Pages 613±690 Vol. 61 1±9±96 No. 6 federal register January 9,1996 Tuesday announcement ontheinsidecoverofthisissue. For informationonbriefingsinWashington,DC,see Briefings onHowToUsetheFederalRegister 1 II Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 6 / Tuesday, January 9, 1996

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 General online information 202–512–1530 the Office of the Federal Register, National Archives and Records Administration, Washington, DC 20408, under the Federal Register Single copies/back copies: Act (49 Stat. 500, as amended; 44 U.S.C. Ch. 15) and the Paper or fiche 512–1800 regulations of the Administrative Committee of the Federal Register Assistance with public single copies 512–1803 (1 CFR Ch. I). Distribution is made only by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, DC FEDERAL AGENCIES 20402. Subscriptions: The Federal Register provides a uniform system for making Paper or fiche 523–5243 available to the public regulations and legal notices issued by Assistance with Federal agency subscriptions 523–5243 Federal agencies. These include Presidential proclamations and For other telephone numbers, see the Reader Aids section Executive Orders and Federal agency documents having general applicability and legal effect, documents required to be published at the end of this issue. by act of Congress and other Federal agency documents of public interest. Documents are on file for public inspection in the Office of the Federal Register the day before they are published, unless THE FEDERAL REGISTER earlier filing is requested by the issuing agency. The seal of the National Archives and Records Administration WHAT IT IS AND HOW TO USE IT authenticates this issue of the Federal Register as the official serial publication established under the Federal Register Act. 44 U.S.C. FOR: Any person who uses the Federal Register and Code of Federal 1507 provides that the contents of the Federal Register shall be Regulations. judicially noticed. WHO: Sponsored by the Office of the Federal Register. The Federal Register is published in paper, 24x microfiche and as WHAT: Free public briefings (approximately 3 hours) to present: an online database through GPO Access, a service of the U.S. 1. The regulatory process, with a focus on the Federal Register Government Printing Office. The online database is updated by 6 system and the public’s role in the development of a.m. each day the Federal Register is published. The database regulations. includes both text and graphics from Volume 59, Number 1 (January 2, 1994) forward. Free public access is available on a 2. The relationship between the Federal Register and Code of Wide Area Information Server (WAIS) through the Internet and via Federal Regulations. asynchronous dial-in. Internet users can access the database by 3. The important elements of typical Federal Register using the World Wide Web; the Superintendent of Documents documents. l home page address is http://www.access.gpo.gov/su docs/, by 4. An introduction to the finding aids of the FR/CFR system. using local WAIS client software, or by telnet to swais.access.gpo.gov, then login as guest, (no password required). WHY: To provide the public with access to information necessary to Dial-in users should use communications software and modem to research Federal agency regulations which directly affect them. call (202) 512–1661; type swais, then login as guest (no password There will be no discussion of specific agency regulations. required). For general information about GPO Access, contact the GPO Access User Support Team by sending Internet e-mail to [email protected] gpo.gov; by faxing to (202) 512–1262; or by calling (202) 512–1530 between 7 a.m. and 5 p.m. Eastern time, WASHINGTON, DC Monday–Friday, except for Federal holidays. [Two Sessions] The annual subscription price for the Federal Register paper WHEN: January 9, 1996 at 9:00 am and edition is $494, or $544 for a combined Federal Register, Federal Register Index and List of CFR Sections Affected (LSA) January 23, 1996 at 9:00 am subscription; the microfiche edition of the Federal Register WHERE: Office of the Federal Register Conference including the Federal Register Index and LSA is $433. Six month Room, 800 North Capitol Street, NW., subscriptions are available for one-half the annual rate. The charge Washington, DC (3 blocks north of Union 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 Station Metro) in microfiche form. All prices include regular domestic postage RESERVATIONS: 202–523–4538 and handling. International customers please add 25% for foreign 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: 61 FR 12345.

2 III

Contents Federal Register Vol. 60, No. 6

Tuesday, January 9, 1996

Broadcasting Board of Governors CNG Transmission Corp., 645 NOTICES Columbia Gas Transmission Corp., 645–646 Meetings; Sunshine Act, 682 Columbia Gulf Transmission Co., 646 Eastern Shore Natural Gas Co., 646–647 Commerce Department El Paso Natural Gas Co., 647 See Export Administration Bureau Equitrans, Inc., 647–648 Florida Gas Transmission Co., 648 Defense Department Mojave Pipeline Co., 648–649 See Navy Department Northern Natural Gas Co., 649 NOTICES Northwest Pipeline Corp., 649 Grants and cooperative agreements; availability, etc.: Questar Pipeline Co., 649–650 National security education program, 643 Texas Gas Transmission Corp., 650 Meetings: Trunkline Gas Co., 650–651 Defense Intelligence Agency Scientific Advisory Board, Williston Basin Interstate Pipeline Co., 651–652 643 Scientific Advisory Board, 643 Federal Housing Finance Board Wage Committee, 643–644 NOTICES Meetings; Sunshine Act, 682 Energy Department See Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Federal Reserve System See Hearings and Appeals Office, Energy Department NOTICES See Western Area Power Administration Applications, hearings, determinations, etc.: Chittenden Corp. et al., 658 Environmental Protection Agency Downs Bancshares, Inc., et al., 658 NOTICES Pikeville National Corp. et al.; correction, 658 Toxic and hazardous substances control: Regions Financial Corp. et al.; correction, 659 Premanufacture notices receipts Young In Chung et al., 659 Review period extension due to furlough, 657–658 Federal Retirement Thrift Investment Board Export Administration Bureau NOTICES NOTICES Meetings; Sunshine Act, 682 Meetings: President’s Export Council, 643 Federal Trade Commission NOTICES Federal Aviation Administration Premerger notification waiting periods; early terminations, RULES 659–660 Air traffic operating and flight rules: Flights between Republic of Yugoslavia (Serbia and Food and Drug Administration Montenegro) and U.S.; prohibition, 629–631 RULES Airworthiness directives: Food additives: Bell, 613–617 N-butoxypoly(oxyethylene)poly(oxypropylene) glycol, Hamilton Standard, 617–622 631–632 Jetstream, 622–623 Maule Aerospace Technology, Inc., 623–625 Health and Human Services Department Textron Lycoming, 625–629 See Food and Drug Administration PROPOSED RULES NOTICES Airworthiness directives: Meetings: Boeing, 634–636 President’s Council on Physical Fitness and Sports, 660– de Havilland, 636–637 661 McDonnell Douglas, 637–640 Saab, 640–642 Hearings and Appeals Office, Energy Department NOTICES NOTICES Agency information collection activities: Special refund procedures; implementation, 652–655 Submission for OMB review; comment request, 678 Passenger facility charges; applications, etc.: Housing and Urban Development Department Columbus Municipal Airport Authority, OH, et al., 678– RULES 681 Federal regulatory review: Mortgagee Review Board; hearing procedures Federal Energy Regulatory Commission streamlined, 684–685 NOTICES Applications, hearings, determinations, etc.: Interior Department ANR Pipeline Co., 644 See Land Management Bureau IV Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 6 / Tuesday, January 9, 1996 / Contents

Land Management Bureau Western Area Power Administration NOTICES NOTICES Meetings: Power rate adjustments: Northern and Eastern Colorado Desert coordinated Pacific Northwest-Pacific Southwest Intertie Project, 655– management plan, 661 657

Navy Department Separate Parts In This Issue NOTICES Environmental statements; availability, etc.: Part II Marine Corps Camp Pendleton, CA— Flood protection facilities construction and Basilone Department of Housing and Urban Development, 684–685 Road Bridge replacement, 644 Part III Department of Transportation, Research and Special Nuclear Regulatory Commission Programs Administration, 688–690 PROPOSED RULES Rulemaking petitions: Heartland Operation to Protect Environment, 633–634 Reader Aids NOTICES Additional information, including a list of public laws, Abnormal occurrence reports: telephone numbers, and finding aids, appears in the Reader Quarterly reports to Congress, 661–669 Aids section at the end of this issue. Environmental statements; availability, etc.: Commonwealth Edison Co., 669–670 Organization, functions, and authority delegations: New Feature in the Reader Aids! Local public document room relocation and Beginning with the issue of December 4, 1995, a new listing establishment— will appear each day in the Reader Aids section of the Wood River Junction Site, RI; closing, 670–671 Federal Register called ‘‘Reminders’’. The Reminders will Petitions; Director’s decisions: have two sections: ‘‘Rules Going Into Effect Today’’ and Northeast Utilities, 671–672 ‘‘Comments Due Next Week’’. Rules Going Into Effect Today will remind readers about Rules documents Public Health Service published in the past which go into effect ‘‘today’’. See Food and Drug Administration Comments Due Next Week will remind readers about impending closing dates for comments on Proposed Rules documents published in past issues. Only those documents Research and Special Programs Administration published in the Rules and Proposed Rules sections of the PROPOSED RULES Federal Register will be eligible for inclusion in the Hazardous materials: Reminders. Hazardous liquid transportation— The Reminders feature is intended as a reader aid only. Open head fiber drum packaging; extension of Neither inclusion nor exclusion in the listing has any legal authority for shipping, 688–690 significance. The Office of the Federal Register has been compiling data for the Reminders since the issue of November 1, 1995. No Securities and Exchange Commission documents published prior to November 1, 1995 will be NOTICES listed in Reminders. Self-regulatory organizations; proposed rule changes: Boston Stock Exchange, Inc., 672–676 Stock Clearing Corp. of Philadelphia, 676–678 Electronic Bulletin Board Free Electronic Bulletin Board service for Public Law Transportation Department numbers, Federal Register finding aids, and a list of See Federal Aviation Administration documents on public inspection is available on 202–275– See Research and Special Programs Administration 1538 or 275–0920. Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 6 / Tuesday, January 9, 1996 / Contents V

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.

10 CFR Proposed Rules: 61...... 633 14 CFR 39 (6 documents) ...... 613, 617, 622, 623, 625, 627 91...... 629 Proposed Rules: 39 (4 documents) ...... 634, 636, 637, 640 21 CFR 173...... 631 24 CFR 25...... 684 49 CFR Proposed Rules: 171...... 688 613

Rules and Regulations Federal Register Vol. 61, No. 6

Tuesday, January 9, 1996

This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER ADDRESSES: Submit comments in closer inspection reveals a crack in the contains regulatory documents having general triplicate to the Federal Aviation blade skin, replacement of the blade applicability and legal effect, most of which Administration (FAA), Office of the with an airworthy blade is required. If are keyed to and codified in the Code of Assistant Chief Counsel, Attention: no crack is found in the blade skin, the Federal Regulations, which is published under Rules Docket No. 95–SW–33–AD, 2601 area from which the paint was removed 50 titles pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 1510. Meacham Blvd., room 663, Fort Worth, is coated with a light-weight oil or an The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by Texas 76137. equivalent corrosion preventive the Superintendent of Documents. Prices of FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. compound, and then repetitive visual new books are listed in the first FEDERAL Charles Harrison, Aerospace Engineer, checks are required at intervals not to REGISTER issue of each week. Rotorcraft Certification Office, exceed 3 hours time-in-service (TIS). Rotorcraft Directorate, FAA, Fort Worth, The initial visual check that is required Texas 76193–0170, telephone (817) before further flight and the repetitive DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 222–5447, fax (817) 222–5960. checks may be performed by a pilot, but must be entered into the aircraft records Federal Aviation Administration SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On November 3, 1995, the FAA issued showing compliance with paragraph (a) 14 CFR Part 39 priority letter AD 95–23–02, applicable of this AD in accordance with sections to certain serial-numbered BHT Models 43.11 and 91.417(a)(2)(v) of the Federal [Docket No. 95±SW±33±AD; Amdt. 39±9484; 222, 222B, 222U, and 230 helicopters, to Aviation Regulations. This AD allows a AD 96±01±08] require an initial check of both surfaces pilot to perform this check because it involves only a visual check for Airworthiness Directives; Bell of each blade for cracks; an inspection cracking in the painted surface of the Helicopter Textron, A Division of of the blade skin if a crack of a specified blade skin, and can be performed Textron Canada Ltd. Model 222, 222B, size or location is found in the paint; equally well by a pilot or a mechanic. 222U, and 230 Helicopters and replacement of the blade if a crack is found in the blade skin. That action Since a situation exists that requires AGENCY: Federal Aviation was prompted by two incidents in the immediate adoption of this Administration, DOT. which a crack developed in the stainless regulation, it is found that notice and ACTION: Final rule; request for steel blade skins on BHT Model 230 opportunity for public comment hereon comments. helicopters. In one of these incidents, are impracticable, and that good cause the blade failed during flight. exists for making this amendment SUMMARY: This amendment supersedes Subsequent investigation revealed effective in less than 30 days. an existing priority letter airworthiness fatigue cracks originating from sanding Comments Invited directive (AD) 95–23–02, applicable to marks on the blade skin. The cracks certain serial-numbered Bell Helicopter were located just outboard of the Although this action is in the form of Textron, A Division of Textron Canada stainless steel blade doubler. That a final rule that involves requirements Ltd. (BHT) Model 222, 222B, 222U, and condition, if not corrected, could result affecting flight safety and, thus, was not 230 helicopters, that currently requires in failure of a blade due to a fatigue preceded by notice and an opportunity an initial check of both surfaces of each crack, loss of the tail rotor and tail rotor for public comment, comments are tail rotor blade (blade) for cracks; an gear box, and subsequent loss of control invited on this rule. Interested persons inspection of the blade skin if a crack of the helicopter. are invited to comment on this rule by of a specified size or location is found Since the issuance of that AD, the submitting such written data, views, or in the paint; and replacement of the FAA has discovered that an error was arguments as they may desire. blade if a crack is found in the blade made in the applicability paragraph of Communications should identify the skin. This AD requires the same actions the priority letter AD, which incorrectly Rules Docket number and be submitted as required by the priority letter AD, but stated the S/N of one of the affected in triplicate to the address specified corrects some affected serial numbers models. The Model 230 helicopters under the caption ADDRESSES. All (S/N) that were incorrectly stated in that affected by the AD include S/N 23001 communications received on or before AD. This amendment is prompted by through 23038. The priority letter AD the closing date for comments will be two incidents in which a crack incorrectly stated S/N 23001 through considered, and this rule may be developed in the stainless steel blade 23034. amended in light of the comments skins on BHT Model 230 helicopters, Since the unsafe condition described received. Factual information that which are similar in design to the is likely to exist or develop on other supports the commenter’s ideas and Models 222, 222B and 222U helicopters. BHT Models 222, 222B, 222U, and 230 suggestions is extremely helpful in The actions specified by this AD are helicopters of the same type design, this evaluating the effectiveness of the AD intended to prevent failure of a blade AD supersedes priority letter AD 95–23– action and determining whether due to a fatigue crack, loss of the tail 02 to require, before further flight, an additional rulemaking action would be rotor and tail rotor gear box, and initial visual check of both painted needed. subsequent loss of control of the surfaces of each blade for cracks. If a Comments are specifically invited on helicopter. crack of a specified size and location is the overall regulatory, economic, DATES: Effective January 24, 1996. found in the paint, removal of the paint environmental, and energy aspects of Comments for inclusion in the Rules and a visual inspection using a 10- the rule that might suggest a need to Docket must be received on or before power or higher magnifying glass is modify the rule. All comments March 11, 1996. required before further flight. If this submitted will be available, both before 614 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 6 / Tuesday, January 9, 1996 / Rules and Regulations and after the closing date for comments, PART 39ÐAIRWORTHINESS (b) The visual check required by paragraph in the Rules Docket for examination by DIRECTIVES (a) may be performed by an owner/operator interested persons. A report that (pilot) holding at least a private pilot 1. The authority citation for part 39 summarizes each FAA-public contact certificate, and must be entered into the continues to read as follows: aircraft records showing compliance with concerned with the substance of this AD Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701. paragraph (a) of this AD in accordance with will be filed in the Rules Docket. sections 43.11 and 91.417(a)(2)(v) of the Commenters wishing the FAA to § 39.13 [Amended] Federal Aviation Regulations. acknowledge receipt of their comments 2. Section 39.13 is amended by (c) If the visual check described in submitted in response to this rule must adding the following new airworthiness paragraph (a) reveals any crack outboard of the doubler tip (Station 14.250), or any submit a self-addressed, stamped directive (AD), Amendment 39–9484, to chordwise crack inboard of the doubler tip postcard on which the following read as follows: that is longer than 1 inch (see Figure 3), statement is made: ‘‘Comments to AD 96–01–08 Bell Helicopter Textron, a accomplish the following: Docket No. 95–SW–33–AD.’’ The Division of Textron Canada Ltd.: (1) Remove the paint from the skin in the postcard will be date stamped and Amendment 39–9484. Docket No. 95– cracked area using the following procedures returned to the commenter. SW–33–AD. Supersedes Priority Letter (see Figure 4): AD 95–23–02, issued November 3, 1995, The regulations adopted herein will Note 2: Paint cracking that follows the Docket No. 95–SW–31–AD. contour of the doubler is common and is of not have substantial direct effects on the Applicability: Model 222 helicopters, serial no concern. States, on the relationship between the numbers (S/N) 47006 through 47089, and (2) Using a 180 or 220 grit abrasion paper, Model 222B helicopters, S/N 47131 through National government and the States, or sand by hand with spanwise strokes until 47156, with tail rotor blades, part numbers on the distribution of power and greenish- or yellow-colored primer or bare responsibilities among the various (P/N) 222–016–001–101, –107, –111, and –113; Model 222U helicopters, S/N 47501 metal begins to be exposed. levels of government. Therefore, in through 47574, with tail rotor blades, P/N (3) Using spanwise or circular sanding accordance with Executive Order 12612, 222–016–001–107 and –111; and Model 230 motions, continue hand-sanding the it is determined that this final rule does helicopters, S/N 23001 through 23038, with remaining greenish- or yellow-colored primer not have sufficient federalism tail rotor blades, P/N 222–016–001–111, in the cracked area using a 320 or 400 grit installed, certificated in any category. paper until sufficient metal has been exposed implications to warrant the preparation to allow inspection (see area indicated in of a Federalism Assessment. Note 1: This AD applies to each helicopter identified in the preceding applicability Figure 4). The FAA has determined that this provision, regardless of whether it has been (d) Inspect the blade skin for cracks in the regulation is an emergency regulation modified, altered, or repaired in the area area that was exposed in accordance with that must be issued immediately to subject to the requirements of this AD. For paragraph (c) using a 10-power or higher correct an unsafe condition in aircraft, helicopters that have been modified, altered, magnifying glass. or repaired so that the performance of the (1) If no crack is found in the blade skin, and that it is not a ‘‘significant requirements of this AD is affected, the coat the bare metal area with a lightweight regulatory action’’ under Executive owner/operator must use the authority oil or an equivalent corrosion preventive Order 12866. It has been determined provided in paragraph (g) to request approval compound. further that this action involves an from the FAA. This approval may address (2) If any crack is discovered, remove the emergency regulation under DOT either no action, if the current configuration blade and replace it with an airworthy blade. Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 eliminates the unsafe condition, or different (e) Perform the requirements of this AD actions necessary to address the unsafe FR 11034, February 26, 1979). If it is upon installation of a replacement blade. condition described in this AD. Such a (f) Perform the visual checks of paragraph determined that this emergency request should include an assessment of the (a) of this AD and the subsequent regulation otherwise would be effect of the changed configuration on the inspections, if appropriate, at intervals not to significant under DOT Regulatory unsafe condition addressed by this AD. In no exceed 3 hours TIS. Policies and Procedures, a final case does the presence of any modification, alteration, or repair remove any helicopter Note 3: A lightweight oil or equivalent regulatory evaluation will be prepared from the applicability of this AD. corrosion preventive compound may be and placed in the Rules Docket. A copy applied after accomplishing the repetitive Compliance: Required before further flight, of it, if filed, may be obtained from the unless accomplished previously. To prevent requirements of paragraph (f) of this AD. Rules Docket at the location provided failure of a tail rotor blade (blade) due to a (g) An alternative method of compliance or under the caption ADDRESSES. fatigue crack (see Figure 1), loss of the tail adjustment of the compliance time that rotor and tail rotor gear box, and subsequent provides an acceptable level of safety may be List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39 loss of control of the helicopter, accomplish used when approved by the Manager, the following: Rotorcraft Certification Office, Rotorcraft Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation (a) Clean the painted surfaces of the blades Directorate, FAA. Operators shall submit safety, Safety. in an area approximately 6 inches spanwise their requests through an FAA Principal on either side of the doubler tip. Visually Maintenance Inspector, who may concur or Adoption of the Amendment check both surfaces of each blade for cracks comment and then send it to the Manager, by pushing the blade tip away from the Rotorcraft Certification Office. Accordingly, pursuant to the surface being checked until it contacts the authority delegated to me by the Note 4: Information concerning the flapping stop and then holding the blade existence of approved alternative methods of Administrator, the Federal Aviation firmly against the stop. Pay particular compliance with this AD, if any, may be attention to the area reaching from the Administration amends part 39 of the obtained from the Rotorcraft Certification doubler tip to 1 inch outboard, centering on Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR Office. an area 2 inches aft of the blade leading edge part 39) as follows: (see Figure 2). BILLING CODE 4910±13±U Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 6 / Tuesday, January 9, 1996 / Rules and Regulations 615 616 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 6 / Tuesday, January 9, 1996 / Rules and Regulations

BILLING CODE 4910±13±C Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 6 / Tuesday, January 9, 1996 / Rules and Regulations 617

(h) Special flight permits to accomplish the that the existing ultrasonic shear wave Since the issuance of that priority requirements of this AD will not be issued. inspection may not detect cracks as letter AD, the FAA and Hamilton (i) This amendment becomes effective on originally determined with some blades Standard have been working to improve January 15, 1996. due to geometric differences. The the crack detection capability of the Issued in Fort Worth, Texas, on December actions specified by this AD are ultrasonic inspection method as well as 21, 1995. intended to prevent separation of a working to refine the crack growth rate Eric Bries, propeller blade due to cracks initiating prediction methodology. The results of Acting Manager, Rotorcraft Directorate, in the blade taper bore, that can result this work form the basis for the new Aircraft Certification Service. in aircraft damage, and possible loss of inspection method and the change in [FR Doc. 96–259 Filed 1–8–96; 8:45 am] the aircraft. repetitive inspection interval. This AD BILLING CODE 4910±13±U DATES: Effective January 19, 1996. will require that propeller blades be The incorporation by reference of calibrated for ultrasonic transmissibility certain publications listed in the before conducting an ultrasonic shear 14 CFR Part 39 regulations is approved by the Director wave inspection, thereby improving the [Docket No. 95±ANE±73; Amendment 39± of the Federal Register as of January 19, detection capability of the ultrasonic 9477, AD 96±01±01] 1996. shear wave inspection technique. This Comments for inclusion in the Rules action will also decrease the repetitive Airworthiness Directives; Hamilton Docket must be received on or before inspection interval for the 14RF–9, Standard Propellers Models 14RF±9, January 29, 1996. 14SF–5, –7, –11, –15, –17, –19, and –23 14RF±19, 14RF±21; and 14SF±5, 14SF± ADDRESSES: Submit comments in from 1,250 flight cycles to 500 flight 7, 14SF±11, 14SFL11, 14SF±15, 14SF± triplicate to the Federal Aviation cycles. This action will further establish 17, 14SF±19, and 14SF±23; and Administration (FAA), New England a new ultrasonic shear wave inspection Hamilton Standard/British Aerospace Region, Office of the Assistant Chief interval of 1,000 flight cycles for the 6/5500/F Counsel, Attention: Rules Docket No. 14RF–19 and 2,500 flight cycles for the 95–ANE–73, 12 New England Executive 14RF–21 and the 6/5500/F propeller AGENCY: Federal Aviation models. This AD also requires removal Administration, DOT. Park, Burlington, MA 01803–5299. The service information referenced in of the life limited 14SFL11 propellers ACTION: Final rule; request for this AD may be obtained from Hamilton currently in service, approximately four comments. Standard, One Hamilton Road, Windsor propellers. These 14SFL11 propellers will be replaced with the Hamilton SUMMARY: This amendment adopts a Locks, CT 06096–1010; telephone (203) Standard Model 247F propellers. The new airworthiness directive (AD) that is 654–6876. This information may be actions specified by this AD are applicable to Hamilton Standard examined at the FAA, New England intended to prevent the separation of a Propeller Models 14RF–9, 14RF–19, Region, Office of the Assistant Chief propeller blade due to cracks initiating 14RF–21; and 14SF–5, 14SF–7, 14SF– Counsel, 12 New England Executive Park, Burlington, MA; or at the Office of in the blade taper bore, that can result 11, 14SFL11, 14SF–15, 14SF–17, 14SF– in aircraft damage, and possible loss of 19, and 14SF–23; and Hamilton the Federal Register, 800 North Capitol Street, NW., suite 700, Washington, DC. aircraft control. Standard/British Aerospace 6/5500/F. This AD references two ultrasonic FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: This action supersedes priority letter inspection methods, one that can be Frank Walsh, Aerospace Engineer, AD 95–18–06R1, that was issued on accomplished without removing the August 30, 1995, that currently requires Boston Aircraft Certification Office, lead from the taper bore which permits ultrasonic shear wave inspection on all FAA, Engine & Propeller Directorate, 12 an on wing inspection and a second Hamilton Standard 14RF–9 propeller New England Executive Park, inspection that requires the blade be blades, and ultrasonic shear wave Burlington, MA 01803, telephone (617) removed and inspected at an FAA inspection on certain Hamilton 238–7152, fax: (617) 238–7199. approved facility. The inspection that is Standard Propeller Models 14RF–19, SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On August conducted without removing the lead 14RF–21; and 14SF–5, 14SF–7, 14SF– 30, 1995, the Federal Aviation from the taper bore cannot be 11, 14SFL11, 14SF–15, 14SF–17, 14SF– Administration (FAA) issued priority accomplished on some blades because 19, and 14SF–23; and Hamilton letter airworthiness directive (AD) 95– of ultrasonic transmissibility problems Standard/British Aerospace 6/5500/F 18–06R1 applicable to Hamilton caused by the lead wool absorbing the propeller blades. This action requires Standard Propeller Models 14RF–9, signal. These blades must be removed that all blades of applicable Hamilton 14RF–19, 14RF–21; and 14SF–5, 14SF– and inspected at an FAA approved Standard propellers be calibrated for 7, 14SF–11, 14SFL11, 14SF–15, 14SF– facility where the lead wool will be ultrasonic transmissibility before 17, 14SF–19, and 14SF–23; and extracted. conducting the ultrasonic shear wave Hamilton Standard/British Aerospace 6/ The FAA has reviewed and approved inspection. This action improves the 5500/F propellers, which requires the technical contents of the following crack detection capability of the ultrasonic shear wave inspection on all Hamilton Standard Alert Service ultrasonic shear wave inspection. This Hamilton Standard 14RF–9 propeller Bulletins (ASB’s): No. 14RF–9–61–A91, action also decreases the repetitive blades, and ultrasonic shear wave No. 14RF–19–61–A55, No. 14RF–21– inspection interval for the 14RF–9, inspection on certain Hamilton 61–A73, No. 14SF–61–A93, and No. 6/ 14SF–5, –7, –11, –15, –17, –19, and –23 Standard Models 14RF–19, –21; and 5500/F–61–A41, all dated December 7, from 1,250 flight cycles to 500 flight 14SF–5, –7, –11, L11, –15, –17, –19, and 1995, and No. 14RF–9–61–A91, Rev 1, cycles. This action also establishes a –23; and Hamilton Standard/British No. 14RF–19–61–A55, Rev 1, No. 14RF– new ultrasonic shear wave inspection Aerospace 6/5500/F propeller blades. 21–61–A73, Rev 1, No. 14SF–61–A93, interval of 1,000 flight cycles for the That AD action was prompted by a Rev 1, and No. 6/5500/F–61–A41, Rev 1, 14RF–19 and 2,500 flight cycles for the report of a Hamilton Standard 14RF–9 all dated December 15, 1995, that 14RF–21 and the 6/5500/F. This AD propeller blade installed on an Embraer describe procedures for ultrasonic shear also removes 14SFL11 propellers from EMB–120 aircraft that had separated wave inspections of the blade taper service. This AD is prompted by reports inflight. bores for cracks after the lead wool has 618 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 6 / Tuesday, January 9, 1996 / Rules and Regulations been removed. The Rev. 1 ASB’s permit amended in light of the comments Administrator, the Federal Aviation the installation of a plastic cone in the received. Factual information that Administration amends part 39 of the taper bore that will enhance resistance supports the commenter’s ideas and Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR to corrosion and mechanical damage. suggestions is extremely helpful in part 39) as follows: Inspection procedures are the same. evaluating the effectiveness of the AD In addition the FAA has approved action and determining whether PART 39ÐAIRWORTHINESS ASB’s No. 14RF–9–61–A95, No. 14RF– additional rulemaking action would be DIRECTIVES 19–61–A57, No. 14RF–21–61–A75, No. needed. 1. The authority citation for part 39 14SF–61–A95, and No. 6/5500/F–61– Comments are specifically invited on continues to read as follows: A43, all dated December 18, 1995, and the overall regulatory, economic, No. 14RF–9–61–A95, Rev 1, No. 14RF– environmental, and energy aspects of Authority: 49 USC 106(g), 40101, 40113, 19–61–A57, Rev 1, No. 14RF–21–61– the rule that might suggest a need to 44701. A75, Rev 1, No. 14SF–61–A95, Rev 1, modify the rule. All comments § 39.13 [Amended] and No. 6/5500/F–61–A43, Rev 1, all submitted will be available, both before 2. Section 39.13 is amended by dated December 21, 1995, that describe and after the closing date for comments, adding the following new airworthiness ultrasonic shear wave inspection that in the Rules Docket for examination by directive: can be accomplished without removing interested persons. A report that the lead from the taper bore which summarizes each FAA-public contact 96–01–01 Hamilton Standard: Amendment permits an on-wing inspection of the concerned with the substance of this AD 39–9477. Docket No. 95–ANE–73. Supersedes AD 95–18–06R1. blade taper bores for cracks. The Rev. 1 will be filed in the Rules Docket. ASB’s do not require immediate Commenters wishing the FAA to Applicability: Hamilton Standard Models removal of the blades that cannot be 14RF–9, –14RF–19, 14RF–21; and 14SF–5, acknowledge receipt of their comments 14SF–7, 14SF–11, 14SFL11, 14SF–15, 14SF– inspected for cracks due to the lead submitted in response to this notice 17, 14SF–19, and 14SF–23; and Hamilton wool absorbing the ultrasonic signal. must submit a self-addressed, stamped Standard/British Aerospace 6/5500/F These blades may be removed at any postcard on which the following propellers installed on but not limited to time within the applicable compliance statement is made: ‘‘Comments to Embraer EMB–120, EMB–120RT; period. Inspection procedures are the Docket Number 95–ANE–73.’’ The Aerospatiale ATR42–100, ATR42–300, same. postcard will be date stamped and ATR42–320, ATR72, ATR72–210; Since an unsafe condition has been returned to the commenter. deHavilland DHC–8–100 series, DHC–8–200 identified that is likely to exist or The regulations adopted herein will series, DHC–8–300 series; SAAB–SCANIA SF develop on other propellers of this same 340B; Canadair CL–215T, CL–415; not have substantial direct effects on the Construcciones Aeronauticas SA (CASA) type design, this AD supersedes priority States, on the relationship between the CN–235 series; and British Aerospace ATP letter AD 95–18–06R1 to require all national government and the States, or aircraft. Hamilton Standard Model 14RF–9, –19, on the distribution of power and Note: This airworthiness directive (AD) –21; and 14SF–5, –7, –11, –15, –17, –19, responsibilities among the various applies to each propeller identified in the and –23; and Hamilton Standard/British levels of government. Therefore, in preceding applicability provision, regardless Aerospace 6/5500/F propeller blades be accordance with Executive Order 12612, of whether it has been modified, altered, or calibrated for ultrasonic transmissibility it is determined that this final rule does repaired in the area subject to the before conducting an ultrasonic shear not have sufficient federalism requirements of this AD. For propellers that wave inspection. The actions and implications to warrant the preparation have been modified, altered, or repaired so that the performance of the requirements of inspection intervals for each propeller of a Federalism Assessment. model are required to be accomplished this AD is affected, the owner/operator must The FAA has determined that this use the authority provided in paragraph (n) in accordance with the service bulletins regulation is an emergency regulation to request approval from the Federal Aviation described previously. that must be issued immediately to Administration (FAA). This approval may Since a situation exists that requires correct an unsafe condition in aircraft, address either no action, if the current the immediate adoption of this and is not a ‘‘significant regulatory configuration eliminates the unsafe regulation, it is found that notice and action’’ under Executive Order 12866. It condition, or different actions necessary to opportunity for prior public comment has been determined further that this address the unsafe condition described in hereon are impracticable, and that good action involves an emergency regulation this AD. Such a request should include an assessment of the effect of the changed cause exists for making this amendment under DOT Regulatory Policies and effective in less than 30 days. configuration on the unsafe condition Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, addressed by this AD. In no case does the Comments Invited 1979). If it is determined that this presence of any modification, alteration, or emergency regulation otherwise would repair remove any propeller from the Although this action is in the form of be significant under DOT Regulatory applicability of this AD. a final rule that involves requirements Policies and Procedures, a final Compliance: Required as indicated, unless affecting flight safety and, thus, was not regulatory evaluation will be prepared accomplished previously. preceded by notice and an opportunity and placed in the Rules Docket. A copy To prevent separation of a propeller blade for public comment, comments are of it, if filed, may be obtained from the due to cracks initiating in the blade taper invited on this rule. Interested persons Rules Docket at the location provided bore, that can result in aircraft damage, and possible loss of aircraft control, accomplish are invited to comment on this rule by under the caption ADDRESSES. submitting such written data, views, or the following: arguments as they may desire. List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39 (a) For Hamilton Standard Model 14RF–9 propeller blades, with Serial Numbers less Communications should identify the Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation Rules Docket number and be submitted than 882038 and listed in Hamilton Standard safety, Incorporation by reference, Alert Service Bulletins (ASB’s) No. 14RF–9– in triplicate to the address specified Safety. 61–A95, dated December 18, 1995, or No. under the caption ADDRESSES. All Adoption of the Amendment 14RF–9–61–A95, Rev 1, dated December 21, communications received on or before 1995, installed on but not limited to Embraer the closing date for comments will be Accordingly, pursuant to the EMB–120 and EMB–120RT series aircraft, considered, and this rule may be authority delegated to me by the accomplish the following: Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 6 / Tuesday, January 9, 1996 / Rules and Regulations 619

(1) Within the next 150 flight cycles, after (2) For propeller blades that have been December 21, 1995, within 300 flight cycles the effective date of this AD, perform an previously inspected in accordance with since last inspection or 150 flight cycles after ultrasonic shear wave inspection for cracks Hamilton Standard ASB’s No. 14SF–61–A93, the effective date of this AD, whichever in the blade taper bore in accordance with dated December 7, 1995, or No. 14SF–61– occurs later. the Accomplishment Instructions of A93, Rev 1, dated December 15, 1995, (3) Propeller blades that cannot be Hamilton Standard ASB’s No. 14RF–9–61– perform an ultrasonic shear wave inspection inspected for cracks in accordance with A95, dated December 18, 1995, or No. 14RF– in accordance with the Accomplishments Hamilton Standard ASB’s No. 14RF–9–61– 9–61–A95, Rev 1, dated December 21, 1995. Instructions of Hamilton Standard ASB’s No. A95, dated December 18, 1995, or No. 14RF– (2) For propeller blades that have been 14SF–61–A95, dated December 18, 1995, or 9–61–A95, Rev. 1, dated December 21, 1995, previously inspected in accordance with No. 14SF–61–A95, Rev 1, dated December due to the lead wool absorbing the ultrasonic Hamilton Standard ASB’s No. 14RF–9–61– 21, 1995, within 500 flight cycles since last signal, must be inspected in accordance with A91, dated December 7, 1995, or No. 14RF– inspection or 150 flight cycles after the the Accomplishment Instructions of 9–61–A91, Rev 1, dated December 15, 1995, effective date of this AD, whichever occurs Hamilton Standard ASB’s No. 14RF–9–61– perform an ultrasonic shear wave inspection later. A91, dated December 7, 1995, or No. 14RF– in accordance with the Accomplishment (3) Propeller blades that cannot be 9–61–A91, Rev. 1, dated December 15, 1995, Instructions of Hamilton Standard ASB’s No. inspected for cracks in accordance with within the next 300 flight cycles after the 14RF–9–61–A95, dated December 18, 1995, Hamilton Standard ASB’s No. 14SF–61–A95, effective date of this AD. or No. 14RF–9–61–A95, Rev 1, dated dated December 18, 1995, or No. 14SF–61– (4) Propeller blades that have ultrasonic December 21, 1995, within 500 flight cycles A95, Rev 1, dated December 21, 1995, due to shear wave indications that exceed the limits since last inspection or 150 flight cycles after the lead wool absorbing the ultrasonic signal, specified in Hamilton Standard ASB’s No. the effective date of this AD, whichever must be inspected in accordance with the 14RF–9–61–A95, dated December 18, 1995, occurs later. Accomplishment Instructions of Hamilton or No. 14RF–9–61–A95, dated December 21, (3) Propeller blades that cannot be Standard ASB’s No. 14SF–61–A93, dated 1995, must be inspected in accordance with inspected for cracks in accordance with December 7, 1995, or No. 14SF–61–A93, Rev the Accomplishment Instructions of Hamilton Standard ASB’s No. 14RF–9–61– 1, dated December 15, 1995, within the next Hamilton Standard ASB’s No. 14RF–9–61– A95, dated December 18, 1995, or No. 14RF– 150 flight cycles after the effective date of A91, dated December 7, 1995, or No. 14RF– 9–61–A95, Rev 1, dated December 21, 1995, this AD. 9–61–A91 Rev. 1, dated December 15, 1995. due to the lead wool absorbing the ultrasonic (4) Propeller blades that have ultrasonic (5) Thereafter, perform repetitive ultrasonic signal, must be inspected in accordance with shear wave indications that exceed the limits shear wave inspections at intervals not to the Accomplishment Instructions of specified in Hamilton Standard ASB’s No. exceed 500 flight cycles in accordance with Hamilton Standard ASB’s No. 14RF–9–61– 14SF–61–A95, dated December 18, 1995, or the applicable SB’s. A91, dated December 7, 1995, or No. 14RF– No. 14SF–61–A95, dated December 21, 1995, (6) Propeller blades that have ultrasonic 9–61–A91, Rev 1 dated December 15, 1995, must be inspected in accordance with the shear wave indications that exceed the limits within the next 150 flight cycles after the Accomplishment Instructions of Hamilton specified in Hamilton Standard ASB’s No. effective date of this AD. Standard ASB’s No. 14SF–61–A93, dated 14RF–9–61–A91, dated December 7, 1995, or (4) Propeller blades that have ultrasonic shear wave indications that exceed the limits December 7, 1995, or No. 14SF–61–A93, Rev No. 14RF–9–61–A91, Rev. 1, dated December specified in Hamilton Standard ASB’s No. 1, dated December 15, 1995. 15, 1995, must be removed from service and 14RF–9–61–A95, dated December 18, 1995, (5) Thereafter, perform repetitive ultrasonic replaced with a serviceable part prior to or No. 14RF–9–61–A95, Rev 1, dated shear wave inspections at intervals not to further flight. December 21, 1995, must be inspected in exceed 500 flight cycles in accordance with (d) For Hamilton Standard Models 14SF– accordance with the Accomplishment the applicable SB’s. 5, –7, –11, –15, –17, –19, and –23 propeller Instructions of Hamilton Standard ASB’s No. (6) Propeller blades that have ultrasonic blades with Serial Numbers less than 882038 14RF–9–61–A91 dated December 7, 1995, or shear wave indications that exceed the limits and not listed in ASB’s No. 14SF–61–A95, No. 14RF–9–61–A91, Rev 1 dated December specified in Hamilton Standard ASB’s No. dated December 18, 1995, or No. 14SF–61– 15, 1995. 14SF–61–A93, dated December 7, 1995, or A95, Rev. 1, dated December 21, 1995, (5) Thereafter, perform repetitive ultrasonic No. 14SF–61–A93, Rev 1, dated December installed on but not limited to Aerospatiale shear wave inspections at intervals not to 15, 1995, must be removed from service and ATR42–100, ATR42–300, ATR42–320, exceed 500 flight cycles in accordance with replaced with a serviceable part prior to ATR72, ATR72–210 and deHavilland DHC– the applicable SB’s. further flight. 8–100, DHC–8–200, DHC–8–300 series (6) Propeller blades that have ultrasonic (c) For Hamilton Standard Model 14RF–9 aircraft, accomplish the following: shear wave indications that exceed the limits propeller blades with Serial Numbers less (1) Within the next 300 flight cycles, after specified in Hamilton Standard ASB’s No. than 882038 and not listed in Hamilton the effective date of this AD, perform an 14RF–9–61–A91, dated December 7, 1995, or Standard ASB’s No. 14RF–9–61–A95, dated ultrasonic shear wave inspection for cracks No. 14RF–9–61–A91, Rev 1, dated December December 18, 1995, or No. 14RF–9–61–A95, in the blade taper bore in accordance with 15, 1995, must be removed from service, and Rev 1, dated December 21, 1995, installed on the Accomplishment Instructions of replaced with a serviceable part prior to but not limited to Embraer EMB 120 and Hamilton Standard ASB’s No. 14SF–61–A95, further flight. EMB 120RT series aircraft, accomplish the dated December 18, 1995, or No. 14SF–61– (b) For Hamilton Standard Models 14SF– following: A95 Rev. 1, dated December 21, 1995. 5, –7, –11, –15, and –23 propeller blades with (1) Within the next 300 flight cycles, after (2) For propeller blades that have been Serial Numbers less than 882038 and listed the effective date of this AD, perform an previously inspected in accordance with in Hamilton Standard ASB’s No. 14SF–61– ultrasonic shear wave inspection for cracks Hamilton Standards ASB’s No. 14SF–61– A95, dated December 18, 1995, or No. 14SF– in the blade taper bore in accordance with A93, dated December 7, 1995, or No. 14SF– 61–A95, Rev 1, dated December 21, 1995, the Accomplishment Instructions of 61–A93, Rev. 1, dated December 15, 1995, installed on but not limited to Aerospatiale Hamilton Standard ASB’s No. 14RF–9–61– perform an ultrasonic shear wave inspection ATR42–100, ATR42–300, ATR42–320, A95, dated December 18, 1995, or No. 14RF– in accordance with the Accomplishment ATR72 and deHavilland DHC–8–100, DHC– 61–A95, Rev 1, dated December 21, 1995. Instructions of Hamilton Standard ASB’s No. 8–200, DHC–8–300 series aircraft, (2) For propeller blades that have been 14SF–61–A95, dated December 18, 1995, or accomplish the following: previously inspected in accordance with No. 14SF–61–A95, Rev. 1, dated December (1) Within the next 150 flight cycles, after Hamilton Standards ASB’s No. 14RF–9–61– 21, 1995, within 500 flight cycles since last the effective date of this AD, perform an A91, dated December 7, 1995, or No. 14RF– inspection or 300 flight cycles after the ultrasonic shear wave inspection for cracks 9–61–A91, Rev 1, dated December 15, 1995, effective date of this AD, whichever occurs in the blade taper bore in accordance with perform an ultrasonic shear wave inspection later. the Accomplishment Instructions of in accordance with the Accomplishment (3) Propeller blades that cannot be Hamilton Standard ASB’s No. 14SF–61–A95, Instructions of Hamilton Standard ASB’s No. inspected for cracks in accordance with dated December 18, 1995, or No. 14SF–61– 14RF–9–61–A95, dated December 18, 1995, Hamilton Standard ASB’s No. 14SF–61–A95, A95, Rev 1, dated December 21, 1995. or No. 14RF–9–61–A95, Rev 1, dated dated December 18, 1995, or No. 14SF–61– 620 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 6 / Tuesday, January 9, 1996 / Rules and Regulations

