration, rm. 1–23, 12420            in QA.
Blood Establishments.’’ This guideline        Parklawn Dr., Rockville, MD 20857.            The guideline includes discussions of
is intended to assist manufacturers of        Requests and comments should be            the following: (1) The general concepts
blood and blood components, including         identified with the docket number          of a quality control/assurance program;
blood banks, blood centers, transfusion       found in brackets in the heading of this   (2) the function and reporting
services, and plasmapheresis centers, in      document. Two copies of any comments       responsibilities of the QA unit; (3) the
developing quality assurance (QA)             are to be submitted, except that           responsibilities of the QA unit in such
programs that are consistent with             individuals may submit one copy.           areas as standard operating procedures,
recognized principles of QA and current       Requests and comments should be            training and education, competency
good manufacturing practice (CGMP).           identified with the docket number          evaluation, proficiency testing,
This guideline revises the draft              found in brackets in the heading of this   validation, equipment, error/accident
‘‘Guideline for Quality Assurance in          document. The ‘‘Guideline for Quality      reports, records management, lot release
Blood Establishments,’’ dated June 17,        Assurance in Blood Establishments’’        procedures and QA audits; and (4) the
                         Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 135 / Friday, July 14, 1995 / Notices                             36291

biological product and CGMP                  by law. FDA has made the                    4,470,972) from Schering Corp., and the
regulations for blood and blood              determination because of the                Patent and Trademark Office requested
components in 21 CFR parts 600               submission of an application to the         FDA’s assistance in determining this
through 680, and the CGMP regulations        Commissioner of Patents and                 patent’s eligibility for patent term
in 21 CFR parts 210 through 211. In          Trademarks, Department of Commerce,         restoration. In a letter dated April 12,
addition, the guideline contains a           for the extension of a patent which         1995, FDA advised the Patent and
glossary, a reference page, and an           claims that human drug product.             Trademark Office that this human drug
appendix that provides examples of the       ADDRESSES: Written comments and             product had undergone a regulatory
regulations in 21 CFR parts 210, 211,        petitions should be directed to the         review period and that the approval of
and 21 CFR parts 600 through 680             Dockets Management Branch (HFA–             RENORMAX® represented the first
supplementing each other.                    305), Food and Drug Administration,         permitted commercial marketing or use
   This document is not being issued         rm. 1–23, 12420 Parklawn Dr.,               of the procduct. Shortly thereafter, the
under the authority of 21 CFR 10.90(b)       Rockville, MD 20857.                        Patent and Trademark Office requested
because FDA is in the process of             FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
                                                                                         that FDA determine the product’s
revising this section. This document,        Brian J. Malkin, Office of Health Affairs   regulatory review period.
although called a guideline, does not                                                      FDA has determined that the
                                             (HFY–20), Food and Drug
bind the agency and does not create or                                                   applicable regulatory review period for
                                             Administration, 5600 Fishers Lane,
confer any rights, privileges, or benefits                                               RENORMAX® is 3,996 days. Of this
                                             Rockville, MD 20857, 301–443–1382.
for or on any person. Blood                                                              time, 2,901 days occurred during the
                                             SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Drug
establishments may follow the guideline                                                  testing phase of the regulatory review
                                             Price Competition and Patent Term           period, while 1,095 days occurred
or may choose to use alternative             Restoration Act of 1984 (Pub. L. 98–417)
procedures not provided in the                                                           during the approval phase. These
                                             and the Generic Animal Drug and Patent      periods of time were derived from the
guideline. If a blood establishment          Term Restoration Act (Pub. L. 100–670)
chooses to use alternative procedures,                                                   following dates:
                                             generally provide that a patent may be        1.The date an exemption under
the establishment may wish to discuss        extended for a period of up to 5 years
the matter further with the agency to                                                    section 505(i) of the Federal Food, Drug,
                                             so long as the patented item (human         and Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 355(i))
prevent expenditure of resources on          drug product, animal drug product,
activities that may be unacceptable to                                                   became effective: January 22, 1984. FDA
                                             medical device, food additive, or color     has verified the applicant’s claim that
FDA.                                         additive) was subject to regulatory
   Interested persons may, at any time,                                                  the date that the investigational new
                                             review by FDA before the item was           drug application (IND) became effective
submit written comments to the Dockets
                                             marketed. Under these acts, a product’s     was on January 22, 1984.
Management Branch (address above)
                                             regulatory review period forms the basis      2. The date the application was
regarding this guideline. Two copies of
                                             for determining the amount of extension     initially submitted with respect to the
any comments are to be submitted,
                                             an applicant may receive.                   human drug product under section
except that individuals may submit one          A regulatory review period consists of   505(b) of the Federal Food, Drug, and
copy. Comments are to be identified          two periods of time: A testing phase and    Cosmetic Act: December 31, 1991. FDA
with the docket number found in              an approval phase. For human drug           has verified the applicant’s claim that
brackets in the heading of this              products, the testing phase begins when     the new drug application (NDA) for
document. Continued comment by the           the exemption to permit the clinical        RENORMAX® (NDA 20–240) was
blood industry is encouraged, and            investigations of the drug becomes          initially submitted on December 31,
comments will be continuously                effective and runs until the approval       1991.
accepted by the Dockets Management           phase begins. The approval phase starts       3. The date the application was
Branch.                                      with the initial submission of an           approved: December 29, 1994. FDA has
   FDA periodically will review written      application to market the human drug        verified the applicant’s claim that NDA
comments on the guideline to determine       product and continues until FDA grants      20–240 was approved on December 29,
whether future revisions to the              permission to market the drug product.      1994.
guideline are warranted.                     Although only a portion of a regulatory       This determination of the regulatory
  Dated: July 11, 1995.                      review period may count toward the          review period establishes the maximum
William B. Schultz,                          actual amount of extension that the         potential length of a patent extension.
Deputy Commissioner for Policy.              Commissioner of Patents and                 However, the U.S. Patent and
[FR Doc. 95–17346 Filed 7–13–95; 8:45 am]    Trademarks may award (for example,          Trademark Office applies several
BILLING CODE 4160–01–F                       half the testing phase must be              statutory limitations in its calculations
                                             subtracted as well as any time that may     of the actual period for patent extension.
                                             have occurred before the patent was         In its application for patent extension,
[Docket No. 93E–0076]                        issued), FDA’s determination of the         this applicant seeks 730 days of patent
                                             length of a regulatory review period for    term restoration.
Determination of Regulatory Review                                                         Anyone with knowledge that any of
                                             a human drug product will include all
Period for Purposes of Patent                                                            the dates as published is incorrect may,
                                             of the testing phase and approval phase
Extension; RENORMAX®                                                                     on or before September 12, 1995, submit
                                             as specified in 35 U.S.C. 156(g)(1)(B).
AGENCY:   Food and Drug Administration,         FDA recently approved for marketing      to the Dockets Management Branch
HHS.                                         the human drug product RENORMAX®            (address above) written comments and
ACTION:   Notice.                            (spirapril hydrochloride).                  ask for a redetermination. Furthermore,
                                             RENORMAX® is indicated for the              any interested person may petition FDA,
SUMMARY: The Food and Drug                   treatment of hypertension. Subsequent       on or before January 15, 1996, for a
Administration (FDA) has determined          to this approval, the Patent and            determination regarding whether the
the regulatory review period for             Trademark Office received a patent term     applicant for extension acted with due
RENORMAX® and is publishing this             restoration application for                 diligence during the regulatory review
notice of that determination as required     RENORMAX® (U.S. Patent No.                  period. To meet its burden, the petition
36292                    Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 135 / Friday, July 14, 1995 / Notices

must contain sufficient facts to merit an       National Institute of Mental Health;           clearly unwarranted invasion of
FDA investigation. (See H. Rept. 857,           Notice of Closed Meetings                      personal privacy.
part 1, 98th Cong., 2d sess., pp. 41–42,                                                         This notice is being published less
1984.) Petitions should be in the format           Pursuant to Section 10(d) of the            than fifteen days prior to the meetings
specified in 21 CFR 10.30.                      Federal Advisory Committee Act, as             due to the urgent need to meet timing
  Comments and petitions should be              amended (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2), notice          limitations imposed by the grant review
submitted to the Dockets Management             is hereby given of the following               cycle.
Branch (address above) in three copies          meetings of the National Institute of
                                                                                               (Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance
(except that individuals may submit             Mental Health Special Emphasis Panel:          Program Numbers 93.242, Small Business
single copies) and identified with the            Agenda/Purpose: To review and evaluate       Innovation Research; 93.242, Mental Health
docket number found in brackets in the          grant applications.                            Research Grants; 93.121, Scientist
heading of this document. Comments                Committee Name: National Institute of        Development Awards; 93.282, Mental Health
                                                Mental Health Special Emphasis Panel.          Research Service Awards for Research
and petitions may be seen in the                                                               Training.)
                                                  Date: July 12, 1995.
Dockets Management Branch between 9               Time: 1 p.m.                                   Dated: July 10, 1995.
a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through                   Place: Parklawn Building, Room 9C–18,        Susan K. Feldman,
Friday.                                         5600 Fishers Lane, Rockville, MD 20857.
                                                                                               Committee Management Officer, NIH.
  Dated: June 30, 1995.                           Contact Person: Angela L. Redlingshafer,
                                                Parklawn Building, Room 9C–18, 5600            [FR Doc. 95–17384 Filed 7–12–95; 8:45 am]
Stuart L. Nightingale,
                                                Fishers Lane, Rockville, MD 20857,             BILLING CODE 4140–01–M
Associate Commissioner for Health Affairs.      Telephone: 301, 443–1367.
[FR Doc. 95–17345 Filed 7–13–95; 8:45 am]         Committee Name: National Institute of
BILLING CODE 4160–01–F                          Mental Health Special Emphasis Panel.          Office of Refugee Resettlement
                                                  Date: July 24, 1995.
                                                  Time: 3 p.m.                                 Refugee Resettlement Program:
National Institutes of Health                     Place: Parklawn Building, Room 9C–18,        Allocations to States of FY 1995 Funds
                                                5600 Fishers Lane, Rockville, MD 20857.        for Refugee Social Services and for
National Heart, Lung, and Blood                   Contact Person: William H. Radcliffe,        Refugees Who Are Former Political
Institute; Notice of a Closed Meeting           Parklawn Building, Room 9C–18, 5600            Prisoners From Vietnam
                                                Fishers Lane, Rockville, MD 20857,
   Pursuant to Section 10(d) of the             Telephone: 301, 443–3936.                      AGENCY:   Office of Refugee Resettlement
Federal Advisory Committee Act, as                Committee Name: National Institute of        (ORR), ACF, HHS.
amended (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2), notice           Mental Health Special Emphasis Panel.          ACTION: Final notice of allocations to
is hereby given of the following Heart,           Date: July 26–July 28, 1995.                 States of FY 1995 funds for refugee1
Lung, and Blood Special Emphasis                  Time: 9 a.m.                                 social services and for refugees who are
Panel (SEP) meeting:                              Place: Bethesda Holiday Inn, 8120
                                                                                               former political prisoners from Vietnam.
                                                Wisconsin Avenue, Bethesda, MD 20814.
  Name of SEP: HIV-Associated Pathogens of        Contact Person: Sheri L. Schwartzback,       SUMMARY:    This notice establishes the
Lung: Life Cycle Regulation.                    Parklawn Building, Room 9C–26, 5600
  Date: July 31–August 1, 1995.                                                                allocations to States of FY 1995 funds
                                                Fishers Lane, Rockville, MD 20857,
  Time: 7:30 p.m.                               Telephone: 301, 443–4843.
                                                                                               for social services under the Refugee
  Place: Gaithersburg Marriott                                                                 Resettlement Program (RRP). In order to
                                                  Committee Name: National Institute of
Washingtonian Center, Gaithersburg,             Mental Health Special Emphasis Panel.
                                                                                               help meet the special needs of former
Maryland.                                         Date: July 31, 1995.                         political prisoners from Vietnam, the
  Contact Person: Jon Ranhand, Ph.D.,             Time: 9 a.m.                                 Director has added to the formula
Rockledge Building II, 6701 Rockledge Drive,      Place: The Latham Hotel, 3000 M Street,      allocation $2,000,000 in funds
Room 7093, Bethesda, Maryland 20892–7924,       N.W., Washington, DC 20007.
(301) 435–0280.                                   Contact Person: Lawrence E. Chaitkin,          1 In addition to persons who meet all
  Purpose/Agenda: To review and evaluate        Parklawn Building, Room 9C–18, 5600            requirements of 45 CFR 400.43, ‘‘Requirements for
grant applications.                             Fishers Lane, Rockville, MD 20857,             documentation of refugee status,’’ eligibility for
  The meeting will be closed in accordance      Telephone: 301, 443–4843.                      refugee social services also includes: (1) Cuban and
with the provisions set forth in secs.                                                         Haitian entrants, under section 501 of the Refugee
552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5, U.S.C.        Committee Name: National Institute of        Education Assistance Act of 1980 (Pub. L. 96–422);
Applications and/or proposals and the           Mental Health Special Emphasis Panel.          (2) certain Amerasians from Vietnam who are
discussions could reveal confidential trade       Date: August 7, 1995.                        admitted to the U.S. as immigrants under section
secrets or commercial property such as            Time: 1 p.m.                                 584 of the Foreign Operations, Export Financing,
                                                  Place: Parklawn Building, Room 9–101,        and Related Programs Appropriations Act, 1988, as
patentable material and personal information                                                   included in the FY 1988 Continuing Resolution
concerning individuals associated with the      5600 Fishers Lane, Rockville, MD 20857.
                                                                                               (Pub. L. 100–202); and (3) certain Amerasians from
applications and/or proposals, the disclosure     Contact Person: Shirley H. Maltz, Parklawn
                                                                                               Vietnam, including U.S. citizens, under title II of
of which would constitute a clearly             Building, Room 9–101, 5600 Fishers Lane,       the Foreign Operations, Export Financing, and
unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.       Rockville, MD 20857, Telephone: 301, 443–      Related Programs Appropriations Acts, 1989 (Pub.
                                                3936.                                          L. 100–461), 1990 (Pub. L. 101–167), and 1991 (Pub.
(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance                                                        L. 101–513). For convenience, the term ‘‘refugee’’ is
Programs Nos. 93.837, Heart and Vascular           The meetings will be closed in              used in this notice to encompass all such eligible
Diseases Research; 93.838, Lung Diseases        accordance with the provisions set forth       persons unless the specific context indicates
Research; and 93.839, Blood Diseases and        in secs. 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title      otherwise.
Resources Research, National Institutes of      5, U.S.C. Applications and/or proposals          Refugees admitted to the U.S. under admissions
Health.)                                        and the discussions could reveal               numbers set aside for private-sector-initiative
  Dated: July 5, 1995.                                                                         admissions are not eligible to be served under the
                                                confidential trade secrets or commercial       social service program (or under other programs
Margery G. Grubb,                               property such as patentable material           supported by Federal refugee funds) during their
Senior Committee Management Specialist,         and personal information concerning            period of coverage under their sponsoring agency’s
NIH.                                                                                           agreement with the Department of State—usually
                                                individuals associated with the                two years from their date of arrival or until they
[FR Doc. 95–17285 Filed 7–13–95; 8:45 am]       applications and/or proposals, the             obtain permanent resident alien status, whichever
BILLING CODE 4140–01–M                          disclosure of which would constitute a         comes first.
                       Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 135 / Friday, July 14, 1995 / Notices                                    36293