A95, Rev. 1, dated December 21, 1995, due No. 14SF–61–A95 Rev. 1, dated December 14RF–19–61–A55, dated December 7, 1995, to the lead wool absorbing the ultrasonic 21, 1995, must be removed from service and or No. 14RF–19–61–A55, Rev. 1, dated signal, must be inspected in accordance with inspected in accordance with the December 15, 1995, must be removed from the Accomplishment Instructions of Accomplishment Instructions of Hamilton service and replaced with a serviceable part Hamilton Standard ASB’s No. 14SF–61–A93, Standard ASB’s No. 14SF–61–A93, dated prior to further flight. dated December 7, 1995, or No. 14SF–61– December 7, 1995, or No. 14SF–61–A93 Rev. (g) For all Hamilton Standard Model 14RF– A93, Rev. 1, dated December 15, 1995, within 1, dated December 15, 1995. 21 propeller blades with Serial Numbers less the next 300 flight cycles after the effective (5) Thereafter, perform repetitive ultrasonic than 882038, installed on but not limited to date of this AD. shear wave inspections at intervals not to Construcciones Aeronautic SA (CASA) CN– (4) Propeller blades that have ultrasonic exceed 500 flight cycles in accordance with 235 series aircraft, accomplish the following: shear wave indications that exceed the limits the applicable SB’s. (1) Within the next 300 flight cycles, after specified in Hamilton Standard ASB’s No. (6) Propeller blades that have ultrasonic the effective date of this AD, perform an 14SF–61–A95, dated December 18, 1995, or shear wave indications that exceed the limits ultrasonic shear wave inspection for cracks No. 14SF–61–A95, Rev. 1, dated December specified in Hamilton Standard ASB’s No. in the blade taper bore in accordance with 21, 1995, must be inspected in accordance 14SF–61–A93, dated December 7, 1995, or the Accomplishment Instructions of with the Accomplishment Instructions of No. 14SF–61–93, Rev. 1, dated December 15, Hamilton Standard ASB’s No. 14RF–21–61– Hamilton Standard ASB’s No. 14SF–61–A93, 1995, must be removed from service and A75, dated December 18, 1995, or No. 14RF– dated December 7, 1995, or No. 14SF–61– replaced with a serviceable part prior to 61–A75, Rev. 1, dated December 21, 1995. A93, Rev. 1, dated December 15, 1995. further flight. (2) For propeller blades that have been (5) Thereafter, perform repetitive ultrasonic (f) For all Hamilton Standard Models previously inspected in accordance with shear wave inspections at intervals not to 14RF–19 propeller blades with Serial Hamilton Standard ASB’s No. 14RF–19–61– exceed 500 flight cycles in accordance with Numbers less than 882038, installed on but A55, dated December 7, 1995, or No. 14RF– the applicable SB’s. not limited to SAAB–SCANIA SF 340B series 19–61–A55, Rev. 1, dated December 15, 1995, (6) Propeller blades that have ultrasonic aircraft, accomplish the following: perform an ultrasonic shear wave inspection shear wave indications that exceed the limits (1) Within the next 300 flight cycles, after in accordance with the Accomplishment specified in Hamilton Standard ASB’s No. the effective date of this AD, perform an Instructions of Hamilton Standard ASB’s No. 14SF–61–A93, dated December 7, 1995, or ultrasonic shear wave inspection for cracks 14RF–19–61–A57, dated December 18, 1995, No. 14SF–61–A93, Rev. 1, dated December in the blade taper bore in accordance with or No. 14RF–19–61–A57, Rev. 1, dated 15, 1995, must be removed from service and the Accomplishment Instructions of December 21, 1995, within 1,000 flight cycles replaced with a serviceable part prior to Hamilton Standard ASB’s No. 14RF–19–61– since last inspection or 300 flight cycles after further flight. A57, dated December 18, 1995, or No. 14RF– the effective date of this AD, whichever (e) For all Hamilton Standard Models 19–61–A57, Rev. 1, dated December 21, 1995. occurs later. 14SF–17, and –19 propeller blades with (2) For propeller blades that have been (3) Propeller blades that cannot be Serial Numbers less than 882038, installed previously inspected in accordance with inspected for cracks in accordance with on but not limited to Canadair CL–215T and Hamilton Standards ASB’s No. 14RF–19–61– Hamilton Standard ASB’s No. 14RF–21–61– CL–415 series aircraft, accomplish the A55, dated December 7, 1995, or No. 14RF– A75, dated December 18, 1995, or No. 14RF– following: 19–61–A55, Rev. 1, dated December 15, 1995, 61–A75, Rev. 1, dated December 21, 1995, (1) Within the next 300 flight cycles, after perform an ultrasonic shear wave inspection due to the lead wool absorbing the ultrasonic the effective date of this AD, perform an in accordance with the Accomplishment signal, must be inspected in accordance with ultrasonic shear wave inspection for cracks Instructions of Hamilton Standard ASB’s No. the Accomplishment Instructions of in the blade taper bore in accordance with 14RF–19–61–A57, dated December 18, 1995, Hamilton Standard ASB’s No. 14RF–21–61– the Accomplishment Instructions of or No. 14RF–19–61–A57 Rev. 1, dated A73, dated December 7, 1995, or No. 14RF– Hamilton Standard ASB’s No. 14SF–61–A95, December 21, 1995, within 1,000 flight cycles 21–61–A73, Rev. 1, dated December 15, 1995, dated December 18, 1995, or No. 14SF–61– since last inspection or 300 flight cycles after within the next 300 flight cycles after the A95, Rev. 1, dated December 21, 1995. the effective date of this AD, whichever effective date of this AD. (2) For propeller blades that have been occurs later. (4) Propeller blades that have ultrasonic previously inspected in accordance with (3) Propeller blades that cannot be shear wave indications that exceed the limits Hamilton Standards ASB’s No. 14SF–61– inspected for cracks in accordance with specified in Hamilton Standard ASB’s No. A93, dated December 7, 1995, or No. 14SF– Hamilton Standard ASB’s No. 14SF–61–A95, 14RF–21–61–A75, dated December 18, 1995, 61–A93, Rev. 1, dated December 15, 1995, dated December 18, 1995, or No. 14SF–61– or No. 14RF–21–61–A75, Rev. 1, dated perform an ultrasonic shear wave inspection A95 Rev. 1, dated December 21, 1995, due to December 21, 1995, must be inspected in in accordance with the Accomplishment the lead wool absorbing the ultrasonic signal accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Hamilton Standard ASB’s No. inspect in accordance with the Instructions of Hamilton Standard ASB’s No. 14SF–61–A95, dated December 18, 1995, or Accomplishment Instructions of Hamilton 14RF–21–61–A73, dated December 7, 1995, No. 14SF–61–A95, Rev. 1, dated December Standard ASB’s No. 14SF–61–A93, dated or No. 14RF–21–61–A73, Rev. 1, dated 21, 1995, within 500 flight cycles since last December 7, 1995, or No. 14SF–61–A93, Rev. December 15, 1995. inspection or 300 flight cycles after the 1, dated December 15, 1995, within the next (5) Thereafter, perform repetitive ultrasonic effective date of this AD, whichever occurs 300 flight cycles after the effective date of shear wave inspections at intervals not to later. this AD. exceed 2,500 flight cycles in accordance with (3) Propeller blades that cannot be (4) Propeller blades that have ultrasonic the applicable SB’s. inspected for cracks in accordance with shear wave indications that exceed the limits (6) Propeller blades that have ultrasonic Hamilton Standard ASB’s No. 14SF–61–A95, specified in Hamilton Standard ASB’s 14RF– shear wave indications that exceed the limits dated December 18, 1995, or No. 14SF–61– 19–61–A57, dated December 18, 1995, or No. specified in Hamilton Standard ASB’s No. A95, Rev. 1, dated December 21, 1995, due 14RF–19–61–A57, Rev. 1, dated December 14RF–21–61–A73, dated December 7, 1995, to the lead wool absorbing the ultrasonic 21, 1995, must be inspected in accordance or No. 14RF–21–61–A73, Rev. 1, dated signal, must be inspected in accordance with with the Accomplishment Instructions of December 15, 1995, must be removed from the Accomplishment Instructions of Hamilton Standard ASB’s No. 14RF–19–61– service and replaced with a serviceable part Hamilton Standard ASB’s No. 14SF–61–A93 A55, dated December 7, 1995, or No. 14RF– prior to further flight. dated December 7, 1995, or No. 14SF–61– 19–61–A55, Rev. 1, dated December 15, 1995. (h) For all Hamilton Standard/British A93, Rev. 1, dated December 15, 1995, within (5) Thereafter, perform repetitive ultrasonic Aerospace 6/5500/F propeller blades, with the next 300 flight cycles after the effective shear wave inspections at intervals not to Serial Numbers less than 882038, installed date of this AD. exceed 1,000 flight cycles in accordance with on but not limited to British Aerospace ATP (4) Propeller blades that have ultrasonic the applicable SB’s. series aircraft, accomplish the following: shear wave indications that exceed the limits (6) Propeller blades that have ultrasonic (1) Within the next 300 flight cycles, after specified in Hamilton Standard ASB’s No. shear wave indications that exceed the limits the effective date of this AD, perform an 14SF–61–A95, dated December 18, 1995, or specified in Hamilton Standard ASB’s No. ultrasonic shear wave inspection for cracks Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 6 / Tuesday, January 9, 1996 / Rules and Regulations 621 in the blade taper bore in accordance with 6/5500/F–61–A41, dated December 7, 1995, the lead wool removal is required to the Accomplishment Instructions of or No. 6/5500/F–61–A41, Rev. 1, dated complete the ultrasonic shear wave Hamilton Standard ASB’s No. 6/5500/F–61– December 18, 1995. inspection. A43, dated December 18, 1995, or No. 6/ (5) Thereafter, perform repetitive ultrasonic (l) For the purpose of this AD, a flight cycle 5500/F–61–A43, Rev. 1, dated December 21, shear wave inspections at intervals not to is defined as one takeoff and the next landing 1995. exceed 2,500 flight cycles in accordance with of an aircraft. In addition, each touch and go (2) For propeller blades that have been the applicable SB’s. is defined as a flight cycle, and each water previously inspected in accordance with (6) Propeller blades that have ultrasonic load pickup for amphibian aircraft operation Hamilton Standard ASB’s No. 6/5500/F–61– shear wave indications that exceed the limits is defined as a flight cycle. A41, dated December 7, 1995, or No. 6/5500/ specified in Hamilton Standard ASB’s No. 6/ (m) Propeller blades removed from service F–61–A41, Rev. 1, dated December 18, 1995, 5500/F–61–A41, dated December 7, 1995, or after inspections performed in accordance perform an ultrasonic shear wave inspection No. 6/5500/F–61–A41, Rev. 1, dated with AD 95–18–06R1, and subsequently in accordance with the Accomplishment December 18, 1995, must be removed from inspected in accordance with the Instructions of Hamilton Standard ASB’s No. service and replaced with a serviceable part requirements of this AD and found to be 6/5500/F–61–A43, or No. 6/5500/F–61–A43, prior to further flight. serviceable, may be returned to service. Rev. 1, dated December 21, 1995, as (i) For all currently installed Hamilton (n) An alternative method of compliance or applicable within 2,500 flight cycles since Standard Model 14SFL11 propellers installed adjustment of the compliance time that last inspection or 300 flight cycles after the on Aerospatiale ATR72–210 series aircraft provides an acceptable level of safety may be effective date of this AD, whichever occurs remove all 14SFL11 propellers from service used if approved by the Manager, Boston later. within the next 150 flight cycles, after the Aircraft Certification Office. The request (3) Propeller blades that cannot be effective date of this AD, and replace with should be forwarded through an appropriate inspected for cracks in accordance with serviceable Hamilton Standard 247F FAA Principal Maintenance Inspector, who Hamilton Standard ASB’s No. 6/5500/F–61– propellers. may add comments and then send it to the A43, dated December 18, 1995, or No. 6/ (j) The ultrasonic inspection of the Manager, Boston Aircraft Certification Office. 5500/F–61–A43, Rev. 1, dated December 21, propeller blade taper bore must be performed 1995, due to the lead wool absorbing the by a Level II inspector who is qualified under Note: Information concerning the existence ultrasonic signal, must be inspected in the guidelines established by the American of approved alternative methods of accordance with the Accomplishment Society of Nondestructive Testing or MIL– compliance with this airworthiness directive, Instructions of Hamilton Standard ASB’s No. STD–410 or FAA approved equivalent, and if any, may be obtained from the Boston 6/5500/F–61–A41, dated December 7, 1995, must be trained by Hamilton Standard Aircraft Certification Office. or No. 6/5500/F–61–A41, Rev. 1, dated approved personnel on how to do this (o) Special flight permits may be issued in December 18, 1995, within the next 300 flight inspection procedure. The individual accordance with sections 21.197 and 21.199 cycles after the effective date of this AD. returning the aircraft to service is required to of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR (4) Propeller blades that have ultrasonic verify that the ultrasonic inspection was 21.197 and 21.199) to operate the aircraft to shear wave indications that exceed the limits accomplished in accordance with the a location where the requirements of this AD specified in Hamilton Standard ASB’s No. 6/ requirements of this paragraph. can be accomplished. 5500/F–61–A43, dated December 18, 1995, or (k) For repetitive inspections, propeller (p) The ultrasonic shear wave inspections No. 6/5500/F–61–A43, Rev. 1, dated blades may be evaluated to determine if the and removal and replacement of propeller December 21, 1995, must be inspected in lead wool is absorbing the ultrasonic signal blades shall be done in accordance with the accordance with the Accomplishment at any time during the 500 flight cycle following Hamilton Standard Alert Service Instructions of Hamilton Standard ASB’s No. repetitive inspection interval to determine if Bulletins:

Re- Document No. vi- Date sion

No. 14RF±9±61±A91; Total Pages:40 ...... Dec. 7, 1995. No. 14RF±9±61±A91; Total Pages: 42 ...... 1 Dec. 15, 1995. No. 14RF±19±61±A55; Total Pages: 40 ...... Dec. 7, 1995. No. 14RF±19±61±A55; Total Pages: 42 ...... 1 Dec. 15, 1995. No. 14RF±21±61±A73; Total Pages: 40 ...... Dec. 7, 1995. No. 14RF±21±61±A73; Total Pages: 42 ...... 1 Dec. 15, 1995. No. 14SF±61±A93; Total Pages: 40 ...... Dec. 7, 1995. No. 14SF±61±A93, Total Pages: 42 ...... 1 Dec. 15, 1995. No. 6/5500/F±61±A41; Total Pages: 40 ...... Dec. 7, 1995. No. 6/5500/F±61±A41; Total Pages: 42 ...... 1 Dec. 18, 1995. No. 14RF±9±61±A95; Total Pages: 36 ...... Dec. 18, 1995. No. 14RF±9±61±A95; Total Pages: 36 ...... 1 Dec. 21, 1995. No. 14RF±19±61±A57; Total Pages: 35 ...... Dec. 18, 1995. No. 14RF±19±61±A57; Total Pages: 35 ...... 1 Dec. 21,1995. No. 14RF±21±61±A75, Total Pages: 35 ...... Dec. 18, 1995. No. 14RF±21±61±A75; Total Pages: 35 ...... 1 Dec. 21,1995. No. 14SF±61±A95; Total Pages: 37 ...... Dec. 18, 1995. No. 14SF±61±A95; Total Pages: 37 ...... 1 Dec. 21, 1995. No. 6/5500/F±61±A43; Total Pages: 35 ...... Dec. 18, 1995. No. 6/5500/F±61±A43; Total Pages: 35 ...... 1 Dec. 21, 1995.

This incorporation by reference was may be inspected at the FAA, New England (q) This amendment supersedes priority approved by the Director of the Federal Region, Office of the Assistant Chief Counsel, letter AD 95–18–06R1, issued August 30, Register in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) 12 New England Executive Park, Burlington, 1995. and 1 CFR part 51. Copies may be obtained MA; or at the Office of the Federal Register, (r) This amendment becomes effective on from Hamilton Standard, One Hamilton 800 North Capitol Street, NW., suite 700, January 19, 1996. Road, Windsor Locks, CT 06096–1010; Washington, DC. telephone (203) 654–6876. This information 622 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 6 / Tuesday, January 9, 1996 / Rules and Regulations

Issued in Burlington, Massachusetts, on Standardization Branch, ANM–113, reduced by the amount of labor and December 26, 1995. FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, parts costs that would previously have Jay J. Pardee, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, been applied to those additional Manager, Engine and Propeller Directorate, Washington 98055–4056; telephone airplanes. Aircraft Certification Service. (206) 227–2148; fax (206) 227–1149. The cost impact figures discussed [FR Doc. 96–268 Filed 1–8–96; 8:45 am] SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: A above are based on assumptions that no BILLING CODE 4910±13±U proposal to amend part 39 of the Federal operator has yet accomplished any of Aviation Regulations (14 CFR part 39) the requirements of this AD action, and by superseding AD 94–17–12, 14 CFR Part 39 that no operator would accomplish amendment 39–9007 (59 FR 43025, those actions in the future if this AD [Docket No. 94±NM±237±AD; Amdt. 39± August 22, 1994), which is applicable to were not adopted. 9468; AD 95±26±10] certain Jetstream Model 4101 airplanes, The regulations adopted herein will was published in the Federal Register not have substantial direct effects on the Airworthiness Directives; Jetstream on September 8, 1995 (60 FR 46792). States, on the relationship between the Model 4101 Airplanes The action proposed to continue to national government and the States, or AGENCY: Federal Aviation require repetitive purging of the hydraulic system and installation of an on the distribution of power and Administration, DOT. responsibilities among the various ACTION: Final rule. actuator that has been previously certified marked with an ‘‘R’’ after the levels of government. Therefore, in SUMMARY: This amendment supersedes serial number. The action also proposed accordance with Executive Order 12612, an existing airworthiness directive (AD), to establish an increased life limit for it is determined that this final rule does applicable to certain Jetstream Model certain spoiler actuators, and provide an not have sufficient federalism 4101 airplanes, that currently requires optional terminating action for the implications to warrant the preparation repetitive purging of the hydraulic requirements of the AD. Additionally, of a Federalism Assessment. system and installation of a spoiler the action proposed to limit the For the reasons discussed above, I actuator that has been previously applicability of the rule to fewer certify that this action: (1) is not a certified. That AD was prompted by a airplanes. ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ under report of damage to the locking Interested persons have been afforded Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a mechanisms on some pistons of the an opportunity to participate in the ‘‘significant rule’’ under DOT spoiler actuators. The actions specified making of this amendment. Due Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 by the AD are intended to prevent consideration has been given to the FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and (3) uncommanded extension of the lift single comment received. will not have a significant economic spoiler in the event of loss of hydraulic The commenter supports the impact, positive or negative, on a pressure in the spoiler actuator. This proposed rule. substantial number of small entities amendment establishes an increased life After careful review of the available under the criteria of the Regulatory limit for certain spoiler actuators, and data, including the comment noted Flexibility Act. A final evaluation has provides an optional terminating action above, the FAA has determined that air been prepared for this action and it is for the requirements of that AD. This safety and the public interest require the contained in the Rules Docket. A copy amendment also limits the applicability adoption of the rule as proposed. of it may be obtained from the Rules of the rule to fewer airplanes. The FAA estimates that Docket at the location provided under DATES: Effective February 8, 1996. approximately 17 airplanes of U.S. the caption ADDRESSES. The incorporation by reference of registry will be affected by this AD. Jetstream Alert Service Bulletin J41– The repetitive purging and List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39 A27–034, Revision 1, dated October 28, installation actions that are currently Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation 1994, as listed in the regulations, is required by AD 94–17–12 take safety, Incorporation by reference, approved by the Director of the Federal approximately 6 work hours per Safety. Register as of February 8, 1996. airplane to accomplish, at an average The incorporation by reference of labor rate of $60 per work hour. Based Adoption of the Amendment Jetstream Alert Service Bulletin J41– on these figures, the cost impact on U.S. A27–034, dated June 9, 1994, as listed operators of the actions currently Accordingly, pursuant to the in the regulations, was approved required is estimated to be $6,120, or authority delegated to me by the previously by the Director of the Federal $360 per airplane. Administrator, the Federal Aviation Register as of September 6, 1994 (59 FR Replacement of the spoiler actuator at Administration amends part 39 of the 43025, August 22, 1994). the newly established life limit will add Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR ADDRESSES: The service information no new costs to affected operators. In part 39) as follows: referenced in this AD may be obtained fact, it will reduce the economic burden PART 39ÐAIRWORTHINESS from Jetstream Aircraft, Inc., P.O. Box for most operators, since: (1) Repetitive DIRECTIVES 16029, Dulles International Airport, purging of the actuators will be Washington, DC 20041–6029. This eliminated, and (2) replacement of the information may be examined at the 1. The authority citation for part 39 actuators will not have to be continues to read as follows: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), accomplished as often as was previously Transport Airplane Directorate, Rules required. Additionally, some of the Authority: 49 USC 106(g), 40101, 40113, Docket, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., replacement actuators will be provided 44701. Renton, Washington; or at the Office of to operators free of charge by the § 39.13 [Amended] the Federal Register, 800 North Capitol manufacturer. Street, NW., suite 700, Washington, DC. Further, since this AD is applicable to 2. Section 39.13 is amended by FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: fewer airplanes than was AD 94–17–12, removing amendment 39–9007 (59 FR William Schroeder, Aerospace Engineer, the cost impact of the AD will be 43025, August 22, 1994), and by adding Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 6 / Tuesday, January 9, 1996 / Rules and Regulations 623 a new airworthiness directive (AD), repetitive purging and repetitive installation 14 CFR Part 39 amendment 39–9468, to read as follows: requirements of paragraph (a) of this AD. (c) Installation of improved spoiler [Docket No. 95±CE±97±AD; Amendment 39± 95–26–10 Jetstream Aircraft, Limited: 9476; AD 95±26±18] Amendment 39–9468. Docket 94–NM– actuators (Modification JM 41381) on the left 237–AD. Supersedes AD 94–17–12, and right wings, in accordance with Jetstream Airworthiness Directives; Maule Amendment 39–9007. Service Bulletin J41–27–037, dated Aerospace Technology, Inc. M±4, M±5, Applicability: Model 4101 airplanes; November 7, 1994, constitutes terminating M±6, M±7, MX±7, MXT±7 Series and having constructors numbers 41004 through action for the requirements of paragraphs (a) Models MT±7±235 and M±8±235 41015 inclusive, 41018 through 41026 and (b) of this AD. Airplanes inclusive, 41028 through 41030 inclusive, (d) An alternative method of compliance or and 41032; certificated in any category. adjustment of the compliance time that AGENCY: Federal Aviation Note 1: This AD applies to each airplane provides an acceptable level of safety may be Administration, DOT. identified in the preceding applicability used if approved by the Manager, ACTION: Final rule; request for provision, regardless of whether it has been Standardization Branch, ANM–113, FAA, comments. modified, altered, or repaired in the area Transport Airplane Directorate. Operators subject to the requirements of this AD. For shall submit their requests through an SUMMARY: This amendment adopts a airplanes that have been modified, altered, or appropriate FAA Principal Maintenance repaired so that the performance of the new airworthiness directive (AD) that requirements of this AD is affected, the Inspector, who may add comments and then applies to certain Maule Aerospace owner/operator must use the authority send it to the Manager, Standardization Technology (Maule) M–4, M–5, M–6, provided in paragraph (d) of this AD to Branch, ANM–113. M–7, MX–7, MXT–7 series and Models request approval from the FAA. This Note 2: Information concerning the MT–7–235, and M–8–235 airplanes. approval may address either no action, if the existence of approved alternative methods of This action requires a one-time current configuration eliminates the unsafe compliance with this AD, if any, may be inspection of certain wing lift struts for condition; or different actions necessary to obtained from the Standardization Branch, internal corrosion and replacement of address the unsafe condition described in ANM–113. this AD. Such a request should include an the struts if corrosion is detected. An assessment of the effect of the changed (e) Special flight permits may be issued in accident involving a wing separating configuration on the unsafe condition accordance with sections 21.197 and 21.199 from a Maule airplane in flight addressed by this AD. In no case does the of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR prompted this action. The actions presence of any modification, alteration, or 21.197 and 21.199) to operate the airplane to specified by this AD are intended to repair remove any airplane from the a location where the requirements of this AD prevent corrosion of the wing lift strut, applicability of this AD. can be accomplished. which, if not detected and corrected, Compliance: Required as indicated, unless (f) The actions shall be done in accordance could cause the wing to separate from accomplished previously. with Jetstream Alert Service Bulletin J41– the airplane. To prevent uncommanded extension of the A27–034, dated June 9, 1994, or Jetstream lift spoiler in the event of loss of hydraulic DATES: Effective January 26, 1996. Alert Service Bulletin J41–A27–034, Revision The incorporation by reference of pressure in the spoiler actuator, accomplish 1, dated October 28, 1994. The incorporation the following: certain publications listed in the by reference of Jetstream Alert Service (a) Within 21 days after September 6, 1994 regulations is approved by the Director Bulletin J41–A27–034, dated June 9, 1994, (the effective date of AD 94–17–12, of the Federal Register as of January 26, was approved previously by the Director of amendment 39–9007), remove the spoiler 1996. the Federal Register in accordance with 5 actuators in accordance with Jetstream Alert Comments for inclusion in the Rules U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51 as of Service Bulletin J41–A27–034, dated June 9, Docket must be received on or before 1994, or Jetstream Alert Service Bulletin J41– September 6, 1994 (59 FR 43025, August 22, A27–034, Revision 1, dated October 28, 1994. 1994). The incorporation by reference of February 28, 1996. Following removal of the actuators, Jetstream Alert Service Bulletin J41–A27– ADDRESSES: Submit comments in accomplish the requirements of paragraphs 034, Revision 1, dated October 28, 1994, is triplicate to the Federal Aviation (a)(1) and (a)(2) of this AD, in accordance approved by the Director of the Federal Administration (FAA), Central Region, with the service bulletin. Thereafter, repeat Register in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) Office of the Assistant Chief Counsel, the requirements of this paragraph at Attention: Rules Docket 95–CE–97–AD, intervals not to exceed 500 landings. and 1 CFR part 51. Copies may be obtained (1) Prior to further flight, purge the from Jetstream Aircraft, Inc., P.O. Box 16029, Room 1558, 601 E. 12th Street, Kansas hydraulic system to ensure that there is no Dulles International Airport, Washington, DC City, Missouri 64106. contamination. 20041–6029. Copies may be inspected at the Service information that applies to (2) Prior to further flight, install a spoiler FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 this AD may be obtained from Maule actuator that has been previously certified Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington; or at Aerospace Technology, Inc., 2099 GA. and marked with an ‘‘R’’ after the serial the Office of the Federal Register, 800 North Hwy., 133 South, Moultrie, Georgia number on the nameplate of the actuator. Capitol Street, NW., suite 700, Washington, 31768, telephone (912) 985–2045. This (b) For spoiler actuators having Lucas DC. information may also be examined at Aerospace part number (P/N) TY1763–01A or (g) This amendment becomes effective on the Federal Aviation Administration P/N TY1763–01B: Prior to the accumulation February 8, 1996. of 5,000 total hours time-in-service on the (FAA), Central Region, Office of the spoiler actuator, or within 30 days after the Issued in Renton, Washington, on Assistant Chief Counsel, Attention: effective date of this AD, whichever occurs December 18, 1995. Rules Docket 95–CE–97–AD, Room later, replace the actuator with a new or Darrell M. Pederson, 1558, 601 E. 12th Street, Kansas City, serviceable part, in accordance with Missouri 64106; or at the Office of the Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Jetstream Service Bulletin J41–A27–034, Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. Federal Register, 800 North Capitol Revision 1, dated October 28, 1994. Street, NW., suite 700, Washington, DC. Thereafter, prior to the accumulation of 5,000 [FR Doc. 96–269 Filed 1–8–96; 8:45 am] FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: hours time-in-service on the spoiler actuator, BILLING CODE 4910±13±U replace the actuator with a new or Cindy Lorenzen, Aerospace Engineer, serviceable part, in accordance with the FAA, Atlanta Aircraft Certification service bulletin. Such replacement Office, Campus Building, 1701 constitutes terminating action for the Columbia Avenue, suite 2–160, College 624 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 6 / Tuesday, January 9, 1996 / Rules and Regulations

Park, Georgia 30337–2748; telephone Comments Invited determined that this emergency (404) 305–7357; facsimile (404) 305– Although this action is in the form of regulation otherwise would be 7348. a final rule that involves requirements significant under DOT Regulatory SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The FAA affecting immediate flight safety and, Policies and Procedures, a final received a report involving a wing thus, was not preceded by notice and regulatory evaluation will be prepared separating from a Maule airplane while opportunity to comment, comments are and placed in the Rules Docket it was in flight. Investigation of the invited on this rule. Interested persons (otherwise, an evaluation is not accident revealed that the right forward are invited to comment on this rule by required). A copy of it, if filed, may be unsealed wing lift strut failed 8 to 12 submitting such written data, views, or obtained from the Rules Docket. inches above the lower fitting. Upon arguments as they may desire. List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39 examination of the lift strut, Communications should identify the Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation investigators found internal corrosion. Rules Docket number and be submitted safety, Incorporation by reference, This condition, if not detected and in triplicate to the address specified Safety. corrected, could result in failure of the above. All communications received on wing lift strut and separation of the or before the closing date for comments Adoption of the Amendment wing from the airplane, causing loss of will be considered, and this rule may be Accordingly, pursuant to the the airplane. amended in light of the comments authority delegated to me by the Maule Service Bulletin (SB) No. 11, received. Factual information that Administrator, the Federal Aviation Issued: October 30, 1995, specifies supports the commenter’s ideas and Administration amends part 39 of the procedures for inspecting the wing lift suggestions is extremely helpful in Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR strut for internal corrosion and evaluating the effectiveness of the AD part 39) as follows: replacing the wing lift strut. action and determining whether After examining the circumstances additional rulemaking action would be PART 39ÐAIRWORTHINESS and reviewing all available information needed. DIRECTIVES related to the accident described above, Comments are specifically invited on the overall regulatory, economic, 1. The authority citation for part 39 including the referenced service continues to read as follows: bulletin, the FAA has determined that environmental, and energy aspects of AD action should be taken in order to the rule that might suggest a need to Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40101, 40113, prevent corrosion of the wing lift strut, modify the rule. All comments 44701. submitted will be available, both before which could cause the wing to separate § 39.13 [Amended] from the airplane. and after the closing date for comments, in the Rules Docket for examination by 2. Section 39.13 is amended by Since an unsafe condition has been interested persons. A report that adding a new airworthiness directive identified that is likely to exist or summarizes each FAA-public contact (AD) to read as follows: develop in other Maule Model M–4, M– concerned with the substance of this AD 95–26–18 Maule Aerospace Technology, 5, M–6, M–7, MX–7, MXT–7 series and will be filed in the Rules Docket. Inc.: Amendment 39–9476; Docket No. Models M–7–235 and M–8–235 Commenters wishing the FAA to 95–CE–97–AD. airplanes of the same type design acknowledge receipt of their comments Applicability: M–4, M–5, M–6, M–7, MX– equipped with unsealed wing lift struts, submitted in response to this notice 7, MXT–7 Series and Models MT–7–235, and this AD requires inspecting the wing lift must submit a self-addressed, stamped M–8–235 Airplanes (all serial numbers), struts for internal corrosion damage and postcard on which the following certificated in any category that are equipped replacing the wing lift struts if corrosion statement is made: ‘‘Comments to with part number (P/N) 2079E rear wing lift struts and P/N 2080E front wing lift struts. damage is detected. This action shall be Docket No. 95–CE–97–AD.’’ The accomplished in accordance with Maule postcard will be date stamped and Note 1: This AD applies to each airplane identified in the preceding applicability SB No. 11, dated October 30, 1995. In returned to the commenter. future rulemaking actions, the FAA may revision, regardless of whether it has been The regulations adopted herein will modified, altered, or repaired in the area impose additional procedures on the not have substantial direct effects on the unsealed wing lift struts and require subject to the requirements of this AD. For States, on the relationship between the airplanes that have been modified, altered, or additional modifications. national government and the States, or repaired so that the performance of the The compliance time for this AD is on the distribution of power and requirements of this AD is affected, the presented in calendar time instead of responsibilities among the various owner/operator must request approval for an hours time-in-service. The FAA has levels of government. Therefore, in alternative method of compliance in determined that a calendar time for accordance with Executive Order 12612, accordance with paragraph (b) of this AD. compliance is the most desirable it is determined that this final rule does The request should include an assessment of the effect of the modification, alteration, or method because the unsafe condition not have sufficient federalism described by this AD is caused by repair on the unsafe condition addressed by implications to warrant the preparation this AD; and, if the unsafe condition has not corrosion. Corrosion can occur on of a Federalism Assessment. been eliminated, the request should include airplanes regardless of whether the The FAA has determined that this specific proposed actions to address it. airplane is in service or on the ground. regulation is an emergency regulation Compliance: Required within the next 30 Since a situation exists (wing lift strut that must be issued immediately to calendar days after the effective date of this corrosion and possible loss of a wing) correct an unsafe condition in aircraft, AD, unless already accomplished. that requires the immediate adoption of and that it is not a ‘‘significant Note 2: The compliance times and this regulation, it is found that notice regulatory action’’ under Executive inspection intervals indicated in this AD take precedence over the compliance times and and opportunity for public prior Order 12866. It has been determined inspection intervals called for in the Maule comment hereon are impracticable, and further that this action involves an Service Bulletin (SB) No. 11, Issued: October that good cause exists for making this emergency regulation under DOT 30, 1995. amendment effective in less than 30 Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 Note 3: The paragraph structure of this AD days. FR 11034, February 26, 1979). If it is is as follows: Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 6 / Tuesday, January 9, 1996 / Rules and Regulations 625