previously set aside for social services        Allowable services for the above-cited      contractors; (2) categories of activities
discretionary projects.                      funds for political prisoners include the      provided; (3) numbers of persons
EFFECTIVE DATE: July 14, 1995.               following direct services: (1) Specialized     served; and (4) outcomes, to the extent
                                             orientation and adjustment services,           possible.
ADDRESSES: Office of Refugee
                                             including peer support activities and (2)
Resettlement, Administration for                                                            B. Refugee Social Service Funds
                                             specialized employment-related
Children and Families, 370 L’Enfant          services, as needed. Funds may also be            The population figures for the social
Promenade SW., Washington, DC 20447.         used for the costs of leadership               service allocation include refugees,
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:             development training, including the            Cuban/Haitian entrants, and Amerasians
Toyo Biddle (202) 401–9250.                  costs of travel to attend FPP                  from Vietnam since these populations
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice of         conferences, for the purpose of                may be served through funds addressed
the proposed social service allocations      facilitating the ability of former political   in this notice. (A State must, however,
                                             prisoners to continue the FPP services         have an approved State plan for the
to States was published in the Federal
                                             that were begun under this program             Cuban/Haitian Entrant Program or
Register on March 8, 1995 (60 FR
                                             after the set-aside program ends.              indicate in its refugee program State
12775). The population estimates that
                                             Adjustment services include any service        plan that Cuban/Haitian entrants will be
were used in the proposed notice have
                                             listed under 45 CFR 400.155(c) of the          served in order to use funds on behalf
been adjusted as a result of additional
                                             ORR regulations. Under no                      of entrants as well as refugees.)
population information submitted by 10                                                         The Director is allocating $68,681,700
States.                                      circumstances may these funds be used
                                             for direct cash payments or stipends           to States on the basis of each State’s
I. Amounts For Allocation                    (other than for travel costs to                proportion of the national population of
                                             conferences), for the purchase of              refugees who had been in the U.S. 3
   The Office of Refugee Resettlement
                                             advertising space or air time, or for          years or less as of October 1, 1994
(ORR) has available $80,802,000 in FY
                                             services covered under the Department          (including a floor amount for States
1995 refugee social service funds as part
                                             of State Reception and Placement               which have small refugee populations).
of the FY 1995 appropriation for the                                                           The use of the 3-year population base
Department of Health and Human               Cooperative Agreements.
                                                Allowable services under this               in the allocation formula is required by
Services (Pub. L. 103–333).                                                                 section 412(c)(1)(B) of the Immigration
                                             allocation for Vietnamese political
   Of the total of $80,802,000, the          prisoners are intended to supplement,          and Nationality Act (INA) which states
Director of ORR is making available to       not to supplant, those services provided       that the ‘‘funds available for a fiscal year
States $68,681,700 (85%) under the           to refugees in general under the social        for grants and contracts [for social
allocation formula set out in this notice.   service formula allocation, discussed          services] * * * shall be allocated among
These funds are available for the            below.                                         the States based on the total number of
purpose of providing social services to         ORR intends to provide technical            refugees (including children and adults)
refugees. In addition, the Director of       assistance to States and organizations         who arrived in the United States not
ORR is making available $2,000,000           that request it to assure effective            more than 36 months before the
from discretionary social service funds      program development and                        beginning of such fiscal year and who
to be allocated under the formula in this    implementation.                                are actually residing in each State
notice for additional services to former        Because these funds are to provide          (taking into account secondary
political prisoners from Vietnam.            specifically for services for former           migration) as of the beginning of the
Although we had indicated in the FY          political prisoners from Vietnam, States       fiscal year.’’
1994 social service allocations notice       which allocate social service funds to            As established in the FY 1991 social
that FY 1994 would be the last year in       other local administrative jurisdictions,      services notice published in the Federal
which a special set-aside would be           such as counties, shall do so for these        Register of August 29, 1991, section I,
allocated for additional services for        funds, using a formula which reflects          ‘‘Allocation Amounts’’ (56 FR 42745), a
former political prisoners from Vietnam,     arrivals of this target population during      variable floor amount for States which
we are continuing this special set-aside     FY 1994.                                       have small refugee populations is
in FY 1995 due to continued arrivals of         ORR strongly encourages States and          calculated as follows: If the application
this population in FY 1995.                  other contracting jurisdictions, in            of the regular allocation formula yields
A. Discretionary Social Service Funds        selecting service providers for the            less than $100,000, then—
for Vietnamese Political Prisoners           above, to award these funds, to the               (1) A base amount of $75,000 is
                                             extent possible, to qualified refugee          provided for a State with a population
  In recognition of the special              mutual assistance associations (MAAs)          of 50 or fewer refugees who have been
vulnerability of refugees who are former     with experience serving the target             in the U.S. 3 years or less; and
political prisoners from Vietnam, the        population. All contractors receiving             (2) For a State with more than 50
Director of ORR is setting aside             these funds should have Vietnamese             refugees who have been in the U.S. 3
$2,000,000 from discretionary social         language capacity and Vietnamese               years or less: (a) A floor has been
service funds to be allocated under the      cultural understanding.                        calculated consisting of $50,000 plus
formula set forth in this announcement,         States are required to provide to ORR       the regular per capita allocation for
based on the number of actual political      program performance information on             refugees above 50 up to a total of
prisoner arrivals in FY 1994. This           the Vietnamese political prisoner              $100,000 (in other words, the maximum
formula allocation is shown separately       program that meets the reporting               under the floor formula is $100,000); (b)
in Table 1 (cols. 7 and 8). States are       requirements contained in 45 CFR               if this calculation has yielded less than
required to use this allocation to           92.40, under the terms and conditions of       $75,000, a base amount of $75,000 is
provide additional services, as              the social services grant awards to            provided for the State.
described below, to recent arrivals from     States. The information to be contained           ORR has consistently supported floors
Vietnam who are former political             in the narrative portion of State              for small States in order to provide
prisoners (FPPs) and members of their        quarterly performance reports must             sufficient funds to carry out a minimum
families.                                    include: (1) Names of service                  service program. Given the range in
36294                 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 135 / Friday, July 14, 1995 / Notices

numbers of refugees in the small States,    Amerasians and former political             are expected to use day care funding
we have concluded that a variable floor,    prisoners from Vietnam, in addition to      from other publicly funded mainstream
as established in the FY 1991 notice,       special funding that ORR may designate      programs as a prior resource and are
will be more reflective of needs than       to address the special needs of these       expected to work with service providers
previous across-the-board floors.           populations.                                to assure maximum access to other
   The $12,120,300 in remaining social         ORR funds may not be used to             publicly funded resources for day care.
service funds (15% of the total funds       provide services to United States              In accordance with 45 CFR 400.146, if
available) is expected to be used by ORR    citizens, since they are not covered        a State’s cash assistance dependency
on a discretionary basis to provide         under the authorizing legislation, with     rate for refugees (as defined in section
funds for individual projects intended      the following exceptions: (1) Under         400.146(b)) is 55% or more, funds
to contribute to the effectiveness and      current regulations at 45 CFR 400.208,      awarded under this notice (with the
efficiency of the refugee resettlement      services may be provided to a U.S.-born     exception of the political prisoner set-
program. Grant announcements on             minor child in a family in which both       aside) are subject to a requirement that
discretionary initiatives will be issued    parents are refugees or, if only one        at least 85% of the State’s award be used
separately.                                 parent is present, in which that parent     for employability services as set forth in
                                            is a refugee; and (2) under the FY 1989     section 400.154. (Beginning October 1,
Population to be Served
                                            Foreign Operations, Export Financing,       1995, States will no longer have to
   Although the allocation formula is       and Related Programs Appropriations         adhere to this requirement since the
based on the 3-year refugee population,     Act (Pub. L. No. 100–461), services may     final rule eliminates this requirement.)
in accordance with the current              be provided to an Amerasian from            ORR expects these funds to be used for
requirements of 45 CFR part 400 subpart     Vietnam who is a U.S. citizen and who       services which directly enhance refugee
I—Refugee Social Services, States are       enters the U.S. after October 1, 1988.      employment potential, have specific
not required to limit social service                                                    employment objectives, and are
programs to refugees who have been in       Service Priorities
                                                                                        designed to enable refugees to obtain
the U.S. only 3 years. In keeping with         Refugee social service funding should    jobs in less than one year as part of a
45 CFR 400.147(a), a State must allocate    be used to assist refugee families to       plan to achieve self-sufficiency. This
an appropriate portion of its social        achieve economic independence. To           reflects the Congressional objective that
service funds, based on population and      this end, ORR expects States to ensure      ‘‘employable refugees should be placed
service needs, as determined by the         that a coherent plan of services is         on jobs as soon as possible after their
State, for services to newly arriving       developed for each eligible family that     arrival in the United States’’ and that
refugees who have been in the U.S. less     addresses the family’s needs from time      social service funds be focused on
than one year.                              of arrival until attainment of economic     ‘‘employment-related services, English-
   While 45 CFR 400.147(b) requires that    independence. Each service plan should      as-a-second-language training (in non-
in providing employability services, a      address a family’s needs for both           work hours where possible), and case-
State must give priority to a refugee who   employment-related services and other       management services’’ (INA, section
is receiving cash assistance, social        needed social services.                     412(a)(1)(B)). If refugee social service
service programs should not be limited         Reflecting section 412(a)(1)(A)(iv) of   funds are used for the provision of
exclusively to refugees who are cash        the INA, the Director expects States to     English language training, such training
assistance recipients. If a State intends   ‘‘insure that women have the same           should be provided concurrently, rather
to provide services to refugees who have    opportunities as men to participate in      than sequentially, with employment or
been in the U.S. more than 3 years, 45      training and instruction.’’ In addition,    with other employment-related services,
CFR 400.147(c) requires the State to        States are expected to make sure that       to the maximum extent possible. ORR
specify and justify as part of its Annual   services are provided in a manner that      also encourages the continued provision
Services Plan those funds that it           encourages the use of bilingual women       of services after a refugee has entered a
proposes to use to provide services to      on service agency staffs to ensure          job to help the refugee retain
those refugees.                             adequate service access by refugee          employment or move to a better job.
   However, effective October 1, 1995,      women. In order to facilitate refugee          Since current welfare dependency
the current requirements under              self-support, the Director also expects     data are not available, those States that
§ 400.147 will no longer be in effect and   States to implement strategies which        historically have had dependency rates
will be replaced by new provisions in       address simultaneously the employment       at 55% and above are invited to submit
accordance with the final rule published    potential of both male and female wage      a request for a waiver of the 85%
in the Federal Register on June 28,         earners in a family unit, particularly in   requirement if they can provide reliable
1995, (60 FR 33584). Under the new          the case of large families. States are      documentation that demonstrates a
provisions, States will be required to      expected to make every effort to assure     lower dependency rate.
provide services to refugees in the         the availability of day care services in       ORR will consider granting a waiver
following order of priority, except in      order to allow women with children the      of the 85% provision if a State meets
certain individual extreme                  opportunity to participate in               one of the following conditions:
circumstances: (a) All newly arriving       employment services or to accept or            1. The State demonstrates to the
refugees during their first year in the     retain employment. To accomplish this,      satisfaction of the Director of ORR that
U.S., who apply for services; (b)           day care may be treated as a priority       the dependency rate of refugees who
refugees who are receiving cash             employment-related service under the        have been in the U.S. 24 months or less
assistance; (c) unemployed refugees         refugee social services program.            is below 55% in the State.
who are not receiving cash assistance;      Refugees who are participating in              2. The State demonstrates to the
and (d) employed refugees in need of        employment services or have accepted        satisfaction of the Director that (a) less
services to retain employment or to         employment are eligible for day care        than 85% of the State’s social service
attain economic independence.               services. For an employed refugee, day      allocation is sufficient to meet all
   ORR expects States to ensure that        care funded by refugee social service       employment-related needs of the State’s
refugee social services are made            dollars must be limited to one year after   refugees and (b) there are non-
available to special populations such as    the refugee becomes employed. States        employment-related service needs
                       Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 135 / Friday, July 14, 1995 / Notices                                 36295

which are so extreme as to justify an       projects. Section 412(e)(7)(A) of the INA        a. The organization is legally
allowance above the basic 15%. Or           provides that:                                 incorporated as a nonprofit
   3. In accordance with section              The Secretary [of HHS] shall develop and     organization; and
412(c)(1)(C) of the INA, the State          implement alternative projects for refugees      b. Not less than 51% of the
submits to the Director a plan              who have been in the United States less than   composition of the Board of Directors or
(established by or in consultation with     thirty-six months, under which refugees are    governing board of the mutual
local governments) which the Director       provided interim support, medical services,    assistance association is comprised of
determines provides for the maximum         support [social] services, and case            refugees or former refugees, including
appropriate provision of employment-        management, as needed, in a manner that
                                            encourages self-sufficiency, reduces welfare
                                                                                           both refugee men and women.
related services for, and the maximum
                                            dependency, and fosters greater coordination   State Administration
placement of, employable refugees           among the resettlement agencies and service
consistent with performance standards       providers.                                       States are reminded that under
established under section 106 of the Job                                                   current regulations at 45 CFR 400.206
Training Partnership Act.                     This provision is generally known as
                                            the Wilson/Fish Amendment. The                 and 400.207, States have the flexibility
   Refugee social services should be                                                       to charge the following types of
provided in a manner that is culturally     Department has already issued a
                                            separate notice in the Federal Register        administrative costs against their
and linguistically compatible with a                                                       refugee program social service grants, if
refugee’s language and cultural             with respect to applications for such
                                            projects (50 FR 24583, June 11, 1985).         they so choose: direct and indirect
background. In light of the increasingly                                                   administrative costs incurred for the
diverse population of refugees who are      The notice on alternative projects does
                                            not contain provisions for the allocation      overall management and operation of
resettling in this country, refugee                                                        the State refugee program, including its
service agencies will need to develop       of additional social service funds
                                            beyond the amounts established in this         coordination, planning, policy and
practical ways of providing culturally                                                     program development, oversight and
and linguistically appropriate services     notice. Therefore a State which may
                                            wish to consider carrying out such a           monitoring, data collection and
to a changing ethnic population.                                                           reporting, and travel. See also State
Refugee-specific social services should     project should take note of this in
                                            planning its use of social service funds       Transmittal No. 88–40.
be provided which are specifically
designed to meet refugee needs and are      being allocated under the present              II. Discussion of Comments Received
in keeping with the rules and objectives    notice.
                                                                                              We received 8 letters of comment in
of the refugee program, particularly        Funding to MAAs                                response to the notice of proposed FY
during a refugee’s initial years of
                                              ORR no longer provides set-aside             1995 allocations to States for refugee
resettlement. When planning State
                                            funds to refugee mutual assistance             social services. The comments are
refugee services, States are strongly
                                            associations as a separate component           summarized below and are followed in
encouraged to take into account the
                                            under the social service notice; instead       each case by the Department’s response.
reception and placement (R & P)
services provided by local resettlement     we have folded these funds into the               Comment: Six commenters made
agencies in order to utilize these          social service formula allocation to           comments regarding requirements for
resources in the overall program design     States. Elimination of the MAA set-            the set-aside of discretionary funds for
and to ensure the provision of seamless     aside, however, does not represent any         services to former political prisoners
services to refugees.                       reduction in ORR’s commitment to               (FPP) from Vietnam. Four commenters
   In order to provide culturally and       MAAs as important participants in              suggested that funds from the set-aside
linguistically compatible services in as    refugee resettlement. ORR believes that        be made available to provide leadership
cost-efficient a manner as possible in a    the continued and/or increased                 development training opportunities for
time of limited resources, ORR              utilization of qualified refugee mutual        former political prisoners (FPPs). One of
encourages States and counties to           assistance associations in the delivery of     these commenters recommended that
promote and give special consideration      social services helps to ensure the            training be provided to former political
to the provision of refugee social          provision of culturally and linguistically     prisoners who arrived in the early
services through coalitions of refugee      appropriate services as well as                1990’s to provide services to newly
service organizations, such as coalitions   increasing the effectiveness of the            arrived FPPs in order to expand current
of MAAs, voluntary resettlement             overall service system. Therefore, ORR         programs and to prepare for the closing
agencies, or a variety of service           expects States to use MAAs as service          of funded services. Another commenter
providers. ORR believes it is essential     providers to the maximum extent                suggested training be provided to
for refugee-serving organizations to form   possible. ORR strongly encourages              volunteers such as detainees, lawyers,
close partnerships in the provision of      States when contracting for services,          doctors, and community leaders to form
services to refugees in order to be able    including employment services, to give         a detainee support group to help FPPs
to respond adequately to a changing         consideration to the special strengths of      move from dependency to self-
refugee picture. Coalition-building and     MAAs, whenever contract bidders are            sufficiency. Two commenters suggested
consolidation of providers is               otherwise equally qualified, provided          that funds be made available for the
particularly important in communities       that the MAA has the capability to             costs of travel to attend FPP conferences
with multiple service providers in order    deliver services in a manner that is           and meetings.
to ensure better coordination of services   culturally and linguistically compatible          A fifth commenter recommended that
and maximum use of funding for              with the background of the target              the notice include an expectation by
services by minimizing the funds used       population to be served. ORR also              ORR that agencies receiving FPP awards
for multiple administrative overhead        expects States to continue to assist           should participate in a planning process
costs.                                      MAAs in seeking other public and/or            that ensures that other service
   States should also expect to use funds   private funds for the provision of             providers, such as voluntary agencies,
available under this notice to pay for      services to refugee clients.                   have input in the design of proposed
social services which are provided to         ORR defines MAAs as organizations            services and in a coordinated referral
refugees who participate in alternative     with the following qualifications:             system once an award is made.
36296                  Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 135 / Friday, July 14, 1995 / Notices