Level 1: (a), (b), (c), etc. Issued in Kansas City, Missouri, on the FAA, New England Region, Office of Level 2: (1), (2), (3), etc. December 22, 1995. the Assistant Chief Counsel, 12 New Level 3: (i), (ii), (iii), etc. Dwight A. Young, England Executive Park, Burlington, Level 2 and Level 3 structures are Acting Manager, Small Airplane Directorate, MA; or at the Office of the Federal designations of the Level 1 paragraph they Aircraft Certification Service. Register, 800 North Capitol Street, NW., immediately follow. [FR Doc. 96–270 Filed 1–8–96; 8:45 am] suite 700, Washington, DC. To prevent corrosion of the wing lift strut, BILLING CODE 4910±13±U which, if not detected and corrected, could FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Nick cause the wing to separate from the airplane, Minniti, Aerospace Engineer, New York Aircraft Certification Office, FAA, accomplish the following: 14 CFR Part 39 (a) Inspect the two rear wing lift struts, (P/ Engine and Propeller Directorate, 10 N 2079E) and the two front wing lift struts [Docket No. 94±ANE±63; Amendment 39± Fifth St., Valley Stream, NY 11581; (P/N 2080E) for internal corrosion in 9458; AD 95±03±10] telephone (516) 256–7510, fax (516) accordance with the INSTRUCTIONS and 568–2716. Airworthiness Directives; Textron INSPECTION PROCEDURE sections specified SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On in Maule SB No. 11, Issued: October 30, Lycoming O±235 Series Reciprocating February 7, 1995, the Federal Aviation 1995. Engines (1) If evidence of corrosion damage is Administration (FAA) issued priority found, prior to further flight, accomplish one AGENCY: Federal Aviation letter airworthiness directive (AD) 95– of the following: Administration, DOT. 03–10, applicable to Textron Lycoming (i) Replace the damaged strut with an ACTION: Final rule, request for O–235 series reciprocating engines, airworthy strut of the same part number that comments. which requires a one-time inspection has been treated internally with corrosion within the next 5 hours time in service preventative in accordance with the SUMMARY: This document publishes in to determine the part number (P/N) and INSPECTION PROCEDURE section specified the Federal Register an amendment revision letter of the push rod installed in Maule SB No. 11, Issued October 30, 1995, adopting airworthiness directive (AD) on the engine. All push rods with P/N or 95–03–10 that was sent previously to all 73806 and revision letters ‘‘V’’ or ‘‘W’’ (ii) Replace the damaged strut with a known U.S. owners and operators of must be replaced with serviceable parts. sealed wing lift strut, P/N 2200E or P/N Textron Lycoming O–235 series That action was prompted by reports of 2201E, as applicable, in accordance with the reciprocating engines by individual instructions specified in PART II of the several failures of push rods, P/N 73806, INSTRUCTIONS section of Maule SB No. 11, letters. This AD requires a one-time installed in Textron Lycoming O–235 Issued October 30, 1995. inspection within the next 5 hours time series reciprocating engines. The (2) If no evidence of corrosion damage is in service to determine the part number manufacturer’s investigation has found, prior to further flight, treat the strut (P/N) and revision letter of the push rod determined that the failures initiated internally with corrosion preventative in installed on the engine. All push rods from scoring on the inner diameter (I.D.) accordance with the NOTE in the with P/N 73806 and revision letters ‘‘V’’ of the push rod tube. The scoring was INSPECTION PROCEDURE section in Maule or ‘‘W’’ must be replaced with introduced during the extrusion of the SB No. 11, Issued October 30, 1995. serviceable parts. This amendment is tube at the supplier. These push rods (b) An alternative method of compliance or prompted by reports of several failures were installed in engines shipped from adjustment of the compliance time that of push rods. The actions specified by provides an equivalent level of safety may be the factory between February 22, 1993, approved by the Manager, FAA, Atlanta this AD are intended to prevent engine and September 2, 1994, or were Aircraft Certification Office, Campus roughness and power loss, which could installed as serviceable parts on or after Building, 1701 Columbia Avenue, suite 2– result in loss of the aircraft. February 22, 1993. This condition, if not 160, College Park, Georgia 30337–2748. The DATES: Effective January 24, 1996, to all corrected, could result in engine request shall be forwarded through an persons except those persons to whom roughness and power loss, which could appropriate FAA Maintenance Inspector, it was made immediately effective by result in loss of the aircraft. who may add comments and then send it to priority letter AD 95–03–10, issued on Since publication of the priority letter the Manager, Atlanta Aircraft Certification February 7, 1995, which contained the AD, the FAA has received reports of Office. requirements of this amendment. confusion regarding whether a previous Note 4: Information concerning the The incorporation by reference of AD, 80–25–02 R2, also applicable to existence of approved alternative methods of certain publications listed in the pushrod P/N 73806, remains in effect. compliance with this AD, if any, may be regulations is approved by the Director This final rule AD clarifies in a note that obtained from the Atlanta Aircraft Certification Office. of the Federal Register as of January 24, compliance with AD 80–25–02 R2 is 1996. still mandatory. (c) The inspection and possible Comments for inclusion in the Rules replacements required by this AD shall be The FAA has reviewed and approved done in accordance with Maule Service Docket must be received on or before the technical contents of Textron Bulletin No. 11, Issued: October 30, 1995. March 11, 1996. Lycoming Mandatory Service Bulletin This incorporation by reference was ADDRESSES: Submit comments in No. 552, dated November 1, 1994, that approved by the Director of the Federal triplicate to the Federal Aviation lists by serial number engines shipped Register in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) Administration (FAA), New England from the factory between February 22, and 1 CFR part 51. Copies may be obtained Region, Office of the Assistant Chief 1993, and September 2, 1994, and from Maule Aerospace Technology, Inc., Counsel, Attention: Rules Docket No. describes procedures for inspection of 2099 GA Hwy., 133 South, Moultrie, Georgia, 94–ANE–63, 12 New England Executive push rods to determine if they require 31768. Copies may be inspected at the FAA, Park, Burlington, MA 01803–5299. replacement. Central Region, Office of the Assistant Chief The applicable service information Since the unsafe condition described Counsel, Room 1558, 601 E. 12th Street, Kansas City, Missouri, or at the Office of the may be obtained from Textron is likely to exist or develop on other Federal Register, 800 North Capitol Street, Lycoming, 652 Oliver Street, engines of the same type design, the NW., 7th Floor, suite 700, Washington, DC. Williamsport, PA 17701; telephone FAA issued priority letter AD 95–03–10 (d) This amendment (39–9476) becomes (717) 327–7278, fax (717) 327–7022. to prevent engine roughness and power effective on January 26, 1996. This information may be examined at loss, which could result in loss of the 626 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 6 / Tuesday, January 9, 1996 / Rules and Regulations aircraft. The AD requires a one-time Commenters wishing the FAA to Applicability: Textron Lycoming O–235 inspection within the next 5 hours time acknowledge receipt of their comments series reciprocating engines, shipped from in service to determine the P/N and submitted in response to this notice the factory between February 22, 1993, and revision letter of the push rod installed September 2, 1994, and identified by serial must submit a self-addressed, stamped number in Textron Lycoming Mandatory on the engine. All push rods with P/N postcard on which the following Service Bulletin (MSB) No. 522, dated 73806 and revision letters ‘‘V’’ or ‘‘W’’ statement is made: ‘‘Comments to November 1, 1994; and all Textron Lycoming must be replaced with serviceable parts. Docket Number 94–ANE–63.’’ The O–235 series reciprocating engines that have Textron Lycoming has determined that postcard will be date stamped and had push rods, part number (P/N) 73806, it is not possible to visually inspect the returned to the commenter. installed as service parts on or after February push rod tube for I.D. scoring that can The regulations adopted herein will 22, 1993. These engines are installed on but not limited to the following aircraft: Piper cause the part to fail. The actions are not have substantial direct effects on the required to be accomplished in PA–11, –12, –18, –22, –28, –38; Cessna 152, States, on the relationship between the A152; Beech 77; Taylorcraft F–21; and accordance with the service bulletin national government and the States, or Gulfstream American AA1 series aircraft. described previously. on the distribution of power and Note 1: This airworthiness directive (AD) Since it was found that immediate responsibilities among the various applies to each engine identified in the corrective action was required, notice levels of government. Therefore, in preceding applicability provision, regardless and opportunity for prior public accordance with Executive Order 12612, of whether it has been modified, altered, or comment thereon were impracticable it is determined that this final rule does repaired in the area subject to the and contrary to the public interest, and not have sufficient federalism requirements of this AD. For engines that good cause existed to make the AD have been modified, altered, or repaired so implications to warrant the preparation that the performance of the requirements of effective immediately by individual of a Federalism Assessment. letters issued on February 7, 1995, to all this AD is affected, the owner/operator must use the authority provided in paragraph (b) known U.S. owners and operators of The FAA has determined that this regulation is an emergency regulation to request approval from the Federal Aviation Textron Lycoming O–235 series Administration (FAA). This approval may reciprocating engines. These conditions that must be issued immediately to correct an unsafe condition in aircraft, address either no action, if the current still exist, and the AD is hereby configuration eliminates the unsafe published in the Federal Register as an and is not a ‘‘significant regulatory condition, or different actions necessary to amendment to Section 39.13 of part 39 action’’ under Executive Order 12866. It address the unsafe condition described in of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 has been determined further that this this AD. Such a request should include an CFR part 39) to make it effective to all action involves an emergency regulation assessment of the effect of the changed configuration on the unsafe condition persons. under DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, addressed by this AD. In no case does the Comments Invited 1979). If it is determined that this presence of any modification, alteration, or repair remove any engine from the Although this action is in the form of emergency regulation otherwise would applicability of this AD. be significant under DOT Regulatory a final rule that involves requirements Note 2: This amendment does not affecting flight safety and, thus, was not Policies and Procedures, a final supersede AD 80–25–02 R2, which also preceded by notice and an opportunity regulatory evaluation will be prepared applies to pushrod P/N 73806. AD 80–25–02 for public comment, comments are and placed in the Rules Docket. A copy R2 continues in effect and must be complied invited on this rule. Interested persons of it, if filed, may be obtained from the with. are invited to comment on this rule by Rules Docket at the location provided Compliance: Required as indicated, unless submitting such written data, views, or under the caption ADDRESSES. accomplished previously. To prevent engine roughness and power arguments as they may desire. List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39 Communications should identify the loss, which could result in loss of the aircraft, Rules Docket number and be submitted Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation accomplish the following: (a) Within 5 hours time in service (TIS) in triplicate to the address specified safety, Incorporation by reference, after the effective date of this AD, inspect under the caption ADDRESSES. All Safety. push rods for P/N and revision letter. All communications received on or before Adoption of the Amendment push rods with P/N 73806 and revision letter the closing date for comments will be ‘‘V’’ or ‘‘W’’ must be replaced with considered, and this rule may be Accordingly, pursuant to the serviceable parts in accordance with Textron amended in light of the comments authority delegated to me by the Lycoming MSB No. 522, dated November 1, received. Factual information that Administrator, the Federal Aviation 1994. supports the commenter’s ideas and Administration amends part 39 of the (b) An alternative method of compliance or adjustment of the compliance time that suggestions is extremely helpful in Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR provides an acceptable level of safety may be evaluating the effectiveness of the AD part 39) as follows: used if approved by the Manager, New York action and determining whether Aircraft Certification Office. The request additional rulemaking action would be PART 39ÐAIRWORTHINESS should be forwarded through an appropriate needed. DIRECTIVES FAA Maintenance Inspector, who may add Comments are specifically invited on comments and then send it to the Manager, the overall regulatory, economic, 1. The authority citation for part 39 New York Aircraft Certification Office. environmental, and energy aspects of continues to read as follows: Note: Information concerning the existence the rule that might suggest a need to Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40101, 40113, of approved alternative methods of modify the rule. All comments 44701. compliance with this airworthiness directive, submitted will be available, both before if any, may be obtained from the New York § 39.13 [Amended] Aircraft Certification Office. and after the closing date for comments, in the Rules Docket for examination by 2. Section 39.13 is amended by (c) Special flight permits may be issued in adding the following new airworthiness accordance with sections 21.197 and 21.199 interested persons. A report that of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR summarizes each FAA-public contact directive: 21.197 and 21.199) to operate the aircraft to concerned with the substance of this AD 95–03–10 Textron Lycoming: Amendment a location where the inspection required by will be filed in the Rules Docket. 39–9458 Docket 94–ANE–63. this AD can be accomplished. Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 6 / Tuesday, January 9, 1996 / Rules and Regulations 627

(d) The actions required by this AD shall receiving more accurate information N1928Q, N20HT, N20NC, N20ND, be done in accordance with the following concerning which aircraft were fueled N207X, N2040Q, N2128W, N2165M, MSB: with the contaminated mixture at the N2185K, N2232Z, N22874, N2300R, affected airports. The actions specified N2346G, N2394Q, N24395, N24627, Document No. Page Date by this AD are intended to prevent N24860, N250M, N2555V, N25562, Textron 1±2 November 1, detonation due to low octane, which N2578L, N2603Y, N26602, N28FG, Lycoming 1994. can result in severe engine damage and N2811R, N2815F, N2817Q, N2819A, MSB No. 522. subsequent failure. N2848Q, N28683, N2927M, N2964K, Total pages: DATES: Effective January 24, 1996. N3060M, N32388, N33696, N34242, 2. The incorporation by reference of N36358, N3737U, N37500, N3945K, certain publications listed in the N40ES, N40VF, N400JM, N4222J, This incorporation by reference was regulations is approved by the Director N4293Y, N4316T, N4320F, N4497U, approved by the Director of the Federal of the Federal Register as of January 24, Register in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) N4515P, N4602S, N4674S, N4687P, and 1 CFR part 51. Copies may be obtained 1996. N47SG, N4796V, N47964, N48ES, from Textron Lycoming, 652 Oliver Street, Comments for inclusion in the Rules N494FL, N5199U, N52015, N5217L, Williamsport, PA 17701; telephone (717) Docket must be received on or before N5254K, N5344K, N5418W, N54228, 327–7278, fax (717) 327–7022. Copies may be March 11, 1996. N54661, N5547Q, N55521, N56GS, inspected at the FAA, New England Region, ADDRESSES: Submit comments in N56884, N59850, N6005Z, N6045M, Office of the Assistant Chief Counsel, 12 New triplicate to the Federal Aviation N61569, N6239H, N62801, N6286W, England Executive Park, Burlington, MA; or Administration (FAA), New England at the Office of the Federal Register, 800 N6297V, N63R, N6370P, N6412D, North Capitol Street, NW., suite 700, Region, Office of the Assistant Chief N64120, N6480D, N6483Q, N6493Q, Washington, DC. Counsel, Attention: Rules Docket No. N65425, N671A, N67615, N67975, (e) This amendment becomes effective 95–ANE–67, 12 New England Executive N68SC, N68937, N6905V, N7ZX, January 24, 1996, to all persons except those Park, Burlington, MA 01803–5299. N70416, N71RJ, N711PG, N714ZU, persons to whom it was made immediately The service information referenced in N7157V, N7195G, N7213P, N7230F, effective by priority letter AD 95–03–10, this AD may be obtained from Textron N7230Q, N7248H, N73064, N733WH, issued February 7, 1995, which contained the Lycoming, Reciprocating Engine N734TA, N7361R, N737CM, N737NV, requirements of this amendment. Division, 652 Oliver St., Williamsport, N738GX, N738KC, N738KF, N738KK, Issued in Burlington, Massachusetts, on PA 17701; telephone (717) 327–7278, N738RC, N738ZL, N739RF, N75381, December 8, 1995. fax (717) 327–7022. This information N755GA, N756RV, N757SK, N757SX, Jay J. Pardee, may be examined at the FAA, New N757TU, N7724M, N777EE, N78887, Manager, Engine and Propeller Directorate, England Region, Office of the Assistant N78901, N7894V, N792BW, N804EH, Aircraft Certification Service. Chief Counsel, 12 New England N8070P, N8094Q, N81RP, N81203, [FR Doc. 96–272 Filed 1–8–96; 8:45 am] Executive Park, Burlington, MA; or at N8144G, N8149E, N8184X, N8201B, BILLING CODE 4910±13±U the Office of the Federal Register, 800 N82182, N8223W, N8264W, N8286W, North Capitol Street, NW., suite 700, N8306D, N8372L, N8494E, N8537J, Washington, DC. N8579H, N8691Y, N8810P, N8961P, 14 CFR Part 39 FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: N9114H, N9140J, N9157S, N9296P, [Docket No. 95±ANE±67; Amendment 39± Locke Easton, Aerospace Engineer, N9407K, N9444R, N9451B, N95WT, 9460, AD 95±26±02] Engine and Propeller Standards Staff, N9574L, N96TB, N96134, N9666V, FAA, Engine and Propeller Directorate, N9673L, N9728U, N9783L, N9808J and Airworthiness Directives; Textron 12 New England Executive Park; N9864C. That action requires teardown Lycoming Reciprocating Engines telephone (617) 238–7113, fax (617) and analytical inspection for engines AGENCY: Federal Aviation 238–7199. certified to operate on 91 or higher Administration, DOT. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On June octane aviation gasoline (avgas), and ACTION: Final rule; request for 23, 1994, the Federal Aviation differential compression test and comments. Administration (FAA) issued priority examination of the oil filter for engines letter airworthiness directive (AD) 94– certified to operate on 80 octane avgas. SUMMARY: This amendment adopts a 14–13, applicable to Textron Lycoming That action was prompted by reports of new airworthiness directive (AD) that is (formerly Avco Lycoming) O–235–12C, reports of aviation gasoline (avgas) being applicable to certain Textron Lycoming O–235–L, O–320–A, O–320–B2C, O– contaminated by Jet A fuel. After reciprocating engines installed on 320–E, O–320–E2A, O–320–E2D, O– investigation, the source of the certain aircraft identified by registration 320–E20, O–320–D2J, O–320–D3G, O– contamination has been determined to numbers. This action supersedes 320–H2AD, IO–320–B, IO–320–B, IO– be the refiner of the avgas. Through its priority letter AD 94–14–13 that 320–C, LO–320–A4K, LO–320–D1D, O– distribution system, the refiner currently requires engines certified to 360–A, O–360–A4M, O–360–F, IO–360– inadvertently caused Jet A fuel to be operate on 91 octane or higher aviation A, IO–360–BIB, IO–360–C, LO–360– loaded into distribution tanks intended gasoline (avgas) to undergo a teardown A1A, LO–360–A1D, LIO–360–A1A, for avgas. Contaminated avgas from and analytical inspection for detonation LIO–360–A3B6D, TIO–360–C, TVO– these distribution tanks was then damage, and engines certified to operate 435–AIA, O–540–E, O–540–C, O–540–J, shipped to local fuel distributors. The on 80 octane avgas to undergo IO–540–C, IO–540–D, IO–540 E 290, IO– FAA has determined that aircraft with inspection for evidence of possible 540–K, TIO–540–F, TIO–540–J, TIO– certain Textron Lycoming engines internal engine damage. This action 540–S, 165D–540–B 380, and R–680 installed were fueled with this revises incorrect engine model numbers series reciprocating engines, installed contaminated mixture between May 22 and aircraft registration numbers listed on the following U.S. registered aircraft: and June 2, 1994, at Sacramento in the priority letter AD. This N1010F, N106RE, N1068M, N110MP, Executive (SAC) airport, or between amendment is prompted by the Federal N1285X, N1317P, N1344V, N14006, May 18 and June 2, 1994, at Sacramento Aviation Administration (FAA) N15851, N1666C, N177DT, N1920F, Metro (SMF) airport. The list of U.S. 628 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 6 / Tuesday, January 9, 1996 / Rules and Regulations registered aircraft specified in the analytical inspection as the engine Docket Number 95–ANE–67.’’ The applicability paragraph of this AD is could sustain damage that cannot be postcard will be date stamped and based on investigation of fueling records assessed by any other method; and Avco returned to the commenter. secured from the two affected airports, Lycoming Service Instruction (SI) No. The regulations adopted herein will which the FAA has determined to 1191, dated March 31, 1972, that not have substantial direct effects on the represent the population of affected describes procedures for differential States, on the relationship between the engines. That condition, if not compression tests. national government and the States, or corrected, could result in detonation Since an unsafe condition has been on the distribution of power and due to low octane, which can result in identified that is likely to exist or responsibilities among the various severe engine damage and subsequent develop on other engines of this same levels of government. Therefore, in failure. type design, this AD supersedes priority accordance with Executive Order 12612, This AD requires engines certified to letter AD 94–14–13 to revise incorrect it is determined that this final rule does operate on 91 octane or higher avgas to engine model numbers and aircraft not have sufficient federalism undergo a teardown and analytical registration numbers listed in the implications to warrant the preparation inspection for detonation damage, and priority letter AD. The actions are of a Federalism Assessment. engines certified to operate on 80 octane required to be accomplished in The FAA has determined that this avgas to undergo inspection for accordance with the service documents regulation is an emergency regulation evidence of possible internal engine described previously. that must be issued immediately to damage. Engineering analysis of Since a situation exists that requires correct an unsafe condition in aircraft, operating these engines with avgas the immediate adoption of this and is not a ‘‘significant regulatory contaminated with Jet A fuel indicates regulation, it is found that notice and action’’ under Executive Order 12866. It that actual damage to the engine may opportunity for prior public comment has been determined further that this range from unnoticeable to very severe, hereon are impracticable, and that good action involves an emergency regulation according to the duration of run, engine cause exists for making this amendment under DOT Regulatory Policies and power level, and level of contamination. effective in less than 30 days. Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, Damage may be characterized by Comments Invited 1979). If it is determined that this increased operating temperatures emergency regulation otherwise would resulting in damaged intake valves and Although this action is in the form of be significant under DOT Regulatory burned pistons, and excessive loads a final rule that involves requirements Policies and Procedures, a final imposed by detonation. Since internal affecting flight safety and, thus, was not regulatory evaluation will be prepared damage may not be assessed by any preceded by notice and an opportunity and placed in the Rules Docket. A copy for public comment, comments are other method, engines certified to of it, if filed, may be obtained from the invited on this rule. Interested persons operate on 91 octane or higher avgas Rules Docket at the location provided are invited to comment on this rule by must undergo a teardown and analytical under the caption ADDRESSES. inspection and any parts showing signs submitting such written data, views, or of detonation damage must be replaced. arguments as they may desire. List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39 Investigation revealed the lowest octane Communications should identify the Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation level of the contaminated fuel to be 83 Rules Docket number and be submitted safety, Incorporation by reference, octane, therefore engines certified to in triplicate to the address specified Safety. operate on 80 octane avgas need not under the caption ADDRESSES. All undergo a teardown and analytical communications received on or before Adoption of the Amendment inspection unless evidence of internal the closing date for comments will be Accordingly, pursuant to the engine damage is present by the considered, and this rule may be authority delegated to me by the required differential compression test amended in light of the comments Administrator, the Federal Aviation and examination of the oil filter for received. Factual information that Administration amends part 39 of the metal particles. The refiner has advised supports the commenter’s ideas and Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR the FAA that it may pay for any suggestions is extremely helpful in part 39) as follows: reasonable expense associated with the evaluating the effectiveness of the AD inspection and/or disassembly in action and determining whether PART 39ÐAIRWORTHINESS accordance with the mechanic’s and additional rulemaking action would be DIRECTIVES manufacturer’s recommendations. needed. 1. The authority citation for part 39 Comments are specifically invited on Since the issuance of that priority continues to read as follows: letter AD, the FAA has received more the overall regulatory, economic, accurate information concerning which environmental, and energy aspects of Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40101, 40113, aircraft were fueled with the the rule that might suggest a need to 44701. contaminated mixture at the affected modify the rule. All comments § 39.13 [Amended] airports. This AD therefore corrects submitted will be available, both before 2. Section 39.13 is amended by certain engine model numbers and and after the closing date for comments, adding the following new airworthiness aircraft registration numbers for aircraft in the Rules Docket for examination by directive: that were fueled with the contaminated interested persons. A report that mixture. summarizes each FAA-public contact 95–26–02 Textron Lycoming: Amendment The FAA has reviewed and approved concerned with the substance of this AD 39–9460. Docket No. 95–ANE–67. Supersedes AD 94–14–13. the technical contents of: Avco will be filed in the Rules Docket. Lycoming Service Bulletin (SB) No. 398, Commenters wishing the FAA to Applicability: Textron Lycoming (formerly Avco Lycoming) O–235–12C, O–235–L, O– dated April 30, 1976, that specifies that acknowledge receipt of their comments 320–A, O–320–B2C, O–320–E, O–320–E2A, reciprocating engines operated with submitted in response to this notice O–320–E2D, O–320–E20, O–320–D2J, O– lower octane than that approved for the must submit a self-addressed, stamped 320–D3G, O–320–H2AD, IO–320–B, IO–320– engine or contaminated with Jet A fuel postcard on which the following B, IO–320–C, LO–320–A4K, LO–320–D1D, should undergo a teardown and statement is made: ‘‘Comments to O–360–A, O–360–A4M, O–360–F, IO–360–A, Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 6 / Tuesday, January 9, 1996 / Rules and Regulations 629

IO–360–BIB, IO–360–C, LO–360–A1A, LO– (avgas) within the next 2 hours time in North Capitol Street, NW., suite 700, 360–A1D, LIO–360–A1A, LIO–360–A3B6D, service (TIS) after the effective date of this Washington, DC. TIO–360–C, TVO–435–AIA, O–540–E, O– airworthiness directive (AD) perform an (f) This amendment supersedes priority 540–C, O–540–J, IO–540–C, IO–540–D, IO– engine teardown and analytical inspection, letter AD 94–14–13, issued June 23, 1994. 540 E 290, IO–540–K, TIO–540–F, TIO–540– and replace with serviceable parts as (g) This amendment becomes effective on J, TIO–540–S, and R–680 series reciprocating necessary in accordance with Avco Lycoming January 24, 1996. engines, installed on the following U.S. Service Bulletin (SB) No. 398, dated April 30, Issued in Burlington, Massachusetts, on registered aircraft: N1004V, N1010F, 1976. December 5, 1995. N106RE, N1068M, N110MP, N1285X, (b) For engines that are certified to operate Jay J. Pardee, N1317P, N1344V, N14006, N15851, N1666C, on 80 octane avgas, within the next 2 hours Manager, Engine and Propeller Directorate, N177DT, N1920F, N1928Q, N20HT, N20NC, TIS after the effective date of this AD conduct Aircraft Certification Service. N20ND, N207X, N2040Q, N2128W, N2165M, a differential compression test on all N2185K, N2232Z, N22874, N2300R, N2346G, cylinders in accordance with Avco Lycoming [FR Doc. 96–273 Filed 1–8–96; 8:45 am] N2394Q, N24395, N24627, N24860, N250M, Service Instruction (SI) No. 1191, dated BILLING CODE 4910±13±U N2555V, N25562, N2578L, N2603Y, N26602, March 31, 1972, and examine the oil filter by N28FG, N2811R, N2815F, N2817Q, N2819A, cutting the oil filter apart and spreading the N2848Q, N28683, N2927M, N2964K, filter paper out to look for metal particles. If 14 CFR Part 91 N3060M, N32388, N33696, N34242, N36358, metal particles are present, or if one or more N3737U, N37500, N3945K, N40ES, N40VF, cylinders shows unacceptable compression [Docket No. 26903 Special Federal Aviation N400JM, N4222J, N4293Y, N4316T, N4320F, as specified in Avco Lycoming SI No. 1191, Regulation (SFAR) No. 66±2] N4497U, N4515P, N46GS, N4602S, N4674S, dated March 31, 1972, perform an engine RIN 2120±AF72 N4687P, N47SG, N4796V, N47964, N48ES, teardown and analytical inspection, and N494FL, N5199U, N52015, N5217L, N5254K, replace with serviceable parts as necessary in N5344K, N5418W, N54228, N54661, Indefinite Suspension of the accordance with Avco Lycoming SB No. 398, N5547Q, N55521, N56884, N59850, N6005Z, Prohibition Against Certain Flights dated April 30, 1976. N6045M, N61569, N6239H, N62801, (c) An alternative method of compliance or Between the United States and the N6286W, N6297V, N63R, N6370P, N6412D, adjustment of the compliance time that Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (Serbia N6480D, N6483Q, N6493Q, N65425, N671A, provides an acceptable level of safety may be and Montenegro) N67615, N67975, N68SC, N68937, N6905V, used if approved by the Manager, Engine and N7ZX, N70416, N71RJ, N711PG, N714ZU, Propeller Standards Staff. The request should AGENCY: Federal aviation N7157V, N7195G, N7213P, N7230F, N7230Q, be forwarded through an appropriate FAA Administration (FAA), DOT. N7248H, N73064, N733WH, N734TA, N7361R, N737CM, N737NV, N738GX, Maintenance Inspector, who may add ACTION: Notice of suspension of N738KC, N738KF, N738RC, N738ZL, comments and then send it to the Manager, effectiveness. N739RF, N75381, N755GA, N756RV, Engine and Propeller Standards Staff. N757SK, N757SX, N757TU, N7724M, Note: Information concerning the existence SUMMARY: This action suspends N777EE, N78887, N78901, N7894V, of approved alternative methods of indefinitely the provisions of SFAR No. N792BW, N804EH, N8070P, N8094Q, N81RP, compliance with this airworthiness directive, 66–2. SFAR No. 66–2 prohibits, with N81203, N8144G, N8149E, N8184X, N8201B, if any, may be obtained from the Engine and certain exceptions, the takeoff from, N82182, N8223W, N8264W, N8306D, Propeller Standards Staff. landing in, or overflight of the territory N8372L, N8494E, N8537J, N8579H, N8691Y, (d) Special flight permits may be issued in of the United States by any aircraft on N8810P, N8961P, N9140J, N9157S, N9296P, accordance with sections 21.197 and 21.199 a flight to or from the territory of N9407K, N9444R, N9451B, N95WT, N9574L, of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (Serbia N96TB, N96134, N9666V, N9673L, N9728U, 21.197 and 21.199) to operate the aircraft to N9783L, N9808J and N9864C. a location where the requirements of this AD and Montenegro). In addition, the SFAR Note: This airworthiness directive (AD) can be accomplished. prohibits the landing in, takeoff from, or applies to each engine identified in the (e) The actions required by this AD shall overflight of the territory of the United preceding applicability provision, regardless be done in accordance with the following States by any aircraft on a flight from or of whether it has been modified, altered, or Avco Lycoming service documents: to any intermediate destination, if the repaired in the area subject to the flight’s origin or ultimate destination is requirements of this AD. For engines that Document No. Page Revision Date Serbia and Montenegro. Presidential have been modified, altered, or repaired so Determination No. 96–7 suspends the that the performance of the requirements of SB No. 398 ... 1 Original April 30, sanctions previously imposed under this AD is affected, the owner/operator must 1976. use the authority provided in paragraph (c) Total Executive Order 12810 with respect to to request approval from the Federal Aviation pages: Yugoslavia to achieve a negotiated Administration (FAA). This approval may 1. settlement of the conflict in Bosnia- address either no action, if the current SI No. 1191 .. 1±2 Original March Herzegovina and directs the Department configuration eliminates the unsafe 31, of Transportation to suspend the condition, or different actions necessary to 1972. effectiveness of Order No. 92–6–27. address the unsafe condition described in Total Accordingly, the Administrator is this AD. Such a request should include an pages: suspending indefinitely the assessment of the effect of the changed 2. configuration on the unsafe condition effectiveness of the provisions of SFAR No. 66–2. addressed by this AD. In no case does the This incorporation by reference was presence of any modification, alteration, or approved by the Director of the Federal DATES: Effective on January 2, 1996. repair remove any engine from the Register in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) SFAR No. 66–2 in 14 CFR Part 91 is applicability of this AD. and 1 CFR part 51. Copies may be obtained suspended indefinitely. Compliance: Required as indicated, unless from Textron Lycoming, Reciprocating FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: accomplished previously. Engine Division, 652 Oliver St., Patricia R. Lane, Airspace and Air To prevent detonation due to low octane, Williamsport, PA 17701; telephone (717) which can result in severe engine damage 327–7278, fax (717) 327–7022. Copies may be Traffic Law Branch, AGC–230, Office of and subsequent failure, accomplish the inspected at the FAA, New England Region, the Chief Counsel, Federal Aviation following: Office of the Assistant Chief Counsel, 12 New Administration, 800 Independence (a) For engines that are certified to operate England Executive Park, Burlington, MA; or Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20591; on only 91 or higher octane aviation gasoline at the Office of the Federal Register, 800 telephone: 202–267–3491. 630 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 6 / Tuesday, January 9, 1996 / Rules and Regulations

SUPPLEMENTARY States, Serbia and Montenegro in territory of the United States by an Availability of Document accordance with Security Council aircraft on a flight to or from the Resolution 757. Section 2(d) of territory of the Serbia and Montenegro any person may obtain a copy of this Executive Order 12810, issued by the (57 FR 28031). SFAR No. 66 also document by submitting a request to the President on June 5, 1992, prohibits prohibited the landing in takeoff from, Federal Aviation Administration, Office ‘‘[a]ny transaction by a United States or overflight of the territory of the of Public Affairs, Public Inquiry Center, person, or involving the use of U.S.- United States by any aircraft on a flight APA–230, 800 Independence Avenue, registered vessels and aircraft, relating from or to any intermediate destination, SW., Washington, DC 20591, or by to transportation to or from the Federal if the flight is destined to land in or calling 202–267–3484. Communications Republic of Yugoslavia (Serbia and takeoff from Serbia and Montenegro. must identify the number of this SFAR. Montenegro) * * * or the sale in the After SFAR No. 66 expired on June 19, Persons interested in being placed on a United States by any person holding 1993, the FAA reinstated the mailing list for future rules should also authority under the Federal Aviation prohibition against certain flights request a copy of the Advisory Circular Act * * * of any transportation by air between the United States and the No. 11–2A, which describes the which includes any stop in the Federal Serbia and Montenegro through the applications procedure. Republic of Yugoslavia (Serbia and issuance of SFAR No. 66–1 (58 FR Background Montenegro).’’ Section 2(e) of the 45220). SFAR No. 66–1 became effective Executive Order further prohibits: on August 26, 1993, and expired on The FAA is responsible for the safety August 26, 1994. of flight in the United States and the The granting of permission to any aircraft On May 31, 1995, the FAA replaced safety of U.S.-registered aircraft and U.S. to takeoff from, land in, or overfly the United States, if the aircraft, as part of the same SFAR No. 66–1 with SFAR No. 66–2. operators throughout the world. Section SFAR No. 66–2 prohibits, with certain 40101(d)(1) of Title 49, United States flight or a continuation of that flight, is destined to land in or has taken off from the exceptions, the takeoff from, landing in Code, requires the Administrator of the territory of the Federal Republic of or overflight of the territory of the FAA to consider the regulation of air Yugoslavia (Serbia and Montenegro). United States by an aircraft on a flight commerce in a manner that best Executive Order 12810 cites the to or from the territory of Federal promotes safety and fulfills the Republic of Yugoslavia (Serbia and requirements of national security as Presidents’ authority under the International Emergency Economic Montenegro) 60 FR 28476). In addition, being in the public interest. In addition, SFAR No. 66–2 prohibits the landing in, Powers Act (50 U.S.C. 1701 et seq.), the 49 U.S.C. 40105(b)(A) requires the takeoff from, or overflight of the National Emergencies Act (50 U.S.C. Administrator to exercise his authority territory of the United States by any 1601 et seq.), Section 1114 of the consistently with the obligations of the aircraft on a flight from or to any Federal Aviation Act of 1958, as United States Government under an intermediate destination, if the flights’ amended (49 U.S.C. app. 1514), Section international agreement. origin or ultimate destination is Serbia 301 of Title 3, United States Code (3 One such international agreement is and Montenegro. SFAR No. 66–2 U.S.C. 301), and Section 5 of the United the Charter of the United Nations (the expires on June 2, 1997. Charter) 59 Stat. 1031; 3 Bevans 1153 Nations Participation Act of 1945, as On October 27, 1995, the Embassy of (1945)). Under Article 25 of the Charter, amended (22 U.S.C. 287(c)). In the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia ‘‘the members of the United Nations particular, the United Nations petitioned the FAA for an exemption agree to accept and carry out the Participation Act provides that: from SFAR No. 66–2 to permit the decisions of the Security Council in [N]otwithstanding the provisions of any operation of an aircraft carrying accordance with the present Charter.’’ other law, whenever the United States is delegates from both the Federal Article 48(1) of the Charter further called upon by the [UN] Security Council to Republic of Yugoslavia and the Bosnian provides, in pertinent part, that ‘‘[t]he apply measures which said Council has Serb-Controlled Areas of the Republic of action required to carry out the decided * * * to be employed to give effect Bosnia and Herzegovina to operate to, decisions of the Security Council for the to its decisions under the [United Nations] Charter, the president may, to the extent within, and from the United States to maintenance of international peace and necessary to apply such measures, through and from a point within Bosnia and security shall be taken by all members any agency which he may designate, and Montenegro. Pursuant to the of the United Nations * * * ’’. under such orders, rules, or regulations as Department of Treasury, Office of On May 30, 1992, acting under may be prescribed by him, investigate, Foreign Assets Control, the FAA granted Chapter VII of the charter, the Security regulate, or prohibit in whole or in part, the petition which permitted the Council adopted Resolution 757, economic relations of rail, sea, [and] air transporting of the delegation from mandating an embargo of certain air ** * between any foreign country or to any Belgrade to and from the Peace traffic with Serbia and Montenegro. nation thereof or any person therein and the Conference at Wright Patterson Air Paragraph 7(a) of Resolution 757 United States or any person subject to the Force Base in Dayton, Ohio, for the jurisdiction thereof * * * requires all states to deny permission to purpose of conducting negotiations. any aircraft to takeoff from, land in, or On June 12, 1992, the Office of the On January 2, 1996, the President overfly their territory if the aircraft is Secretary of Transportation issued transmitted Presidential Determination destined to land in or has taken off from Order 92–6–27, which implements No. 96–7, which suspends the sanctions the territory of Serbia and Montenegro. Executive Order 12810 by amending all previously imposed with respect to An exception to this prohibition is made Department of Transportation (DOT) Yugoslavia to the United States for flights that have been approved on certificates issued under Section 401 of Congress. The President determined that the grounds of urgent humanitarian the Act, all permits issued under suspension was necessary to achieve a need by the Security Council Committee Section 402 of the Act, and all negotiated settlement of the conflict in established by Security Council exemptions from Section 401 and 402 Bosnia-Herzegovina that is acceptable to Resolution 724 (1991). accordingly. the parties. On January 2, 1996, the The United States Government has On June 23, 1992, the FAA published Department of Transportation taken several actions to restrict air SFAR No. 66, prohibiting the takeoff suspended the effectiveness of the transportation between the United from, landing in, or overflights of the conditions contained in Order No. 92– Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 6 / Tuesday, January 9, 1996 / Rules and Regulations 631

6–27. A copy of Presidential Federalism Determination ACTION: Final rule. Determination No. 96–7 has been placed The amendment set forth herein will in the docket for this action. SUMMARY: The Food and Drug not have substantial direct effects on the Administration (FDA) is amending the Indefinite Suspension of the Prohibition states, on the relationship between the food additive regulations for n- Against Certain Flights Between the national government and the states, or butoxypoly(oxyethylene)poly United States and the Federal Republic on the distribution of power and (oxypropylene) glycol intended for use of Yugoslavia (Serbia and Montenegro) responsibilities among the various in sugar beet processing to replace the levels of government. Therefore, in existing limitation on molecular weight On the basis of the above, and in accordance with Executive Order 12612 with a limitation on viscosity. This support of Presidential Determination (52 FR 4168; October 30, 1987), it is action responds to a petition filed by determined that this regulation does not No. 96–7, I am ordering an indefinite Union Carbide Corp. have federalism implications warranting suspension of the provisions of SFAR DATES: Effective January 9, 1996; written No. 66–2. For the reasons stated above, the preparation of a Federalism Assessment. objections and requests for a hearing by I find that notice and public comment FEbruary 8, 1996. The Director of the under 5 U.S.C. 553(b) are impracticable Conclusion Office of the Federal Register approves and contrary to the public interest. For the reasons set forth above, the the incorporation by reference in Further, I find that good cause exists for FAA has determined that this action is accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 making this rule effective immediately not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ CFR part 51 of a certain publication in upon issuance. I also find that this under Executive Order 12866. This § 173.340 (21 CFR 173.340), effective action is fully consistent with my action is considered a ‘‘significant rule’’ January 9, 1996. obligations under 49 U.S.C. Section under DOT Regulatory Policies and ADDRESSES: Submit written objections to 40105(b)(1) to ensure that I exercise my Procedures (44 FR 11034; February 26, the Dockets Management Branch (HFA– duties consistently with the obligations 1979). Because this amendment is 305), Food and Drug Administration, of the United States under international relieving in nature, the FAA certifies rm. 1–23, 12420 Parklawn Dr., agreements. that this rule will not have a significant Rockville, MD 20857. Regualtory Evaluation economic impact, positive or negative, FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: on a substantial number of small entities Mitchell A. Cheeseman, Center for Food This amendment is relieving in nature under the criteria of the Regulatory Safety and Applied Nutrition (HFS– and suspends indefinitely the Flexibility Act. 217), Food and Drug Administration, restrictions of flights between the List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 91 200 C St. SW., Washington, DC 20204, United States, Serbia and Montenegro. 202–418–3083. Aircraft, Airmen Airports, Air traffic In addition, the cost to circumnavigate SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: control, Aviation safety, Federal In a notice the territory by U.S.-registered aircraft is published in the Federal Register of removed by this action. Accordingly, Republic of Yugoslavia, Freight, Montenegro, Serbia. August 8, 1995 (60 FR 40384), FDA this action will impose no additional announced that a food additive petition burden on commercial or private Accordingly, for the reasons set forth (FAP 5A4473) had been filed by Union operators. above, the FAA is suspending Carbide Corp., P.O. Box 670, Bound indefinitely the provisions of SFAR 66– Brook, NJ 08805. The petition proposed Paperwork Reduction Act 2. to amend the food additive regulations This rule contains no information Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 1155, 40103, in § 173.340 Defoaming agents (21 CFR collection requests requiring approval of 40113, 40120, 44101, 44111, 44701, 44709, 173.340) to redefine the limitations for 44711, 44712, 44715, 44716, 44717, 44722, the Office of Management and Budget n- 46306, 46315, 46316, 46502, 46504, 46506, butoxypolyoxyethylenepolyoxyprop- pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction 46507, 47122, 47508, 47528–47531; articles Act (44 U.S.C. 3507 et seq.). 12 and 29 of the Convention on International yleneglycol intended for use as a Civil Aviation (61 stat. 1180). defoaming agent in sugar beet International Trade Impact Assessment Issued in Washington, DC, on January 3, processing from molecular weight to 1996. viscosity. SFAR No. 66–2 does not prohibit U.S. FDA has evaluated data in the and foreign air carriers from engaging in David R. Hinson, Administrator. petition and other relevant material. The the sale of air transportation to or from agency concludes that the proposed [FR Doc. 96–275 Filed 1–5–96; 8:45 am] Serbia and Montenegro, nor does it technical amendment concerning n- impose any restrictions on commercial BILLING CODE 4910±13±M butoxypolyoxyethylenepolyoxyprop- carriers beyond those imposed by DOT yleneglycol raises no safety issue, and Order 92–6–27. The FAA, therefore, that § 173.340 should be amended as set determined that SFAR No. 66–2 would DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND forth below. FDA also concludes that not create a competitive advantage or HUMAN SERVICES the appropriate syntax for the chemical disadvantage for foreign companies in Food and Drug Administration name of the additive is the sale of aviation products or services n- in the United States, nor for domestic 21 CFR Part 173 butoxypoly(oxyethylene)poly firms in the sale of aviation products or (oxypropylene)glycol. services in foreign countries. [Docket No. 95F±0244] In accordance with § 171.1(h) (21 CFR Accordingly, the suspension of SFAR Secondary Direct Food Additives 171.1(h)), the petition and the No. 66–2 also will not create a Permitted in Food for Human documents that FDA considered and competitive advantage or disadvantage Consumption relied upon in reaching its decision to for foreign companies in the sale of approve the petition are available for aviation products or services in foreign AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, inspection at the Center for Food Safety countries. HHS. and Applied Nutrition by appointment 632 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 6 / Tuesday, January 9, 1996 / Rules and Regulations with the information contact person and the grounds for the objection. Each Therefore, under the Federal Food, listed above. As provided in 21 CFR numbered objection on which a hearing Drug, and Cosmetic Act and under 171.1(h), the agency will delete from the is requested shall specifically so state. authority delegated to the Commissioner documents any materials that are not Failure to request a hearing for any of Food and Drugs and redelegated to available for public disclosure before particular objection shall constitute a the Director, Center for Food Safety and making the documents available for waiver of the right to a hearing on that Applied Nutrition, 21 CFR part 173 is inspection. objection. Each numbered objection for amended as follows: The agency has previously considered which a hearing is requested shall the potential environmental effects of include a detailed description and PART 173ÐSECONDARY DIRECT this action, as announced in the notice analysis of the specific factual FOOD ADDITIVES PERMITTED IN of filing for FAP 5A4473 (60 FR 40384). information intended to be presented in FOOD FOR HUMAN CONSUMPTION FDA has received no new information support of the objection in the event 1.The authority citation for 21 CFR or comments that would affect the that a hearing is held. Failure to include part 173 continues to read as follows: agency’s previous determination that such a description and analysis for any this action will not have a significant particular objection shall constitute a Authority: Secs. 201, 402, 409 of the impact on the human environment and waiver of the right to a hearing on the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (21 that neither an environmental objection. Three copies of all documents U.S.C. 321, 342, 348). assessment nor an environmental shall be submitted and shall be 2. Section 173.340 is amended in the impact statement is required. identified with the docket number table in paragraph (a)(4) by revising the Any person who will be adversely found in brackets in the heading of this entry for ‘‘n- affected by this regulation may at any document. Any objections received in butoxypolyoxyethylenepolyoxypropyle- time on or before February 8, 1996, file response to the regulation may be seen ne glycol’’ under the headings ‘‘ with the Dockets Management Branch in the Dockets Management Branch Substance’’ and ‘‘Limitations’’ to read as (address above) written objections between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday follows: thereto. Each objection shall be through Friday. separately numbered, and each § 173.340 Defoaming agents. numbered objection shall specify with List of Subjects in 21 CFR Part 173 * * * * * particularity the provisions of the Food additives, Incorporation by (a) * * * regulation to which objection is made reference. (4) * * *

Substance Limitations n-Butoxypoly(oxyethylene)-poly(oxypropylene)glycol Viscosity range, 4,850±5,350 Saybolt Universal Seconds (SUS) at 37.8 °C (100 °F). The viscosity range is determined by the meth- od ``Viscosity Determination of n-butoxypoly(oxyethylene)- poly(oxypropylene) glycol'' dated April 26, 1995, developed by Union Carbide Corp., P.O. Box 670, Bound Brook, NJ 08805, which is incorporated by reference in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51. Copies of the material incorporated by reference are available from the Division of Petition Control, Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition (HFS±215), Food and Drug Administration, 200 C St. SW., Washington, DC 20204, and may be examined at the Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition's Library, 200 C St. SW., rm. 3321, Washing- ton, DC, or at the Office of the Federal Register, 800 North Cap- itol St. NW., suite 700, Washington, DC.