   A sixth commenter recommended that        services to refugees according to a         numbers of Cubans are being admitted
counties which administer FPP                specific order of priority. Under the new   makes it more important and
programs be allowed 15 percent for           rule, unemployed refugees who are not       appropriate, not less appropriate, that
administrative costs and that States be      receiving cash assistance will be the       States have plans for serving this
allowed no more than 5 percent for           third priority group after new arrivals     population. Finally, because 34 States
administrative costs.                        and cash assistance recipients.             have already met the requirement for
   Response: In consideration of the            Comment: One commenter suggested         having approved State plans, we do not
comments, we have included leadership        that the notice include, in addition to     believe the requirement for a State plan
development training as an allowable         the provision for developing a service      impedes this population’s access to
activity under the FPP set-aside,            plan for refugees accessing ORR-funded      services. For these reasons, we do not
including the costs of travel and            services, a requirement that States         intend to abolish the requirement for an
attendance of FPP leadership at FPP          ensure a case management system in          approved State plan for this population.
conferences and meetings. Leadership         which the service plan’s objectives are        Comment: One commenter
training should focus on enabling            closely monitored and coordinated           recommended that the formula for
participants to continue the activities      within the service delivery community.      allocating social service funds should be
that were begun under this program              Response: We agree that case             more flexible in order to accommodate
after ORR funding ends.                      management services are important to        unanticipated arrivals that represent an
   Although we encourage coordination        coordinate and monitor the objectives of    impact on the current year’s funding
and collaboration between service            a client service plan. Therefore, we        allocation. The commenter suggested
providers with regard to both planning       strongly encourage States to provide        that there should be an automatic,
the design of services and coordinating      such services. However, we do not           formulated adjustment made to States’
referrals, we do not believe that the last   believe case management services            allocations when arrivals in the current
year of the FPP set-aside is an              should be imposed on States as a            year greatly exceed the pattern of the
appropriate time to introduce a new          mandatory requirement; we believe           previous three years.
requirement.                                 instead that States should have the            Response: As the notice states, the
   Regarding the distribution of             flexibility to make their own service       allocation formula used for social
administrative costs between county          choices, based on local circumstances.      service funds is required by the
and State, we have no specific guidance         Comment: One commenter observed          Immigration and Nationality Act (INA).
regarding this issue and believe this is     that the notice included the requirement    Section 412(c)(1)(B) of the INA states
an issue that needs to be resolved           that States must have an approved State     that social service funds ‘‘* * * shall be
between the county and the State.            plan for the Cuban/Haitian Entrant          allocated among the States based on the
   Comment: One commenter suggested          program in order to use ORR funds to        total number of refugees (including
that the notice be clarified to state that   provide services to entrants. The           children and adults) who arrived in the
social service funds may be used to          commenter suggested that the                United States not more than 36 months
provide services to unemployed               distinction and the additional plan are     before the beginning of such fiscal year
refugees who are not receiving cash          no longer appropriate. With larger          and who are actually residing in each
assistance as long as refugees who are       numbers of Cubans being admitted, the       State (taking into account secondary
receiving cash assistance are given          commenter indicated an expectation          migration) as of the beginning of the
priority for services. The commenter         that Cubans will be placed in more          fiscal year.’’ No change, therefore, can
suggested that States should be required     States than was previously the case;        be made to the formula for allocating
to provide services to refugees not          some of these States will have little or    social service funds without a statutory
receiving cash assistance as a way to        no tradition of receiving this              change.
keep these refugees from needing to          population. The commenter suggested            It should also be noted that, when
access welfare.                              that access to services for Cubans and      arrivals in a State greatly exceed the
   Response: We believe that the notice      Haitians should be facilitated regardless   pattern of the previous three years, the
is clear that social service funds may be    of whether the State in which they are      higher number of arrivals is
used to provide services to unemployed       placed does or does not have an             incorporated in the next year’s formula.
refugees who are not receiving cash          approved plan.                              A State with high numbers of
assistance. The notice, under the section       Response: In order to provide services   unanticipated arrivals receives an
‘‘Population to be Served,’’ states that     to Cuban and Haitian entrants, a State      allocation in the next year that is
‘‘[w]hile 45 CFR 400.147(b) requires that    must either have a separate Cuban/          proportionately higher than it would
in providing employability services, a       Haitian entrant program State plan or       otherwise have been. The formula does,
State must give priority to a refugee who    indicate in its refugee program State       therefore, accommodate, as quickly as
is receiving cash assistance, social         plan that Cuban and Haitian entrants        possible within statutory limitations,
service programs should not be limited       will be served. According to our            the impact of unanticipated arrivals.
exclusively to refugees who are cash         records, 34 States now have approved           Furthermore, ORR makes available
assistance recipients.’’                     State plans to provide services to Cuban    discretionary grants to States to fund
   As the wording indicates, States may,     and Haitian entrants. An additional         social services for large numbers of
and are encouraged to, provide services      three States, which are not participating   unanticipated arrivals for whom the
to unemployed refugees who are not           in the refugee program, have privately      existing social service system cannot
receiving cash assistance. However,          administered refugee program projects       respond adequately because available
States are not required to provide           which can serve Cuban and Haitian           ORR funding is already committed. This
services to such refugees. States are        entrants.                                   program is intended to provide a bridge
required only to give priority in               The requirement for a plan helps to      between the increased need for services
providing services to refugees who are       ensure both that States are prepared to     that results from increases in arrivals
receiving cash assistance.                   provide appropriate services to entrants    and the time when a State will have
   Effective October 1, 1995, however, in    and that they are prepared for increased    incorporated services for these new
keeping with provisions in the final         numbers of entrants. We believe,            arrivals into their existing social service
rule, States will be required to provide     therefore, that the fact that larger        funded network. This program, by
                        Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 135 / Friday, July 14, 1995 / Notices                                36297

providing funding for the types of             voluntary agencies, in formulating State    counter to the Federal commitment to
activities generally funded by States          social service plans. The final rule that   provide a program of assistance and
under their social services formula            was published on June 28, 1995,             services to refugees throughout the
allocation, mitigates against any adverse      contains a provision that would require     country.
effect on States that the statutorily          States to develop annual service plans         Comment: One commenter requested
mandated social service allocation             on the basis of a local consultative        that the population floor for States
formula might otherwise have when              process, effective October 1, 1995.         receiving allocations from the
States experience unanticipated arrivals          Comment: Two commenters made             discretionary funds set-aside for
or increases in arrivals to communities        comments regarding State                    services to former political prisoners be
where adequate services may not exist.         administrative costs. One commenter         lowered from 320 FPP arrivals to 300
   Comment: Two commenters                     objected to unlimited State                 FPP arrivals.
addressed the issue of ORR’s use of 15         administrative costs for social services.      Response: In response to this
percent of social service funds for            The commenter recommended capping           comment, we have decided to lower the
discretionary grants. One commenter            administrative costs at 5 percent for any   population floor to 300 former political
expressed opposition to the use of 15%         State receiving more than $12 million in    prisoners. In the notice of proposed
discretionary funds to non-impacted            social service funds and allowing           allocations we stated that we did not
counties and States and recommended            counties a maximum of 15 percent for        intend to make FPP allocations to States
that these funds be distributed by             administrative costs. Another               with fewer than 320 FPPs because we
formula to impacted areas. One                 commenter recommended that ORR              believed the resulting level of funding
commenter recommended that States              consider ways to eliminate unnecessary      would be insignificant. In reducing the
should have a role in the development          administrative costs and suggested that     floor in response to this comment,
and selection of projects to be funded         one approach might be to limit the          however, we have taken into
using discretionary funds. The                 amount a State can charge for the           consideration that the only State
commenter also suggested that there            administration of the refugee program.      requesting a change in the floor received
should be greater lead time allowed for           Response: Since the statute does not     an allocation for an FPP program in
the development of proposals, that the         specify a limitation on the amount of       previous years. We also took into
criteria by which proposals are                social service funds that can be used for   consideration that, in a small State
evaluated should be meaningful, and            administrative costs, we have not           receiving a relatively small social
that the criteria should incorporate           imposed a limit on States, choosing         service allocation, 300 or more FPPs
input from the States involved.                instead to allow States to make that        might have a more significant impact on
   Response: We continue to believe that       determination. In regard to the             services than would be the case in a
it is necessary to maintain a portion of       percentage of funds that counties may       larger State with a larger social services
social service funds for discretionary         use for administrative costs, this is an    allocation.
use in order to carry out national             issue that needs to be resolved between
initiatives and special projects that          county and State, not ORR. All costs        III. Allocation Formula
respond to changing needs and                  must meet Federal grant requirements.          Of the funds available for FY 1995 for
circumstances in the refugee program.          Regarding the suggestion that ORR           social services, $68,681,700 is allocated
Regarding more State involvement in            consider limiting the amount a State        to States in accordance with the formula
discretionary funding, since States are        may charge for the administration of the    specified below. A State’s allowable
frequently competitors for ORR                 refugee program in general, States are      allocation is calculated as follows:
discretionary funds, along with other          reimbursed 100%, under current                 1. The total amount of funds
applicants, it is not possible to involve      regulations, for reasonable and             determined by the Director to be
States in funding decisions without            necessary identifiable administrative       available for this purpose; divided by—
creating a conflict of interest, a violation   costs of providing assistance and              2. The total number of refugees and
of Federal grant rules. We fully agree         services in the refugee program. Under      Cuban/Haitian entrants who arrived in
that sufficient lead time is necessary to      the final rule published on June 28,        the United States not more than 3 years
allow refugee community groups                 1995, ORR will review the issue of what     prior to the beginning of the fiscal year
adequate time to develop proposals. We         constitutes reasonable and allowable        for which the funds are appropriated
are committed to improving the process         administrative costs in the refugee         and the number of Amerasians from
each year to allow as much lead time as        program and, if needed, develop             Vietnam eligible for refugee social
possible for potential applicants. We          guidelines defining reasonable and          services, as shown by the ORR Refugee
also agree that the use of meaningful          allowable costs in consultation with        Data System. The resulting per capita
evaluation criteria is essential for the       States. We do not intend, however, to       amount will be multiplied by—
review of grant applications. While we         impose a cap on what a State may               3. The number of persons in item 2,
believe such evaluation criteria are           charge in administrative costs.             above, in the State as of October 1, 1994,
already included in our grant                     Comment: One commenter objected to       adjusted for estimated secondary
announcements, we would welcome                the allotment of a floor amount of social   migration.
specific suggestions for evaluation            service funds to States with small             The calculation above yields the
criteria that States and other interested      refugee populations. In particular, the     formula allocation for each State.
parties may have for use in the future.        commenter suggested that States with        Minimum allocations for small States
   Comment: One commenter suggested            less than 1,000 refugees should not be      are taken into account.
that ORR reiterate in the notice its           included in the allocation.                    Allocations for political prisoners are
expectation that States consider the              Response: We do not concur with the      based on FY 1994 arrival numbers for
views of local providers, including            commenter’s suggestion that States with     this group in each State from the
voluntary agencies, in formulating State       less than 1,000 refugees should not         Refugee Data Center and are limited to
social service plans.                          receive a funding allocation. If we         States with 300 or more political
   Response: We concur with the                implemented this suggestion, 15 States      prisoner arrivals. We have limited the
commenter that States should consider          would not receive social service            population base to FY 1994 political
the views of local providers, including        funding. Such a policy would run            prisoner arrival numbers because these
36298                                  Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 135 / Friday, July 14, 1995 / Notices

funds are intended to serve recent                               and on the numbers of entrants who               Estimates were developed separately
arrivals. We have not included States                            arrived or were resettled, during the          for refugees and entrants and then
with fewer than 300 former political                             preceding three fiscal years: 1992, 1993,      combined into a total estimated 3-year
prisoners in the political prisoner                              and 1994, based on final arrival data by       refugee/entrant population for each
allocations formula in order to ensure                           State. Therefore, estimates have been          State. Eligible Amerasians are included
that the resulting level of funding for                          developed of the numbers of refugees           in the refugee figures.
each State receiving funds is sufficient                         and entrants with arrival or resettlement
                                                                 dates between October 1, 1991, and               Table 1, below, shows the estimated
to provide effective employment-
oriented programs to assist FPPs. In                             September 30, 1994, who are thought to         3-year populations, as of October 1,
States with fewer than 300 FPPs, we                              be living in each State as of October 1,       1994, of refugees (col. 1), entrants (col.
believe the small number of political                            1994. Refugees admitted under the              2), and total refugees and entrants (col.
prisoners could be adequately served                             Federal Government’s private-sector            3); the formula amounts which the
under the State’s refugee social services                        initiative are not included, since their       population estimates yield (col. 4); and
program.                                                         assistance and services are to be              the allocation amounts after allowing for
                                                                 provided by the private sponsoring             the minimum amounts (col. 5). Table 1
IV. Basis of Population Estimates                                organizations under an agreement with          also shows the number of former
   The population estimates for the                              the Department of State.                       political prisoner arrivals in FY 1994
allocation of funds in FY 1995 are based                           The estimates of secondary migration         (col. 6); and the allocation amounts for
on data on refugee arrivals from the                             were based on data submitted by all            services to this population (col. 7).
ORR Refugee Data System, adjusted as                             participating States on Form ORR–11 on
of October 1, 1994, for estimated                                secondary migrants who have resided in         V. Allocation Amounts
secondary migration. The data base                               the U.S. for 36 months or less, as of
                                                                 September 30, 1994. The total migration          Funding subsequent to the
includes refugees of all nationalities,
                                                                 reported by each State was summed,             publication of this notice will be
Amerasians from Vietnam, and Cuban
and Haitian entrants.                                            yielding in- and out-migration figures         contingent upon the submittal and
   For fiscal year 1995, ORR’s formula                           and a net migration figure for each State.     approval of a State annual services plan,
allocations for the States for social                            The net migration figure was applied to        as required by 45 CFR 400.11(b)(2). The
services are based on the numbers of                             the State’s total arrival figure, resulting    following amounts are allocated for
refugees and Amerasians who arrived,                             in a revised population estimate.              refugee social services in FY 1995:

TABLE 1.—ESTIMATED 3-YEAR REFUGEE/ENTRANT POPULATIONS OF STATES PARTICIPATING IN THE REFUGEE PROGRAM
    AND SOCIAL SERVICE FORMULA AMOUNTS AND ALLOCATIONS FOR FY 1995; AND FORMER POLITICAL PRISONER AR-
    RIVALS AND ALLOCATIONS FOR FY 1995.

                                                                                                                                Former politi-
                                                                                                                                 cal prisoner    Former politi-
                                                                                     Total         Formula
                     State                            Refugees       Entrants                                     Allocation    arrivals from     cal prisoner
                                                                                   population      amount                        Vietnam in        allocation
                                                                                                                                  FY 1994

                                                        (1)             (2)            (3)           (4)             (5)             (6)              (7)

Alabama ......................................              746              22            768       $133,380       $133,380              18               $0
Alaska a .......................................            143               1            144         25,009          75,000             23                0
Arizona ........................................          3,692             158          3,850        668,638         668,638            292                0
Arkansas .....................................              303               1            304         52,796          94,113             84                0
California b ...................................         89,172             692         89,864     15,606,873      15,606,873         11,760          871,014
Colorado .....................................            3,874               3          3,877        673,327         673,327            360           26,664
Connecticut .................................             3,348             131          3,479        604,205         604,205            158                0
Delaware .....................................              132              12            144         25,009          75,000              5                0
Dist. of Columbia ........................                1,874               3          1,877        325,983         325,983            274                0
Florida .........................................        12,686          26,102         38,788      6,736,395       6,736,395            651           48,217
Georgia .......................................           9,366              85          9,451      1,641,375       1,641,375          1,768          130,948
Hawaii .........................................            956               0            956        166,031         166,031            175                0
Idaho ...........................................           998               4          1,002        174,019         174,019             87                0
Illinois ..........................................      13,534             141         13,675      2,374,967       2,374,967            522           38,662
Indiana ........................................          1,137              12          1,149        199,549         199,549             55                0
Iowa ............................................         3,120               2          3,122        542,204         542,204            315           23,331
Kansas ........................................           2,240               4          2,244        389,720         389,720            355           26,293
Kentucky c ...................................            1,890              28          1,918        333,103         333,103            202                0
Louisiana .....................................           2,276             110          2,386        414,382         414,382            451           33,404
Maine ..........................................            574               0            574         99,688         100,000              0                0
Maryland .....................................            7,988              81          8,069      1,401,361       1,401,361            347           25,701
Massachusetts ............................               11,413             357         11,770      2,044,121       2,044,121            780           57,771
Michigan ......................................           7,766              39          7,805      1,355,511       1,355,511            332           24,590
Minnesota ...................................             9,490               2          9,492      1,648,496       1,648,496            464           34,367
Mississippi ...................................             128               8            136         23,619          75,000             38                0
Missouri .......................................          5,278              18          5,296        919,768         919,768            371           27,478
Montana ......................................              154               0            154         26,746          75,000              3                0
Nebraska .....................................            1,880               0          1,880        326,504         326,504            354           26,219
Nevada c ......................................             703             470          1,173        203,717         203,717              9                0
New Hampshire ..........................                    579               0            579        100,556         100,556            197                0
New Jersey .................................              7,357             761          8,118      1,409,870       1,409,870            266                0
                                      Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 135 / Friday, July 14, 1995 / Notices                                        36299

TABLE 1.—ESTIMATED 3-YEAR REFUGEE/ENTRANT POPULATIONS OF STATES PARTICIPATING IN THE REFUGEE PROGRAM
    AND SOCIAL SERVICE FORMULA AMOUNTS AND ALLOCATIONS FOR FY 1995; AND FORMER POLITICAL PRISONER AR-
    RIVALS AND ALLOCATIONS FOR FY 1995.—Continued

                                                                                                                             Former politi-
                                                                                                                              cal prisoner    Former politi-
                                                                                   Total        Formula
                    State                           Refugees       Entrants                                    Allocation    arrivals from     cal prisoner
                                                                                 population     amount                        Vietnam in        allocation
                                                                                                                               FY 1994

                                                      (1)             (2)           (3)            (4)            (5)             (6)              (7)

New Mexico ................................             1,143             604          1,747       303,405         303,405              95               0
New York ....................................          70,088           1,010         71,098    12,347,742      12,347,742             534          39,551
North Carolina .............................            3,051              23          3,074       533,868         533,868             314          23,257
North Dakota ...............................            1,150               0          1,150       199,723         199,723              26               0
Ohio ............................................       6,035              46          6,081     1,056,100       1,056,100             179               0
Oklahoma ....................................           1,379               3          1,382       240,015         240,015             348          25,775
Oregon ........................................         5,831              91          5,922     1,028,486       1,028,486             783          57,994
Pennsylvania ...............................           11,016             100         11,116     1,930,540       1,930,540             360          26,664
Rhode Island ...............................              934              11            945       164,120         164,120              12               0
South Carolina ............................               488               2            490        85,099         100,000             113               0
South Dakota ..............................               765               0            765       132,859         132,859               8               0
Tennessee ..................................            3,395              32          3,427       595,174         595,174             262               0
Texas ..........................................       17,519             523         18,042     3,133,393       3,133,393           3,248         240,566
Utah ............................................       1,609               0          1,609       279,438         279,438             220               0
Vermont ......................................            733               0            733       127,302         127,302              73               0
Virginia ........................................       6,056              32          6,088     1,057,316       1,057,316             676          50,068
Washington .................................           19,424               1         19,425     3,373,581       3,373,581           1,910         141,466
West Virginia ...............................              63               0             63        10,941          75,000               0               0
Wisconsin ....................................          5,986               5          5,991     1,040,470       1,040,470              20               0
Wyoming .....................................               6               0              6         1,042          75,000               0               0

         Total .................................      361,468          31,730       393,198    $68,287,536     $68,681,700         29,897       $2,000,000
   a The  Alaska allocation has been awarded for a Wilson/Fish demonstration project.
   bA   portion of the California allocation is expected to be awarded to continue a Wilson/Fish project in San Diego.
   c The  allocation for Kentucky and Nevada is expected to be awarded to continue a Wilson/Fish project.


VI. Paperwork Reduction Act                                    revision will reflect OAR’s broadened         ICDs; (6) evaluates NIH HIV/AIDS
                                                               responsibilities as mandated by the NIH       research programs developed for the
  This notice does not create any                              Revitalization Act of 1993 (Pub. L. 103–      strategic plan and carried out by the
reporting or recordkeeping requirements                        43).                                          ICDs; (7) administers a discretionary
requiring OMB clearance.
                                                                 Section HN–B, Organization and              fund for the support, through the ICDs,
[Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance No.                                                                  of AIDS research; (8) advises the NIH
                                                               Functions, is amended as follows:
93.566 Refugee Assistance—State                                                                              Director and senior staff on the
Administered Programs]                                         Under the heading Office of the
                                                               Director, NIH(HNA), Office of AIDS            development of NIH-wide policy issues
  Dated: July 5, 1995.
                                                               Research (HNA5), delete the functional        related to AIDS research, and serves as
Lavinia Limon,                                                                                               principal liaison with other agencies of
                                                               statement in its entirety and insert the
Director, Office of Refugee Resettlement.                      following:                                    the PHS, DHHS, Federal Government,
[FR Doc. 95–17338 Filed 7–13–95; 8:45 am]                                                                    and the Office for National AIDS Policy;
                                                                 Office of AIDS Research (HNA5). (1)
BILLING CODE 4184–01–P
                                                               Develops a comprehensive strategic            (9) represents the NIH Director on all
                                                               plan that identifies and establishes          outside AIDS-related committees
                                                               objectives, priorities, and policy            requiring NIH participation; (10)
Public Health Service                                                                                        provide staff support to the OAR
                                                               statements governing the conduct and
                                                               support of all NIH AIDS research              Advisory Council, NIH AIDS Executive
National Institutes of Health; Statement
of Organization, Functions, and                                activities; (2) develops and presents to      Committee, and the Coordinating
Delegations of Authority                                       OMB and the President an annual               Committees for each AIDS research
                                                               scientifically justified budget estimate      discipline at NIH; (11) develops policy
  Part H, Chapter HN (National                                 for NIH AIDS-related research activities;     on laboratory safety for AIDS
Institutes of Health) of the Statement of                      (3) submits an alternate AIDS budget to       researchers and monitors the AIDS
Organization, Functions, and                                   the Secretary, DHHS, and the Director,        surveillance program; (12) develops and
Delegations of Authority for the                               NIH, in accordance with the strategic         maintains an information data base on
Department of Health and Human                                 plan; (4) receives and disburses all          intramural/extramural AIDS activities
Services (40 FR 22859, May 27, 1975, as                        appropriated funds for NIH AIDS               and prepares special or recurring reports
amended most recently at 60 FR 8410,                           research activities to the NIH Institutes,    as needed; (13) develops information
February 14, 1995) is amended to reflect                       Centers, and Divisions (ICDs) in              strategies to assure that the public is
the revision of the functional statement                       accordance with the strategic plan; (5)       informed of NIH AIDS research
of the Office of AIDS Research (OAR)                           directs the planning, coordination, and       activities; (14) recommends solutions to
within the Office of the Director,                             integration of all AIDS research              issues arising from NIH intramural/
National Institutes of Health (NIH). This                      activities across and throughout the NIH      extramural AIDS research; (15)
36300                    Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 135 / Friday, July 14, 1995 / Notices