* * * * * * * Dated: December 21, 1995. Fred R. Shank, Director, Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition. [FR Doc. 96–228 Filed 1–8–96; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4160±01±F 633

Proposed Rules Federal Register Vol. 61, No. 6

Tuesday, January 9, 1996

This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: following termination of the license contains notices to the public of the proposed Background issued by the Commission (NRC) for issuance of rules and regulations. The such disposal * * *.’’ Therefore, the purpose of these notices is to give interested The NRC published an advance notice petitioner proposes that the NRC persons an opportunity to participate in the of proposed rulemaking (ANPRM) in the regulations should conform to NWPA rule making prior to the adoption of the final Federal Register on August 3, 1994 (59 rules. provision and require private land FR 39485). The ANPRM announced that ownership during operations and the NRC was considering amending its closure of the facility, then converting regulations to allow private ownership NUCLEAR REGULATORY title to the site to the U.S. Department of the land used for a low-level COMMISSION of Energy. radioactive waste (LLRW) facility site as The petitioner states that, because of 10 CFR Part 61 an alternative to the current requirement the conflict between the NRC regulation for Federal or State ownership. In the [Docket No. PRM±61±3] and the NWPA statute, the NRC ANPRM, NRC considered the option to regulation is void with regard to Federal allow private-land ownership ownership of a LLRW disposal site Heartland Operation To Protect the indefinitely, given that adequate land- Environment before commencement of the receipt of use restrictions were imposed. The waste. The petitioner asserts that if the AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory ANPRM invited comment on 12 regulation is void with regard to Federal Commission. questions to assist the NRC in ownership, that it is also silent or determining if such a change could be ACTION: Notice of receipt of petition for unconstitutional with regard to State made without adversely impacting rulemaking. ownership. The petitioner references the public health and safety. The NRC following case [New York v. United SUMMARY: received 49 comment letters in response The Nuclear Regulatory States, 112 S.Ct. 2408 (1992)]. to the ANPRM. The NRC prepared a Commission (NRC) is docketing, as a Several commenters, including the detailed summary of the comments petition for rulemaking, a document, petitioner, made similar comments on received.1 dated August 7, 1995, filed with the the ANPRM that there is not an On July 18, 1995 (60 FR 36744), the Commission by Heartland Operation to adequate basis for requiring Federal or NRC published a notice withdrawing Protect the Environment (HOPE). The State land ownership, which therefore the ANPRM published in the Federal petition was assigned Docket No. PRM– would support private ownership. In the Register on August 3, 1994. In the 61–3 on October 6, 1995. The petitioner withdrawal of the ANPRM, the notice of withdrawal, the NRC stated requests that the Commission amend its Commission stated that it believes there that a rule change to allow private-land regulations to adopt a rule regarding is adequate statutory authority for NRC ownership of a LLRW site is not government ownership of a low-level to require Federal or State land warranted or needed. The NRC stated radioactive waste disposal site that is ownership. The Commission Paper that the bases for its decision are that consistent with Federal statute. In this (SECY–95–152; dated June 13, 1995) State and compacts have generally document, the NRC is announcing the further discussed the NRC staff rationale indicated that they do not need, nor receipt of the petition and requesting for believing that NRC has this would they allow, private-land public comment on the suggested authority. The paper stated the staff’s ownership and that this rule change amendment. belief that NRC has authority to require could be potentially disruptive to the DATES: Submit comments by March 11, Federal or State land ownership current LLRW program. 1996. Comments received after this date pursuant to the Atomic Energy Act of will be considered if it is practical to do Petitioner’s Concern 1954, as amended, in Section 161b. This so. However, assurance of consideration The petitioner states that the NRC’s section gives the Commission the cannot be given except as to comments present regulation (10 CFR 61.59(a)), authority to promulgate regulations received on or before this date. which requires disposal of LLRW ‘‘only deemed necessary or desirable to protect ADDRESSES: Submit comments to the on land owned in fee by the Federal or health or to minimize danger to life or Nuclear Regulatory Commission, a State government,’’ is in conflict with property. Attention: Docketing and Service a provision in the Nuclear Waste Policy The petitioner further states that the Branch, Office of the Secretary, Act of 1982 (NWPA), as amended (42 notice withdrawing the ANPRM (60 FR Washington, DC 20555–0001. For a copy USC 10171(b)). The act authorizes the 36744) contains no documentation or of the petition, write to the Rules U.S. Department of Energy ‘‘to assume statement of any issue of public health Review Section, Rules Review and title and custody of low-level and safety as the basis for the regulation; Directives Branch, Division of Freedom radioactive waste and the land on which therefore, the petitioner believes public of Information and Publications such waste is disposed of, upon request health and safety cannot be an issue Services, Office of Administration, U.S. by the owner of such waste and land upon which the NRC regulation is Nuclear Regulatory Commission, based. Washington, DC 20555. 1 Copies of the summary are available for The petitioner also states that the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: inspection or copying for a fee from the NRC Public notice of withdrawal contains the Michael T. Lesar, Chief, Rules Review Document Room at 2120 L Street NW, (Lower statement: ‘‘The Commission believes Level), Washington DC; the PDR’s mailing address Section, at the same address as above or is US NRC, Mail Stop LL–6, Washington, DC that the potential negative impact of by telephone: 301–415–7163 or toll free: 20555–0001; telephone (202) 634–3273; fax (202) disrupting the current process far 1–800–368–5642. 634–3343. outweighs any potential benefits that 634 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 6 / Tuesday, January 9, 1996 / Proposed Rules might be derived from making a generic DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: rule change at that time.’’ In response, Comments Invited the petitioner asserts that the Federal Aviation Administration Commission’s role is to regulate nuclear Interested persons are invited to 14 CFR Part 39 material in a manner that protects participate in the making of the proposed rule by submitting such public health and safety and the [Docket No. 95±NM±93±AD] written data, views, or arguments as environment, that its role is not to Airworthiness Directives; Boeing they may desire. Communications shall facilitate specific processes, i.e., the identify the Rules Docket number and current LLRW disposal process. Model 747±100, ±200, and ±300 Series Airplanes be submitted in triplicate to the address The petitioner references the specified above. All communications following quote from the notice of AGENCY: Federal Aviation received on or before the closing date withdrawal: Administration, DOT. for comments, specified above, will be For over three decades the public has been ACTION: Supplemental notice of considered before taking action on the led to believe that all LLW disposal sites proposed rulemaking; reopening of proposed rule. The proposals contained would necessarily be owned and controlled comment period. in this notice may be changed in light by either a Federal or State government. This, of the comments received. SUMMARY: we believe, has been an important factor in This document revises an Comments are specifically invited on convincing many proponent groups and State earlier proposed airworthiness directive the overall regulatory, economic, and local LLW advisory groups that LLW can (AD), applicable to certain Boeing environmental, and energy aspects of and will be disposed of in a safe manner. To Model 747–100, –200, and –300 series the proposed rule. All comments now try and convince these groups that airplanes, that would have required an submitted will be available, both before Federal or State ownership of LLW disposal inspection to determine if hinge bolts and after the closing date for comments, sites is not required may be difficult and and nuts are installed in the overhead in the Rules Docket for examination by generate a significant credibility problem. stowage bins, and the installation of interested persons. A report hinge bolts and nuts, if necessary. That summarizing each FAA-public contact In response, the petitioner states that proposal was prompted by reports that concerned with the substance of this credibility problems occur when overhead stowage bins in the passenger proposal will be filed in the Rules misrepresentations, i.e., government compartment have fallen out of position Docket. ownership is necessary to ensure proper due to missing hinge bolts. This action Commenters wishing the FAA to LLRW management, are initially made revises the proposed rule by revising the acknowledge receipt of their comments and that the credibility problems are applicability to include additional submitted in response to this notice exacerbated the longer the airplanes. The actions specified by this must submit a self-addressed, stamped misrepresentations are allowed to proposed AD are intended to ensure that postcard on which the following continue. The petitioner believes that hinge bolts are installed in the overhead statement is made: ‘‘Comments to there certainly would appear to be a storage bins. Missing hinge bolts could Docket Number 95–NM–93–AD.’’ The larger credibility problem for the result in the overhead stowage bins postcard will be date stamped and returned to the commenter. Commission to maintain a regulation falling out of position and injuring airplane occupants. that is in direct conflict with a statute. Availability of NPRMs The petitioner offers that the DATES: Comments must be received by January 29, 1996. Any person may obtain a copy of this Commission might reflect on the NPRM by submitting a request to the Department of Energy’s recent efforts to ADDRESSES: Submit comments in FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, gain credibility by coming clean on past triplicate to the Federal Aviation ANM–103, Attention: Rules Docket No. misrepresentations, i.e., secret radiation Administration (FAA), Transport 95–NM–93–AD, 1601 Lind Avenue, studies. Airplane Directorate, ANM–103, SW., Renton, Washington 98055–4056. Attention: Rules Docket No. 95–NM– Conclusion 93–AD, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Discussion Renton, Washington 98055–4056. The petitioner believes that for the A proposal to amend part 39 of the Comments may be inspected at this Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR stated reasons, the NRC should adopt a location between 9:00 a.m. and 3:00 part 39) to add an airworthiness rule regarding government ownership of p.m., Monday through Friday, except directive (AD), applicable to certain LLRW disposal sites that is consistent Federal holidays. Boeing Model 747–100, –200, and –300 with the Federal statute [42 USC The service information referenced in series airplanes, was published as a 10171(b)]. the proposed rule may be obtained from notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 2nd day Boeing Commercial Airplane Group, in the Federal Register on August 23, of January, 1996. P.O. Box 3707, Seattle, Washington 1995 (60 FR 43728). That NPRM would For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. 98124–2207. This information may be have required a one-time visual examined at the FAA, Transport John C. Hoyle, inspection to determine if the hinge Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind bolts and nuts are installed in the Secretary of the Commission. Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington. overhead stowage bins. That NPRM also [FR Doc. 96–282 Filed 1–8–96; 8:45 am] FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: would have required installation of BILLING CODE 7590±01±P Dorothy Lundy, Aerospace Engineer, hinge bolts and nuts, if necessary. That Airframe Branch, ANM–120S, FAA, NPRM was prompted by reports Transport Airplane Directorate, Seattle indicating that overhead stowage bins in Aircraft Certification Office, 1601 Lind the passenger compartment of certain Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington; Model 747 series airplanes have fallen telephone (206) 227–1675; fax (206) out of position and injured passengers 227–1181. due to missing hinge bolts. Missing Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 6 / Tuesday, January 9, 1996 / Proposed Rules 635 hinge bolts could result in the overhead extending this credit time for previously PART 39ÐAIRWORTHINESS stowage bins falling out of position and accomplished inspections will not DIRECTIVES injuring airplane occupants. adversely affect safety and will prevent Since the issuance of that NPRM, the an unnecessary economic burden on 1. The authority citation for part 39 FAA has reviewed and approved Boeing operators who have performed the continues to read as follows: Alert Service Bulletin 747–25A3095, inspection within that credit time. Authority: 49 USC 106(g), 40101, 40113, Revision 1, dated September 28, 1995. There are approximately 573 Model 44701. This service bulletin revises the 747–100, –200, and –300 series § 39.13 [Amended] effectivity listing of the original issue of airplanes of the affected design in the 2. Section 39.13 is amended by the service bulletin by adding airplanes worldwide fleet. The FAA estimates that RA006, and RD251 through RD262 adding the following new airworthiness 157 airplanes of U.S. registry would be directive: inclusive. In addition, certain passenger affected by this proposed AD, that it airplanes (which have been converted to would take approximately 1 work hour Boeing: Docket 95–NM–93–AD. special freighters) are removed from the per airplane to accomplish the proposed Applicability: Model 747–100, –200, and effectivity of the alert service bulletin. actions, and that the average labor rate –300 series airplanes, as listed in Boeing This revision of the service bulletin is $60 per work hour. Based on these Alert Service Bulletin 747–25A3095, does not describe any additional work Revision 1, dated September 28, 1995; figures, the cost impact of the proposed certificated in any category. requirements. AD on U.S. operators is estimated to be Note 1: This AD applies to each airplane The FAA has determined that these $9,420, or $60 per airplane. additional airplanes are subject to the identified in the preceding applicability The cost impact figure discussed same unsafe condition as described provision, regardless of whether it has been above is based on assumptions that no previously, and therefore, must be modified, altered, or repaired in the area operator has yet accomplished any of subject to the requirements of this AD. For subject to the requirements of the the proposed requirements of this AD airplanes that have been modified, altered, or proposed AD. The FAA has revised the action, and that no operator would repaired so that the performance of the proposal to add these airplanes to the accomplish those actions in the future if requirements of this AD is affected, the applicability of the rule. owner/operator must use the authority Since this change expands the scope this AD were not adopted. provided in paragraph (b) of this AD to of the originally proposed rule, the FAA The regulations proposed herein request approval from the FAA. This has determined that it is necessary to would not have substantial direct effects approval may address either no action, if the reopen the comment period to provide on the States, on the relationship current configuration eliminates the unsafe additional opportunity for public between the national government and condition; or different actions necessary to the States, or on the distribution of address the unsafe condition described in comment. this AD. Such a request should include an In addition, the FAA has given due power and responsibilities among the various levels of government. Therefore, assessment of the effect of the changed consideration to the following configuration on the unsafe condition comments received in response to the in accordance with Executive Order addressed by this AD. In no case does the proposal: 12612, it is determined that this presence of any modification, alteration, or Three commenters request that the proposal would not have sufficient repair remove any airplane from the ‘‘credit time’’ for inspections federalism implications to warrant the applicability of this AD. accomplished prior to the effective date preparation of a Federalism Assessment. Compliance: Required as indicated. of the AD be extended. The commenters For the reasons discussed above, I To ensure that hinge bolts are installed in note that several operators have certify that this proposed regulation (1) the overhead storage bins, accomplish the accomplished the inspection on their is not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ following: fleets as far back as when the original under Executive Order 12866; (2) is not (a) Within 90 days after the effective date of this AD, unless accomplished previously service bulletin was issued in April a ‘‘significant rule’’ under the DOT within the last 18 months prior to the 1995. Because the proposed AD would Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 effective date of this AD, perform a one-time provide credit only if the inspection FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and (3) if visual inspection to determine if hinge bolts previously had been accomplished promulgated, will not have a significant and nuts are installed in the overhead within the last 6 months prior to the economic impact, positive or negative, stowage bins, in accordance with either effective date of the AD, these operators on a substantial number of small entities Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 747–25A3095, would be required to perform the under the criteria of the Regulatory dated April 27, 1995, or Revision 1, dated inspection again. Therefore, one of these Flexibility Act. A copy of the draft September 28, 1995. commenters requests that the credit regulatory evaluation prepared for this (1) If the hinge bolts and nuts are installed, no further action is required by this AD. time be extended from 6 months to 18 action is contained in the Rules Docket. (2) If any hinge bolt or nut is not installed, months prior to the effective date of the A copy of it may be obtained by prior to further flight, install a hinge bolt and rule. contacting the Rules Docket at the nut in accordance with either alert service The FAA concurs. Since the relevant location provided under the caption bulletin. service bulletin containing the ADDRESSES. (b) An alternative method of compliance or instructions for the inspection was adjustment of the compliance time that issued originally in April 1995, the FAA List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39 provides an acceptable level of safety may be considers that inspections conducted at Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation used if approved by the Manager, Seattle least since then will satisfy the intent of safety, Safety. Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), FAA, the proposed AD. In light of this, and Transport Airplane Directorate. Operators The Proposed Amendment shall submit their requests through an taking into account the number of days appropriate FAA Principal Maintenance normally required for the rulemaking Accordingly, pursuant to the Inspector, who may add comments and then process, the FAA has revised the authority delegated to me by the send it to the Manager, Seattle ACO. proposal to provide credit for Administrator, the Federal Aviation Note 2: Information concerning the inspections that were accomplished Administration proposes to amend part existence of approved alternative methods of within 18 months prior to the effective 39 of the Federal Aviation Regulations compliance with this AD, if any, may be date of this AD. The FAA finds that (14 CFR part 39) as follows: obtained from the Seattle ACO. 636 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 6 / Tuesday, January 9, 1996 / Proposed Rules

(c) Special flight permits may be issued in York Aircraft Certification Office, 10 these airplanes have inadvertently accordance with sections 21.197 and 21.199 Fifth Street, Third Floor, Valley Stream, turned on due to voltage spikes from of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR New York. other equipment when the main battery 21.197 and 21.199) to operate the airplane to power is switched off. Transport Canada a location where the requirements of this AD FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: can be accomplished. Wing Chan, Aerospace Engineer, Aviation also advises that the existing Systems and Flight Test Branch, ANE– emergency light switch arrangement can Issued in Renton, Washington, on January allow the flight compartment panel 3, 1996. 172, FAA, Engine and Propeller Directorate, New York Aircraft switch and the flight attendant’s panel Darrell M. Pederson, switch to override each other. Such Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Certification Office, 10 Fifth Street, Third Floor, Valley Stream, New York failures of the emergency lighting Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. system, if not corrected, could prevent [FR Doc. 96–260 Filed 1–8–96; 8:45 am] 11581; telephone (516) 256–7511; fax (516) 568–2716. the use of the emergency lights in the BILLING CODE 4910±13±U event of an emergency. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: De Havilland has issued Service Comments Invited Bulletin 7–33–7, dated October 17, 14 CFR Part 39 1980, which describes procedures for Interested persons are invited to [Docket No. 95±NM±110±AD] modification of the emergency lights participate in the making of the circuitry. The modification Airworthiness Directives; de Havilland proposed rule by submitting such (Modification No. 7/1697) involves Model DHC±7 Series Airplanes written data, views, or arguments as revising the switching logic of the they may desire. Communications shall emergency lights. This modification also AGENCY: Federal Aviation identify the Rules Docket number and entails reworking the wiring in the relay Administration, DOT. be submitted in triplicate to the address panel of the electrical equipment bay, ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking specified above. All communications and replacing the current emergency (NPRM). received on or before the closing date light switch (part number MS24659– for comments, specified above, will be SUMMARY: This document proposes the 21A) located on the passenger warning considered before taking action on the panel on the flight attendant’s panel adoption of a new airworthiness proposed rule. The proposals contained directive (AD) that is applicable to with a new type of switch. in this notice may be changed in light Accomplishment of this modification certain de Havilland Model DHC–7 of the comments received. series airplanes. This proposal would will ensure that the emergency lights Comments are specifically invited on can be turned on when necessary, that require modification of the emergency the overall regulatory, economic, lights circuitry. This proposal is the emergency lights will not turn on environmental, and energy aspects of inadvertently, and that the flight prompted by reports of the emergency the proposed rule. All comments lights turning on inadvertently due to compartment and flight attendant’s submitted will be available, both before panel switches do not override each voltage spikes from other equipment, and after the closing date for comments, other. Transport Canada Aviation and reports that the existing emergency in the Rules Docket for examination by classified this service bulletin as light switch arrangement allows the interested persons. A report mandatory and issued Canadian flight compartment and flight summarizing each FAA-public contact airworthiness directive CF–95–04, dated attendant’s panel switches to override concerned with the substance of this March 9, 1995, in order to assure the each other. The actions specified by the proposal will be filed in the Rules continued airworthiness of these proposed AD are intended to prevent Docket. airplanes in Canada. such failures of the emergency light Commenters wishing the FAA to This airplane model is manufactured systems, which could prevent the use of acknowledge receipt of their comments in Canada and is type certificated for the emergency lights in the event of an submitted in response to this notice operation in the United States under the emergency. must submit a self-addressed, stamped provisions of section 21.29 of the DATES: Comments must be received by postcard on which the following Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR February 13, 1996. statement is made: ‘‘Comments to 21.29) and the applicable bilateral ADDRESSES: Submit comments in Docket Number 95–NM–110–AD.’’ The airworthiness agreement. Pursuant to triplicate to the Federal Aviation postcard will be date stamped and this bilateral airworthiness agreement, Administration (FAA), Transport returned to the commenter. Transport Canada Aviation has kept the Airplane Directorate, ANM–103, FAA informed of the situation described Attention: Rules Docket No. 95–NM– Availability of NPRMs above. The FAA has examined the 110–AD, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Any person may obtain a copy of this findings of Transport Canada Aviation, Renton, Washington 98055–4056. NPRM by submitting a request to the reviewed all available information, and Comments may be inspected at this FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, determined that AD action is necessary location between 9:00 a.m. and 3:00 ANM–103, Attention: Rules Docket No. for products of this type design that are p.m., Monday through Friday, except 95–NM–110–AD, 1601 Lind Avenue, certificated for operation in the United Federal holidays. SW., Renton, Washington 98055–4056. States. The service information referenced in Since an unsafe condition has been the proposed rule may be obtained from Discussion identified that is likely to exist or Bombardier, Inc., Bombardier Regional Transport Canada Aviation, which is develop on other airplanes of the same Aircraft Division, Garratt Boulevard, the airworthiness authority for Canada, type design registered in the United Downsview, Ontario M3K 1Y5, Canada. recently notified the FAA that an unsafe States, the proposed AD would require This information may be examined at condition may exist on certain de modification of the emergency lights the FAA, Transport Airplane Havilland Model DHC–7 series circuitry. The actions would be required Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., airplanes. Transport Canada Aviation to be accomplished in accordance with Renton, Washington; or at the FAA, advises that it has received reports the service bulletin described Engine and Propeller Directorate, New indicating that the emergency lights on previously. Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 6 / Tuesday, January 9, 1996 / Proposed Rules 637

The FAA estimates that 14 airplanes § 39.13 [Amended] Issued in Renton, Washington, on January 3, 1996. of U.S. registry would be affected by this 2. Section 39.13 is amended by Darrell M. Pederson, proposed AD, that it would take adding the following new airworthiness approximately 8 work hours per directive: Acting Manager, Transport Airplane airplane to accomplish the proposed Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. actions, and that the average labor rate De Havilland, Inc.: Docket 95–NM–110–AD. [FR Doc. 96–261 Filed 1–9–96; 8:45 am] is $60 per work hour. Required parts Applicability: Model DHC–7 series BILLING CODE 4910±13±U would be provided by the manufacturer airplanes, serial numbers 3 through 27 at no cost to operators. Based on these inclusive, on which de Havilland figures, the cost impact of the proposed Modification No. 7/1697 has not been 14 CFR Part 39 AD on U.S. operators is estimated to be installed; certificated in any category. [Docket No. 94±NM±195±AD] $6,720, or $480 per airplane. Note 1: This AD applies to each airplane identified in the preceding applicability The cost impact figure discussed Airworthiness Directives; McDonnell above is based on assumptions that no provision, regardless of whether it has been otherwise modified, altered, or repaired in Douglas Model DC±9 and C±9 (Military) operator has yet accomplished any of the area subject to the requirements of this Series Airplanes the proposed requirements of this AD AD. For airplanes that have been modified, action, and that no operator would altered, or repaired so that the performance AGENCY: Federal Aviation accomplish those actions in the future if of the requirements of this AD is affected, the Administration, DOT. this AD were not adopted. owner/operator must use the authority ACTION: Supplemental notice of The regulations proposed herein provided in paragraph (c) to request approval proposed rulemaking; reopening of would not have substantial direct effects from the FAA. This approval may address comment period. on the States, on the relationship either no action, if the current configuration between the national government and eliminates the unsafe condition; or different SUMMARY: This document revises an the States, or on the distribution of actions necessary to address the unsafe earlier proposed airworthiness directive power and responsibilities among the condition described in this AD. Such a (AD), which would have superseded an various levels of government. Therefore, request should include an assessment of the existing AD that is applicable to effect of the changed configuration on the McDonnell Douglas Model DC–9 and C– in accordance with Executive Order unsafe condition addressed by this AD. In no 12612, it is determined that this case does the presence of any modification, 9 (military) series airplanes. The proposal would not have sufficient alteration, or repair remove any airplane from existing AD currently requires the federalism implications to warrant the the applicability of this AD. implementation of a program of preparation of a Federalism Assessment. Compliance: Required as indicated, unless structural inspections to detect and For the reasons discussed above, I accomplished previously. correct fatigue cracking in order to certify that this proposed regulation (1) To prevent failure of the emergency ensure the continued airworthiness of is not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ lighting system due to voltage spikes from these airplanes as they approach the under Executive Order 12866; (2) is not other equipment or due to inadvertent manufacturer’s original fatigue design a ‘‘significant rule’’ under the DOT override of the emergency lighting switches, life goal. The previously proposed Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 accomplish the following: action would have required, among FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and (3) if (a) Within 6 months after the effective date other things, revision of the existing promulgated, will not have a significant of this AD, modify the emergency lights program to require additional visual economic impact, positive or negative, circuitry by accomplishing de Havilland inspections of additional structure. The Modification No. 7/1697 (Emergency previously proposed action was on a substantial number of small entities Lights—Revised Switching Logic), in under the criteria of the Regulatory accordance with the Accomplishment prompted by new data submitted by the Flexibility Act. A copy of the draft Instructions of de Havilland Service Bulletin manufacturer indicating that certain regulatory evaluation prepared for this No. 7–33–7, dated October 17, 1980. revisions to the program are necessary action is contained in the Rules Docket. (b) As of the effective date of this AD, no in order to increase the confidence level A copy of it may be obtained by person shall install an emergency light of the statistical program to ensure contacting the Rules Docket at the switch, part number MS24659–21A, on any timely detection of cracks in various location provided under the caption airplane subject to this AD. airplane structures. This action revises ADDRESSES. (c) An alternative method of compliance or the proposed rule by deleting the adjustment of the compliance time that requirement to perform certain visual List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39 provides an acceptable level of safety may be inspections of Fleet Leader Operator Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation used if approved by the Manager, Sampling (FLOS) Principal Structural safety, Safety. Standardization Branch, ANM–113, FAA, Elements (PSE). The actions specified Transport Airplane Directorate. Operators by this proposed AD are intended to The Proposed Amendment shall submit their requests through an appropriate FAA Principal Maintenance prevent fatigue cracking that could Accordingly, pursuant to the Inspector, who may add comments and then compromise the structural integrity of authority delegated to me by the send it to the Manager, Standardization these airplanes. Administrator, the Federal Aviation Branch, ANM–113. DATES: Comments must be received by Administration proposes to amend part Note 2: Information concerning the January 29, 1996. 39 of the Federal Aviation Regulations existence of approved alternative methods of ADDRESSES: Submit comments in (14 CFR part 39) as follows: compliance with this AD, if any, may be triplicate to the Federal Aviation obtained from the Standardization Branch, PART 39ÐAIRWORTHINESS ANM–113. Administration (FAA), Transport Airplane Directorate, ANM–103, DIRECTIVES (d) Special flight permits may be issued in Attention: Rules Docket No. 94–NM– 1. The authority citation for part 39 accordance with sections 21.197 and 21.199 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR 195–AD, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., continues to read as follows: 21.197 and 21.199) to operate the airplane to Renton, Washington 98055–4056. Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40101, 40113, a location where the requirements of this AD Comments may be inspected at this 44701. can be accomplished. location between 9:00 a.m. and 3:00 638 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 6 / Tuesday, January 9, 1996 / Proposed Rules p.m., Monday through Friday, except FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, The FAA concurs. Paragraph (b)(3) Federal holidays. ANM–103, Attention: Rules Docket No. from the original NPRM has been The service information referenced in 94–NM–195–AD, 1601 Lind Avenue, deleted, and a new NOTE 3 has been the proposed rule may be obtained from SW., Renton, Washington 98055–4056. added to this supplemental NPRM to McDonnell Douglas Corporation, P.O. indicate that these visual inspections Discussion Box 1771, Long Beach, California are not required. However, the visual 90846–1771, Attention: Business Unit A proposal to amend part 39 of the inspections that are part of the Non Manager, Contract Data Management, Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR Destructive Inspection (NDI) procedures C1–255 (35–22). This information may part 39) to add an airworthiness specified in Section 2 of Volume II of be examined at the FAA, Transport directive (AD), applicable to McDonnell the SID would still be required by this Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Douglas Model DC–9 and C–9 (military) AD action. Additionally, paragraph Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington; or at series airplanes, was published as a (b)(4) from the originally proposed rule, the FAA, Transport Airplane notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) which would have required certain Directorate, Los Angeles Aircraft in the Federal Register on May 16, 1995 general visual inspections, has been Certification Office, 3960 Paramount (60 FR 26007). That NPRM would have deleted from this supplemental NPRM Boulevard, Lakewood, California. required implementation of a program since the requirement to perform visual of structural inspections to detect and FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sol inspections of FLOS PSE’s are no longer correct fatigue cracking in order to Davis or David Hsu, Aerospace required by this AD action. ensure the continued airworthiness of Engineers, Airframe Branch, ANM– Also, since issuance of the original these airplanes as they approach the 120L, FAA, Transport Airplane NPRM, the FAA has reviewed and manufacturer’s original fatigue design Directorate, Los Angeles Aircraft approved Volume III–95 of the SID, life goal. That NPRM was prompted by Certification Office, 3960 Paramount dated September 1995, which new data submitted by the manufacturer Boulevard, Lakewood, California eliminates the visual FLOS inspections indicating that certain revisions to the 90712–4137; telephone (310) 627–5233 that were contained in Volume III–94 of program were necessary in order to for Mr. Davis, or (310) 627–5323 for Mr. the SID, dated July 1994. Volume III–94 increase the confidence level of the Hsu; fax (310) 627–5210. was referenced in the original NPRM as statistical program to ensure timely the appropriate source of service SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: detection of cracks in various airplane information for performing visual structures. That condition, if not Comments Invited inspections of PSE’s. Therefore, corrected, could result in fatigue paragraph (b) of this supplemental Interested persons are invited to cracking that could compromise the NPRM has been revised to reference participate in the making of the structural integrity of these airplanes. Volume III–95 as the appropriate source proposed rule by submitting such Since the issuance of that NPRM, the of service information. written data, views, or arguments as FAA has received a comment from the Since these changes significantly they may desire. Communications shall manufacturer that has caused the FAA revise the originally proposed rule, the identify the Rules Docket number and to reconsider its position on certain FAA has determined that it is necessary be submitted in triplicate to the address aspects of the proposed rule. to reopen the comment period to specified above. All communications McDonnell Douglas requests a provide additional opportunity for received on or before the closing date revision of paragraph (b)(1) of the public comment. for comments, specified above, will be proposal for clarification purposes. The Although other comments were considered before taking action on the manufacturer notes that the proposal received in response to the original proposed rule. The proposals contained states that operators are required to NPRM, those comments, as well as any in this notice may be changed in light inspect airplanes before the threshold other received in response to this of the comments received. (Nth); however, the proposal does not supplemental NPRM, will be addressed Comments are specifically invited on clearly indicate that operators do not in the final rule. the overall regulatory, economic, receive credit for these inspections in There are approximately 889 Model environmental, and energy aspects of the Supplemental Inspection Document DC–9 and C–9 (military) series airplanes the proposed rule. All comments (SID) program, unless the aircraft has of the affected design in the worldwide submitted will be available, both before exceeded one-half of that threshold (Nth/ fleet. The FAA estimates that 568 and after the closing date for comments, 2). The FAA concurs. The FAA has airplanes of U.S. registry and 38 U.S. in the Rules Docket for examination by revised proposed paragraph (b)(1) to operators would be affected by this interested persons. A report indicate that the inspections are to be proposed AD. summarizing each FAA-public contact performed prior to reaching the Incorporation of the SID program into concerned with the substance of this threshold (Nth), but no earlier than Nth/ an operator’s maintenance program, as proposal will be filed in the Rules 2. required by AD 94–03–01, is estimated Docket. McDonnell Douglas also requests the to necessitate 1,062 work hours (per Commenters wishing the FAA to deletion of the requirement to visually operator), at an average labor rate of $60 acknowledge receipt of their comments inspect the Fleet Leader Operator per work hour. Based on these figures, submitted in response to this notice Sampling (FLOS) Principal Structural the cost to the 38 affected U.S. operators must submit a self-addressed, stamped Elements (PSE) that are proposed in to incorporate the SID program is postcard on which the following paragraph (b)(3). The manufacturer estimated to be $2,421,360. statement is made: ‘‘Comments to states that these requirements are The incorporation of the revised Docket Number 94–NM–195–AD.’’ The redundant to those required by AD 92– procedures proposed in this AD action postcard will be date stamped and 22–08 R1, amendment 39–8591 (58 FR would require approximately 20 returned to the commenter. 32281, June 9, 1993), which requires the additional work hours per operator to implementation of a corrosion accomplish, at an average labor rate of Availability of NPRMs prevention and control program to $60 per work hour. Based on these Any person may obtain a copy of this inspect all primary structure, including figures, the cost to the 38 affected U.S. NPRM by submitting a request to the all PSE’s. operators to incorporate these revised Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 6 / Tuesday, January 9, 1996 / Proposed Rules 639 procedures into the SID program into an economic impact, positive or negative, (2) The Non Destructive Inspection (NDI) operator’s maintenance program is on a substantial number of small entities techniques set forth in Section 2 of Volume estimated to be $45,600. under the criteria of the Regulatory II, dated April 1991, of the SID provide The recurring inspection costs, as Flexibility Act. A copy of the draft acceptable methods for accomplishing the required by AD 94–03–01, are estimated inspections required by this paragraph. regulatory evaluation prepared for this (3) All inspection results (negative or to be 362 work hours per airplane per action is contained in the Rules Docket. positive) must be reported to McDonnell year, at an average labor rate of $60 per A copy of it may be obtained by Douglas, in accordance with the instructions work hour. Based on these figures, the contacting the Rules Docket at the contained in Section 2 of Volume III–92, recurring inspection costs required by location provided under the caption dated July 1992, of the SID. Information AD 94–01–03 are estimated to be ADDRESSES. collection requirements contained in this $21,720 per airplane, or $12,336,960 for regulation have been approved by the Office the affected U.S. fleet. List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39 of Management and Budget (OMB) under the The recurring inspection procedures Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of added to the program by this proposed safety, Safety. 1980 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.) and have been AD action would not add any new assigned OMB Control Number 2120–0056. additional economic burden on affected The Proposed Amendment Note 1: Volume II, dated April 1991, of the operators since certain inspections Accordingly, pursuant to the SID is comprised of the following: authority delegated to me by the would be added while others would be Revision deleted. Administrator, the Federal Aviation Volume designation level shown Based on the figures discussed above, Administration proposes to amend part on volume the cost impact of this AD is estimated 39 of the Federal Aviation Regulations to be $12,382,560 for the first year, and (14 CFR part 39) as follows: Volume II±10/20 ...... 3 $12,336,960 for each year thereafter. Volume II±20/30 ...... 4 These cost impact figures discussed PART 39ÐAIRWORTHINESS Volume II±40 ...... 3 Volume II±50 ...... 3 above is based on assumptions that no DIRECTIVES operator has yet accomplished any of 1. The authority citation for part 39 Note 2: NDI inspections accomplished in the proposed requirements of this AD continues to read as follows: accordance with the following Volume II of action. However, it can be reasonably be the SID provide acceptable methods for Authority: 49 USC 106(g), 40101, 40113, assumed that the majority of the affected accomplishing the inspections required by 44701. operators have already initiated the SID this paragraph: program (as required by AD 94–03–01). § 39.13 [Amended] Additionally, the number of required Revision Date of re- 2. Section 39.13 is amended by Volume designation level vision work hours for each proposed removing amendment 39–8807 (59 FR inspection (and for the SID program), as 6538, February 11, 1994), and by adding Volume II±10/20 .... 3 ...... Apr. 1991. indicated above, is presented as if the a new airworthiness directive (AD), to Volume II±10/20 .... 2 ...... Apr. 1990. accomplishment of those actions were read as follows: Volume II±10/20 .... 1 ...... June 1989. to be conducted as ‘‘stand alone’’ Volume II/20 ...... Original .... Nov. 1987. actions. However, in actual practice, McDonnell Douglas: Docket 94–NM–195– Volume II±20/30 .... 4 ...... Apr. 1991. these actions for the most part will be AD. Supersedes AD 94–03–01, Volume II±20/30 .... 3 ...... Apr. 1990. Amendment 39–8807. accomplished coincidentally or in Volume II±20/30 .... 2 ...... June 1989. combination with normally scheduled Applicability: Model DC–9–10, ¥20, ¥30, Volume II±20/30 .... 1 ...... Nov. 1987. ¥40, ¥50, and C–9 (military) series Volume II±40 ...... 3 ...... Apr. 1991. airplane inspections and other airplanes; certificated in any category. maintenance program tasks. Therefore, Volume II±40 ...... 2 ...... Apr. 1990. Compliance: Required as indicated, unless Volume II±40 ...... 1 ...... June 1989. the actual number of necessary accomplished previously. Volume II±40 ...... Original .... Nov. 1987. additional work hours will be minimal To ensure the continuing structural Volume II±50 ...... 3 ...... Apr. 1991. in many instances. Further, any cost integrity of these airplanes, accomplish the Volume II±50 ...... 2 ...... Apr. 1990. associated with special airplane following: Volume II±50 ...... 1 ...... June 1989. scheduling can be expected to be (a) Within 6 months after March 14, 1994 Volume II±50 ...... Original .... Nov. 1987. (the effective date of AD 94–03–01, minimal. amendment 39–8807), incorporate a revision The regulations proposed herein into the FAA-approved maintenance (b) Within 6 months after the effective date would not have substantial direct effects inspection program which provides for of this AD, replace the revision of the FAA- on the States, on the relationship inspection(s) of the Principal Structural approved maintenance inspection program between the national government and Elements (PSE) defined in McDonnell required by paragraph (a) of this AD, with a the States, or on the distribution of Douglas Report No. L26–008, ‘‘DC–9 revision that provides for inspection(s) of the Supplemental Inspection Document (SID),’’ PSE’s defined in McDonnell Douglas Report power and responsibilities among the No. L26–008, ‘‘DC–9 Supplemental various levels of government. Therefore, Section 2 of Volume I of Revision 3, dated April 1991, in accordance with Section 2 of Inspection Document (SID),’’ Section 2 of in accordance with Executive Order Volume III–92, dated July 1992, of the SID. Volume I of McDonnell Douglas Report No. 12612, it is determined that this (1) Visual inspections of all PSE’s on L26–008, ‘‘DC–9 Supplemental Inspection proposal would not have sufficient airplanes listed in Volume III–92, dated July Document (SID),’’ Revision 4, dated July federalism implications to warrant the 1992, of the SID planning data, are required 1993, in accordance with Section 2 of preparation of a Federalism Assessment. by the fleet leader-operator sampling (FLOS) Volume III–95, dated September 1995, of the For the reasons discussed above, I program at least once during the interval SID. certify that this proposed regulation (1) between the start date (SDATE) and the end Note 3: Operators should note that certain date (EDATE) established for each PSE. visual inspections of FLOS PSE’s that were is not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ previously specified in earlier revisions of under Executive Order 12866; (2) is not These visual inspections are defined in Section 3 of Volume II, dated April 1991, of Volume III of the SID are no longer specified a ‘‘significant rule’’ under the DOT the SID, and are required only for those in Volume III–95 of the SID. Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 airplanes that have not been inspected (1) Prior to reaching the threshold (Nth), but FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and (3) if previously in accordance with Section 2 of no earlier than one-half of the threshold (Nth/ promulgated, will not have a significant Volume II, dated April 1991, of the SID. 2), specified for all PSE’s listed in Volume 640 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 6 / Tuesday, January 9, 1996 / Proposed Rules