facilitates collaboration in AIDS               These properties reviewed are listed      800–927–7588 for detailed instructions
research between government, industry,       as suitable/available and unsuitable. In     or write a letter to David J. Pollack at the
and universities; and (16) fosters and       accordance with the Pryor Act                address listed at the beginning of this
develops plans for NIH involvement in        Amendment the suitable properties will       Notice. Included in the request for
international AIDS research activities.      be made available for use to assist the      review should be the property address
  Dated: July 5, 1995.                       homeless.                                    (including zip code), the date of
                                                Properties listed as suitable/available   publication in the Federal Register, the
Donna E. Shalala,
                                             will be available exclusively for            landholding agency, and the property
Secretary.
                                             homeless use for a period of 60 days         number.
[FR Doc. 95–17308 Filed 7–13–95; 8:45 am]    from the date of this Notice. Please be         For more information regarding
BILLING CODE 4140–01–M                       advised, in accordance with the              particular properties identified in this
                                             provisions of the Pryor Act Amendment,       Notice (i.e., acreage, floor plan, existing
                                             that if no expressions of interest or        sanitary facilities, exact street address),
DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND                    applications are received by the             providers should contact the
URBAN DEVELOPMENT                            Department of Health and Human               appropriate landholding agencies at the
                                             Services (HHS) during the 60 day             following addresses: U.S. Air Force:
Office of the Assistant Secretary for        period, these properties will no longer      John Carr, Realty Specialist, HQ–
Community Planning and                       be available for use to assist the           AFBDA/BDR, Pentagon, Washington,
Development                                  homeless. In the case of buildings and       DC 20330–5130; (703) 696–5581; (This
[Docket No. N–95–1917; FR–3778–N–45]         properties for which no such notice is       is not a toll-free number).
                                             received, these buildings and properties
                                                                                            Dated: July 7, 1995.
Federal Property Suitable as Facilities      shall be available only for the purpose
                                                                                          Jacquie M. Lawing,
to Assist the Homeless                       of permitting a redevelopment authority
                                             to express in writing an interest in the     Deputy Assistant Secretary for Economic
AGENCY:  Office of the Assistant                                                          Development.
                                             use of such buildings and properties.
Secretary for Community Planning and
                                             These buildings and properties shall be      Title V, Federal Surplus Property
Development HUD.
                                             available for a submission by such           Program Federal Register Report for 07/
ACTION: Notice.                              redevelopment authority exclusively for      14/95
SUMMARY: This Notice identifies              one year. Buildings and properties
                                                                                          Suitable/Available Properties
unutilized, underutilized, excess, and       available for a redevelopment authority
                                             shall not be available for use to assist     BUILDINGS (by State)
surplus Federal property reviewed by
HUD for suitability for possible use to      the homeless. If a redevelopment             California
assist the homeless.                         authority does not express an interest in    9 Dormitories
                                             the use of the buildings or properties or    Mather Air Force Base
ADDRESSES: For further information,
                                             commence the use of buildings or             Sacramento Co: Sacramento CA 95655-
contact David J. Pollack, room 7262,                                                      Landholding Agency: Air Force–BC
                                             properties within the applicable time
Department of Housing and Urban                                                           Property Number: 199530001
                                             period such buildings and properties
Development, 451 Seventh Street SW,                                                       Status: Pryor Amendment
                                             shall then be republished as properties
Washington, DC 20410; telephone (202)                                                     Base closure Number of Units: 9
                                             available for use to assist the homeless
708–1234; TDD number for the hearing-                                                     Comment: 14754–25693 sq. ft., Bldgs. 1210.
                                             pursuant to Section 501 of the Stewart         1214, 1216, 1218, 1220, 1222, 1224, 1234
and speech-impaired (202) 708–2565           B. McKinney Homeless Assistance Act.
(these telephone numbers are not toll-                                                      and 2750
                                                Homeless assistance providers             2 Dining Facilities
free), or call the toll-free Title V         interested in any such property should
information line at 1–800–927–7588.                                                       Mather Air Force Base
                                             send a written expression of interest to     Sacramento Co: Sacramento CA 95655-
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In                HHS, addressed to Judy Breitman,             Landholding Agency: Air Force–BC
accordance with sections 2905 and 2906       Division of Health Facilities Planning,      Property Number: 199530002
of the National Defense Authorization        U.S. Public Health Service, HHS, room        Status: Pryor Amendment
Act for Fiscal Year 1994, Pub. L. 103–       17A–10, 5600 Fishers Lane, Rockville,        Base closure Number of Units: 2
160 (Pryor Act Amendment) and with           MD 20857; (301) 443–2265. (This is not       Comment: 14955 & 32886 sq. ft., Bldgs. 1226
56 FR 23789 (May 24, 1991) and section                                                      and 2774
                                             a toll-free number.) HHS will mail to the
501 of the Stewart B. McKinney               interested provider an application           4 Offices
Homeless Assistance Act (42 U.S.C.                                                        Mather Air Force Base
                                             packet, which will include instructions      Sacramento Co: Sacramento CA 95655-
11411), as amended, HUD is publishing        for completing the application. In order     Landholding Agency: Air Force–BC
this Notice to identify Federal buildings    to maximize the opportunity to utilize a     Property Number: 199530003
and other real property that HUD has         suitable property, providers should          Status: Pryor Amendment
reviewed for suitability for use to assist   submit their written expressions of          Base closure Number of Units: 4
the homeless. The properties were            interest as soon as possible. For            Comment: 6064–25693 sq. ft., Bldgs. 1228,
reviewed using information provided to       complete details concerning the                1230, 1236 and 3860
HUD by Federal landholding agencies          processing of applications, the reader is    6 Classrooms
regarding unutilized and underutilized       encouraged to refer to the interim rule      Mather Air Force Base
buildings and real property controlled       governing this program, 56 FR 23789          Sacramento Co: Sacramento CA 95655-
by such agencies or by GSA regarding         (May 24, 1991).                              Landholding Agency: Air Force–BC
                                                                                          Property Number: 199530004
its inventory of excess or surplus              Properties listed as unsuitable will
                                                                                          Status: Pryor Amendment
Federal property. This Notice is also        not be made available for any other          Base closure Number of Units: 6
published in order to comply with the        purpose for 20 days from the date of this    Comment: 5877–29816 sq. ft., Bldgs. 2785,
April 21, 1993 Court Order in National       Notice. Homeless assistance providers          2860, 2880, 3750, 3785 and 3875
Coalition for the Homeless v. Veterans       interested in a review by HUD of the         Bldg. 2890
Administration, No. 88–2503–OG               determination of unsuitability should        Mather Air Force Base
(D.D.C.).                                    call the toll free information line at 1–    Sacramento Co: Sacramento CA 95655-
                         Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 135 / Friday, July 14, 1995 / Notices                                   36301

Landholding Agency: Air Force–BC              SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:     In              708–2866, or (202) 708–4594 (TDD).
Property Number: 199530005                    anticipation of the next round of              (These are not toll-free numbers.)
Status: Pryor Amendment                       funding under the Fair Housing                 SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This
Base closure Number of Units: 1               Initiatives Program, the Department is
Comment: 8642 sq. ft., most recent use—                                                      redelegation is consistent with HUD’s
  photo lab
                                              holding a public meeting to invite and         field reorganization in which local field
                                              consider comment from potential                offices have been given greater authority
Bldg. 2898
Mather Air Force Base
                                              applicants, prior grantees and                 to operate HUD programs. It is issued in
Sacramento Co: Sacramento CA 95655-           applicants, and any other interested           accordance with HUD policy as recently
Landholding Agency: Air Force–BC              parties, on the administration of FHIP         reaffirmed by the issuance of Notice H
Property Number: 199530006                    funding. The meeting will be held on           95–38 (HUD). HUD’s policy is that
Status: Pryor Amendment                       Friday, July 21, 1995, at 1 pm., in Room       sponsors of Section 202 and 811
Base closure Number of Units: 1               5202, Department of Housing and Urban          projects may receive approval from
Comment: 2452 sq. ft., most recent use—       Development, 451 Seventh Street, SW.,          HUD to obtain secondary financing. In
  vehicle maintenance                         Washington, DC 20410. Visitors must            order to expedite the handling of
Bldg. 3790                                    enter the building from the South              requests and delivery of services, the
Mather Air Force Base                         Entrance and must have a photo ID to
Sacramento Co: Sacramento CA 95655-
                                                                                             authority to approve the secondary
                                              be admitted.                                   financing from public bodies is being
Landholding Agency: Air Force–BC
Property Number: 199530007
                                                The Department is especially                 redelegated to the Multifamily Housing
Status: Pryor Amendment                       interested in comments on the                  Director for each local field office. Prior
Base closure Number of Units: 1               application procedures for funding in          to approving such secondary financing
Comment: 4598 sq. ft., most recent use—       general, and on the content of FHIP            from public bodies, the Multifamily
  child care center                           Notices of Funding Availability                Housing Director shall insure that the
Bldg. 3800                                    (NOFAs) in particular. The Department          Assistant General Counsel for the
Mather Air Force Base                         will consider the comments made at this        geographical area has determined that
Sacramento Co: Sacramento CA 95655-           public meeting when it formulates plans        the secondary financing documents are
Landholding Agency: Air Force–BC              for the disposition of funds                   legally acceptable.
Property Number: 199530008                    appropriated for Fiscal Year 1996.
Status: Pryor Amendment
                                                                                                Accordingly, the Assistant Secretary
Base closure Number of Units: 1                 Dated: July 10, 1995.                        for Housing—Federal Housing
Comment: 7021 sq. ft., most recent use—gym.   Elizabeth K. Julian,                           Commissioner redelegates authority as
                                              Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary for Policy   follows:
[FR Doc. 95–17223 Filed 7–13–95; 8:45 am]
                                              and Initiatives, Fair Housing and Equal        Section A. Authority Redelegated
BILLING CODE 4210–29–M
                                              Opportunity.
                                              [FR Doc. 95–17246 Filed 7–13–95; 8:45 am]         The authority to approve secondary
                                              BILLING CODE 4210–28–P
                                                                                             financing from public bodies for
Office of the Assistant Secretary for                                                        projects, under Section 202 of the
Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity                                                           Housing Act of 1959, 12 U.S.C. 1701q,
[Docket No. FR–3776–N–02]                     Office of the Assistant Secretary for          and Section 811 of the Cranston-
                                              Housing—Federal Housing                        Gonzalez National Affordable Housing
Notice of Public Meeting on the Fair          Commissioner                                   Act, 41 U.S.C. 8013, is redelegated to
Housing Initiatives Program                                                                  the Multifamily Housing Director for
                                              [Docket No. FR–3934–D–01]
                                                                                             each local field office.
AGENCY:  Office of the Assistant
Secretary for Fair Housing and Equal                                                           Authority: Sec. 7(d) of the Department of
Opportunity, HUD.                             Redelegation of Authority                      Housing and Urban Development Act, (42
                                                                                             U.S.C. 3535(d)).
ACTION: Notice of public meeting on the       AGENCY:  Office of the Assistant                 Dated: June 30, 1995.
Fair Housing Initiatives Program (FHIP).      Secretary for Housing—Federal Housing
                                                                                             Nicolas P. Retsinas,
                                              Commissioner, HUD.
SUMMARY: This Notice invites interested                                                      Assistant Secretary for Housing—Federal
                                              ACTION: Notice of redelegation of              Housing Commissioner.
parties to attend a public meeting to
                                              authority.                                     [FR Doc. 95–17283 Filed 7–13–95; 8:45 am]
comment on the Department’s
administration of FHIP funding.               SUMMARY:   In this notice, the Assistant       BILLING CODE 4210–27–M

DATES: The public meeting will be held        Secretary for Housing—Federal Housing
on Friday, July 21, 1995, at 1 pm.            Commissioner redelegates authority to
ADDRESSES: Interested persons are             the Multifamily Housing Director for           DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
invited to attend in Room 5202,               each HUD local field office to approve
                                              secondary financing from public bodies,        Bureau of Land Management
Department of Housing and Urban
Development, 451 Seventh Street SW.,          under Section 202 of the Housing Act of        [CA–060–04–5440–10–B026]
Washington, DC 20410.                         1959, 12 U.S.C. 1701q, and under
                                              Section 811 of the Cranston-Gonzalez           Mesquite Regional Class III Landfill;
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
                                              National Affordable Housing Act, 42            Notice of Availability
Maxine Cunningham, Director, Office of
Fair Housing Initiatives and Voluntary        U.S.C. 8013.
                                                                                             AGENCY:   Bureau of Land Management,
Programs, Room 5234, 451 Seventh              EFFECTIVE DATE: June 30, 1995.                 Interior.
Street SW., Washington, DC 20410–             FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:               ACTION: Notice of availability.
2000. Telephone number (202) 708–             Aretha Williams, Office of Elderly and
0800. A telecommunications device             Assisted Housing, Room 6116, U.S.              SUMMARY:   Notice is hereby given that a
(TDD) for hearing and speech impaired         Department of Housing and Urban                joint Final Environmental Impact
persons is available at (202) 708–0455.       Development, 451 Seventh Street, SW,           Statement and Environmental Impact
(These are not toll-free numbers.)            Washington, DC 20410, telephone (202)          Report (EIS/EIR) has been prepared by
36302                 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 135 / Friday, July 14, 1995 / Notices

the Bureau of Land Management and the      materials from originating                       Dated: June 23, 1995.
County of Imperial for the proposed        transportation operations (in accordance       G. Ben Koski,
Mesquite Regional Class III Landfill.      with AB939) would also be provided.            Area Manager.
The proposed federal action analyzes          The proposed project would involve          [FR Doc. 95–16778 Filed 7–13–95; 8:45 am]
the environmental effects of a land
                                           4,250 acres, of which 2,290 acres would        BILLING CODE 4310–40–P
exchange for approximately 1,750 acres,
                                           be utilized for the landfill footprint and
rights of way for a railroad spur and a
gas pipeline plus an amendment to the      ancillary facilities. The proposed             [AZ–024–05–1430–01; AZA–12731]
California Desert Conservation Area        landfill is designed to accommodate up
Plan.                                      to 600 million tons of MSW residue and         Notice of Realty Action; Recreation
   The Draft EIS/EIR was released on       would have an operational life of 100          and Public Purposes (R&PP) Act
April 8, 1994, with a 90 day public        years. MSW would be collected from             Classification; Arizona
review period. Two public hearings         population centers in Southern                 AGENCY:   Bureau of Land Management,
were held during the public comment        California, including Imperial County,         Interior.
period to receive verbal testimony         by local collection vehicles and taken to
                                                                                          ACTION: Notice.
regarding the Draft document’s             existing or future transfer stations/
adequacy or accuracy. The first hearing    material recovery facilities (MRFs)            SUMMARY:    The following public lands in
was held at 7 p.m. PDT, Wednesday,         where it would be sorted and processed         Maricopa County, Arizona, have been
May 25, 1994, at the El Centro             to remove recyclables, hazardous               examined and found suitable for
Community Center, 375 South First          materials, and other unacceptable              classification for conveyance to the Deer
Street, El Centro, California 92243. The   wastes in accordance with AB939. From          Valley Unified School District under the
second hearing was held at 7 p.m. PDT,     these locations, MSW residue would be          provisions of the Recreation and Public
Thursday, May 26, 1994, at the Desert      transferred to railroad loading                Purposes Act, as amended (43 U.S.C.
Expo Center, Fine Arts Building, 46–350    intermodals where it would be loaded           869, et seq.). The Deer Valley Unified
Arabia Street, Indio, California 92201.                                                   School District proposes to use the
                                           for rail haulage to the Mesquite Regional
Written comments were accepted                                                            lands for a school facility and
                                           Landfill project site. Truck transfer of
through July 6, 1994. Responses to all                                                    community recreational facilities.
public comments and statements given       Imperial County MSW residue could
at the various public hearings are         also occur (based on future decisions          Gila and Salt River Meridian, Arizona
included as part of the Final EIS/EIR.     made by local officials) after processing      T. 5 N., R. 3 E.,
Public comments were considered            at local transfer stations/MRFs. The             Sec. 12, lots 6, 7, 11, 14, 15, 16, 18, 19,
during preparation of the Final EIS/EIR.   estimated rate of growth of daily MSW               NE1⁄4 SW1⁄4 NW1⁄4, NW1⁄4 SE1⁄4 NW1⁄4.
DATES: For Public Comments: A 30-day       volumes would be 4,000 tons per day              Containing 60.10 acres more or less.
public review period has been              (tpd) for Year 1 of operations, increasing
                                                                                             The lands are not needed for Federal
established for this document. Written     up to 20,000 tpd after Year 7. The             purposes. Conveyance of these lands is
comments concerning the adequacy or        estimated daily number of trains that          consistent with current BLM land use
accuracy of the Final EIS/EIR must be      would be required would be one train           planning and would be in the public
filed no later than August 14, 1995.       during Year 1 (4,000 tpd), increasing to       interest.
ADDRESSES: Written comments must be        5 trains after Year 7 (20,000 tpd). The           The patent, when issued, will be
filed no later than August 14, 1995, and   proposed maximum daily volume of               subject to the following terms,
should be addressed to: Bureau of Land     MSW residue would be 20,000 tons per           conditions and reservations:
Management, 1661 South 4th Street, El      day averaged over a two week, 12 day              1. Provisions of the Recreation and
Centro, CA 92243.                          period. The actual rate of growth and          Public Purposes Act and all regulations
FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION CONTACT:        operational life of the landfill will          of the Secretary of the Interior.
Thomas Zale, Multi-Resources Staff         depend upon market conditions for                 2. A right-of-way for ditches and
Chief, Bureau of Land Management, El       MSW disposal in communities that               canals constructed by the authority of
Centro Resource Area, 1661 South 4th       choose to use the regional landfill.           the United States.
Street, El Centro, California, 92243.         In addition to the No Action                   3. All minerals shall be reserved to
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Gold            Alternative, four alternatives to the          the United States, together with the
Fields Mining Co. (Gold Fields),           proposed action are considered in the          right to prospect for, mine, and remove
Western Waste Industries, and S.P.                                                        the minerals.
                                           Final EIS/EIR and include: Smaller
Environmental Systems have formed a                                                          4. Those rights for power line
                                           Landfill Footprint (Alternative I);
(Partnership) that would own and                                                          purposes granted to the Arizona Public
                                           Decreased Disposal Rate (Alternative II);      Service Company by Right-of-way AZA–
develop the proposed landfill located      Alternative Mesquite Regional Landfill
contiguous to the site of the currently                                                   16829.
                                           Site (Alternative III); and Larger Project
operating Mesquite Gold Mine and Ore                                                        5. Those rights for telephone line
                                           (increased maximum disposal rate and
Processing Facility (Mesquite Mine) in                                                    purposes granted to U.S. West
                                           larger landfill footprint) (Alternative IV).
eastern Imperial County. The proposed                                                     Communications Inc. by Right-of-Way
project would include the unloading        The Final EIS/EIR analyzes the effects of
                                           the proposed action and alternatives on        AZA–17050.
and loading of Municipal Solid Waste
(MSW) residue containers, placement of     such environmental issues including              6. Those rights for access road
MSW into the landfill, rail and            but not limited to: air quality, social and    purposes granted to the Maricopa
equipment maintenance, landfill gas        economic impacts, ground and surface           County Highway Department by Right-
recovery and destruction by flaring or     water quality, endangered and other            of-way AZA–22667.
utilization of energy recovery             special status plants and animals,               7. Those rights for access road
techniques, leachate collection and        cultural or historical and visual              purposes granted to the Maricopa
processing and waste water treatment.      resources.                                     County Highway Department by Right-
Temporary storage of recyclable                                                           of-way AZA–23666.
                         Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 135 / Friday, July 14, 1995 / Notices                                  36303

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:              filings under the general mining laws          and Record of Decision for the Eugene
Adrian A. Garcia, Bureau of Land              and the mineral leasing laws to                BLM District, Oregon.
Management, Phoenix Resource Area             determine its suitability for conveyance
office, 2015 West Deer Valley Road,           of the reserved mineral interest               SUMMARY:   In accordance with the
Phoenix, Arizona 85027. Telephone             pursuant to section 209 of the Federal         National Environmental Policy Act of
(602) 780–8090.                               Land Policy and Management Act of              1969 (40 CFR 1550.2), and the Federal
   Upon publication of this notice in the     October 21, 1976.                              Land Policy and Management Act of
Federal Register, the lands will be              The mineral interests will be               1976, (43 CFR 1610.2 (g)), the
segregated from all other forms of            conveyed in whole or in part upon              Department of the Interior, Bureau of
appropriation under the public land           favorable mineral examination.                 Land Management (BLM), Eugene
laws, including the general mining laws,         The purpose is to allow consolidation       District provides notice of availability of
except for lease or conveyance under          of surface and subsurface of minerals          the Approved Resource Management
the Recreation and Public Purposes Act.       ownership where there are no known             Plan (ARMP) and Record of Decision
For a period of 45 days from the date of      mineral values or in those instances           (ROD) for the Eugene District. In
publication of this notice, interested        where the reservation interferes with or       addition to describing the decisions, the
parties may submit comments regarding         precludes appropriate nonmineral               ARMP will provide the framework to
the proposed conveyance or                    development and such development is a          guide land and resource allocations and
classification of the lands to the District   more beneficial use of the land than the       management direction for the next 10 to
Manager, Phoenix District Office, 2015        mineral development.                           20 years in the Eugene District. This
West Deer Valley Road, Phoenix,               FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:               ARMP supersedes the existing Eugene
Arizona 85027.                                Marcia Sieckman, California State              District Management Framework Plan
CLASSIFICATION COMMENTS: Interested           Office, Federal Office Building, 2800          (1983), and other related documents for
parties may submit comments involving         Cottage Way, Room E–2845,                      managing approximately 318,000 acres
the suitability of the land for a school      Sacramento, California 95825, (916)            of mostly forested public land and 1,299
facility and community recreational           979–2858. Serial No. CACA 34048.               acres of non-federal surface ownership
facilities. Comments on the                   T. 30 N., R. 8 W., Mount Diablo Meridian
                                                                                             with federal mineral estate administered
classification are restricted to whether                                                     by the Bureau of Land Management in
                                                 Sec. 14, Parcel 1 as shown and designated
the land is physically suited for the                                                        Benton, Douglas, Lane, and Linn
                                              upon that certain Parcel Map #349–79 for
proposal, whether the use will                John and Kathleen Bejarano filed for record    counties in Oregon.
maximize the future use or uses of the        in the office of the County Recorder on        ADDRESSES:   Copies of the ARMP/ROD
land, whether the use is consistent with      September 2, 1981 in Book 22 of Parcel Maps    are available upon request by contacting
local planning and zoning, or if the use      at page 43, Shasta County Records. County—     the Eugene District Office, Bureau of
is consistent with State and Federal          Shasta.
                                                 Minerals Reservation—All coal and other
                                                                                             Land Management, 2890 Chad Drive,
programs.                                                                                    Eugene, Oregon 97408–7336. This
                                              minerals.
APPLICATION COMMENTS: Interested                                                             document has been sent to all those
parties may submit comments regarding            Upon publication of this Notice of          individuals and groups who were on the
the specific use proposed in the              Segregation in the Federal Register as         mailing list for the Proposed Eugene
application and plan of development,          provided in 43 CFR 2720.1–1(b), the            District Resource Management Plan/
whether the BLM followed proper               mineral interests owned by the United          Final Environmental Impact Statement.
administrative procedures in reaching         States in the private lands covered by         The full supporting record for the
the decision, or any other factor not         the application shall be segregated to         ARMP is available for inspection in the
directly related to the suitability of the    the extent that they will not be subject       Eugene District Office at the address
land for a school facility and                to appropriation under the mining and          shown above. Copies of the draft RMP/
community recreational facilities.            mineral leasing laws. The segregative          EIS and proposed RMP/final EIS are
   Any adverse comments will be               effect of the application shall terminate      also available for inspection in the
reviewed by the State Director. In the        by publication of an opening order in          public room on the 7th floor of the BLM
absence of any adverse comments, the          the Federal Register specifying the date       Oregon/Washington State Office, 1515
classification will become effective 60       and time of opening; upon issuance of          SW Fifth Street, Portland, Oregon, and
days from the date of publication in the      a patent or other document of                  public libraries in Eugene/Springfield
Federal Register.                             conveyance to such mineral interest; or        during normal hours.
                                              two years from the date of publication
  Dated: July 7, 1995.                        of this notice, whichever occurs first.        FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Judy
David J. Miller,                                                                             Nelson, District Manager, Eugene
                                                Dated: July 6, 1995.
Associate District Manager.                                                                  District Office, Bureau of Land
                                              David McIlnay,                                 Management. She can be reached by
[FR Doc. 95–17243 Filed 7–13–95; 8:45 am]
                                              Chief, Branch of Lands.                        telephone at 503–683–6600 or by FAX
BILLING CODE 4310–32–M
                                              [FR Doc. 95–17244 Filed 7–13–95; 8:45 am]      at 503–683–6981.
                                              BILLING CODE 4310–40–P
[CA–930–5410–00–B056; CACA 34048]                                                            SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:    The
                                                                                             Eugene District ARMP/ROD is
Conveyance of Mineral Interests in            [OR–090–95–6350–00–G5–130]                     essentially the same as the Eugene
California                                                                                   District Proposed Resource Management
                                              Notice of Availability of Approved             Plan and Final Environmental Impact
AGENCY: Bureau of Land Management,
                                              Resource Management Plan and                   Statement (PRMP/FEIS). Virtually no
Interior.
                                              Record of Decision                             changes to the proposed decisions have
ACTION: Notice of Segregation.
                                              AGENCY: Bureau of Land Management,             been made, except for some clarifying
SUMMARY: The private land described in        Interior.                                      language in response to the nine valid
this notice, aggregating 149.61 acres, is     ACTION: Notice of Availability of the          protests BLM received on the Eugene
segregated and made unavailable for           Approved Resource Management Plan              District PRMP/FEIS and as a result of
36304                                  Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 135 / Friday, July 14, 1995 / Notices