III–95, dated September 1995, of the SID, maintenance inspection program that is friction and jamming between the fin inspect each PSE sample in accordance with required by this AD should include a damage and the rudder and subsequent reduced the NDI procedures set forth in Section 2 of tolerance assessment for that PSE. controllability of the airplane. Volume II, dated July 1993. Thereafter, repeat (d) An alternative method of compliance or DATES: the inspection for that PSE at intervals not to adjustment of the compliance time that Comments must be received by exceed DNDI/2 of the NDI procedure that is provides an acceptable level of safety may be February 20, 1996. specified in Volume III–95, dated September used if approved by the Manager, Los ADDRESSES: Submit comments in 1995, of the SID. Angeles ACO. Operators shall submit their triplicate to the Federal Aviation (2) The NDI techniques set forth in Section requests through an appropriate FAA 2 of Volume II, dated July 1993, of the SID Administration (FAA), Transport Principal Maintenance Inspector, who may Airplane Directorate, ANM–103, provide acceptable methods for add comments and then send it to the accomplishing the inspections required by Manager, Los Angeles ACO. Alternative Attention: Rules Docket No. 95–NM– this paragraph. methods of compliance previously granted 121–AD, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., (3) All inspection results (negative or for AD 94–03–01, amendment 39–8807, Renton, Washington 98055–4056. positive) must be reported to McDonnell continue to be considered as acceptable Comments may be inspected at this Douglas, in accordance with the instructions alternative methods of compliance with this location between 9:00 a.m. and 3:00 contained in Section 2 of Volume III–95, amendment. p.m., Monday through Friday, except dated September 1995, of the SID. Note 7: Information concerning the Information collection requirements Federal holidays. existence of approved alternative methods of contained in this regulation have been The service information referenced in compliance with this AD, if any, may be approved by the Office of Management and the proposed rule may be obtained from obtained from the Manager, Los Angeles Budget (OMB) under the provisions of the SAAB Aircraft AB, SAAB Aircraft ACO. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980 (44 U.S.C. Product Support, S–581.88, Linko¨ping, 3501 et seq.) and have been assigned OMB (e) Special flight permits may be issued in Sweden. This information may be Control Number 2120–0056. accordance with sections 21.197 and 21.199 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR examined at the FAA, Transport Note 4: Volume II, dated July 1993, of the 21.197 and 21.199) to operate the airplane to Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind SID is comprised of the following: a location where the requirements of this AD Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington. can be accomplished. Revision FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Volume designation level shown Issued in Renton, Washington, on January Ruth Harder, Aerospace Engineer, on volume 3, 1996. Standardization Branch, ANM–113, Darrell M. Pederson, FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, Volume II±10/20 ...... 4 Acting Manager, Transport Airplane 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Volume II±20/30 ...... 5 Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. Volume II±40 ...... 4 Washington 98055–4056; telephone Volume II±50 ...... 4 [FR Doc. 96–262 Filed 1–08–96; 8:45 am] (206) 227–1721; fax (206) 227–1149 BILLING CODE 4910±13±U SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Note 5: NDI inspections accomplished in accordance with the following Volume II of Comments Invited 14 CFR Part 39 the SID provide acceptable methods for Interested persons are invited to accomplishing the inspections required by [Docket No. 95±NM±121±AD] this paragraph: participate in the making of the proposed rule by submitting such Airworthiness Directives; Saab Model Revision Date of re- written data, views, or arguments as Volume designation level vision SAAB SF340A and SAAB 340B they may desire. Communications shall AGENCY: Federal Aviation identify the Rules Docket number and Volume II±10/20 .... 4 ...... July 1993. Administration, DOT. be submitted in triplicate to the address Volume II±10/20 .... 3 ...... Apr. 1991. specified above. All communications ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking Volume II±10/20 .... 2 ...... Apr. 1990. received on or before the closing date Volume II±10/20 .... 1 ...... June 1989. (NPRM). Volume II/20 ...... Original .... Nov. 1987. for comments, specified above, will be Volume II±20/30 .... 5 ...... July 1993. SUMMARY: This document proposes the considered before taking action on the Volume II±20/30 .... 4 ...... Apr. 1991. adoption of a new airworthiness proposed rule. The proposals contained Volume II±20/30 .... 3 ...... Apr. 1990. directive (AD) that is applicable to in this notice may be changed in light Volume II±20/30 .... 2 ...... June 1989. certain Saab Model SAAB SF340A and of the comments received. Volume II±20/30 .... 1 ...... Nov. 1987. SAAB 340B series airplanes. This Comments are specifically invited on Volume II±40 ...... 4 ...... July 1993. proposal would require visual and dye the overall regulatory, economic, Volume II±40 ...... 3 ...... Apr. 1991. Volume II±40 ...... 2 ...... Apr. 1990. penetrant inspection(s) to detect cracks environmental, and energy aspects of Volume II±40 ...... 1 ...... June 1989. of the nose rib of the rudder, and stop the proposed rule. All comments Volume II±40 ...... Original .... Nov. 1987. drilling and blending of minor cracks. submitted will be available, both before Volume II±50 ...... 4 ...... July 1993. The proposal would also require and after the closing date for comments, Volume II±50 ...... 3 ...... Apr. 1991. replacement of the nose rib with a new in the Rules Docket for examination by Volume II±50 ...... 2 ...... Apr. 1990. nose rib and reinforcement of the nose interested persons. A report Volume II±50 ...... 1 ...... June 1989. rib, if estensive cracking is detected or summarizing each FAA-public contact Volume II±50 ...... Original .... Nov. 1987. if an operator elects to terminate the concerned with the substance of this repetitive inspections. This proposal is proposal will be filed in the Rules (c) Any cracked structure detected during Docket. the inspections required by either paragraph prompted by the result of an inspection (a) or (b) of this AD must be repaired before that revealed a cracked nose rib on the Commenters wishing the FAA to further flight, in accordance with a method front spar of the rudder due to vibration- acknowledge receipt of their comments approved by the Manager, Los Angeles related stress. The actions specified by submitted in response to this notice Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), FAA, the proposed AD are intended to must submit a self-addressed, stamped Transport Airplane Directorate. prevent such stress and cracking, which postcard on which the following Note 6: Requests for approval of any PSE could result in the deformation of the statement is made: ‘‘Comments to repair that would affect the FAA-approved nose rib; this condition may lead to Docket Number 95–NM–121–AD.’’ The Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 6 / Tuesday, January 9, 1996 / Proposed Rules 641 postcard will be date stamped and develop on other airplanes of the same The Proposed Amendment returned to the commenter. type design, the proposed AD would Accordingly, pursuant to the require visual and dye penetrant Availability of NPRMs authority delegated to me by the inspection(s) to detect cracks of the nose Administrator, the Federal Aviation Any person may obtain a copy of this rib of the rudder, and stop drilling and Administration proposes to amend part NPRM by submitting a request to the blending of minor cracks. The proposed 39 of the Federal Aviation Regulations FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, AD would also require replacement of (14 CFR part 39) as follows: ANM–103, Attention: Rules Docket No. the nose rib with a new nose rib and 95–NM–121–AD, 1601 Lind Avenue, reinforcement of the nose rib, if any PART 39ÐAIRWORTHINESS SW., Renton, Washington 98055–4056. extensive crack is detected or if an DIRECTIVES Discussion operator elects to terminate the repetitive inspections. The actions 1. The authority citation for part 39 The Luftfartsverket (LFV), which is would be required to be accomplished continues to read as follows: the airworthiness authority for Sweden, in accordance with the service bulletin Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40101, 40113, recently notified the FAA that an unsafe described previously. 44701. condition may exist on certain Saab Model SAAB SF340A and SAAB 340B The FAA estimates that 221 airplanes § 39.13 [Amended] series airplanes. The LFV advises that, of U.S. registry would be affected by this 2. Section 39.13 is amended by during a normal zonal inspection of one proposed AD, that it would take adding the following new airworthiness of these airplanes, a cracked nose rib approximately 4 work hours per directive: airplane to accomplish the proposed was found on the front spar of the Saab Aircraft AB: Docket 95–NM–121–AD. rudder. The cause of such cracking has inspection, and that the average labor rate is $60 per work hour. Based on Applicability: Model SAAB SF340A series been attributed to vibration-related airplanes having serial numbers (S/N) 004 stress to the nose rib. This condition, if these figures, the cost impact of the through 159 inclusive, and Model SAAB not corrected, could result in cracking inspection proposed AD on U.S. 340B having S/N’s 160 through 369 and subsequent deformation of the nose operators is estimated to be $53,040, or inclusive; certificated in any category. rib; this condition consequently may $240 per airplane, per inspection cycle. Note 1: This AD applies to each airplane lead to friction and jamming between The cost impact figure discussed identified in the preceding applicability the fin and the rudder, and subsequent above is based on assumptions that no provision, regardless of whether it has been reduced controllability of the airplane. operator has yet accomplished any of modified, altered, or repaired in the area Saab has issued Service Bulletin 340– subject to the requirements of this AD. For the proposed requirements of this AD airplanes that have been modified, altered, or 55–032, dated May 22, 1995, which action, and that no operator would repaired so that the performance of the describes procedures for visual and dye accomplish those actions in the future if requirements of this AD is affected, the penetrant inspection(s) to detect cracks this AD were not adopted. owner/operator must use the authority of the nose rib of the rudder, and stop The regulations proposed herein provided in paragraph (b) of this AD to drilling and blending of minor cracks. request approval from the FAA. This would not have substantial direct effects approval may address either no action, if the The service bulletin also describes on the States, on the relationship procedures for replacement of the nose current configuration eliminates the unsafe between the national government and condition; or different actions necessary to rib with a new nose rib and the States, or on the distribution of address the unsafe condition described in reinforcement of the nose rib, if any power and responsibilities among the this AD. Such a request should include an extensive crack is detected or if an various levels of government. Therefore, assessment of the effect of the changed operator elects to terminate the in accordance with Executive Order configuration on the unsafe condition repetitive inspections. The addressed by this AD. In no case does the 12612, it is determined that this presence of any modification, alteration, or reinforcement will thicken the nose rib, proposal would not have sufficient and, thus, dampen the vibration. The repair remove any airplane from the federalism implications to warrant the applicability of this AD. LFV classified this service bulletin as preparation of a Federalism Assessment. mandatory and issued Swedish Compliance: Required as indicated, unless For the reasons discussed above, I accomplished previously. airworthiness directive (SAD) 1–074, To prevent vibration-related stress and effective date May 22, 1995, in order to certify that this proposed regulation (1) is not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ cracking and consequent deformation of the assure the continued airworthiness of nose rib, which could result in friction and these airplanes in Sweden. under Executive Order 12866; (2) is not jamming between the fin and the rudder and This airplane model is manufactured a ‘‘significant rule’’ under the DOT subsequent reduced controllability of the in Sweden and is type certificated for Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 airplane, accomplish the following: operation in the United States under the FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and (3) if (a) Prior to the accumulation of 2,400 total provisions of section 21.29 of the promulgated, will not have a significant flight hours, or within 800 flight hours after Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR economic impact, positive or negative, the effective date of this AD, whichever occurs later, perform a visual and dye 21.29) and the applicable bilateral on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria of the Regulatory penetrant inspection to detect cracks of the airworthiness agreement. Pursuant to nose rib of the rudder, in accordance with this bilateral airworthiness agreement, Flexibility Act. A copy of the draft Saab Service Bulletin 340–55–032, dated the LFV has kept the FAA informed of regulatory evaluation prepared for this May 22, 1995. the situation described above. The FAA action is contained in the Rules Docket. (1) If no cracks are detected, repeat the has examined the findings of the LFV, A copy of it may be obtained by inspection thereafter at intervals not to reviewed all available information, and contacting the Rules Docket at the exceed 800 flight hours, or replace the nose determined that AD action is necessary location provided under the caption rib with a new nose rib and reinforce it, in ADDRESSES. accordance with the service bulletin. for products of this type design that are Accomplishment of the replacement and certificated for operation in the United List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39 reinforcement constitutes terminating action States. for this AD. Since an unsafe condition has been Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation (2) If any minor crack [less than 25.4 mm identified that is likely to exist or safety, Safety. (1.0 inch) long] is detected, prior to further 642 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 6 / Tuesday, January 9, 1996 / Proposed Rules flight, stop drill and blend the crack in reinforcement constitutes terminating action obtained from the Standardization Branch, accordance with the service bulletin. Repeat for this AD. ANM–113. the inspection thereafter at intervals not to (b) An alternative method of compliance or (c) Special flight permits may be issued in exceed 800 flight hours, or replace the nose adjustment of the compliance time that accordance with sections 21.197 and 21.199 rib with a new nose rib and reinforce it, in provides an acceptable level of safety may be of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR accordance with the service bulletin. used if approved by the Manager, 21.197 and 21.199) to operate the airplane to Standardization Branch, ANM–113, FAA, Accomplishment of the replacement and a location where the requirements of this AD Transport Airplane Directorate. Operators reinforcement constitutes terminating action can be accomplished. shall submit their requests through an for this AD. Issued in Renton, Washington, on January appropriate FAA Principal Maintenance 3, 1996. (3) If any extensive crack [greater than or Inspector, who may add comments and then equal to 25.4 mm (1.0 inch) long] is detected, send it to the Manager, Standardization Darrell M. Pederson, prior to further flight, replace the nose rib Branch, ANM–113. Acting Manager, Transport Airplane with a new nose rib and reinforce it, in Note 2: Information concerning the Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. accordance with the service bulletin. existence of approved alternative methods of [FR Doc. 96–263 Filed 1–8–96; 8:45 am] Accomplishment of this replacement and compliance with this AD, if any, may be BILLING CODE 4910±13±U 643

Notices Federal Register Vol. 61, No. 6

Tuesday, January 9, 1996

This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER (703) 696–5667, or via INTERNET: Strategic Environmental Research and contains documents other than rules or [email protected] Development Program, Scientific proposed rules that are applicable to the Advisory Board public. Notices of hearings and investigations, FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: committee meetings, agency decisions and Mr. Edmond J. Collier, Deputy Director ACTION: Notice. rulings, delegations of authority, filing of for External Affairs, National Security petitions and applications and agency In accordance with Section 10(a)(2) of Education Program, 1101 Wilson statements of organization and functions are the Federal Advisory Committee Act Boulevard, Suite 1210, Arlington, examples of documents appearing in this (Pub. L. 92–463), announcement is Virginia 22209–2248; (703) 696–1991 section. made of the following Committee Electronic mail address: meeting: [email protected]. DATE OF MEETING: DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE February 6, 1996 from Dated: January 3, 1996. 0800 to approximately 1745 and Bureau of Export Administration L.M. Bynum, February 7, 1996 from 0800 to Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison approximately 1600. President's Export Council, Officer, Department of Defense. PLACE: Radisson Plaza Hotel at Mark Subcommittee on Export [FR Doc. 96–231 Filed 1–8–96; 8:45 am] Center, 5000 Seminary Road, Administration; Notice of Meeting BILLING CODE 5000±04±M Alexandria, VA. Change MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED: Research and Development proposals and Federal Register citation of previous Defense Intelligence Agency, Scientific continuing projects requesting Strategic announcement: p. 58596, November 28, Advisory Board Closed Meeting 1995. Environmental Research and Development Program funds in excess Previously announced time of AGENCY: Department of Defense, Defense of $1M will be reviewed. meeting: 2:00 p.m., January 12, 1996. Intelligence Agency. New time of meeting: 1:30 p.m., This meeting is open to the public. February 8, 1996, Room 4830. ACTION: Notice. Any interested person may attend, appear before, or file statements with January 4, 1996. SUMMARY: Pursuant to the provisions of the Scientific Advisory Board at the Sue Eckert, Subsection (d) of Section 10 of Public time and in the manner permitted by the Assistant Secretary for Export Law 92–463, as amended by Section 5 Board. Administration. of Public Law 94–409, notice is hereby FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. [FR Doc. 96–302 Filed 1–8–96; 8:45 am] given that a closed meeting of the DIA Kimberly Kay, 8000 Westpark Drive, BILLING CODE 3510±DT±M Scientific Advisory Board has been Suite 400, McLean, Va 22102, or scheduled as follows: telephone 703–506–1400 extension 552. DATES: January 23–24, 1996 (830 to 430). Dated: January 4, 1996. DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE Patricia L. Toppings, ADDRESSES: The Defense Intelligence Agency, 200 MacDill Blvd., Washington, Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison Office of the Secretary Officer, Department of Defense. DC 20340–5100. [FR Doc. 96–279 Filed 1–8–96; 8:45 am] Third Annual National Security FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Education Program (NSEP) BILLING CODE 5000±04±M Institutional Grants Competition Mr. William H.G. Wheeler, Executive Secretary, DIA Scientific Advisory AGENCY: Department of Defense, Board, Washington, D.C. 20340–1328 Department of Defense Wage National Security Education Program (202) 231–4930. Committee; Notice of Closed Meetings (NSEP). SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The entire Pursuant to the provisions of section ACTION: Notice. meeting is devoted to the discussion of 10 of Public Law 92–463, the Federal Advisory Committee Act, notice is SUMMARY: classified information as defined in The NSEP announces the hereby given that closed meetings of the opening of its Third Annual Section 552b(c)(I), Title 5 of the U.S. Code and therefore will be closed to the Department of Defense Wage Committee Competition for Grants to U.S. will be held on January 9, 1996; January Institutions of Higher Education. public. The Board will receive briefings on and discuss several current critical 16, 1996; January 23, 1996; and January DATES: Grants Solicitations intelligence issues and advise the 30, 1996, at 10:00 a.m. in Room A105, (applications) will be available Director, DIA, on related scientific and The Nash Building, 1400 Key beginning Monday, February 5, 1995. technical matters. Boulevard, Rosslyn, Virginia. Preliminary Proposals are due Friday, Under the provisions of section 10(d) April 19, 1996. Dated: January 4, 1996. of Public Law 92–463, the Department ADDRESSES: Request copies of the Patricia L. Toppings, of Defense has determined that the solicitations (applications) from NSEP, Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison meetings meet the criteria to close Institutional Grants, Rosslyn P.O. Box Officer, Department of Defense. meetings to the public because the 20010, 1101 Wilson Blvd., Suite 1210, [FR Doc. 96–280 Filed 1–8–96; 8:45 am] matters to be considered are related to Arlington, VA 22209–2248, by FAX to BILLING CODE 5000±04±M internal rules and practices of the 644 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 6 / Tuesday, January 9, 1996 / Notices

Department of Defense and the detailed control facilities, including a detention DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY wage data to be considered were basin location and a concrete lined obtained from officials of private flood control channel; and alternative Federal Energy Regulatory establishments with a guarantee that the alignments of the Basilone Road Bridge. Commission data will be held in confidence. Major environmental issues that will However, members of the public who [Docket No. RP96±96±000] may wish to do so are invited to submit be addressed in the EIS include air quality, water quality, traffic, utilities, material in writing to the chairman ANR Pipeline Co; Notice of Proposed endangered species and cultural concerning matters believed to be Changes in FERC Gas Tariff deserving of the Committee’s attention. resources. This notification was delayed due to The Marine Corps will initiate a January 3, 1996. an administrative oversight. Additional scoping process for the purpose of Take notice that on December 27, information concerning the meetings determining the extent of issues to be 1995, ANR Pipeline Company (ANR) may be obtained by writing to the addressed and identifying the Chairman, Department of Defense Wage tendered for filing as part of its FERC significant issues related to this action. Gas Tariff, Second Revised Volume No. Committee, 4000 Defense Pentagon, The Marine Corps will hold a public Washington, DC 20301–4000. 1, the following tariff sheets, to become scoping meeting on January 25, 1996, effective on the dates shown: Dated: January 4, 1996. beginning at 4:00 pm, at the San Rafael L.M. Bynum, Elementary School, 1616 San Rafael Effective March 1, 1995 Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison Drive, Oceanside, CA. This meeting will First Revised Ninth Revised Sheet No. 18 Officer, Department of Defense. be advertised in area newspapers. Effective May 3, 1995 [FR Doc. 96–281 Filed 1–8–96; 8:45 am] A brief presentation will precede Second Revised Ninth Revised Sheet No. 18 BILLING CODE 5000±04±M request for public comment. Marine ANR states that the purpose of the Corps representatives will be available instant filing is to file revised transition Department of the Navy at this meeting to receive comments cost surcharges that take into from the public regarding issues of consideration the application of the Notice of Intent To Prepare An concern to the public. It is important Commission’s Natural policy on the Environmental Impact Statement for that federal, state, and local agencies order of discounting, effective March 1, Construction of Flood Protection and interested individuals take this 1995, pursuant to orders issued in Facilities Along the Santa Margarita opportunity to identify environmental Docket No. RP94–43–000, et al. The River and Replacement of the Basilone concerns that should be addressed compliance filing results in lower Road Bridge at Marine Corps Base during the preparation of the EIS. In the transition cost surcharges for the Camp Pendleton, CA interest of available time, each speaker applicable periods than contained in the Pursuant to the National will be asked to limit their oral tariff sheets proposed to be superseded. comments to five minutes. Environmental Policy Act as Any person desiring to be heard or to implemented by the Council on Agencies and the public are also protest this filing should file a motion Environmental Quality regulations (40 invited and encouraged to provide to intervene or protest with the Federal CFR Parts 1500–1508), the U.S. Marine written comment on scoping issues in Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 Corps intends to prepare an addition to, or in lieu of, oral comments First Street, N.E., Washington, D.C. Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) at the public meeting. To be most 20426, in accordance with 18 CFR to evaluate the environmental effects of helpful, scoping comments should 385.214 and 385.211 of the construction of flood protection clearly describe specific issues or topics facilities and replacement of the Commission’s Rules and Regulations. which the commentor believes the EIS Pursuant to Section 154.210 of the Basilone Road Bridge at Marine Corps should address. Written statements and Base (MCB) Camp Pendleton. During the Commission’s Regulations, all such or questions regarding the scoping winter of 1993, heavy rains and motions or protests must be filed not process should be mailed to: stormwater runoff resulted in the Santa later than 12 days after the date of the Margarita River flooding facilities at Commanding Officer, Southwest filing noted above. Protests will be MCB Camp Pendleton, including Division, Naval Facilities Engineering considered by the Commission in Marine Corps Air Station (MCAS) Camp Command, 1220 Pacific Coast Highway, determining the appropriate action to be Pendleton. The flood also destroyed the San Diego, CA 92132–5187, (Attn: Ms. taken, but will not serve to make Basilone Road Bridge, a transportation Melanie Ault, Code 232MA), phone protestants parties to the proceeding. corridor which spans the Santa number (619) 532–3355. All comments Any person wishing to become a party Margarita River. must be received no later than February must file a motion to intervene. Copies The proposed action involves 12, 1996. of this filing are on file with the construction of a levee and stormwater Dated: January 3, 1996. Commission and are available for public control measures to prevent flooding By direction of the Commandant of the inspection in the Public Reference from the Santa Margarita River Marine Corps. Room. damaging facilities at MCB/MCAS Camp Lois D. Cashell, Pendleton, and construction of a new Kim G. Weirick, two-lane bridge to replace the bridge Acting Head, Land Use and Military Ssecretary. destroyed by the flood. Construction Branch, Facilities and Services [FR Doc. 96–237 Filed 1–8–96; 8:45 am] Alternatives to be addressed in the Division, Installations and Logistics BILLING CODE 6717±01±M EIS will focus on methods of Department. implementing flood protection [FR Doc. 96–257 Filed 1–8–96; 8:45 am] measures, including different levee BILLING CODE 3810±FF±P alignments; alternative stormwater Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 6 / Tuesday, January 9, 1996 / Notices 645