ongoing staff review. The clarifying                                      the plan and also meet the plan                             Management Areas, Connectivity/
language concerns:                                                        elements or adopt decisions made in the                     Diversity Blocks, and Adaptive
—Revisions intended to strengthen the                                     Northwest Forest Plan/ROD. The                              Management Areas. An Aquatic
  link between the ARMP and the 1994                                      Northwest Forest Plan/ROD was signed                        Conservation Strategy will be applied to
  Record of Decision for Amendments                                       by the Secretary of the Interior who                        all lands and waters under BLM
  to Forest Service and Bureau of Land                                    directed the BLM to adopt it in its                         jurisdiction.
  Management Planning Documents                                           Resource Management Plans for western                          Approximately 69,000 acres will be
  Within the Range of the Northern                                        Oregon. Furthermore, those decisions                        managed for timber production. The
  Spotted Owl and Standards and                                           were upheld by the United States
                                                                                                                                      Allowable Sale Quantity will be 6.1
  Guidelines for Management of Habitat                                    District Court for the Western District of
  for Late-Successional and Old-Growth                                                                                                million cubic feet (36 million board
                                                                          Washington on December 21, 1994.
  Forest Related Species Within the                                          Ecosystem Management and Forest                          feet). To contribute to biological
  Range of the Northern Spotted Owl                                       Product Production: The ARMP/ROD                            diversity, standing trees, snags, and
  (Northwest Forest Plan/ROD).                                            responds to the need for a healthy forest                   down dead woody material will be
—Revisions that incorporate guidelines                                    ecosystem with habitat that will support                    retained. A process for monitoring,
  issued by the Regional Ecosystem                                        populations of native species                               evaluating, and amending or revising
  Office since the issuance of the 1994                                   (particularly those associated with late-                   the plan is described.
  Record of Decision named above.                                         successional and old growth forests). It                       Areas of Critical Environmental
  Such guidelines may clarify or                                          also responds to the need for a                             Concern (ACEC): The ARMP/ROD will
  interpret the 1994 Record of Decision.                                  sustainable supply of timber and other                      continue the designation of seven Areas
  Seven alternatives that encompass a                                     forest products that will help maintain                     of Critical Environmental Concern
spectrum of realistic management                                          the stability of local and regional                         (ACEC), five ACEC/Research Natural
options were considered in the planning                                   economies, and contribute valuable                          Areas (RNA), two ACEC/Outstanding
process. The final plan is a mixture of                                   resources to the national economy on a                      Natural Areas (ONA), and one
the management objectives and actions                                     predictable and long-term basis. BLM                        Environmental Education Area (EEA).
that, in the opinion of the BLM, best                                     administered lands are primarily                            The ARMP/ROD designates or
resolve the issues and concerns that                                      allocated to Riparian Reserves, Late-                       redesignates the following ACECs and
originally initiated the preparation of                                   Successional Reserves, General Forest                       RNAs with the noted restrictions.

                                                                                                                            Timber/
                                                                                                                  Approx.                            Min.                 Min.
                                               Area name                                                                      veg.    OHV use               Min. lease
                                                                                                                   acres                             loc.                salable
                                                                                                                             harv.

Coburg Hills, Cottage
Grove Lake, and Dorena
Lake Relict Forest Islands
ACEC ..........................................................................................................       876   P         P          P          open-NSO     P
Cougar Mtn. Yew ACEC .............................................................................                     10   P         P          P          open-NSO     P
Grassy Mtn. ACEC .....................................................................................                 74   P         P          P          open-NSO     P
Hult Marsh ACEC .......................................................................................               167   P         R          P          open-NSO     P
Long Tom ACEC ........................................................................................                  7   R         P          P          open-NSO     P
Camas Swale ACEC/RNA ..........................................................................                       314   P         P          P          open-NSO     P
Fox Hollow ACEC/RNA ..............................................................................                    160   P         P          P          open-NSO     P
Horse Rock Ridge ACEC/RNA ...................................................................                         378   P         P          P          open-NSO     P
Mohawk ACEC/RNA ...................................................................................                   292   P         P          P          open-NSO     P
Upper Elk Meadows ACEC/RNA ................................................................                           223   P         P          P          open-NSO     P
Heceta Sand Dunes ACEC/ONA ...............................................................                            218   P         P          P          open-NSO     P
Lake Creek Falls ACEC/ONA .....................................................................                        58   P         R          P          open-NSO     P
McGowan Creek EEA .................................................................................                    79   P         P          P          open-NSO     P
   P = Use is prohibited.
   R = Use is allowed but with restrictions.
   NSO = No surface occupancy.


   Wild and Scenic Rivers:                                                consideration, as applicable. The                           ARMP/ROD provides for road closures
Approximately 39 miles of river found                                     supporting records for the ARMP/ROD,                        to meet ecosystem management
eligible for designation and studied by                                   document those river or stream segment                      objectives. Such closures may be
BLM are found not suitable for                                            analyses.                                                   permanent or seasonal, and will be
designation. Three river segments                                           Off Highway Vehicle (OHV) Use: The                        affected by use of signs, gates, barriers,
(involving approximately 70 miles) have                                   ARMP/ROD makes the following                                or total road deconstruction and site
been determined to be administratively                                    designations for OHV management in                          restoration.
eligible for further consideration for                                    the District: approximately 80 acres will                      Land Tenure Adjustment: The ARMP/
designation as a component of the                                         be open; 314,800 acres will be restricted                   ROD identifies approximately 78,175
National Wild and Scenic Rivers System                                    to designated existing roads and trails                     acres of BLM administered lands that
under recreational river classifications,                                 and/or seasonally closed; and 3,120                         will be retained in public ownership;
pending other interagency suitability                                     acres will be closed to all use, except for                 238,398 acres of BLM lands that may be
studies. All administratively suitable or                                 specified administrative or emergency                       considered for exchange under
eligible (pending further study) river                                    uses. The closed areas include                              prescribed circumstances; and 36 acres
segments will be managed under BLM                                        administratively withdrawn areas such                       of BLM lands that may be available for
interim management guidelines pending                                     as seed orchards and progeny test sites,                    sale or disposal under other authorized
further legislative or administrative                                     and various ACECs. In addition, the                         processes. The ARMP also provides
                         Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 135 / Friday, July 14, 1995 / Notices                             36305

criteria for the acquisition of lands, or    statement, and Washington County            include the Beaver Dam Slope Desert
interests in lands, where such               Habitat Conservation Plan are available     Wildlife Management Area of the
acquisition would meet objectives of the     for public review. Copies of the above      Northeastern Mojave Desert Tortoise
various resource programs. The plan          documents have been sent to all             Recovery Unit. The Beaver Dam Slope
allocates approximately 1,367 acres as       agencies and individuals who                Desert Wildlife Management Area,
right-of-way exclusion areas and             participated in the scoping process and     located in the extreme southwestern
151,091 acres as right-of-way avoidance      to all others who have already requested    corner of the State of Utah, is not
areas.                                       copies. This notice is provided pursuant    addressed in this permit application.
   Special Recreation and Visual             to section 10(c) of the Act, and National   The permit application was received on
Resource Management Areas: The               Environmental Policy Act regulations        June 15, 1995, and was accompanied by
ARMP/ROD identifies seven Special            (40 CFR 1506.6). Comments are               the Washington County Habitat
Recreation Management Areas (SRMA),          requested.                                  Conservation Plan (HCP), which
including one existing (Shotgun              DATES: Written comments on the draft        describes the Applicant’s proposed
Recreation Site) and six new SRMA            environmental impact statement,             measures to minimize, monitor, and
(Upper Lake Creek, Lower Lake Creek,         incidental take permit application, and     mitigate the impacts of their proposed
Gilkey Creek, Row River, McKenzie            habitat conservation plan must be           take on the desert tortoise.
River, Siuslaw River). The existing          received on or before August 28, 1995.        The Applicant proposes to minimize
SRMA totals approximately 277 acres          ADDRESSES: Requests for any of the          incidental take through design of a
and the new SRMAs total approximately        above documents and comments or             desert habitat reserve of the largest size
24,454 acres. The ARMP/ROD allocates         materials concerning them should be         practicable that will meet
approximately 1,265 acres of BLM             sent to the Assistant Field Supervisor,     recommendations for the Upper Virgin
administered lands for 39 existing or        Fish and Wildlife Service, 145 East 1300    River Recovery Unit, as detailed in the
potential recreation sites. The plan also    South, Suite 404, Salt Lake City, Utah      Desert Tortoise Recovery Plan. Other
allocates lands for 26 existing or           84115. The documents and comments           methods to minimize incidental take
potential trails, totaling approximately     and materials received will be available    will include fencing, law enforcement,
102 miles. The plan also identifies          for public inspection, by appointment,      education, and translocation research.
management objectives for three Visual                                                   Fencing is an important component of
                                             during normal business hours at the
Resource Management classifications.                                                     both minimization and mitigation
                                             above address.
   Mineral and Energy Resource                                                           measures, as it will be designed to
                                             FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Management: Most BLM administered                                                        minimize desert tortoise mortality,
                                             Robert D. Williams, Assistant Field
lands will remain available for mineral                                                  including human-caused injury and
                                             Supervisor (see ADDRESSES above)
leasing and location of mining claims,                                                   death. As mitigation, fencing will also
                                             (telephone 801–524–5001, facsimile          serve to enhance habitat within the
but 52 acres are closed to leasing for oil   801–524–5021).
and gas resources by law, and 15,230                                                     proposed reserve, allowing habitat
                                             SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Section 9        preservation and rehabilitation.
acres will be closed to location of
                                             of the Endangered Species Act (Act) of        Consolidation of desert habitat into a
claims.
                                             1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et         reserve managed for desert tortoise and
  Dated: June 13, 1995.                      seq.), prohibits the ‘‘taking’’ of any      other species, and removal of competing
Judy Ellen Nelson,                           threatened or endangered species,           uses will comprise the primary
Eugene District Manager.                     including the desert tortoise. However,     mitigation for proposed take. The
[FR Doc. 95–15708 Filed 7–13–95; 8:45 am]    the Fish and Wildlife Service (Service),    Applicant proposes establishment of a
BILLING CODE 4310–33–P                       under limited circumstances, may issue      60,969-acre desert habitat reserve,
                                             permits to take threatened and              within the Upper Virgin River Desert
                                             endangered wildlife species if such         Tortoise Recovery Unit. The proposed
Fish and Wildlife Service                    taking is incidental to, and not the        reserve extends from the western
                                             purpose of, otherwise lawful activities.    boundary of the Paiute Indian tribal
Availability of a Draft Environmental        Regulations governing permits for           lands on the west to the City of
Impact Statement and Receipt of an           threatened and endangered species are       Hurricane on the east. Within this area,
Application for an Incidental Take           at 50 CFR 17.22.                            uses will be carefully controlled and all
Permit for Desert Tortoises in                  Washington County, Utah (Applicant)      management actions will place desert
Washington County, Utah                      submitted an application to the Service     tortoise and desert tortoise habitat
AGENCY:   Fish and Wildlife Service,         for a permit to incidentally take desert    conservation as the highest priority. The
Interior.                                    tortoise, pursuant to section 10(a)(1)(B)   reserve also will provide habitat for
                                             of the Act, in association with various     numerous Federal candidate and State
ACTION: Notice.
                                             private projects in Washington County.      sensitive species. Outside the reserve,
SUMMARY: Washington County, Utah             The proposed permit would allow             Federal activities in desert tortoise
(Applicant) has applied to the Fish and      incidental take of desert tortoise for a    habitat will be subject to the Act section
Wildlife Service (Service) for an            period of 20 years, resulting from          7 consultations with the Service.
incidental take permit pursuant to           development of up to 12,298 acres of        Mitigation for the proposed take also
section 10(a)(1)(B) of the Endangered        private lands in the vicinity of the        will include fencing of plant reserve
Species Act of 1973, as amended (Act).       Upper Virgin River Desert Tortoise          areas for endangered plant species,
The Applic