[Docket Nos. RP94±96±015 and RP94±213± [Docket No. RP96±95±000] on February 1, 1996, and tendered for 012 (Consolidated)] filing the revised tariff sheets to its CNG Transmission Corp.; Notice of FERC Gas Tariff, Second Revised CNG Transmission Corp.; Notice of Proposed Changes in FERC Gas Tariff Volume No. 1 and Original Volume No. Proposed Changes in FERC Gas Tariff January 3, 1996. 2, listed on Appendix A to the filing. The revised tariff sheets on Appendix A January 3, 1996. Take notice that on December 27, 1995, CNG Transmission Corporation bear an issue date of December 29, 1995, Take notice that on December 29, (CNG), tendered for filing as part of its and a proposed effective date of 1995, CNG Transmission Corporation FERC Gas Tariff, Second Revised February 1, 1996. Columbia states that it is also (CNG), tendered for filing as part of its Volume No. 1, the following revised tendered for filing the revised tariff FERC Gas Tariff, Second Revised tariff sheets, with an effective date of sheets listed on Appendix B to the Volume No. 1, the following tariff February 1, 1996: sheets: filing, which bear an issue date of Sixteenth Revised Sheet No. 32 December 29, 1995, and a proposed Substitute Second Rev. Sheet No. 106 Sixteenth Revised Sheet No. 33 effective date of may 1, 1996. Columbia Substitute Third Rev. Sheet No. 107 CNG states that the purpose of its states that it is not moving the Substitute Original Sheet No. 107A filing is twofold: first, CNG is Appendix B tariff sheets into effect at Substitute First Rev. Sheet No. 118 submitting its quarterly revision of the this time, but is reserving the right to Substitute Second Rev. Sheet No. 120 Stranded Cost Surcharge, effective for move them into effect as of May 1, 1996, Substitute Original Sheet No. 120A the three-month period commencing or at any time thereafter. Columbia Substitute Third Rev. Sheet No. 121 February 1, 1996; second, CNG is states that the revised filing is being Substitute Second Rev. Sheet No. 135 made in accordance with the Substitute First Rev. Sheet No. 319 providing the annual reconciliation of the Stranded Account No. 858 costs, as Commission’s suspension order issued CNG requests an effective date of required by Section 18.2.B.4 of the August 31, 1995 in this proceeding and January 1, 1996, for these tariff sheets. General Terms and Conditions of CNG’s 18 CFR 154.206. Columbia states that in accordance CNG states that the purpose of its filing tariff. CNG states that copies of this letter of with an agreement between Columbia, is to comply with a December 21, 1995, Commission Staff and intervenors, the Letter Order in the captioned transmittal and enclosures are being mailed to CNG’s customers and Appendix A tariff sheets reflect a 25% proceeding. CNG states that it is filing reduction of the filed-for increase various tariff sheets that address the interested state commissions. Any person desiring to be heard or to (including the impact of the proposed relationship of CNG’s gathering and protest this filing should file a motion Stranded Facilities Charge (SFC) and mainline transportation services. In to intervene or protest with the Federal Electric Power Cost Adjustment (EPCA)) particular, CNG has inserted language to Energy Regulatory Commission, to all rates except the gathering and permit new Part 284 transportation Washington, DC, 20426, in accordance processing rates. However, Columbia customers to elect whether or not to with 18 CFR 385.214 and 385.211 of the states that the gathering and processing obtain an MARQ at CNG’s Appalachian Commission’s Rules and Regulations. rates set forth on the Appendix A tariff Aggregation Points. Pursuant to Section 154.210 of the sheets reflect the lower May 1, 1996, CNG states that copies of this letter of Commission’s Regulations, all such rates for those services. The Appendix A tariff sheets also reflect the correction transmittal and enclosures are being motions or protests must be filed not of a classification error, and revisions to mailed to the parties to the captioned later than 12 days after the date of the the Stranded Facilities Charge and proceedings. filing noted above. Protests will be considered by the Commission in Section 46 of the General Terms and Any person desiring to protest this determining the appropriate action to be Conditions of Columbia’s tariff required filing should file a protest with the taken, but will not serve to make by the suspension order. The Appendix Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, protestants parties to the proceeding. B tariff sheets reflect the correction of a classification error, the changes required 888 First Street, N.E., Washington, DC, Any person wishing to become a party by the suspension order, and an 20426, in accordance with §§ 385.211 of must file a motion to intervene. Copies adjustment removing certain base the Commission’s Rules and of this filing are on file with the period expenses in accordance with Regulations. Pursuant to Section Commission and are available for public Columbia’s recent settlement in Docket 154.210 of the Commission’s inspection in the Public Reference No. GP94–02, et al. The filing and the Regulations, all such protests must be Room. Appendix A and Appendix B tariff filed not later than 12 days after the date Lois D. Cashell, of the filing noted above. Protests will sheets are explained in greater detail in Secretary. the transmittal letter accompanying the be considered by the Commission in [FR Doc. 96–239 Filed 1–8–96; 8:45 am] determining the appropriate action to be filing. BILLING CODE 6717±01±M Columbia states that copies of its taken, but will not serve to make filing have been mailed to all firm protestants parties to the proceeding. [Docket No. RP95±408±004] customers, interested interruptible Copies of this filing are on file with the customers and affected state regulatory Commission and are available for public Columbia Gas Transmission Corp.; commissions. inspection in the Public Reference Notice of Proposed Changes in FERC Any person desiring to protest said Room. Gas Tariff filing should file a protest with the Lois D. Cashell, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Secretary. January 3, 1996. 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC [FR Doc. 96–238 Filed 1–8–96; 8:45 am] Take notice that on December 29, 20426, in accordance with Rule 211 of 1995, Columbia Gas Transmission the Commission’s Rules of Practice and BILLING CODE 6717±01±M Corporation (Columbia) filed a motion Procedure. Pursuant to Section 154.210 to place its suspended rates into effect of the Commission’s Regulations, all 646 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 6 / Tuesday, January 9, 1996 / Notices such protests must be filed not later Protests will be considered by the 888 First Street, N.E., Washington, D.C. than 12 days after the date of the filing Commission in determining the 20426, in accordance with the Rule 211 noted above. Protests will be considered appropriate action to be taken, but will of the Commission’s Rules of Practice by the Commission in determining the not serve to make protestants parties to and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211). All appropriate action to be taken, but will the proceeding. Any person wishing to such protests must be filed on or before not serve to make protestants parties to become a party must file a motion to January 10, 1996. Protests will be the proceedings. Copies of Columbia’s intervene. Copies of this filing are on considered by the Commission in filings are on file with the Commission file with the Commission and are determining the appropriate action to be and are available for public inspection available for public inspection in the taken, but will not serve to make in the Public Reference Room. Public Reference Room. protestants parties to the proceeding. Lois D. Cashell, Lois D. Cashell, Copies of Columbia Gulf’s filings are on Secretary. Secretary. file with the Commission and are [FR Doc. 96–240 Filed 1–8–96; 8:45 am] [FR Doc. 96–241 Filed 1–8–96; 8:45 am] available for public inspection in the Public Reference Room. BILLING CODE 6717±01±M BILLING CODE 6717±01±M Lois D. Cashell, Secretary [Docket No. RP96±94±000] [Docket No. RP90±107±027] [FR Doc. 96–242 Filed 1–8–96; 8:45 am] Columbia Gas Transmission Corp.; Columbia Gulf Transmission BILLING CODE 6717±01±M Notice of Proposed Changes in FERC Company; Notice of Refund Report Gas Tariff [Docket No. TQ96±2±23±000] January 3, 1996. January 3, 1996. Take notice that on December 29, Eastern Shore Natural Gas Company; Take notice that on December 26, 1995, Columbia Gulf Transmission Notice of Proposed Changes in FERC 1995, Columbia Gas Transmission Company (Columbia Gulf) tendered for Gas Tariff Corporation (Columbia) tendered for filing with the Federal Energy filing as part of its FERC Gas Tariff, Regulatory Commission (Commission) January 3, 1996. Second Revised Volume No. 1, the its Refund Report made to comply with Take notice that on December 27, following tariff sheets, to become the Commission’s order dated April 16, 1995, Eastern Shore Natural Gas effective February 1, 1996. 1992, the April 17, 1995, Offer of Company (ESNG) tendered for filing Settlement filed in Docket Nos. RP90– Title Page certain revised tariff sheets in the above 107, et al. (Customer Settlement) as captioned docket as part of its FERC Gas First Revised Sheet No. 99A approved by the Commission on June Tariff, First Revised Volume No. 1, with First Revised Sheet No. 99B 15, 1995, in Columbia Gulf a proposed effective date of January 1, This filing comprises Columbia’s Transmission Co., 71 FERC ¶ 61,377 1996. supplemental close out filing with (1995). Eastern Shore states that the revised respect to its Account No. 191 pursuant Columbia Gulf states that the report tariff sheets included herein are being to Section 39 of the General Terms and shows that on November 28, 1995, filed pursuant to Section 21 of the Conditions (GTC) of its FERC Gas Tariff, Columbia Gulf made a lump sum refund General Terms and Conditions of Second Revised Volume No. 1. GTC to its customers pertaining to the above ESNG’s Gas Tariff to reflect changes in Section 39, ‘‘Account No. 191 referenced proceeding for the period ESNG’s jurisdictional rates. The sales Reconciliation Mechanism,’’ provides November 30, 1990 through November rates set forth herein reflect an increase for Columbia’s refund to or recovery 30, 1991, in the amount of of $0.5390 per dt in the Commodity from certain customers of any over $3,242,420.00. Article III of the Charge, as measured against ESNG’s recovered or under recovered balance in Customer Settlement provided for the Out-Of-Cycle Quarterly Purchased Gas Columbia’s Account No. 191 as a result partial payment of refund in Columbia Adjustment filing, Docket No. TQ96–1– of implementing Order No. 636. This Gulf Docket No. RP90–107 within 30 23–000, et al., filed on December 1, filing also satisfies the reporting days after the date of an initial order of 1995. requirement contained in GTC Section United States Bankruptcy Court for the The commodity purchased gas cost 39.5 and prior Commission orders, that District of Delaware (Bankruptcy Court) adjustment reflects ESNG’s projected Columbia submit a report detailing its approving such partial payment. The cost of gas for the month of January 1, Account No. 191 balance, reflecting Bankruptcy Court issued an order 1996 through January 31, 1996, and has adjustments from March 1, 1995 approving a partial payment on August been calculated using its best estimate through December 31, 1995. As 4, 1995. Columbia Gulf states that on available gas supplies to meet discussed therein, this filing comprises partial payment was paid on August 28, ESNG’s anticipated purchase a net credit to the Account No. 191 of 1995, and was the subject of a prior requirements. The increased gas costs in $847,459. refund report. In accordance with the this filing are a result of higher prices Any person desiring to be heard or Customer Settlement, on November 28, being paid to producers/suppliers under protest said filing should file a motion 1995, Columbia Gulf refunded to ESNG’s market-responsive gas supply to intervene or protest with the Federal Supporting Parties under the Customer contracts. Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 Settlement their respective shares of the ESNG respectfully requests waiver of First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426, remaining principal amount of the Commission’s thirty (30) day notice in accordance with §§ 385.214 and $2,350,478 of the Docket No. RP90–107 requirement so as to permit it to place 385.211 of the Commission’s Rules of refund plus interest of $891,942 the subject rates into effect on January Practice and Procedure. Pursuant to calculated in accordance with 18 CFR 1, 1996, as proposed. ESNG is unable to Section 154.210 of the Commission’s 154.501. meet the thirty (30) day notice regulations, all such motion or protests Any person desiring to protest said requirements due to the fact that the must be filed not later than 12 days after filing should file a protest with the normal purchasing of gas supplies from the date of the filing noted above. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, producers/suppliers is negotiated five Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 6 / Tuesday, January 9, 1996 / Notices 647 working days before the end of the Third Revised Sheet No. 111 (Amendment) to its original application month (for the next month’s supply). Third Revised Sheet No. 113 in Docket No. CP95–565–000, which The normal time frame to order gas Sub Alt First Revised Sheet No. 117 was filed pursuant to Section 7(c) of the supply for the next month does not give Substitute First Revised Sheet Nos. 118–119 Natural Gas Act, the purpose of which Substitute First Revised Sheet No. 309 is to: (1) Amend the application by (a) ESNG any flexibility in order to make a Substitute First Revised Sheet No. 362 filing in time for the ‘‘notice Substitute Original Sheet Nos. 365–367 withdrawing the request for advance requirement’’ when gas prices spike Sheet Nos. 368 through 399 Commission approval of recovery upward (from projected) as they have through jurisdictional rates of the for the month of January, 1996. The Third Revised Volume No. 2 undepreciated costs of the storage Commission’s waiver of the thirty (30) Sub Alt 36th Revised Sheet No. 1–D.2 reservoir and return thereon in the event day notice requirement in the case of Twenty-Ninth Revised Sheet No. 1–D.3 of reservoir damage, and (b) indicating this instant filing would allow for a El Paso states that it is filing pursuant that Equitrans proposes to withdraw 400 more accurate recovery of ESNG’s costs to Section 4(e) of the Natural Gas Act MMcf of natural gas during the three- and mitigate the deferred commodity and Section 154.206 of the year period in which it proposes to costs which would occur in the absence Commission’s Regulations under the inject up to 300 MMcf of nitrogen; and of such waiver. Natural Gas Act a motion to place into (2) supplement its application with (a) ESNG states that copies of the filing effect on January 1, 1996, a change in assurances of service continuation have been served upon its jurisdictional rates for natural gas transportation despite any such reservoir damage, (b) customers and interested State service. information requested by certain parties Commissions. El Paso states that on June 30, 1995, that participated in a technical Any person desiring to be heard or to at Docket No. RP95–363–000, it filed conference held on September 15, 1995, protest said filing should file a motion with the Commission a notice of change and (c) a brief summary of the points to intervene or protest with the Federal in rates for natural gas transportation made by the speakers at the technical Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 service to become effective August 1, conference along with copies of slides First Street, N.E., Washington, D.C. 1995. El Paso states that by order issued that were shown, all as more fully set 20426, in accordance with Rule 211 and July 26, 1995, at Docket No. RP95–363– fourth in the application which is on Rule 214 of the Commission’s Rules of 000, the Commission conditionally file with the Commission and open to Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 accepted the tariff sheets, suspended public inspection. and 385.214). Pursuant to Section their effectiveness for five months to Equitrans states that, based on the 154.210 of the Commission’s become effective January 1, 1996, concerns expressed by its customers, Regulations, all such motions or protests subject to refund, and established Equitrans has reexamined the risks and must be filed not later than 12 days after hearing and settlement procedures. remediation strategies for the project the date of the filing noted above. El Paso states that the instant motion and has determined that the risk of Protests will be considered by the places those suspended tariff sheets into damage being sustained at the Shirley Commission in determining the effect. storage reservoir as the result of appropriate action to be taken, but will Any person desiring to protest this injecting nitrogen under the controlled not serve to make protestants parties to filing should file a protest with the conditions carefully developed for the the proceeding. Any person wishing to Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, project is de minimis. To allay the become a party must file a motion to 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC concerns expressed by certain intervene. Copies of this filing are on 20426, in accordance with Section intervenor-customers about their rights file with the Commission and are 385.211 of the Commission’s Rules and to challenge future rate treatment of available for public inspection. Regulations. Pursuant to Section Shirley storage costs, Equitrans states Lois D. Cashell, 154.210 of the Commission’s that it hereby foregoes its request for rate recovery treatment of such costs. Secretary. Regulations, all such protests must be Equitrans states that in the unlikely [FR Doc. 96–243 Filed 1–8–96; 8:45 am] filed not later than 12 days after the date of the filing noted above. Protests will event that the injection of nitrogen BILLING CODE 6717±01±M be considered by the Commission in mixes with cushion or working gas of determining the appropriate action to be the Shirley reservoir or causes damage [Docket No. RP95±363±003] taken, but will not serve to make to surface facilities, Equitrans will bear protestants parties to the proceeding. all costs of remediating storage field El Paso Natural Gas Company; Notice Copies of this filing are on file with the operations. Further, it is stated that any of Motion to Place Tariff Sheets into Commission and are available for public such costs will not be included in rates Effect inspection in the Public Reference in any future proceeding. Rather Equitrans, contends that it will use the January 3, 1996. Room. Lois D. Cashell, revenues which it proposes to retain Take notice that on December 28, from the sale of base gas from the Secretary. 1995, El Paso Natural Gas Company (El Shirley reservoir to fund any required Paso), tendered for filing as part of its [FR Doc. 96–244 Filed 1–8–96; 8:45 am] remediation activities.1 Based on the FERC Gas Tariff, Volume Nos. 1–A and BILLING CODE 6717±01±M risk assessment work performed over 2, the following tariff sheets, to become the last several months, Equitrans states effective January 1, 1996: [Docket No. CP95±565±001] that it is convinced that the risk of Second Revised Volume No. 1–A Sub Alternate Fifth Revised Sheet No. 20 Equitrans, Inc.; Notice of Amendment 1 As part of its original application, Equitrans Sub Alt Second Revised Sheet No. 22 requested authorization to sell the gas withdrawn January 3, 1996. Sub Alt Fifth Revised Sheet No. 23 from the Shirley reservoir to accommodate the Take notice that on December 29, nitrogen injection process, to credit its ‘‘Account Sixth Revised Sheet No. 24 117, Gas stored underground—noncurrent’’ for the Fifth Revised Sheet No. 26 1995, Equitrans, Inc. (Equitrans), 3500 LIFO inventory value of the gas withdrawn, and to Substitute Fourth Revised Sheet Nos. 27–28 Park Lane, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania retain any revenues received from the sale of the Second Revised Sheet Nos. 30–32 15275, filed an amendment gas. 648 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 6 / Tuesday, January 9, 1996 / Notices nitrogen blending with natural gas to an motion to intervene in accordance with FGT states that, in order to ensure that extend which would adversely impact the Commission’s Rules. any potential benefit resulting from the storage operations is remote, and that Take further notice that, pursuant to use of different indices and imbalance such an occurrence could be remediated the authority contained in and subject to factors was properly accounted for, FGT quickly and effectively at a minimal jurisdiction conferred upon the Federal was required to credit to its shippers all cost. Equitrans contends that this Energy Regulatory Commission by revenues derived from Cash-Outs which project is important both for itself and Sections 7 and 15 of the Natural Gas Act exceed the actual cost to FGT to for the industry and is willing to assume and the Commission’s Rules of Practice maintain a reasonable system balance. the risks of the project to see it moves and Procedure, a hearing will be held These requirements were contained in forward. with further notice before the Section 14.B.8. of the GTC of FGT’s Equitrans states that it intends to Commission or its designee on this tariff. withdraw up to 400 MMcf of natural gas application if no motion to intervene is Although these provisions of Section as part of the project, instead of the 300 filed within the time required herein, if 14.B.8. were superseded December 1, MMcf it originally proposed. The reason the Commission on its own review of 1995 by the provisions of a settlement Equitrans proposes to withdraw the matter finds that a grant of the in Docket No. RP95–103–000, FGT approximately 100 MMcf more of its certificate is required by the public states that it is filing the instant report base gas than it will replace with convenience and necessity. If a motion to avoid an unintended gap in reporting nitrogen is that by doing so, the for leave to intervene is timely filed, or periods. pressures within the reservoir will push if the Commission on its own motion FGT proposes to directly refund the nitrogen away from the main portion believes that a formal hearing is $238,651.53 of excess cash-out revenues of the reservoir where the working gas required, further notice of such hearing to shippers identified in Schedule B to is stored and toward a narrow will be duly given. FGT’s filing. FGT proposes to make southeastern perimeter of the reservoir Under the procedure herein provided these refunds within 30 days following where only base gas is present, and for, unless otherwise advised, it will be a final Commission Order accepting the filing. which perimeter is separated from the unnecessary for Equitrans to appear or Any person desiring to be heard or to main portion of the reservoir by a thin be represented at the hearing. protest said filing should file a Motion ‘‘neck’’ area. It is stated that the net Lois D. Cashell, to Intervene or Protest with the Federal reduction in the amount of cushion gas Secretary. Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 in the Shirley reservoir will ultimately [FR Doc. 96–245 Filed 1–8–96; 8:45 am] First Street, N.E., Washington, D.C. reduce Equitrans’’ storage rate base to BILLING CODE 6717±01±M 20426, in accordance with Sections the benefit of customers, while having 385.214 and 385.211 of the virtually no impact on storage Commission’s Rules and Regulations. operations. [Docket No. RP96±86±000] All such motions or protests should be After reassessing the maximum risk of filed on or before January 10, 1996. any reservoir damage resulting from Florida Gas Transmission Company; Protests will be considered by the implementation of the proposed project, Notice of Filing of Annual Report of Commission in determining the Equitrans states that it will commit that Cash-Out Activity appropriate actions to be taken, but will certificated entitlement levels of not serve to make protestants parties to existing storage customers will be met January 3, 1996. the proceedings. Any person wishing to through the term of all existing storage Take notice that on December 20, become a party must file a Motion to contracts regardless of any unforeseen 1995, Florida Gas Transmission Intervene. Copies of this filing are on adverse effects of injecting nitrogen into Company (FGT) tendered for filing file with the Commission and are the Shirley reservoir. Equitrans schedules detailing certain information available for public inspections. contends that this commitment is made related to the Cash-Out mechanism Lois D. Cashell, in order to render moot the security of provided for in Section 14 of the Secretary. supply concerns expressed by certain General Terms and Conditions (GTC) of intervenor-customers, thereby limiting its FERC Gas Tariff, Third Revised [FR Doc. 96–246 Filed 1–8–96; 8:45 am] the number of issued needed to be Volume No. 1. No tariff changes are BILLING CODE 6717±01±M addressed by the Commission. proposed therein. Any person desiring to be heard or to FGT states that Section 14 provides [Docket No. RP95±175±004] make any protest with reference to said for the resolution of differences between application should on or before January quantities of gas scheduled and Mojave Pipeline Company; Notice of 12, 1996, file with the Federal Energy physically received and/or delivered Tariff Filing Regulatory Commission, Washington, each month and provides that the January 3, 1996. DC 20426, a motion to intervene or a elimination of any monthly imbalances Take notice that on December 22, protest in accordance with the not resolved through the Book-Out 1995, Mojave Pipeline Company requirements of the Commission’s Rules provisions will be by cash settlement (Mojave) in compliance with the of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR (‘‘Cash-Out’’). The Cash-Out provisions Commission’s order issued in the above 385.214 or 385.211) and the Regulations of Section 14 provide that different proceeding on December 1, 1995, under the Natural Gas Act (18 CFR imbalances factors and price index will tendered for filing as part of its FERC 157.10). All protests filed with the be used to value imbalances due the Gas Tariff, First Revised Volume No. 1, Commission will be considered by it in imbalance parties. FGT states that the the following tariff sheets, to become determining the appropriate action to be purpose of the weighted valuation effective January 1, 1996: taken but will not serve to make the method was to encourage shipper protestants parties to the proceeding. adherence to scheduled quantities to Seventh Revised Sheet No. 11 Any person wishing to become a party maintain the integrity of FGT’s system, Third Revised Sheet No. 26 to a proceeding or to participate as a which has no storage facilities to Mojave states that Seventh Revised party in any hearing therein must file a accommodate imbalances. Sheet No. 11 sets forth Mojave’s rates Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 6 / Tuesday, January 9, 1996 / Notices 649 applicable to shippers who are Substitute First Revised Sheet No. 64 Substitute Sixth Revised Sheet No. 8 Supporting Parties under the settlement. First Revised Sheet No. 100 Substitute Second Revised Sheet No. 8.1 Since these rates are identical to Second Revised Sheet No. 101 Substitute Fifth Revised Sheet No. 375 Mojave’s currently effective rates First Revised Sheet No. 103 Substitute Fourth Revised Sheet No. 376 First Revised Sheet No. 106 applicable to all Mojave shippers, Substitute Fifth Revised Sheet No. 377 First Revised Sheet No. 114 Substitute Third Revised Sheet No. 378 including shippers not supporting the First Revised Sheet No. 115 Substitute Second Revised Sheet No. 380 settlement, Mojave has not separately First Revised Sheet No. 134 listed rates applicable to supporting First Revised Sheet No. 136 Original Volume No. 2 shippers. First Revised Sheet No. 138 Substitute Twenty-First Revised Sheet No. 2 Mojave states that Third Revised First Revised Sheet No. 139 Substitute Sixteenth Revised Sheet No. 2.1 Sheet No. 26 contains provisions for First Revised Sheet No. 141 Substitute Twentieth Revised Sheet No. 2–A crediting of interruptible transportation Second Revised Sheet No. 143 First Revised Sheet No. 145 Northwest states that the purpose of revenues to firm shippers which are this filing is to move into effect on applicable to, and binding upon, only First Revised Sheet No. 146 Second Revised Sheet No. 147 February 1, 1996, Northwest’s Docket those firm shippers who are Supporting First Revised Sheet No. 206 No. RP95–409–000 rates that were Parties under the Stipulation and First Revised Sheet No. 255 originally filed with the Commission on Agreement. First Revised Sheet No. 265 August 1, 1995, as part of a general rate Any person desiring to protest said Second Revised Sheet No. 401 increase. Northwest states that with the filing should file a protest with the exception of changes to the ACA and Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Original Volume No. 2 GRI surcharges, these rates are the same 888 First Street, N.E., Washington, D.C. Substitute 146 Revised Sheet No. 1C as those filed on August 1, 1995. By this 20426, in accordance with Section Substitute Twenty-First Revised Sheet No. filing, Northwest also updates its index 385.211 of the Commission’s Rules and 1C.a of customers. Regulations. Pursuant to Section Northern further states that copies of 154.210 of the Commission’s the motion have been mailed to each of Any person desiring to protest this Regulations, all such protests must be its customers and interested State filing should file a protest with the filed not later than 12 days after the date Commissions. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, of the filing noted above. Protests will Any person desiring to protest said 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC be considered by the Commission in filing should file a protest with the 20426, in accordance with Section determining the appropriate action to be Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 385.211 of the Commission’s Rules and taken, but will not serve to make 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC Regulations. Pursuant to Section protestants parties to the proceeding. 20426, in accordance with Rule 211 of 154.210 of the Commission’s Copies of this filing are on file with the the Commission’s Rules of Practice and Regulations, all such protests must be Commission and are available for public Procedure (18 CFR 385.211). Pursuant to filed not later than 12 days after the date inspection in the Public Reference Section 154.210 of the Commission’s of the filing noted above. Protests will Room. Regulations, all such protests must be be considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to be Lois D. Cashell, filed not later than 12 days after the date of the filing noted above. Protests will taken, but will not serve to make Secretary. protestants parties to the proceeding. [FR Doc. 96–247 Filed 1–8–96; 8:45 am] be considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to be Copies of this filing are on file with the BILLING CODE 6717±01±M taken, but will not serve to make Commission and are available for public protestants parties to the proceeding. inspection in the Public Reference [Docket No. RP95±185±011] Copies of this filing are on file with the Room. Commission and are available for public Lois D. Cashell, Northern Natural Gas Company; Notice inspection. Secretary. to Place Tariff Sheets into Effect Lois D. Cashell, [FR Doc. 96–249 Filed 1–8–96; 8:45 am] January 3, 1996. Secretary. BILLING CODE 6717±01±M Take notice that on December 27, [FR Doc. 96–248 Filed 1–8–96; 8:45 am] 1995, Northern Natural Gas Company BILLING CODE 6717±01±M (Northern) filed a motion to place into [Docket No. RP95±407±003] effect on January 1, 1996, a rate increase [Docket No. RP95±409±003] filing previously accepted and Questar Pipeline Company; Notice of suspended by the Commission’s March Northwest Pipeline Corporation; Notice Proposed Changes in Tariff Filing 30, 1995 suspension order. Northern is of Proposed Changes in FERC Gas January 3, 1996. moving into effect the following tariff Tariff sheets: Take notice that on December 22, January 3, 1996. 1995, Questar Pipeline Company Fifth Revised Volume No. 1 Take notice that on December 28, (Questar), tendered for filing and Substitute Eighteenth Revised Sheet No. 50 1995, Northwest Pipeline Corporation acceptance tariff sheets to its FERC Gas Substitute Eighteenth Revised Sheet No. 51 (Northwest) tendered for filing as part of Tariff to comply with ordering Substitute Seventh Revised Sheet No. 52 Paragraph G of the Commission’s Twenty-Seventh Revised Sheet No. 53 its FERC Gas Tariff the following tariff First Revised Sheet No. 54 sheets, to become effective February 1, August 31, 1995, order, to become First Revised Sheet No. 55 1996: effective February 1, 1996. Questar Substitute Seventh Revised Sheet No. 59 tendered for filing and acceptance the Second Substitute Eighth Revised Sheet No. Third Revised Volume No. 1 following tariff sheets: 60 Substitute Seventh Revised Sheet No. 5 First Revised Sheet No. 61 Substitute Sixth Revised Sheet No. 5–A First Revised Volume No. 1 First Revised Sheet No. 62 Substitute Third Revised Sheet No. 6 Second Substitute Alternate Fifth Revised Substitute First Revised Sheet No. 63 Substitute Third Revised Sheet No. 7 Sheet No. 5 650 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 6 / Tuesday, January 9, 1996 / Notices

Substitute Fifth Revised Sheet No. 6 filing to become part of its FERC Gas Volume No. 1, the following substitute Original Volume No. 3 Tariff, First Revised Volume No. 1 the tariff sheet, to become effective January following revised tariff sheets, with an 22, 1996: Substitute Fifteenth Revised Sheet No. 8 effective date of February 1, 1996: Sub First Revised Sheet No. 204 Questar states that the purpose of the Fourteenth Revised Sheet No. 10 filing is to comply with the Trunkline states that this tariff sheet Eleventh Revised Sheet No. 11 is being filed in substitution for a Commission’s August 31, 1995, order in Sixth Revised Sheet No. 11A Docket No. RP95–407–000. The order Third Revised Sheet No. 15 revised tariff sheet filed by Trunkline on directed Questar to file revised tariff Third Revised Sheet No. 16 December 22, 1995 in the referenced docket. The substitution is required as sheets implementing rates reflecting the Texas Gas states that the revised tariff a correction to clarify that satisfactory elimination of non-deductible business sheets are being filed in compliance dehydration must take place onshore, as expenses from Questar’s income tax with Section 5.3 of Rate Schedule ISS of explained in the transmittal letter which calculation. Texas Gas’s FERC Gas Tariff, First accompanied the December 22, 1995 Further, Questar states that it has Revised Volume No. 1, in effect included on the prepared tariff sheets filing. November 1, 1993, through March 31, Trunkline states that a copy of this the changes and modification from the 1994, and reflects the ISS Revenue September 15, 1995, compliance filing, filing was mailed to affected shippers Credit Adjustment as required by the and interested state regulatory agencies. Questar’s August 31, 1995, ACA filing referenced section. Also, Texas Gas in Docket No. TM96–1–55, and Any person desiring to protest said herein adjusts its February 1, 1996 rates filing should file a protest with the Questar’s December 1, 1995, GRI filing to remove the Interruptible Revenue in Docket No. TM96–2–55. The ACA Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Credit Adjustment which expires 888 First Street, N.E., Washington, D.C. filing in Docket No. TM96–1–55, was January 31, 1996, in accordance with accepted by order issued September 29, 20426, in accordance with Section the provisions of Texas Gas’s Docket No. 385.211 of the Commission’s Rules and 1995. The September 15, 1995, RP95–102 as approved by the compliance filing and the December 1, Regulations. Pursuant to Section Commission in its orders dated January 154.210 of the Commission’s 1995, GRI filing have not been acted on 27, 1995 (70 FERC 61,088) and July 24, by the Commission as of the date of this Regulations, all such motions or protests 1995 (letter order). must be filed not later than 12 days after filing. Texas Gas states that copies of this Questar states that copies of the the date of the filing noted above. filing have been served upon Texas Protests will be considered by the proposed tariff sheets and the Gas’s jurisdictional customers and transmittal letter describing the nature Commission in determining the interested state commissions. appropriate action to be taken, but will of the filing were served upon all parties Any person desiring to be heard or to not serve to make protestants parties to set out on the official service list in protest said filing should file a motion the proceeding. Copies of this filing are Docket No. RP95–407–000. to intervene or protest with the Federal on file with the Commission and are Any person desiring to protest this Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 available for public inspection in the filing should file a protest with the First Street, N.E., Washington, DC Public Reference Room. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 20426, in accordance with Sections 888 First Street, N.E., Washington, DC, 385.211 and 385.214 of the Lois D. Cashell, 20426, in accordance with 18 CFR Commission’s Rules and Regulations. Secretary. 385.211 of the Commission’s Rules and Pursuant to Section 154.210 of the [FR Doc. 96–253 Filed 1–8–96; 8:45 am] Regulations. Pursuant to Section Commission’s Regulations, all such BILLING CODE 6717±01±M 154.210 of the Commission’s motions or protests mut be filed later regulations, all such protests must be than 12 days after the date of the filing [Docket No. RP96±91±000] filed not later than 12 days after the date noted above. Protests will be considered of the filing noted above. Protests will by the Commission in determining the Trunkline Gas Company; Notice of be considered by the Commission in appropriate action to be taken, but will Proposed Changes in FERC Gas Tariff determining the appropriate action to be not serve to make protestants parties to taken, but will not serve to make the proceeding. Any person wishing to January 3, 1996. protestants parties to the proceeding. become a party to the proceeding must Take notice that on December 22, Copies of this filing are on file with the file a motion to intervene. Copies of this 1995, Trunkline Gas Company Commission and are available for public filing are on file with the Commission (Trunkline) tendered for filing as part of inspection in the Public Reference and are available for public inspection its FERC Gas Tariff, First Revised Room. in the Public Reference Room. Volume No. 1, the following tariff Lois D. Cashell, Lois D. Cashell, sheets, to become effective January 22, 1996: Secretary. Secretary. [FR Doc. 96–250 Filed 1–8–96; 8:45 am] [FR Doc. 96–251 Filed 1–8–96; 8:45 am] First Revised Sheet No. 204 First Revised Sheet No. 205 BILLING CODE 6717±01±M BILLING CODE 6717±01±M Trunkline states that the revised tariff sheets are being submitted in order to [Docket No. RP96±97±000] [Docket No. RP96±91±001] expand the opportunities to shippers (or Texas Gas Transmission Corporation; Trunkline Gas Company; Notice of their designees) to satisfy the annually Notice of Proposed Changes in FERC Proposed Changes in FERC Gas Tariff elected processing requirements Gas Tariff currently contained in Trunkline’s tariff January 3, 1996. by arranging for satisfactory dehydration January 3, 1996. Take notice that on December 29, of gas onshore. The revision is desirable Take notice that on December 28, 1995, Trunkline Gas Company because third party dehydration 1995, Texas Gas Transmission (Trunkline) tendered for filing as part of facilities may become available to Corporation (Texas Gas) tendered for its FERC Gas Tariff, First Revised Trunkline’s shippers, at least some of Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 6 / Tuesday, January 9, 1996 / Notices 651 whom might benefit from the applicable Docket Nos. RP90–137–000 determining the appropriate action to be opportunity to dehydrate gas onshore, and RP91–56–000 amounts have been taken, but will not serve to make from time to time, in lieu of processing. combined and will be recovered over an protestants parties to the proceeding. Trunkline states that a copy of this 18 month period through a new Copies of this filing are on file with the filing was mailed to affected shippers recovery mechanism beginning January Commission and are available for public and interested state regulatory agencies. 1, 1996. inspection in the Public Reference Any person desiring to be heard or Any person desiring to be heard or Room. protest said filing should file a motion protest said filing should file a motion Lois D. Cashell, to intervene or protest with the Federal to intervene or protest with the Federal Secretary. Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 [FR Doc. 96–255 Filed 1–8–96; 8:45 am] First Street, N.E., Washington, D.C. First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426, 20426, in accordance with §§ 385.214 in accordance with §§ 385.214 and BILLING CODE 6717±01±M and 385.211 of the Commission’s Rules 385.211 of the Commission’s Rules of of Practice and Procedure. All such Practice and Procedure. All such motions or protests must be filed as motions or protests must be filed as [Docket No. TM96±3±49±000] provided in Section 154.210 of the provided in Section 154.210 of the Commission’s Regulations. Protests will Commission’s Regulations. Protests will Williston Basin Interstate Pipeline be considered by the Commission in be considered by the Commission in Company; Notice of Fuel determining the appropriate action to be determining the appropriate action to be Reimbursement Charge Filing taken, but will not serve to make taken, but will not serve to make January 3, 1996. protestants parties to the proceeding. protestants parties to the proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party Any person wishing to become a party Take Notice that on December 29, must file a motion to intervene. Copies must file a motion to intervene. Copies 1995, Williston Basin Interstate Pipeline of this filing are on file with the of this filing are on file with the Company (Williston Basin), tendered for Commission and are available for public Commission and are available for public filing as part of its FERC Gas Tariff the inspection in the Public Reference inspection in the Public Reference following revised tariff sheets to become Room. Room. effective February 1, 1996: Lois D. Cashell, Lois D. Cashell, Second Revised Volume No. 1 Secretary. Secretary. Fifteenth Revised Sheet No. 15 [FR Doc. 96–252 Filed 1–8–96; 8:45 am] [FR Doc. 96–254 Filed 1–8–96; 8:45 am] Seventh Revised Sheet No. 15A BILLING CODE 6717±01±M BILLING CODE 6717±01±M Eighteenth Revised Sheet No. 16 Seventh Revised Sheet No. 16A Fifteenth Revised Sheet No. 18 [Docket Nos. RP90±137±028, and RP96±93± [Docket No. RP95±364±003] Seventh Revised Sheet No. 18A 000 (Not Consolidated)] Seventh Revised Sheet No. 19 Williston Basin Interstate Pipeline Seventh Revised Sheet No. 20 Williston Basin Interstate Pipeline Company; Notice of Proposed Thirteenth Revised Sheet No. 21 Company; Notice of Compliance Filing Changes in FERC Gas Tariff Original Volume No. 2 January 3, 1996. January 3, 1996. Sixtieth Revised Sheet No. 11B Take notice that on December 22, Take notice that on December 29, 1995, Williston Basin Interstate Pipeline 1995, Williston Basin Interstate Pipeline Williston Basin states that the revised Company (Williston Basin), tendered for Company (Williston Basin), tendered for tariff sheets reflect revisions to the fuel filing as part of its FERC Gas Tariff, filing revised tariff sheets to Second reimbursement charge and percentage Second Revised Volume No. 1 and Revised Volume No. 1 and Original components of the Company’s relevant Original Volume No. 2 and Original Volume No. 2 of its FERC Gas Tariff. gathering, transportation and storage Volume No. 1–A of its superseded FERC The proposed effective date of these rates, pursuant to Williston Basin’s Fuel Gas Tariff, the following revised tariff tariff sheets is January 1, 1996. Reimbursement Adjustment Provision, sheets to become effective as shown on Williston Basin states that this motion contained in Section 38 of the General the tariff sheets. to place suspended tariff sheets into Terms and Conditions of FERC Gas Williston Basin states that, in effect, along with supporting Tariff, Second Revised Volume No. 1. accordance with the Commission’s workpapers, is being filed pursuant to Any person desiring to be heard or to December 6, 1995 Order, the revised the Commission’s July 27, 1995 and protest said filing should file a motion tariff sheets exempt the Rate Schedule December 22, 1995 Orders in the above- to intervene or protest with the Federal S–2 service performed for Chevron referenced proceeding and Section Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 U.S.A. Inc., Union Oil Company of 154.206 of the Commission’s First Street, N.E., Washington, D.C. California, Marathon Oil Company, Regulations. 20426, in accordance with 18 CFR Koch Gas Services Company, and Any person desiring to protest this 385.214 and 385.211 of the Graham Royalty Ltd. and Amoco filing should file a protest with the Commission’s Rules and Regulations. Production Company with Rainbow Gas Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, All such motions or protests must be Company acting as their agent, from 888 First Street, N.E., Washington, DC filed on or before January 10, 1996. Williston Basin’s take-or-pay volumetric 20426, in accordance with §§ 385.211 of Protests will be considered by the surcharge both retroactively and the Commission’s Rules and Commission in determining the prospectively. Williston Basin further Regulations. Pursuant to Section appropriate action to be taken, but will states that the revised schedules reflect 154.210 of the Commission’s not serve to make the protestants parties recovery beginning January 1, 1996, for Regulations, all such protests must be to the proceeding. Any person wishing the amounts refunded in Docket No. filed not later than 12 days after the date to become a party must file a motion to RP93–175–000 over the remaining total of the filing noted above. Protests will intervene. Copies of this filing are on recovery period in that docket. The be considered by the Commission in file with the Commission and are 652 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 6 / Tuesday, January 9, 1996 / Notices available for public inspection in the As the Decision and Order indicates, August 19, 1973 through January 28, Public Reference Room. Applications for Refund from the 1981, Vessels was subject to price rules Lois D. Cashell, Vessels’ consent order fund may now be set forth in 10 CFR Part 212, Subpart K, Secretary. filed. Applications must be filed no later and antecedent regulations at 6 CFR [FR Doc. 96–256 Filed 1–8–96; 8:45 am] than 90 days from the date of 150.1 et seq. An ERA audit of Vessels’ publication of this Decision and Order. business records at the Irondale and BILLING CODE 6717±01±M Applications will be accepted from Brighton locations revealed possible customers who purchased NGLs and pricing violations with respect to the Office of Hearings and Appeals NGLPs from Vessels during the period firm’s sales of NGLs and NGLPs at the September 1, 1973 through December Irondale plant during the audit period Implementation of Special Refund 31, 1977. The specific information from September 1, 1973 through Procedures required in and Application for Refund December 31, 1977 and at the Brighton is set forth in the Decision and Order. plant from April 1, 1975 through AGENCY: Office of Hearings and Appeals, December 31, 1977.2 Subsequently, on Dated: December 21, 1995. DOE. October 7, 1986, the DOE issued a George B. Breznay, ACTION: Notice of Implementation of Remedial Order to Vessels, finding that Special Refund Procedures. Director, Office of Hearings and Appeals. the firm had overcharged its customers Special Refund Procedures and requiring it to remit to the DOE SUMMARY: The Office of Hearings and $1,571,671.40, plus interest. Vessels Gas Name of Firm: Vessels Gas Processing Appeals of the Department of Energy Processing Co., 15 DOE ¶ 83,002 (1986). announces procedures for the Company Vessels appealed the Remedial Order to Date of Filing: February 27, 1995 disbursement of $1,564,222.74 (plus the Federal Energy Regulatory Case Number: VEF–0007 accrued interest) collected pursuant to a Commission (FERC) (Case No. R087–3– consent order with Vessels Gas In accordance with the procedural 000). While the Appeal was pending, Processing Company. The funds will be regulations of the Department of Energy Vessels and the DOE entered into a distributed in accordance with the (DOE), 10 CFR Part 205, Subpart V, the Consent Order on December 17, 1987, in DOE’s special refund procedures, 10 Regulatory Litigation branch of the order to settle all claims and disputes CFR Part 205, Subpart V. Office of General Counsel (OGC) between Vessels and the DOE regarding DATES AND ADDRESSES: Applications for (formerly the Economic Regulatory the firm’s compliance with price Refund of a portion of the consent order Administration (ERA)) filed a Petition regulations in sales of NGLs and NGLPs must be filed in duplicate on or before for the Implementation of Special during the audit period. In that Order, April 8, 1996, and should be addressed Refund Procedures with the Office of Vessels agreed to remit a total of to: Vessels Gas Processing Company Hearings and Appeals (OHA) on $1,500,000, plus installment interest, to Proceeding, Department of Energy, February 27, 1995. The petition requests the DOE for distribution to the firm’s Office of Hearings and Appeals, 1000 that the OHA formulate and implement customers. The Consent Order became Independence Ave., S.W., Washington, procedures for the distribution of funds final on February 16, 1988. Vessels has D.C. 20585–0107. All Applications received pursuant to a Consent Order made payments totalling $1,564,222.74 should conspicuously display reference entered into by the DOE and Vessels Gas to the DOE.3 These funds, plus accrued to Case Number VEF–0007. Processing Company (Vessels) of interest, are presently in a DOE escrow Colorado.1 FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: account maintained by the Department Richard W. Dugan, Associate Director, I. Background of the Treasury. 1000 Independence Ave. S.W., Vessels was a ‘‘refiner’’ of natural gas II. Jurisdiction Washington D.C. 20585–0107, (202) liquids (NGLs) and natural gas liquid The procedural regulations of the 586–2860. products (NGLPs), which were included DOE set forth general guidelines by SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In within the definitions of ‘‘covered which the OHA may formulate and accordance with the procedural products’’ in 6 CFR 150.352 and in the implement a plan of distribution for regulations of the Department of Energy, price regulations promulgated pursuant funds received as a result of an 10 CFR 205.282 (c), notice is hereby to the Emergency Petroleum Allocation enforcement proceeding. 10 CFR Part given of the issuance of the Decision Act of 1973, Public Law 93–159. 205, Subpart V. It is DOE policy to use and Order set out below. The Decision Accordingly, during the period from the Subpart V process to distribute such and Order relates to a consent Order funds. For a more detailed discussion of entered into by the DOE and Vessels Gas 1 For the sake of convenience and clarity, Subpart V and the authority of the OHA Processing Company (Vessels). The ‘‘Vessels’’ will refer to Vessels Gas Processing Company (VGPC) and Vessels Gas Process, Limited to fashion procedures to distribute consent order settled possible pricing (VGPL) in this Decision and Order. In addition, refunds obtained as a part of settlement violations with respect to Vessels’ sales ‘‘Vessels’’ will refer to the operations of Halliburton agreements, see Office of Enforcement, 9 of natural gas liquids (NGLs) and Resource Management (HRM) at the Irondale and DOE ¶ 82,553 (1982); Office of natural gas liquid products (NGLPs). Brighton plants on behalf of VGPC and VGPL. Vessels operated under a contract with HRM, a Enforcement, 9 DOE ¶ 82,508 (1981). The DOE has collected $1,564,222.74 division of Halliburton Company (Halliburton). After reviewing the record in the and is holding the money in an interest- Under that agreement, the natural gas owned by present case, we have concluded that a bearing escrow account pending Vessels was processed and sold at three plants Subpart V proceeding is an appropriate distribution. On September 28, 1995, owned and operated by HRM. HRM was paid or retained a service fee from the sales proceeds. On the Office of Hearings and Appeals February 25, 1983, Vessels filed, in conjunction 2 The discrepancy in dates between the two plants issued a Proposed Decision and Order with a ‘‘Preliminary Statement of Objections’’ to the is due to the fact that the Brighton plant was not which tentatively established refund Proposed Remedial Order issued to it on November fully operational until April 1975. procedures and solicited comments 5, 1982, a ‘‘Motion to Join Halliburton Company 3 Vessels’ appeal to FERC was dismissed on and Hold it Jointly Liable for Any Overcharges that February 26, 1988. Vessels Gas Processing Co., 42 from interested parties concerning the are Proven.’’ On May 25, 1983, the OHA gave leave FERC ¶ 63,023 (1988). The firm’s final payment proper distribution of the consent order to amend the PRO to join Halliburton. Vessels Gas under the Consent Order was received by the DOE fund. No comments were received. Processing Co., 11 DOE ¶ 82,509 (1983). on October 12, 1994. Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 6 / Tuesday, January 9, 1996 / Notices 653 mechanism for distributing the Vessels monthly schedule of the number of December 31, 1977, multiplied by a consent order fund. We therefore shall gallons of NGLs and NGLPs purchased volumetric refund amount of $0.0185 grant OGC’s petition and assume from September 1, 1973 through per gallon.8 jurisdiction over distribution of the December 31, 1977 and documentation Each successful claimant will also fund. that these products were purchased receive a pro rata share of the interest from either the Irondale or Brighton accrued on the consent order funds III. Refund Procedures plants. Indirect purchasers of Vessels’ between the date the funds were placed On September 28, 1995, OHA issued products may be eligible for a refund if in the Vessels escrow account and the a Proposed Decision and Order (PDO) the reseller from whom they purchased date the applicant’s refund is disbursed. establishing tentative procedures to the products passed through Vessels’ C. Presumptions of Injury distribute the Vessels settlement fund. alleged overcharges to its own That PDO was published in the Federal customers. Indirect purchasers must In addition to the volumetric Register and a 30-day period was identify the reseller from whom they presumption, we are adopting a number provided for the submission of made the purchases, and establish the of presumptions regarding injury for comments regarding our proposed basis for their belief the products claimants in each category listed below. refund plan. See 60 Fed. Reg. 53369 originated from either the Irondale or These presumptions will simplify the (October 13, 1995). More than 30 days Brighton plant. Affiliates of Vessels will refund process and will help ensure that have elapsed and the OHA has received be ineligible to apply for a refund in this refund claims are evaluated in the most no comments concerning the proposed proceeding.6 efficient and equitable manner possible. procedures for the distribution of the B. Calculation of Refund Amounts a. End-Users Vessels settlement fund. Consequently, the procedures will be adopted as We shall use a volumetric End-users of Vessels products, i.e., proposed. methodology to distribute the consent consumers, whose use of NGLs or order funds to Vessels’ customers. The NGLPs was unrelated to the petroleum A. Refund Claimants volumetric refund presumption assumes business, are presumed injured and Refund monies will be distributed to that the alleged overcharges by a firm need only document their purchase those parties which were injured in were dispersed equally over all gallons volumes from Vessels during the their transactions with Vessels during of product marketed by that firm. In the consent order period to be eligible to the audit period that were covered by absence of better information, this receive their full allocable share. the Consent Order.4 We have limited assumption is sound because the DOE b. Refiners, Resellers, and Retailers information on Vessels’ customers and price regulations generally required a Seeking Refunds of $10,000 or Less the number of gallons purchased by regulated firm to account for increased each customer. From company records costs on a firm-wide basis in Reseller claimants (including refiners available to this Office, we have determining its prices.7 and retailers), whose allocable share is compiled a partial list of Vessels’ Under the volumetric approach we $10,000 or less, i.e., who purchased customers. They are as follows: are adopting in this proceeding, a 540,540 gallons or less of Vessels’ Farmland Industries, Inc., Littleton Gas claimant’s ‘‘allocable share’’ (or products during the consent order Co., California Liquid Gas Co., Hytrans, ‘‘volumetric share’’) of the Vessels fund period, will be presumed injured and Inc., UPG, Inc.5 is equal to the number of gallons of therefore need not provide a further These customers, and any additional NGLs and NGLPs purchased from demonstration of injury, besides customers, will be required to submit a Vessels from September 1, 1973 through documentation of their purchase volumes, to receive their full allocable 4 For the reason set forth in footnote 1 this 6 As in other refund proceedings involving share. See, e.g., E.D.G., Inc., 17 DOE ¶ includes firms that purchased NGLs and NGLPs alleged refined products violations, we will 85,679 (1988). We recognize that the from HRM that originated with Vessels. Since presume that affiliates of the Consent Order firm cost to the applicant of gathering ethane, an NGLP, was decontrolled effective April were not injured by the firm’s overcharges. See, e.g., 1, 1974, Vessels’ customers would not have been Marathon Petroleum Co./EMRO Propane Co., 15 evidence of injury to support a small injured by purchases of ethane on or after that date. DOE ¶ 85,288 (1987). This is because the Consent refund claim could exceed the expected They are thus not eligible for refunds for ethane Order firm presumably would not have sold refund. Consequently, without purchases made after March 31, 1974. petroleum products to an affiliate if such a sale simplified procedures, some injured 5 In comments submitted in response to the would have placed the purchaser at a competitive Notice of the Proposed Consent Order in the disadvantage. See Marathon Petroleum Co./Pilot Oil parties would be denied an opportunity December 28, 1987 Federal Register, Enron Corp. Corp., 16 DOE ¶ 85,611 (1987), amended claim to obtain a refund. requested that it be specifically named as a payee denied, 17 DOE ¶ 85,291 (1988), reconsideration in the Consent Order. Enron contended that UPG, denied, 20 DOE ¶ 85,236 (1990). Furthermore, if an c. Medium-Range Refiner, Reseller, and Inc. was the principal customer of Vessels’ NGLs, affiliate of the Consent Order firm were granted a Retailer Claimants and that Enron, as UPG’s successor in interest, is refund, that Consent Order firm would be indirectly therefore eligible for a refund in this proceeding. compensated from the Consent Order fund remitted In lieu of making a detailed showing ERA determined in its response to Enron’s to settle its own alleged violations. See Propane of injury (see part III D, below), a comments that it was OHA’s prerogative to name Industrial, Inc. v. DOE, 985 F.2d 586 (Temp. Emer. reseller claimant whose allocable share Enron as a payee in its Implementation Order. The Ct. App. 1993) (refund to affiliate would be ‘‘unjust exceeds $10,000 may elect to receive a review and analysis of the written comments did enrichment’’). not provide any information that would support the 7 However this presumption is rebuttable. A refund under the medium-range modification or rejection of the proposed Consent claimant which believes that it suffered a presumption of injury. Under this Order with Vessels and Halliburton. Therefore, the disproportionate share of the alleged overcharges presumption, a claimant will receive as Consent Order was issued without modification. may submit evidence proving this claim in order to its refund the larger of $10,000 or 60 While this Office is aware that UPG is affiliated receive a larger refund. See Sid Richardson Carbon with Enron, we have no detailed information and Gasoline Co./Siouxland Propane Co., 12 DOE percent of its allocable share up to regarding the exact nature of their corporate ¶ 85,054 (1984); see also Amtel, Inc./Whitco, Inc., relationship. Accordingly, we will not name Enron 19 DOE ¶ 85,319 (1989) (Amtel). In computing the 8 The volumetric factor was computed by as a payee in this Decision. However Enron is appropriate refund in such a case, we will prorate dividing $1,564,222.74 by 84,689,877 (the invited to submit to this Office an Application for the alleged overcharge amount by the ratio of the approximate number of gallons of NGLs and NGLPs Refund, in which it provides documentation to Vessels settlement amount to the aggregate Vessels sold to its customers during the audit support its contention that it is entitled to a refund overcharge amount determined by the Vessels period). The latter figure was obtained from records for UPG’s purchases. Remedial Order. See Amtel. submitted to this Office by Vessels. 654 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 6 / Tuesday, January 9, 1996 / Notices

$50,000.9 The use of this presumption anticipation of financial advantage as a applicant operated under more than one reflects our conviction that these result of those purchases, and (ii) they name or under a different name during claimants were likely to have were forced by market conditions to the price control period, the applicant experienced some injury as a result of resell the product at a loss that was not should specify these names; the alleged overcharges. In other subsequently recouped through the (2) The applicant’s use of NGLs and proceedings involving NGLs and draw down of banks. See Quaker State NGLPs from Vessels: e.g., consumer NGLPs, we have determined that a 60 Oil Refining Corp./Certified Gasoline (end-user), cooperative, or public utility; percent presumption for the medium- Co., 14 DOE ¶ 85,465 (1986). (3) A monthly purchase schedule range purchasers of NGLs and NGLPs covering the period from September 1, D. Showing of Injury accurately reflected the amount of their 1973 through December 31, 1977. The injury as a result of their purchases of As in prior refund proceedings, applicant should specify the source of those products. See Sauvage Gas Co., 17 claimants who are medium-range this gallonage information. In DOE ¶ 85,304 (1988); Suburban resellers (including retailers and calculating its purchase volumes, an Propane Gas Co., 16 DOE ¶ 85,382 refiners) will be afforded the applicant should use actual records (1987). Such an applicant will be opportunity to prove injury in order to from the refund period, if available. If required only to provide documentation receive a refund equal to their full these records are not available, the of its purchase volumes of Vessels’ allocable share. These claimants will be applicant may submit estimates of its products during the consent order required to demonstrate that during the purchases, but the estimation method period in order to be eligible to receive audit period they would have must be reasonable, explained in detail, a medium-range refund. maintained their prices for the NGLs and supported by some documentation; and NGLPs purchased from Vessels at (4) If the applicant is a regulated d. Regulated Firms and Cooperatives the same level had the alleged utility or cooperative, a certification that We have determined that, in order to overcharges not occurred. While there it will pass on the entirety of any refund receive a full volumetric refund, a are a variety of ways to make this received to its customers or customer- claimant whose prices for goods and showing, a reseller generally must members, will notify its state utility services are regulated by a governmental demonstrate that, at the time it commission, other regulatory agency, or agency, e.g., a public utility, or by the purchased the product from Vessels, membership body of the receipt of any terms of a cooperative agreement, needs market conditions would not permit it refund, and a brief description as to how only to submit documentation of its to pass through to its customers the the refund will be passed along; purchases of products used by itself or, additional costs associated with the (5) A statement as to whether the in the case of a cooperative, sold to its alleged overcharges. See Atlantic applicant or a related firm has filed, or members. However, a regulated firm or Richfield Co./Odessa L.P.G. Transport, has authorized any individual to file on cooperative whose allocable share is 21 DOE ¶ 85,384 (1991); Gulf Oil Corp./ its behalf, any other application in the greater than $10,000 will also be Anderson & Watkins, Inc., 21 DOE Vessels refund proceeding. If so, an required to certify that it will pass any ¶ 85,380 (1991). In addition, the reseller explanation of the circumstances of the refund through to its customers or will be required to show that it had a other filing or authorization should be member-customers, provide us with a ‘‘bank’’ of unrecovered costs in order to submitted; (6) If the applicant is or was in any full explanation of how it plans to demonstrate that it did not recover the way affiliated with Vessels, it should accomplish the restitution, and certify increased costs associated with the explain this affiliation, including the that it will notify the appropriate alleged overcharges by increasing its regulatory body or membership group of time period in which it was affiliated; own prices. The maintenance of a bank (7) A statement as to whether the the receipt of the refund.10 does not, however, automatically ownership of the applicant’s firm e. Spot Purchasers establish injury. See Tenneco Oil Co./ changed during or since the refund Chevron U.S.A., Inc., 10 DOE ¶ 85,014 period. If an ownership change As in prior Subpart V proceedings, we (1982). are adopting a rebuttable presumption occurred, the applicant should list the that a reseller that made only irregular E. Refund Application Requirements names, addresses, and telephone numbers of any prior or subsequent or sporadic, i.e., spot, purchases from To apply for a refund from the Vessels owners. The applicant should also Vessels did not suffer injury as a result Consent Order fund, a claimant should provide copies of any relevant Purchase of those purchases. Accordingly, a spot submit an Application for Refund and Sale Agreements, if available. If purchaser claimant must submit specific containing all of the following such written documents are not and detailed evidence to rebut the spot information: purchaser presumption and to establish (1) Identifying information including available, the applicant should submit a the extent to which it was injured as a the claimant’s name, current business description of the ownership change, result of its spot purchases from Vessels. address, business address during the including the year of the sale and the In prior proceedings we have stated that refund period, taxpayer identification refunds will be approved for spot wish to submit a social security number must number, a statement indicating whether submit an employer identification number if one purchasers who demonstrate that (i) the claimant is an individual, exists. This information will be used in processing they made the spot purchases for the corporation, partnership, sole refund applications, and is requested pursuant to purpose of ensuring a supply for their proprietorship, or other business entity, our authority under the Petroleum Overcharge base period customers rather than in Distribution and Restitution Act of 1986 and the the name, title, and telephone number regulations codified at 10 C.F.R. Part 205, Subpart of the person to contact for any V. The information may be shared with other 9 That is, reseller claimants who purchased in additional information, and the name Federal agencies for statistical, auditing or excess of 540,540 gallons of Vessels product during archiving purposes, and with law enforcement the consent order period may elect to utilize this and address of the person who should 11 agencies when they are investigating a potential presumption. receive any refund check. If the violation of civil or criminal law. Unless an 10 A cooperative’s sales to non-members will be applicant claims confidentiality, this information treated in the same manner as sales by other 11 Under the Privacy Act of 1974, the submission will be available to the public in the Public resellers. See Total Petroleum/Farmers Petroleum of a social security number by an individual Reference Room of the Office of Hearings and Cooperative, 19 DOE ¶ 85,215 (1989). applicant is voluntary. An applicant that does not Appeals. Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 6 / Tuesday, January 9, 1996 / Notices 655 type of sale (e.g., sale of corporate stock, practice is to deposit all Subpart V SUMMARY: The Western Area Power sale of company assets); refund checks in that account within Administration (Western) is requesting (8) A statement as to whether the two business days of receipt and to applications on the Pacific Northwest- applicant has ever been a party in a DOE disburse refunds to applicants within 30 Pacific Southwest Intertie Project, enforcement action or a private Section calendar days thereafter. Unless such responding to comments received on the 210 action. If so, an explanation of the certification is received by the OHA, all Federal Register notice (FRN) dated case and copies of the relevant refund checks approved will be made September 19, 1995, and issuing its final documents should also be provided; payable solely to the applicants. marketing plan for firm transmission (9) The following statement signed by Representatives who have not service available as a result of the the individual applicant or a previously submitted an escrow account completion of construction of the Mead- responsible official of the firm filing the certification form to the OHA may Phoenix (MPP) and Mead-Adelanto refund application: 12 obtain a copy of the appropriate form by (MAP) 500–kV transmission projects. I swear (or affirm) that the information contacting: Marcia B. Carlson, HG–13, DATES: contained in this application and its Applications from all interested attachments is true and correct to the best of Chief, Docket & Publications Division, parties will be accepted until February my knowledge and belief. I understand that Office of Hearings and Appeals, 8, 1996. anyone who is convicted of providing false Department of Energy, Washington, D.C. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: information to the federal government may 20585–0107. Mr. J. Tyler Carlson, Regional Manager, be subject to a fine, a jail sentence, or both, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1001. I understand that F. Distribution of Funds Remaining Desert Southwest Customer Service the information contained in this application After First Stage Region, Western Area Power Administration, P.O. Box 6457, is subject to public disclosure. I have Any funds that remain after all first- Phoenix, AZ 85005–6457, Telephone: enclosed a duplicate of this entire stage claims have been decided will be application which will be placed in the OHA (602) 352–2521, Facsimile: (602) 352– distributed in accordance with the Public Reference Room. 2630 provisions of the Petroleum Overcharge Mr. Anthony Montoya, Acting, Power All applications should be either Distribution and Restitution Act of 1986 Marketing Manager, Desert Southwest typed or printed and clearly labeled (PODRA), 15 U.S.C. 4501–07. PODRA Customer Service Region, Western ‘‘Vessels Special Refund Proceeding, requires that the Secretary of Energy Area Power Administration, P.O. Box Case No. VEF–0007.’’ Each applicant determine annually the amount of oil 6457, Phoenix, AZ 85005–6457, must submit an original and one copy overcharge funds that will not be Telephone: (602) 352–2789, of the application. If the applicant required to refund monies to injured Facsimile: (602) 352–2630 believes that any of the information in parties in Subpart V proceedings and its application is confidential and does make those funds available to state SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In the not wish for this information to be governments for use in four energy FRN dated September 19, 1995 (60 FR publicly disclosed, it must submit an conservation programs. The Secretary 48513), Western announced its original application, clearly designated has delegated these responsibilities to intention to market the additional ‘‘confidential,’’ containing the OHA. Any funds in the Vessels escrow capacity available as a result of the confidential information, and two account the OHA determines will not be completion of the construction on the copies of the application with the needed to effect direct restitution to MPP and MAP which are a part of the confidential information deleted. All injured Vessels customers will be Pacific Northwest-Pacific Southwest refund applications should be distributed in accordance with the Intertie Project (AC Intertie). Comments postmarked no later than 90 days from provisions of PODRA. were requested and received from the publication of this Decision and It is therefore ordered That: customers and interested parties by the Order in the Federal Register, and sent (1) Applications for Refund from the deadline of October 19, 1995. As a result to: Vessels Special Refund Proceeding, funds remitted to the Department of of comments received, Western is Office of Hearings and Appeals, Energy by Vessels Gas Processing issuing its marketing plan for MPP and Department of Energy, 1000 Company pursuant to the Consent Order MAP. Independence Avenue, S.W., that became final on February 16, 1988 Customer Comments Washington, D.C. 20585–0107. may now be filed. In those cases where applications are (2) All Applications for Refund must Comment: The MPP has been filed by representatives, e.g., filing be postmarked no later than 90 days identified by Western in the past as the services or attorneys, we may request after publication of this Decision and Westwing-Marketplace Transmission information from the representative Order in the Federal Register. Project. Many customers anticipated, regarding its solicitation practices and and responded particularly to earlier materials and the procedures it uses. Date: December 21, 1995. interest requests by Western, based on Furthermore, each representative that George B. Breznay, the premise of interconnection and requests that it be a payee of a refund Director, Office of Hearings and Appeals. access to the Westwing bus. Western’s check must file with the OHA if it has [FR Doc. 96–290 Filed 1–8–96; 8:45 am] marketing plan should include access not already done so a statement BILLING CODE 6450±01±P between Westwing and Perkins to certifying that it maintains a separate ensure that allocations of project escrow account at a bank or other capability are usable and to ensure the financial institution for the deposit of Western Area Power Administration highest practical subscription level. all refunds received on behalf of Response: Western has access to the applicants, and that its normal business Pacific Northwest-Pacific Southwest Westwing 500–kV bus in an amount up Intertie Project to its equivalent ownership share in 12 We will not process applications signed by AGENCY: Western Area Power MPP. Western believes that the Perkins filing services or other representatives. In addition, Administration, DOE. and Westwing 500–kV buses are the statement must be dated on or after the date of equivalent and that access to Westwing this Decision and Order. Any application signed ACTION: Notice and Request for 500–kV bus is ensured for allocations of and dated before the date of this Decision will be Applications of Additional Capacity. summarily dismissed. project capability. 656 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 6 / Tuesday, January 9, 1996 / Notices

Comment: The requirements of that Western will have the right to with as much flexibility as possible. existing Parker-Davis Project market as a result of the completion of This means that Western may market a transmission customers to serve load the construction of the MPP and MAP. portion of its MPP and MAP entitlement growth along the Colorado River should Although Western has rights to market as long term and a portion of it as short be given first priority on available AC this capacity, Western does not believe term. In this manner Western may Intertie transmission capacity. One way that all of the capacity on all of the benefit from opportunities in the future to do this might be to operationally segments will initially be fully to better utilize its transmission assets. transfer to the AC Intertie system subscribed, therefore, Western has For example, Western may utilize its existing Parker-Davis Project contracts estimated, for rate making purposes, transmission assets to make sales in of customers using Parker-Davis Project that 668 MW will be the initial southern California or the southwest capability as a path between Arizona marketable capacity for the AC Intertie United States. and either Nevada or California, rather System. This estimated marketable Response: It is Western’s intention to than serving loads along the river within capacity will be used as a starting point make the most effective long term use of Arizona. Capacity made available on the for determining a transmission rate and capacity and resulting project Parker-Davis Project transmission does not represent a limit for marketing repayment. This marketing plan is system could then be utilized to serve capacity on the AC Intertie system. At designed to meet this goal. existing and growing loads along the this time Western has no plans to Comment: A comment was made that Colorado River. reserve capacity in the AC Intertie for its customers taking transmission service Response: The only priority being own purposes. should be allowed to assign and/or assigned to this marketing plan was Comment: One customer indicated it wheel for third parties when the discussed in the September 19 FRN and may be interested in obtaining short- customers are not utilizing the service again in this FRN. It is not Western’s term and/or long term firm transmission themselves. The belief is that this would intention to establish any new priorities service from Perkins Substation to enhance the marketability of Western’s in marketing this additional capacity. Marketplace Substation to transmit a transmission assets. Western would be willing to portion of its San Juan Unit entitlement. accommodate a customer with both Since terms and conditions for such Response: The ability to assign or Parker-Davis Project and AC Intertie service are not specified in the transfer may be used under certain allocations, who wished to make a September 19 FRN, this customer was terms and conditions which will be contractual change which would give it unable to evaluate the characteristics of agreed to during contract negotiations. the ability to schedule its capacity in a the service provided by Western. Marketing Issues manner such as discussed in this Response: A prototype transmission comment. service contract has been drafted which The additional capacity on the AC Comment: The available capacity will include terms, conditions and Intertie is anticipated to be available defined in the Marketable Resource standard contract language to be after January 1, 1996. Western’s section of the September 19 FRN should provided by Western. The prototype contracted firm transmission service correspond with the Marketable contract may be requested by calling, will begin on the inservice date of the Capacity used in the proposed rate. If writing or faxing your request to the MPP and MAP, as determined by Western is planning to utilize capacity name, address or number provided in Western. in MPP or MAP for its own purposes, the ‘‘For Further Information Contact’’ Marketing Criteria Western should publish its capacity section above. requirements and the effect of such Comment: The comment was made a. Authority: Congress has granted the reservation of capacity on the MPP and that as the electric utility industry is Secretary of Energy acting by and MAP rates. undergoing dramatic structural changes through Western’s Administrator, the Response: The Marketable Resource at this time, it is the customers’ view authority to market certain Federal identified in the September 19 FRN is that Western may market its assets in a resources. the incremental AC Intertie capacity manner that provides the customers b. Marketable Resource:

Point of receipt Point of delivery Capacity

Perkins Switchyard ...... Mead Substation ...... 412 MW Mead Substation ...... Perkins Switchyard ...... 412 MW Mead Substation ...... Marketplace Switching Station ...... 580 MW Marketplace Switching ...... Mead Substation Station ...... 580 MW Marketplace Switching ...... Adelanto Switching Station Station ...... 100 MW Adelanto Switching ...... Marketplace Switching Station ...... 100 MW

c. Marketing Area: Western will (a) Both directions, same amount e. Resource Allocation: The priority of market this additional capacity to a (b) Both directions, different amounts each request will be evaluated in the requestor regardless of their principal (c) One direction only following descending order, with place of business. 2. Perkins to Marketplace or Mead to requests for service under section (a) on d. Priority of Allocation: Western will Adelanto each line segment having the highest market the capacity from MPP and MAP (a) Both directions, same amount priority. A request for firm bidirectional by line segments in each direction. The (b) Both directions, different amounts capacity on each segment would receive following method will be used in the (c) One direction only the highest priority. If any one path is evaluation process as follows: 3. Perkins to Adelanto oversubscribed, then all the requested 1. Perkins to Mead, Mead to (a) Both directions, same amount allocations on such path will be Marketplace or Marketplace to (b) Both directions, different amounts prorated to try to accommodate each Adelanto (c) One direction only requestor. Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 6 / Tuesday, January 9, 1996 / Notices 657

After this initial marketing process is Environmental Evaluation SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In completed, and if there is still some Western will comply with the anticipation of the then impending remaining capacity available, Western National Environmental Policy Act furlough, EPA arranged with the PMN will market such capacity under other (NEPA) of 1969, 42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.; submitters voluntary suspensions, transmission service categories, such as, Council On Environmental Quality (40 pursuant to 40 CFR 720.75(b), of the nonfirm, or short-term. CFR Parts 1500–1508) and DOE NEPA PMN review periods for any PMNs f. Term of Contracts: Firm regulations (10 CFR Parts 1500–1508) submitted under TSCA section 5(a)(1) Transmission Service contracts will and DOE NEPA regulations (10 CFR Part and 40 CFR part 720, received by EPA become effective on January 1, 1996, 1021). Western has determined that this before December 16, 1995, and for subject to the inservice date determined action is categorically excluded from the which the review period had not yet by Western, and will have a minimum preparation of an environmental expired. Effective December 16, 1995, term of 10 years, provided, that no assessment or an environmental impact due to the lack of authorized funding contract will exceed a term of 40 years statement. (i.e., a Fiscal Year 1996 Appropriations from the date of execution. Bill or a Continuing Resolution), EPA g. Contract Provisions: All contracts Issued in Golden, Colorado, December 14, 1995. employees have been furloughed and offered as a result of this marketing plan will incorporate Western’s standard J. M. Shafer, non-excepted work operations at the terms, conditions and provisions for Administrator. Agency have ceased. No work has been transmission service contracts, [FR Doc. 96–291 Filed 1–8–96; 8:45 am] performed on reviewing these PMNs including the latest version of the BILLING CODE 6450±01±P since the furlough began. Due to the General Power Contract Provisions as protracted duration of the current may be updated for transmission furlough, EPA is now extending for an service. A notice in the Federal Register ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION additional period of time, pursuant to will announce Western’s final AGENCY TSCA sections 5(c) and 26(c) and 40 CFR 720.75(c), the review periods of all allocations under this marketing plan. [OPPTS±51845; FRL±4993±9] h. Application Information: Each PMNs received before December 16, application for firm transmission service Certain Chemicals; Premanufacture 1995, and for which the review period must include: Notices; Extension of Review Periods has not yet expired as of the date of 1. Customer/Entity Name, address, signature of this notice. and point of contact. AGENCY: Environmental Protection There is a possibility that the 2. Selected Point of Receipt(s) and Agency (EPA). chemical substances submitted for Point(s)of Delivery. ACTION: Notice. review in these PMNs may be regulated 3. Amount of long term firm SUMMARY: Due to the lack of authorized by EPA under TSCA. The Agency transmission service requested in requires an extension of the review megawatts (MW) for each Point. funding (i.e., a Fiscal Year 1996 periods to complete its risk assessment, 4. Contract term requested. Appropriations Bill or a Continuing to examine its regulatory options, and to Incomplete or late applications will Resolution), and the resultant furlough prepare the necessary documents, be considered only after all other of the EPA employees, EPA is extending applications received which meet the the review periods for all should regulatory action be required. requirements of this FRN have been premanufacture notices (PMNs), Therefore, EPA has determined that evaluated. submitted under section 5 of the Toxic good cause exists to extend, under i. Evaluation Process: The Substances Control Act (TSCA; 15 TSCA section 5(c), the review period for applications will be evaluated on the U.S.C. section 2604), received by EPA each such PMN. following criteria: before December 16, 1995, and for The duration of this extension period 1. The most effective use of capacity which the review period has not yet will be equivalent to the duration of the and resulting project repayment. expired as of the date of signature of this current furlough, i.e, equivalent to the 2. The amount of capacity requested notice. This action is taken under the number of days between December 15, authority of TSCA sections 5(c) and bidirectionally on each segment. 1995, and the date on which the EPA 26(c). 3. The amount of capacity requested furlough terminates and EPA operations bidirectionally in a continuous path on DATES: The duration of this extension resume. Under TSCA section 5(c), the more than one segment. period will be equivalent to the duration total extensions of the review period for of the current furlough, i.e, equivalent to 4. The amount of capacity requested an individual PMN shall in no event the number of days between December unidirectionally on one or more exceed 90 days. Thus, if the extension 15, 1995, and the date on which the segments. described in this notice is for less than 5. The length of contractual term EPA furlough terminates and EPA operations resume. 90 days, EPA reserves the right to issue requested. additional extensions under TSCA FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Paul Determination Under Executive Order section 5(c) in the future for good cause J. Campanella, Chief, New Chemicals 12866 up to a total of 90 days. Branch, Chemical Control Division DOE has determined that this is not (7405), Environmental Protection After the furlough ends and EPA a significant regulatory action because it Agency, Rm. E–447, 401 M St., SW., operations resume, PMNs will be does not meet the criteria of Executive Washington, DC 20460, Telephone: available for public inspection in Rm. Order 12866 (58 FR 51735). Western has (202) 260–3725, Facsimile: (202) 260– NE–B607, at the EPA headquarters, an exemption from centralized 0118. address given above, from noon to 4 regulatory review under Executive *Note: No one will be available at EPA p.m., Monday through Friday, except Order 12866; accordingly, no clearance to respond to inquiries until the legal holidays. of this notice by the Office of furlough ends and EPA operations Management and Budget is required. resume. 658 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 6 / Tuesday, January 9, 1996 / Notices

Dated: January 3, 1996. 1. FNB Bankshares, Inc., Milnor, or the offices of the Board of Governors Charles M. Auer, North Dakota; to acquire 100 percent of not later than January 23, 1996. Director, Chemical Control Division, Office the voting shares of First National Bank, A. Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas of Pollution Prevention and Toxics. Lisbon, North Dakota, a de novo bank City (John E. Yorke, Senior Vice [FR Doc. 96–334 Filed 1–5–96; 10:28 am] that will be immediately merged into President) 925 Grand Avenue, Kansas Applicant’s existing subsidiary bank, City, Missouri 64198: BILLING CODE 6560±50±F First National Bank of Milnor, Milnor, 1. Downs Bancshares, Inc., Downs, North Dakota, upon consummation. The Kansas; to engage de novo through its Lisbon bank will become a branch of the subsidiary, Cushing Insurance, Inc., FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM Milnor bank. Downs, Kansas, in the sale of general Chittenden Corporation, et al.; Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve insurance in a town of less than 5,000 Formations of; Acquisitions by; and System, December 29, 1995. in population, pursuant to § Mergers of Bank Holding Companies Barbara R. Lowrey, 225.25(b)(8)(iii)(A) of the Board’s Associate Secretary of the Board. Regulation Y. This activity will be The companies listed in this notice conducted in Downs, Kansas. [FR Doc. 96–296 Filed 1–8–96; 8:45 am] have applied for the Board’s approval 2. Geneva State Co., Geneva, under section 3 of the Bank Holding BILLING CODE 6210±01±F Nebraska; to engage de novo through its Company Act (12 U.S.C. 1842) and § subsidiary, Bicentennial Apartments, 225.14 of the Board’s Regulation Y (12 Downs Bancshares, Inc., et al.; Notice Inc., Geneva, Nebraska, in construction CFR 225.14) to become a bank holding of Applications to Engage de novo in of low- and moderate-income housing, company or to acquire a bank or bank Permissible Nonbanking Activities pursuant to § 225.25(b)(6) of the Board’s holding company. The factors that are Regulation Y. considered in acting on the applications The companies listed in this notice Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve are set forth in section 3(c) of the Act have filed an application under § System, December 29, 1995. (12 U.S.C. 1842(c)). 225.23(a)(1) of the Board’s Regulation Y Barbara R. Lowrey, Each application is available for (12 CFR 225.23(a)(1)) for the Board’s immediate inspection at the Federal approval under section 4(c)(8) of the Associate Secretary of the Board. Reserve Bank indicated. Once the Bank Holding Company Act (12 U.S.C. [FR Doc. 96–295 Filed 1–8–96; 8:45 am] application has been accepted for 1843(c)(8)) and § 225.21(a) of Regulation BILLING CODE 6210±01±F processing, it will also be available for Y (12 CFR 225.21(a)) to commence or to inspection at the offices of the Board of engage de novo, either directly or Pikeville National Corporation, et al.; Governors. Interested persons may through a subsidiary, in a nonbanking Change in Bank Control Notices; express their views in writing to the activity that is listed in § 225.25 of Acquisitions of Shares of Banks or Reserve Bank or to the offices of the Regulation Y as closely related to Bank Holding Companies; Correction Board of Governors. Any comment on banking and permissible for bank an application that requests a hearing holding companies. Unless otherwise This notice corrects a notice (FR Doc. must include a statement of why a noted, such activities will be conducted 95-31232) published on page 66801 of written presentation would not suffice throughout the United States. the issue for Tuesday, December 26, in lieu of a hearing, identifying Each application is available for 1995. specifically any questions of fact that immediate inspection at the Federal Under the Federal Reserve Bank of are in dispute and summarizing the Reserve Bank indicated. Once the Cleveland heading, the entry for evidence that would be presented at a application has been accepted for Whitaker Bank Corporation of hearing. processing, it will also be available for Kentucky, Lexington, Kentucky, is Unless otherwise noted, comments inspection at the offices of the Board of revised to read as follows: regarding each of these applications Governors. Interested persons may 2. Whitaker Bank Corporation of must be received not later than January express their views in writing on the Kentucky, Lexington, Kentucky; to 31, 1996. question whether consummation of the acquire 100 percent of the voting shares A. Federal Reserve Bank of Boston proposal can ‘‘reasonably be expected to of, and thereby merge with Mount (Robert M. Brady, Vice President) 600 produce benefits to the public, such as Sterling National Holding Corporation, Atlantic Avenue, Boston, Massachusetts greater convenience, increased Mount Sterling, Kentucky, and thereby 02106: competition, or gains in efficiency, that indirectly acquire Mount Sterling 1. Chittenden Corporation, outweigh possible adverse effects, such National Bank, Mount Sterling, Burlington, Vermont; to acquire 100 as undue concentration of resources, Kentucky. percent of the voting shares of Flagship decreased or unfair competition, In connection with this application, Bank and Trust Company, Worcester, conflicts of interests, or unsound Applicant also has applied to acquire Massachusetts. banking practices.’’ Any request for a Independence Financial, Inc., Mount B. Federal Reserve Bank of hearing on this question must be Sterling, Kentucky, and thereby Richmond (Lloyd W. Bostian, Jr., Senior accompanied by a statement of the indirectly engage in consumer finance Vice President) 701 East Byrd Street, reasons a written presentation would activities, pursuant to § 225.25(b)(1) of Richmond, Virginia 23261: not suffice in lieu of a hearing, the Board’s Regualtion Y. 1. Matewan Bancshares, Inc., identifying specifically any questions of Comments on this application must Williamson, West Virginia; to acquire fact that are in dispute, summarizing the be received by January 19, 1996. 100 percent of the voting shares of Bank evidence that would be presented at a One, Pikeville, N.A., Pikeville, hearing, and indicating how the party Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, December 29, 1995. Kentucky. commenting would be aggrieved by C. Federal Reserve Bank of approval of the proposal. Barbara R. Lowrey, Minneapolis (James M. Lyon, Vice Unless otherwise noted, comments Associate Secretary of the Board. President) 250 Marquette Avenue, regarding the applications must be [FR Doc. 96–297 Filed 1–8–96; 8:45 am] Minneapolis, Minnesota 55480: received at the Reserve Bank indicated BILLING CODE 6210±01±F Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 6 / Tuesday, January 9, 1996 / Notices 659

Regions Financial Corporation; In connection these applications, 1. Young In Chung and Hye Sun Change in Bank Control Notices; Applicants also have applied to acquire Chung, both of Warren, New Jersey; to Acquisitions of Shares of Banks or FF Bancorp, Inc., New Smyrna Beach, acquire an additional 1.1 percent, for a Bank Holding Companies; Correction Flordia, and thereby indirectly acquire total of 10.9 percent, of the voting shares First Federal Savings Bank of New of BNB Financial Services Corporation, This notice corrects a notice (FR Doc. Smyrna, New Smyrna Beach, Florida, New York, New York, and thereby 95-31149) published on page 66551 of and First Federal Savings Bank of Citrus indirectly acquire Broadway National the issue for Friday, December 22, 1995. County, Inverness, Florida, and thereby Bank, New York, New York. Under the Federal Reserve Bank of engage in operating a savings Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve Dallas heading, the entry for Regions association, pursuant to § 225.25(b)(9) Financial Corporation, is revised to read System, January 3, 1996. of the Board’s Regulation Y. Jennifer J. Johnson, as follows: Comments on this application must A. Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta be received by January 19, 1996. Deputy Secretary of the Board. (Zane R. Kelley, Vice President) 104 [FR Doc. 96–233 Filed 1–8–96; 8:45 am] Marietta Street, N.W., Atlanta, Georgia Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, January 3, 1996. BILLING CODE 6210±01±F 30303: 1. Regions Financial Corporation, Jennifer J. Johnson, Birmingham, Alabama, and Regions Deputy Secretary of the Board. Merger Subsidiary, Inc., Gainesville, [FR Doc. 96–234 Filed 1–8–96; 8:45 am] FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION Georgia; to acquire 100 percent of the BILLING CODE 6210±01±F voting shares of First National Bancorp, Granting of Request for Early Gainesville, Georgia, and thereby Termination of the Waiting Period indirectly acquire The First National Young In Chung, et al.; Change in Under the Premerger Notification Bank of Gainesville, Gainesville, Bank Control Notices; Acquisitions of Rules Georgia; First National Bank of Shares of Banks or Bank Holding Habersham, Cornelia, Georgia; Granite Companies Section 7A of the Clayton Act, 15 U.S.C. 18a, as added by Title II of the City Bank, Elberton, Georgia; Bank of The notificants listed below have Hart-Scott-Rodino Antitrust Clayton, Clayton, Georgia; First National applied under the Change in Bank Improvements Act of 1976, requires Bank of White County; Cleveland, Control Act (12 U.S.C. 1817(j)) and § persons contemplating certain mergers Georgia; The Citizens Bank, Toccoa, 225.41 of the Board’s Regulation Y (12 or acquisitions to give the Federal Trade Georgia; Bank of Banks County, Homer, CFR 225.41) to acquire a bank or bank Commission and the Assistant Attorney Georgia; First National Bank of Gilmer holding company. The factors that are General advance notice and to wait County, Ellijay, Georgia; The Peoples considered in acting on the notices are designated periods before Bank of Forsyth County, Cumming, set forth in paragraph 7 of the Act (12 Georgia; Pickens County Bank, Jasper, U.S.C. 1817(j)(7)). consummation of such plans. Section Georgia; The First National Bank of The notices are available for 7A(b)(2) of the Act permits the agencies, Paulding County, Dallas, Georgia; immediate inspection at the Federal in individual cases, to terminate this Citizens Bank, Ball Ground, Georgia; Reserve Bank indicated. Once the waiting period prior to its expiration Bank of Villa Rica, Villa Rica, Georgia; notices have been accepted for and requires that notice of this action be The Community Bank of Carrollton, processing, they will also be available published in the Federal Register. Carrollton, Georgia; The Commercial for inspection at the offices of the Board The following transactions were Bank, Douglasville, Georgia; Barrow of Governors. Interested persons may granted early termination of the waiting Bank & Trust Company, Winder, express their views in writing to the period provided by law and the Georgia; and The Key Bank of Florida, Reserve Bank indicated for that notice premerger notification rules. The grants Tampa, Florida. or to the offices of the Board of were made by the Federal Trade In addition to this application, Governors. Comments must be received Commission and the Assistant Attorney Regions Merger Subsidiary, Inc., not later than January 23, 1996. General for the Antitrust Division of the Gainesville, Georgia, has applied to A. Federal Reserve Bank of New Department of Justice. Neither agency become a bank holding company, by York (Christopher J. McCurdy, Senior intends to take any action with respect merging with First National Bancorp, Vice President) 33 Liberty Street, New to these proposed acquisitions during Gainesville, Georgia. York, New York 10045: the applicable waiting period.

TRANSACTIONS GRANTED EARLY TERMINATION BETWEEN 121895 AND 122995

Name of acquiring person, name of Date acquired person, name of acquired entity PMN No. terminated

Massachusetts Mutual Life Insurance Company, Ronald H. Fielding, Rochester Capital Advisors, L.P., Rochester Capital Adv ...... 96±0502 12/18/95 DAKA International, Inc., Champps Entertainment, Inc., Champps Entertainment, Inc ...... 96±0545 12/18/95 Micro Warehouse, Inc., Inmac Corp., Inmac Corp ...... 96±0556 12/18/95 Plains Resources, Inc., USX Corporation, Marathon Oil Company ...... 96±0566 12/18/95 Ethyl Corporation, Texaco Inc., Texaco Additive Company ...... 96±2773 12/19/95 Irish Dairy Board Co-operative Ltd., SDA Holdings, L.P., Specialty Distributors of America, Inc ...... 96±0582 12/19/95 Smithfield Foods, Inc., Chiquita Brands International, Inc., John Morrell & Co ...... 96±0181 12/20/95 The Loewen Group, Inc., S.I. Acquisition Associates, L.P., Ourso Investment Corporation ...... 96±0406 12/20/95 GTE Corporation, SBC Communications, Inc., Associated Directory ServicesÐWC, Company ...... 96±0455 12/20/95 Sun Healthcare Group, Inc., A. Keith and Delta B. Holloway, A. Keith and Delta B. Holloway ...... 96±0506 12/20/95 The Washington Post Company, Cox Enterprises, Inc., Cox Communications Texarkana, Inc ...... 96±0548 12/20/95 Kvaerner a.s. (a Norwegian company), AMEC p.l.c. (a British company), AMEC p.l.c ...... 96±0574 12/20/95 Career Horizons, Inc., Daniel Reinhardt, Programming Enterprises, Inc., dba Mini-Systems Association ...... 96±0600 12/20/95 660 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 6 / Tuesday, January 9, 1996 / Notices

TRANSACTIONS GRANTED EARLY TERMINATION BETWEEN 121895 AND 122995ÐContinued

Name of acquiring person, name of Date acquired person, name of acquired entity PMN No. terminated

ABRY Broadcast Partners II, L.P., Norman Lear, Act III Broadcasting, Inc ...... 96±0541 12/21/95 Retlaw Enterprises, Inc., Donald E. Tykeson, Northwest TV, Inc. & SW Oregon TV Broadcasting, Inc ...... 96±0553 12/21/95 IES Industries, Inc., Wainoco Oil Corporation, Wainoco Oil & Gas Company ...... 96±0576 12/21/95 General Electric Company, Aon Corporation, Union Fidelity Life Insurance Company ...... 96±0590 12/21/95 TOTAL, American United Global, Inc., American United Products, Inc ...... 96±0591 12/21/95 G. Kenneth Baum, Norman Polsky, Fixtures Manufacturing Corporation ...... 96±0592 12/21/95 Paul G. Allen, Roy M. Speer, Precision Systems, Inc ...... 96±0596 12/21/95 John H. Kroeger, Brian L. Weiner, Amarillo Periodical, Inc ...... 96±0602 12/21/95 United Auto Group, Inc., Carl H. Westcott, Atlanta Toyota, Inc ...... 96±0520 12/22/95 Tribune Company, SoftKey International, Inc., Cubsco I, Inc., & Cubsco II, Inc ...... 96±0549 12/22/95 SoftKey International, Inc., Tribune Company, Compton's NewMedia, Inc. and Compton's Learning Company ...... 96±0550 12/22/95 Northern States Power Company, Aetna Life and Casualty Company, AE Fourteen, Incorporated ...... 96±0565 12/22/95 Citation Corporation, Texas Steel Company, Texas Steel Company ...... 96±0586 12/22/95 Echlin, Inc., Handy & Harman, Handy & Harman Automotive Group, Inc ...... 96±0587 12/22/95 Cincinnati Bell Inc., Information Systems Development Partnership, Information Systems Development Partnership . 96±0588 12/22/95 Frederick R. McLaren, Sandoz, Ltd. (a Swiss company), McLaren/Hart, Inc ...... 96±0607 12/22/95 Wyle Electronics, Mr. Gerhard Bacharach, Sylan Ginsbury Ltd ...... 96±0611 12/22/95 Mr. Lewis W. van Amerongen, Mobile Corporation, Mobile Oil Corporation ...... 96±0622 12/22/95 Alco Standard Corporation, Conestoga Holdings, Inc., Conestoga Holdings, Inc ...... 96±0626 12/22/95 Samuel Lehrman, Nuclear Electric Insurance Limited, Colonnade Associates, L.P ...... 96±0634 12/22/95 Oriental Chemical Industries, Rhone-Poulenc Chimie S.A. (a French company), Rhone-Poulenc of Wyoming Co ..... 96±0647 12/22/95 Yarmouth Capital Partners L.P.I., First Union Corporation, CK-Southern Associates #2, Limited Partnership ...... 96±0649 12/22/95 Noelle Balson Trust /U/A/K/A Balson Fam. 1994 Spe. Tru., Heidelberger Zement AG (a German company), Lehigh Portland Cement Company ...... 96±0654 12/22/95 Cincinnati Milacron, Inc., The Fairchild Corporation, VSI Corporation (D-M-E Division) ...... 96±0515 12/26/95 Harsco Corporation, Merrill L. Nash, Symons Corporation ...... 96±0546 12/26/95 The Coastal Corporation, Chevron Corporation, Chevron Chemical Company ...... 96±0547 12/26/95 Farmland Industries, Inc., James T. Hudson, Hudson Foods, Inc ...... 96±0585 12/26/95 Syratech Corporation, Rauch Industries, Inc., Rauch Industries, Inc ...... 96±0615 12/26/95 Ameritech Pension Trust, Kajima International, Inc., Industrial Development International, Inc ...... 96±0698 12/26/95 AlliedSignal, Incorporated, Northrop Grumman Corporation, Electronic and Systems Integration Division ...... 95±2533 12/27/95 Ronald W. Burkle, Smith's Food & Drug Centers, Inc., Smith Food & Drug Centers, Inc ...... 96±0476 12/27/95 Sanfill, Inc., Greenfield Environmental, Falcon Disposal Service, Inc ...... 96±0507 12/27/95 Mallinckrodt Group, Inc., Phillip F. Dressel, Consolidated Flavor Corporation ...... 96±0561 12/27/95 Hercules, Inc., Phillip F. Dressel, Consolidated Flavor Corporation ...... 96±0562 12/27/95 Assa Abloy AB, EI Holdings Corp., EI Holdings Corp ...... 96±0618 12/27/95 Medaphis Corporation, James F. Thacker, Medical Management Sciences, Inc ...... 96±0604 12/28/95 James F. Thacker, Medaphis Corporation, Medaphis Corporation ...... 96±0605 12/28/95 TNT Freightways Corporation, Transus, Inc., Transus, Inc ...... 96±0639 12/28/95 KU Energy Corporation, First Chicago NBD Corporation, Vermeer Corporation ...... 96±0670 12/28/95 Metropolitan Life Insurance Company, Sanford N. Diller and Helen P. Diller, Alcosta-Gateway, Ltd ...... 96±0625 12/29/95 Newell Co., The Holson Burnes Group, Inc., The Holson Burnes Group, Inc ...... 96±0641 12/29/95

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: ACTION: Notice of meeting. and Sports operates under Executive Sandra M. Peay or Renee A. Horton, Order #12345, as amended, and Contact Representatives, Federal Trade SUMMARY: This notice sets forth the subsequent orders. The functions of the Commission, Premerger Notification schedule and proposed agenda of a Council are: (1) To advise the President Office, Bureau of Competition, Room forthcoming meeting of the President’s and the Secretary concerning progress 303, Washington, DC 20580, (202) 326– Council on Physical Fitness and Sports. made in carrying out the provisions of 3100. This notice also describes the functions the Executive Order and recommending of the Council. Notice of this meeting is to the President and Secretary, as By Direction of the Commission. required under the Federal Advisory Donald S. Clark, necessary, actions to accelerate progress; Committee Act. (2) advise the President and the Secretary. DATES: February 8, 1996, 9:00 a.m. Secretary on matters pertaining to the [FR Doc. 96–274 Filed 1–8–96; 8:45 am] ADDRESSES: White House Conference ways and means of enhancing BILLING CODE 6750±01±M Center, Truman Room, Third Floor, 726 opportunities for participation in Jackson Place, NW., Washington, D.C. physical fitness and sports actions to 20503. extend and improve physical activity programs and services; (3) advise the DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: President and the Secretary on state, HUMAN SERVICES Sandra Perlmutter, Executive Director, President’s Council on Physical Fitness local, and private actions to extend and President's Council on Physical and Sports, 701 Pennsylvania Avenue, improve physical activity programs and Fitness and Sports; Meeting NW, Suite 250, Washington, DC 20004– services. 2608, 202/272–2145. The Council will hold this meeting to AGENCY: Office of the Assistant SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The apprise the members of the national Secretary for Health. President’s Council on Physical Fitness program on physical fitness and sports, Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 6 / Tuesday, January 9, 1996 / Notices 661 to report on ongoing Council initiatives, and events that the Commission (4) Any action taken to prevent and to plan for future directions. considers significant from the recurrence. Dated: January 4, 1996. standpoint of public health and safety The Commission shall also provide as wide dissemination to the public of the Sandra Perlmutter, for reporting to Congress, and to make the AO policy consistent with recent information specified in clauses (1) and Executive Director, President’s Council on (2) of this section as reasonably possible Physical Fitness and Sports. changes to NRC regulations. The revised AO criteria contain more discrete within 15 days of its receiving [FR Doc. 96–288 Filed 1–8–96; 8:45 am] reporting thresholds making them easier information of each AO and shall BILLING CODE 4160±17±M to use and ensuring more consistent provide as wide dissemination to the application of the intended AO public as reasonably possible of the reporting policy set forth by the information specified in clauses (3) and DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Commission. (4) as soon as such information becomes available to it. DATES: The public comment period on Bureau of Land Management In July 1975, in the exercise of the this proposed policy statement ends authority conferred upon the [CA±063±1150±00] April 8, 1996. Comments received after Commission by Congress to determine the public comment period will be which unscheduled incidents or events Cancellation of Public Workshops for addressed if it is practicable to do so, are significant from the standpoint of the Northern and Eastern Colorado but the Commission is able to ensure Desert Coordinated Management Plan public health and safety and are consideration of only those comments reportable to Congress as AOs, the The following public meetings received on or before the last day of the Commission developed interim criteria announced in the Federal Register will comment period. for evaluating licensee incidents or not be held because of the furlough of ADDRESSES: Send comments to: events. On the basis of these interim BLM employees during the partial Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory criteria and as required by Section 208, shutdown of the Federal government: Commission, Washington DC 20555, the Commission began issuing quarterly January 8, Riverside Attn: Docketing and Service Branch. reports to Congress on AOs. These January 9, Long Beach Hand deliver comments to 11555 reports 1 ‘‘Report to Congress on January 10, Twentynine Palms Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland, Abnormal Occurrences,’’ have been January 11, Palm Springs between 7:45 a.m. and 4:15 p.m. Federal issued in NUREG 75/090 and NUREG– January 16, Needles workdays. 0090–1 through 5 for the period from January 17, Blythe Examine comments received at the January 1975 through September 1976. January 18, El Centro NRC Public Document Room, 2120 L On the basis of its experience in the January 22, Rancho Bernardo Street NW (Lower Level), Washington, preparation and issuance of AO reports, For More Information: Contact the DC. the Commission issued a general Bureau of Land Management, California FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: statement of policy that described the Desert District, External Affairs Office, Harriet Karagiannis, Office for Analysis manner in which it will, as part of the 6221 Box Springs Boulevard, Riverside, and Evaluation of Operational Data, U.S. routine conduct of its business, carry California 92507, (909) 697–5217. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, out its responsibilities under Section Washington, DC 20555, telephone: (301) 208 of the Energy Reorganization Act of Dated: January 3, 1996. 415–6377. 1974, as amended, for identifying AOs Jo Simpson, and making the requisite information Acting District Manager. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: concerning each such occurrence [FR Doc. 96–278 Filed 1–8–96; 8:45 am] Background available to Congress and the public in BILLING CODE 4310±FP±M Section 208 of the Energy a timely manner. This general statement Reorganization Act of 1974 (Public Law of policy was published in the Federal 93–438, 42 U.S.C. 5848), as amended, Register on February 24, 1977 (Vol. 42, NUCLEAR REGULATORY provides that: No. 37, pages 10950–10952) and provides criteria and examples of types COMMISSION The Commission shall submit to of events that the Commission uses in Congress each quarter a report listing for Abnormal Occurrence Reports: determining whether a particular event that period any AOs at or associated Implementation of Section 208 Energy is reportable to Congress as an AO. The with any facility which is licensed or Reorganization Act of 1974; Proposed Commission has since refined this otherwise regulated pursuant to the Policy Statement statement of policy on a number of Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, occasions to reflect changes in or pursuant to this Act. For the purposes AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory regulation and policy. On the basis of of this Section, an AO is an Commission. these criteria, and as required by unscheduled incident or event which ACTION: Proposed policy statement. Section 208 of the Energy the Commission has determined to be Reorganization Act of 1974, as SUMMARY: significant from the standpoint of public This policy statement amended, the Commission has issued health and safety. Nothing in the presents the revised criteria the quarterly reports to Congress on AOs preceding sentence shall limit the Commission is considering for use in since March 1977. These reports, submitting the quarterly abnormal authority of a court to review the determination of the Commission. Each occurrence (AO) reports to Congress and 1 Copies of the NUREG–0090 series may be the public in a timely manner as stated such report shall contain: obtained from the Superintendent of Documents, in Section 208 of the Energy (1) The date and place of each U.S. Government Printing Office, Mail Stop SSOP, Reorganization Act of 1974, as occurrence; Washington, DC 20402–9328, the National (2) The nature and probable Technical Information Service, 5285 Port Royal amended. The AO policy statement has Road, Springfield, VA 22161, and the NRC Public been revised to provide more specific consequence of each occurrence; Document Room, 2120 L Street, NW (Lower Level), criteria for determining those incidents (3) The cause or causes of each; and Washington, DC. 20037 662 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 6 / Tuesday, January 9, 1996 / Notices

‘‘Report to Congress on Abnormal Commission considers significant from revise the policy statement accordingly Occurrences,’’ have been issued in the standpoint of public health and and then resubmit it to the Commission NUREG–0090–6 through 10 and safety. The policy reflects a range of for final approval. The policy statement NUREG–0090, Volumes 1 through 18. health and safety concerns and is is currently scheduled to be presented Based on its experience to date in the applicable to incidents and events to the Commission for final approval preparation and issuance of AO reports, involving a single occupational worker during the summer of 1996. the Commission has decided that its as well as those having an overall General Statement of Policy on responsibilities under Section 208 can impact on the general public. be carried out more appropriately if the The policy statement contains criteria Implementation of Section 208 of the existing AO criteria are updated to that include the reporting thresholds for Energy Reorganization Act of 1974, as reflect changes in the Commission’s determining those incidents and events Amended policy and changes to the regulations. that are reportable by NRC for the 1. Applicability—Implementation of Accordingly, the Commission is issuing purposes of Section 208 of the Energy Section 208 of the Energy this general statement of policy that Reorganization Act of 1974, as Reorganization Act of 1974, as describes the manner in which the amended. The Commission has amended, Abnormal Occurrence Commission will, as part of the routine established the reporting thresholds at a Reports, involves the conduct of conduct of its business, carry out its level which will assure that all events Commission business and does not responsibilities under Section 208 of the that should be considered for reporting impose requirements on licensees. Energy Reorganization Act of 1974, as to Congress will be identified. At the Reports will cover certain unscheduled amended, for identifying AOs and same time, the thresholds are generally incidents or events related to the making the requisite information above the normal level of reporting to manufacture, construction, or operation concerning each such occurrence NRC to exclude those events which of a facility or conduct of an activity available to Congress and the public in involve some variance from regulatory subject to the requirements of Parts 20, a timely manner. Included in the policy limits, but are not significant from the 30 through 36, 39, 40, 50, 61, 70, 71, or statement are criteria that the standpoint of public health and safety. 72 of Chapter I, Title 10, Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR). Commission will use in determining Licensee Reports whether a particular event is a Under an exchange of information reportable AO within the meaning of This general statement of policy will program, Agreement States provide Section 208. It is expected that as not change the reporting requirements information to NRC on incidents and additional experience is gained, changes imposed on NRC licensees by events involving applicable nuclear in the criteria may be required. Commission regulations, license materials that have occurred in their conditions, or technical specifications States. Those events reported by Paperwork Reduction Act Statement (TS). NRC licensees will continue to Agreement States that reach the This proposed policy statement does submit required reports on a wide threshold for reporting as an AO are also not contain a new or amended spectrum of events, including events published in the quarterly ‘‘Report to information collection requirement such as instrument malfunctions and Congress on Abnormal Occurrences.’’ subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act deviations from normal operating 2. Definition of terms—As used in this of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). Existing procedures that are not significant from policy statement: (a) An abnormal requirements were approved by the the standpoint of the public health and occurrence means an unscheduled Office of Management and Budget, safety but which provide data useful to incident or event at a facility or approval 3150–0014, 10 CFR Part 20; the Commission in monitoring operating associated with an activity that is 3150–0017, 10 CFR Part 30; 3150–0016, trends of licensed facilities and in licensed or otherwise regulated, 10 CFR Part 31; 3150–0001, 10 CFR Part comparing the actual performance of pursuant to the Atomic Energy Act of 32; 3150–0015, 10 CFR Part 33; 3150– these facilities with the potential 1954, as amended, or the Energy 0007, 10 CFR Part 34; 3150–0010, 10 performance for which the facilities Reorganization Act of 1974, as CFR Part 35; 3150–0158, 10 CFR Part 36; were designed and/or licensed. amended, that the Commission 3150–0130, 10 CFR Part 39; 3150–0020, Information pertaining to all events determines to be significant from the 10 CFR Part 40; 3150–0011, 10 CFR Part reported to NRC will continue to be standpoint of public health and safety; 50; 3150–0135, 10 CFR Part 61; 3150– made available and placed in the public and (b) an unintended radiation 0009, 10 CFR Part 70; 3150–0008, 10 document rooms for public perusal. In exposure includes any occupational CFR Part 71; and 3150–0132, 10 CFR addition, NRC publishes annual reports exposure, exposure to the general Part 72; 3150–0002, 10 CFR Part 73; and on events (NUREG–1272 series). public, or exposure as a result of a 3150–0093, 10 CFR Part 100. Information can also be obtained by medical misadministration (as defined writing to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory in 10 CFR 35.2) involving the wrong Public Protection Notification Commission, Public Document Room, individual that exceeds the reporting The NRC may not conduct or sponsor, Washington, DC 20555. In addition, the values established in the regulations. and a person is not required to respond Commission will continue to issue news All other reported medical to, a collection of information unless it announcements on events that seem to misadministrations will be considered displays a currently valid OMB control be newsworthy whether or not they are for reporting as an AO under the criteria number reported as AOs. for medical licensees. In addition, The Commission invites all interested unintended radiation exposures include Abnormal Occurrence Reporting persons who wish to submit written any exposure to a nursing infant, fetus, The general statement of policy has comments or suggestions on the AO or embryo as a result of an exposure been developed to comply with the criteria in this policy statement. A (other than an occupational exposure to legislative intent of Section 208 of the period of 90 days from the date of an undeclared pregnant woman) to a Energy Reorganization Act of 1974, as publication has been established for nursing mother or pregnant woman. amended, to keep Congress and the receiving comments pertaining to this 3. Abnormal occurrence general public informed of unscheduled proposed policy statement. The NRC statement of policy—The Commission incidents or events which the staff will analyze all comments and will apply the following policy in Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 6 / Tuesday, January 9, 1996 / Notices 663 determining whether an incident or 1. Any unintended radiation exposure 1. Any lost, stolen, or abandoned event at a facility or involving an to an adult (any individual 18 years of sources that exceed 0.01 times the A1 activity that is licensed or otherwise age or older) resulting in an annual total values, as listed in 10 CFR Part 71, regulated by the Commission is an AO effective dose equivalent (TEDE) of 250 Appendix A, Table A–1, for special within the purview of Section 208 of the millisievert (mSv) (25 rem) or more; or form (sealed/nondispersible) sources, or Energy Reorganization Act of 1974, as the sum of the annual deep dose the smaller of the A2 or 0.01 times the amended. equivalent and committed dose A1 values, as listed in Table A–1, for An incident or event will be equivalent to any individual organ or normal form (unsealed/ dispersible) considered an AO if it involves a major tissue, other than bone marrow, the lens sources or for sources for which the reduction in the degree of protection of of the eye, or gonads of 2500 mSv (250 form is not known. Excluded from the public health or safety. Such an rem) or more; or an annual dose reporting under this criterion are those incident or event would have a equivalent to bone marrow, the lens of events involving sources that are lost, moderate or more severe impact on the the eye, or gonads of 500 mSv (50 rem) stolen, or abandoned under the public health or safety and could or more; or an annual shallow-dose following conditions: sources include but need not be limited to the equivalent to the skin or extremities of abandoned in accordance with the following: 2500 mSv (250 rem) or more. requirements of 10 CFR 39.77(c); sealed (1) Moderate exposure to, or release 2. Any unintended radiation exposure sources contained in labeled, rugged of, radioactive material licensed by or to any minor (an individual less than 18 source housings; recovered sources with otherwise regulated by the Commission; years of age) resulting in an annual sufficient indication that doses in excess (2) Major degradation of essential TEDE of 50 mSv (5 rem) or more, or to of the reporting thresholds specified in safety-related equipment; or an embryo/fetus resulting in a dose AO criteria I.A.1 and I.A.2 did not occur (3) Major deficiencies in design, equivalent of 50 mSv (5 rem) or more. during the time the source was missing; 3. Any radiation exposure that has construction, use of, or management and unrecoverable sources lost under resulted in unintended permanent controls for licensed facilities or such conditions that doses in excess of functional damage to an organ or a the reporting thresholds specified in AO material. physiological system as determined by a Criteria by type of event used to criteria I.A.1 and I.A.2 were not known physician. to have occurred. determine which incidents or events B. Discharge or Dispersal of 2. A substantiated case of actual or will be considered for reporting as AOs Radioactive Material from its Intended attempted theft or diversion of licensed are set out in Appendix A of this policy Place of Confinement: statement. 1. The release of radioactive material material or sabotage of a facility. 4. Commission dissemination of AO to an unrestricted area in concentrations 3. Any substantiated loss of special information. which, if averaged over a period of 24 nuclear material or any substantiated (a) The Commission will provide as hours, exceed 5000 times the values inventory discrepancy that is judged to wide a dissemination of information to specified in Table 2 of Appendix B to be significant relative to normally the public as reasonably possible. A 10 CFR Part 20, unless the licensee has expected performance, and that is Federal Register notice will be issued demonstrated compliance with 10 CFR judged to be caused by theft or diversion on each AO with copies distributed to 20.1301 using 20.1302(b)(1) or or by substantial breakdown of the the NRC Public Document Room and all 20.1302(b)(2)(ii). accountability system. local public document rooms. When 2. Radiation levels in excess of the 4. Any substantial breakdown of additional information is anticipated, design values for a package, or the loss physical security or material control the notice will state that the information of confinement of radioactive material (i.e., access control containment or can be obtained at the NRC Public resulting in one or more of the accountability systems) that Document Room and in all local public following: (a) A radiation dose rate of 10 significantly weakened the protection document rooms. mSv (1 rem) per hour or more at 1 meter against theft, diversion, or sabotage. (b) Each quarter, the Commission will (3.28 feet) from the accessible external D. Other Events (i.e., those concerning submit a report to Congress listing for surface of a package containing design, analysis, construction, testing, that period any AOs at or associated radioactive material, (b) a radiation dose operation, use, or disposal of licensed with any facility or activity which is rate of 50 mSv (5 rem) per hour or more facilities or regulated materials): licensed or otherwise regulated on the accessible external surface of a 1. An accidental criticality [10 CFR pursuant to the Atomic Energy Act of package containing radioactive material 70.52(a)]. 1954, as amended, or the Energy and that meet the requirements for 2. A major deficiency in design, Reorganization Act of 1974, as ‘‘exclusive use’’ as defined in 10 CFR construction, control, or operation amended. This report will contain the 71.47, or (c) release of radioactive having significant safety implications date, place, nature, and probable material from a package in amounts requiring immediate remedial action. consequence of each AO, the cause or greater than the regulatory limits in 10 3. A serious deficiency in causes of each AO, and any action taken CFR 71.51(a)(2). management or procedural controls in to prevent recurrence. C. Theft, Diversion, or Loss of major areas. Licensed Material, or Sabotage or 4. Series of events (where individual Appendix A—Abnormal Occurrence Security Breach 2: events are not of major importance), Criteria recurring incidents, and incidents with Criteria by types of events used to 2 Information pertaining to certain incidents may implications for similar facilities be either classified or under consideration for determine which incidents or events classification because of national security (generic incidents) that create a major will be considered for reporting as AOs implications. Classified information will be safety concern. are as follows: withheld when formally reporting these incidents in accordance with Section 208 of the Energy II. For Commercial Nuclear Power Plant I. For All Licensees Reorganization Act of 1974, as amended. Any Licensees classified details regarding such incidents would be A. Human Exposure to Radiation from available to the Congress, upon request, under A. Malfunction of Facility, Structures, Licensed Material: appropriate security arrangements. or Equipment: 664 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 6 / Tuesday, January 9, 1996 / Notices

1. Exceeding a safety limit of license by the wrong route of administration, or potential AOs to the Commission is TS [10 CFR 50.36(c)]. (iii) is delivered to the wrong treatment important and requires established 2. Serious degradation of fuel site, or (iv) is delivered by the wrong reporting thresholds whenever integrity, primary coolant pressure treatment mode, or (v) is from a leaking practicable. These reporting thresholds boundary, or primary containment source(s). were selected with the intent of boundary. capturing the majority of the significant V. Guidelines for ‘‘Other Events of 3. Loss of plant capability to perform events and eliminating nonsignificant Interest’’ essential safety functions such that a events from those to be proposed to the release of radioactive materials, which The Commission may determine that Commission. could result in exceeding the dose limits events other than AOs may be of interest An additional criterion has been of 10 CFR Part 100 or 5 times the dose to Congress and be included in an added for those uncommon significant limits of 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix A, Appendix to the AO report as ‘‘Other events that could occur without General Design Criterion (GDC) 19, Events of Interest’’. Guidelines for triggering a reporting threshold. This could occur from a postulated transient events to be included in the AO report new criterion would require radiation or accident (e.g., loss of emergency core for this purpose are as follows: exposures that have resulted in cooling system, loss of control rod Items that may possibly be perceived unanticipated permanent functional system). by the public to be of health or safety damage of an organ or physiological B. Design or Safety Analysis significance. Such items do not involve system, as determined by a physician, Deficiency, Personnel Error, or a major reduction in the level of be reported to Congress. See Criterion Procedural or Administrative protection provided for public health or I.A.3 in Appendix A. Inadequacy: safety; therefore, they are not reportable The policy statement has also been 1. Discovery of a major condition not as abnormal occurrences. An example is revised to include changes that have specifically considered in the safety an event where upon final evaluation by been made to the regulations. analysis report (SAR) or TS that requires an NRC Incident Investigation Team, or The revised criteria have been applied immediate remedial action. an Agreement State equivalent response, to events previously considered as 2. Personnel error or procedural a determination is made that such event potential AOs to ensure that the new deficiencies that result in loss of plant does not meet the criteria for an criteria will identify significant events capability to perform essential safety abnormal occurrence. and eliminate nonsignificant events functions such that a release of Supplemental Information—Bases for from those to be proposed to the radioactive materials, which could Revised Abnormal Occurrence Commission. A similar review of events result in exceeding the dose limits of 10 Reporting Policy Statement involving lost, stolen, and abandoned CFR Part 100 or 5 times the dose limits source events has also been performed. of 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix A, GDC 19, 1. Discussion—The AO reporting The results of these reviews were could occur from a postulated transient policy has been developed to comply documented in Attachments 2, and 3 to or accident (e.g., loss of emergency core with the legislative intent of Section 208 the Commission paper, SECY–95–083, cooling system, loss of control rod of the Energy Reorganization Act of ‘‘Revised Abnormal Occurrence system). 1974, as amended, to keep Congress and Criteria,’’ dated April 5, 1995. the public informed of unscheduled 2. Definition of terms—Terms relating III. For Fuel Cycle Licensees incidents or events which the to the bases for the AO reporting criteria 1. A required plant shutdown as a Commission considers significant from are defined as follows: result of violating a license condition the standpoint of public health and (a) Nonstochastic effects are those safety limit. safety. The policy reflects a range of health effects, the severity of which 2. A major condition not specifically health and safety concerns related to varies with the dose, and for which a considered in the SAR or TS that production and utilization facilities and threshold is believed to exist. Radiation- requires immediate remedial action. the possession and use of byproduct, induced cataract formation is an 3. An event that seriously source, and special nuclear materials example of a nonstochastic effect (also compromises the ability of a licensed or otherwise regulated called deterministic effect). [10 CFR confinement system to perform its pursuant to the Atomic Energy Act of 20.1003] designated function. 1954, as amended, or to the Energy (b) Stochastic effects are those health Reorganization Act of 1974, as IV. For Medical Licensees effects that occur randomly and for amended. These safety concerns can which the probability of the effect A medical misadministration that: include events ranging from an occurring, rather than its severity, is (a) results in a dose that is (1) equal overexposure of a single occupational assumed to be a linear function of dose to or greater than 1 gray (Gy) (100 rads) worker to those having an overall without threshold. Hereditary effects to a major portion of the bone marrow, impact on the general public. and cancer incidence are examples of to the lens of the eye, or to the gonads, The revised policy statement provides stochastic effects. [10 CFR 20.1003] or (2) equal to or greater than 10 Gy a more usable policy for determining (c) Threshold dose denotes the (1000 rads) to any other organ; and which events will be reported to amount of radiation below which no (b) represents either (1) a dose or Congress as AOs. The revised AO effect under consideration is likely to dosage that is at least 50 percent greater criteria in Appendix A contain more occur. Threshold dose is applicable to than that prescribed in a written discrete reporting thresholds than those deterministic effects. directive or (2) a prescribed dose or previously provided in the examples of (d) Reporting threshold denotes a dosage that (i) is the wrong AOs for easier and consistent discrete value at or above which an radiopharmaceutical,3 or (ii) is delivered application of the provisions established occurrence will be considered for by the policy statement for reporting to reporting as an AO. 3 The wrong radiopharmaceutical as used in the Congress. 3. Abnormal occurrence criteria— AO criterion for medical misadministrations refers to any radiopharmaceutical other than the one The consistent application of the AO The AO criteria provide the reporting listed in the written directive or in the diagnostic criteria by the staff, Agreement States, threshold for determining those events clinical procedures manual. and licensees for proposing events as that are reportable for purposes of Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 6 / Tuesday, January 9, 1996 / Notices 665

Section 208 of the Energy adult (18 years of age and older) lens of the eye. [NCRP Commentary No. Reorganization Act of 1974, as resulting in an annual TEDE of 250 mSv 7] amended. The Commission has (25 rem) or more, is based on the • It is below the threshold dose for established criteria that contain following: permanent sterility from a single dose to reporting thresholds intended to • It is greater than the regulatory the gonads. [NCRP Commentary No. 7] identify those events that are likely to be allowable TEDE limit (50 mSv [5 rem]) (d) The reporting threshold for an significant from the standpoint of public for annual occupational exposure unintended annual shallow-dose health and safety. At the same time, the established in 10 CFR 20.1201(a)(1)(i). equivalent to the skin or extremities AO reporting thresholds established by • It is equal to the generally accepted (extremities include the hand, elbow, the criteria are generally above the level of exposure that is considered by arm below the elbow, foot, knee, leg normal level of reporting events to NRC the industry to be a significant below the knee) of an adult, resulting in to exclude those events which involve unplanned occupational overexposure. 2500 mSv (250 rem) or more is based on some variance from regulatory limits, • It is at a level of exposure for which the following: but are not significant enough from the the potential for morbidity is considered • It is greater than the allowable standpoint of public health and safety to for individuals with an increased organ regulatory limit (500 mSv [50 rem]) for be reported to Congress. and tissue sensitivity to radiation (e.g., annual occupational shallow-dose 4. Basis—The following discussion a genetic condition causing an equivalent to the skin or to any provides the basis for the changes to the individual to be heterozygous as a result extremity as established in 10 CFR AO reporting criteria as documented in of the ataxia telangiectasia gene 4). 20.1201(a)(2)(ii). • Appendix A of the policy statement. (b) The reporting threshold for an It is below the threshold dose for unintended radiation exposure to an detrimental deterministic effects in the I. For All Licensees: organ of an adult (other than bone tissue of the skin, and the bone (other A. Human Exposure to Radiation from marrow, lens of the eye, and gonads) than the bone marrow) and muscle of Licensed Material: resulting in the sum of the annual deep the extremities. [NCRP Commentary No. Criterion I.A.1: Any unintended dose equivalent and committed dose 7] radiation exposure to an adult (any equivalent to any individual organ or Criterion I.A.2 has been added in individual 18 years of age or older) tissue of 2500 mSv (250 rem) or more response to the Commission’s request in resulting in an annual total effective is based on the following: the SRM of May 19, 1994 on SECY–93– dose equivalent (TEDE) of 250 • It is greater than the allowable 259, to reaffirm that a single reporting millisievert (mSv) (25 rem) or more; or regulatory limit for occupational threshold for unintended exposure is the sum of the annual deep dose exposure (500 mSv [50 rem]) for the acceptable. The potential for adverse equivalent and committed dose sum of the deep-dose equivalent and the health effects from radiation is equivalent to any individual organ or committed dose equivalent to an organ independent of an individual’s status as tissue, other than bone marrow, the lens or tissue (other than the lens of the eye) a radiation worker, wrong individual, or of the eye, or gonads of 2500 mSv (250 established by 10 CFR 20.1201(a)(1)(ii). member of the general public. rem) or more; or an annual dose • It is below the different morbidity Therefore, assigning a single dose value equivalent to bone marrow, the lens of threshold doses for deterministic effects for unintended radiation exposures is the eye, or gonads of 500 mSv (50 rem) in radiosensitive organs such as consistent with the requirements of or more; or an annual shallow-dose gastrointestinal track mortality, Section 208 of the Energy equivalent to the skin or extremities of pulmonary lethality, and mental Reorganization Act of 1974, as 2500 mSv (250 rem) or more. [10 CFR incapacitation. [National Council on amended. However, health effects are 20.1201(a)(1), 20.1201(a)(2), and 35.2] Radiation Protection and Measurements age dependent because organs and Criterion I.A.2: Any unintended (NCRP) Commentary No. 7] tissues in minors, fetuses, and embryos radiation exposure to any minor (an (c) The reporting threshold for an are more radiosensitive than in a typical individual less than 18 years of age) unintended radiation exposure to bone adult. Because of increased resulting in an annual TEDE of 50 mSv marrow, lens of the eye, or gonads of an radiosensitivity, a lower dose threshold (5 rem) or more, or to an embryo/fetus adult resulting in 500 mSv (50 rem) or for minors (including occupational resulting in a dose equivalent of 50 mSv more is based on the following: exposures to minors), fetuses, and • (5 rem) or more. [10 CFR20.1207, and It is equal to the allowable embryos has been included for AO 20.1301] regulatory limit for the sum of the reporting. Criterion I.A.1 and Criterion I.A.2 annual deep dose equivalent and Criterion I.A.2 contains the reporting have been revised to reflect guidance committed dose equivalent for thresholds for unintended radiation provided by the Commission, and to occupational exposures (0.5 Sv [50 exposures to any minor. This criterion incorporate the changes to 10 CFR Part rem]) to the bone marrow or gonads; and considers both deterministic and 20, that became mandatory on January greater than the allowable regulatory stochastic effects for the purpose of 1, 1994. limit (150 mSv [15 rem]) for an annual radiation protection. Criterion I.A.1 has been revised to occupational dose equivalent to the lens (a) The reporting thresholds for an establish reporting thresholds for of the eye as established in 10 CFR unintended radiation exposure resulting unintended exposures to adults 20.1201(a)(2)(i). in an annual TEDE of 50 mSv (5 rem) including TEDEs, and individual doses • It is at the threshold dose for initial or more to a minor or a dose equivalent to organs, lens of the eye, skin, and signs of temporary bone marrow of 50 mSv (5 rem) or more to an embryo/ extremities. The changes to this depression. [NCRP Commentary No. 7] fetus are based on the potential for • criterion takes into consideration It is at the minimum threshold dose permanent adverse health effects during deterministic and stochastic effects for for known deterministic effects in the the most radiosensitive period from the the purposes of radiation protection. point of conception to adulthood and The bases for the reporting thresholds 4 T.J. McMillian; ‘‘The Molecular Basis of include the following: Radiosensitivity;’’ In The Biological Basis of • are as follows. Radiosensitivity, Second Edition; (EDS: G.G. Steel, It is greater than the allowable (a) The reporting threshold for an G.E. Adams, and A. Horwich); Elsevier Science regulatory limit (1 mSv [0.1 rem] or 10 unintended radiation exposure to an Publishers B.V.; copyright 1989. percent of the limits established in 10 666 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 6 / Tuesday, January 9, 1996 / Notices

CFR 20.1201) for annual exposures to gestation) of embryo or fetus 20.1207. The 50 mSv (5 rem) TEDE individuals other than radiation workers development. The reporting threshold reporting threshold for minors is 20 and occupational dose limits for minors (50 mSv [5 rem]) is at the threshold dose percent of the threshold dose as established in 10 CFR 20.1301 and for reduced head size but no adverse established for adults in Criterion I.A.1. 20.1207, respectively. health effects are anticipated at this If individual organ reporting thresholds • It is below the minimum threshold dose. [NCRP Commentary No. 7] for minor occupational workers were doses for permanent deterministic (b) Organ doses limits are not also reduced by 20 percent (Refer to effects in selective organs of minors provided in this criterion because the Table 1, ‘‘Conversion from TEDE to because the annual TEDE reporting intent of Section 208 is addressed with Organ Dose’’), the resulting dose values threshold for minors of 50 mSv (5 rem) the single TEDE limit based on the would be close in magnitude or more equates to individual organ doses less following: than the known doses that will result in • Individual organ doses for minors as conservative than organ doses that deterministic effects. (Refer to item (b) members of the general public would would equate to the 50 mSv (5 rem) below.) [NCRP Commentary No. 7] not be consistent with the requirements TEDE reporting threshold. This • It is below the individual threshold of 10 CFR 20.1301, ‘‘Dose limits for assessment is based on the ‘‘Organ Dose dose (100 mSv [10 rem]) for known individual members of the general Weighting Factors’’ as provided in 10 permanent adverse health effects public.’’ CFR 20.1003 which result in the (mental retardation) during the most • Individual occupational organ doses following data: radiosensitive period (8 to 15 weeks of for minors are defined in 10 CFR

TABLE 1.ÐCONVERSION FROM TEDE TO ORGAN DOSE

Organ Reduced** Weighting dose to reporting Criterion Organ factor yield 50 threshold I.A.1 mSv* for minors threshold

Whole Body ...... 1.0 50 mSv 50 mSv 250 mSv Gonads ...... 0.25 200 mSv 100 mSv 500 mSv Breast ...... 0.15 330 mSv 500 mSv 2500 mSv Bone marrow ...... 0.12 420 mSv 100 mSv 500 mSv Lungs ...... 0.12 420 mSv 500 mSv 2500 mSv Thyroid ...... 0.03 1670 500 mSv 2500 mSv mSv Bone surface ...... 0.03 1670 500 mSv 2500 mSv mSv * Organ Dose/Weighting Factor. ** 0.2 x Criterion I.A.1 reporting thresholds.

[10 CFR 20.1003, 20.1201, 20.1207, and the licensee has demonstrated containing radioactive material, (b) a 20.1301] compliance with 10 CFR 20.1301 using radiation dose rate of 50 mSv (5 rem) • Individual organs that do not have 20.1302(b)(1) or 20.1302(b)(2)(ii). [10 per hour or more on the accessible a weighting factor are still considered in CFR 20.1301, 20.1302(b)(1), or external surface of a package containing the revised criteria by Criterion I.A.3, 20.1302(b)(2)(ii)] radioactive material and that meet the which requires reporting to Congress Criterion I.B.1 has been revised to requirements for ‘‘exclusive use’’ as any permanent functional damage as a reflect changes to 10 CFR Part 20 that defined in 10 CFR 71.47, or (c) release result of an exposure to an individual became mandatory on January 1, 1994, of radioactive material from a package organ. [10 CFR 20.1003 and 20.1301] and to maintain the same thresholds for in amounts greater than the regulatory Criterion I.A.3: Any radiation reporting as required by the existing AO limits in 10 CFR 71.51(a)(2). [10 CFR exposure that has resulted in criterion. The existing reporting 71.47(a) and 71.51(i)(1)] unintended permanent functional threshold of ‘‘500 times the regulatory Criterion I.B.2 has been revised to damage to an organ or a physiological limit of Appendix B, Table II, 10 CFR take into consideration additional system as determined by a physician. Part 20’’ was increased to ‘‘5000 times regulatory requirements in 10 CFR Part [General] the values specified in Table 2 of 71. This criterion has been changed to Criterion I.A.3 has been added to Appendix B to 10 CFR Part 20’’ because include limits for packages that meet the identify for reporting those incidents or the implied dose limit of 5 mSv (500 requirements for ‘‘exclusive use’’ as events that have resulted in an organ or mrem) used to calculate the defined in 10 CFR 71.47, a radiation physiological system morbidity or concentration values in Table 2 of dose rate of 50 mSv (5 rem) per hour or mortality at dose levels below the Appendix B was decreased to 0.5 mSv more on the accessible external surface established AO reporting thresholds. (50 mrem) in the revision to 10 CFR Part of a package containing radioactive B. Discharge or Dispersal of 20. material, or the loss of confinement of Radioactive Material from its Intended Criterion I.B.2: Radiation levels in radioactive material from a package in Place of Confinement: excess of the design values for a amounts greater than the regulatory Criterion I.B.1: The release of package, or the loss of confinement of limits. radioactive material to an unrestricted radioactive material resulting in one or The contamination requirement was area in concentrations that, if averaged more of the following: (a) a radiation removed from this criterion because over a period of 24 hours, exceed 5000 dose rate of 10 mSv (1 rem) per hour or certain shipping casks often experience times the values specified in Table 2 of more at 1 meter (3.28 feet) from the contamination beyond licensee control Appendix B to 10 CFR Part 20, unless accessible external surface of a package after decontamination requirements had Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 6 / Tuesday, January 9, 1996 / Notices 667 been met as a result of contaminants equivalent of 50 mSv (5 rem); a ingestion of an improper transfer or ‘‘leaching’’ from the pores of the outer committed dose equivalent to any disposal of an unsealed (dispersible) surface of the shipping cask. This individual organs including the skin of source was calculated to be 2 × 10 ±6. leaching effect typically occurs as a 0.5 Sv (50 rem); or in special cases, a This calculated value was based on the result of condensation on the exterior of 0.15 Sv (15 rem) dose to the lens of the review of an actual accident with the shipping cask that occurs during eye of any member of the general public, extensive uptake information (for 194 shipping. Contamination from this assuming that an exposure occurs as a cleanup workers and 77 members of the phenomena is not a public health and result of a source being stolen or lost. general public). Both average fraction- safety concern and will not be reported (a) The A1 values in 10 CFR Part 71, taken-in values for transportation to Congress. Appendix A, Table A–1, represent the accidents, and events involving lost or C. Theft, Diversion, or Loss of source strength for sealed stolen sources are comparable. Licensed Material, or Sabotage or (nondispersible) sources that will result Therefore, the A2 values can be used Security Breach: in exceeding an effective dose directly to determine the source Criterion I.C.1: Any lost, stolen, or equivalent of 50 mSv (5 rem), from an strengths for lost and stolen unsealed abandoned sources that exceed 0.01 exterior exposure at 1 meter (3.28 feet sources that will result in a deep dose times the A 1 values, as listed in 10 CFR [ft]) for 30 minutes. The proximity and equivalent, committed dose equivalent, Part 71, Appendix A, Table A–1, for duration factors of 1 meter (3.28 ft) for or shallow dose equivalent of 0.5 Sv (50 special form (sealed/non-dispersible) 30 minutes are based on the estimated rem). sources, or the smaller of the A2 or 0.01 exposure conditions during a The smaller of the two values, the A2 times the A1 values, as listed in Table transportation accident involving or 0.01 times the A1 values, is used for A–1, for normal form (unsealed/ licensed materials, typically a a dispersible source because the dispersible) sources or for sources for controlled situation. material may not be dispersed and can which the form is not known. Excluded For the loss or theft of a sealed source, perform as a sealed source resulting in from reporting under this criterion are it has been conservatively calculated in external exposure. Therefore, if the those events involving sources that are a study 5 performed by Oak Ridge source strength is greater than the 0.01 lost, stolen, or abandoned under the Institute for Science and Education times the A1 value or greater than the A2 following conditions: sources (ORISE) that the accident-weighted value, the potential exists for exceeding abandoned in accordance the average exposure proximity and an effective or committed effective dose requirements of 10 CFR 39.77(c); sealed duration factors are 1 meter for 46 hours equivalent of 50 mSv (5 rem); a sources contained in labeled, rugged for the improper transfer or disposal of committed dose equivalent to any source housings; recovered sources with licensed material. To account for the individual organs, including the skin, of sufficient indication that doses in excess longer duration at 1 meter, from 30 0.5 Sv (50 rem); or in special cases, a of the reporting thresholds specified in minutes to 46 hours (approximately 0.15 Sv (15 rem) dose equivalent to the AO criteria I.A.1 and I.A.2 did not occur 1:100), conservatively assuming that the lens of the eye. If the form of the source during the time the source was missing; entire exposure is received by one material is unknown, the smaller of the and unrecoverable sources lost under individual, the A1 values in 10 CFR Part two values is also used to ensure all such conditions that doses in excess of 71, Appendix A, Table A–1, will need potentially reportable incidents and the reporting thresholds specified in AO to be decreased by a factor of 100. The events are submitted to the Commission criteria I.A.1 and I.A.2 were not known multiples (0.01 × A1 values) of the A1 for consideration as an AO. to have occurred. [10 CFR 20.2201(a)(i), values in 10 CFR Part 71, Appendix A, (c) Sources abandoned in accordance 30.50(a), 40.60(a), and 70.50(a)] Table A–1, will determine the source with the requirement of 10 CFR 39.77(c) Criterion I.C.1 has been revised to strength of a source that will result in are excluded from reporting because include the reporting of lost or stolen exceeding an effective dose equivalent these sources do not represent an sources that exceed 0.01 times the A1 of 50 mSv (5 rem) from external uncontrolled condition or potential values, as listed in 10 CFR Part 71, exposures. effects adverse to public health and Appendix A, Table A–1, for ‘‘special (b) The A2 values in 10 CFR Part 71, safety. form’’ (sealed/nondispersible) sources, Appendix A, Table A–1, represent the (d) Sealed (nondispersible) sources or the smaller of the A2 or 0.01 times the source strength for an unsealed source contained in labeled, rugged source A1 values, as listed in Table A–1, for (dispersible) that will result in a deep housings are excluded from reporting to ‘‘normal form’’ (unsealed/dispersible) dose equivalent or committed dose Congress because public health and sources. Excluded from reporting under equivalent to any individual organs of safety have been shown to be reasonably this criterion are those events involving 0.5 Sv (50 rem), a shallow dose protected during the loss or theft of sources that are lost, stolen, or equivalent to the skin of 0.5 Sv (50 rem), sources that are maintained in source abandoned under the following or in special cases, a 0.15 Sv (15 rem) housings. This exclusion is based on the conditions: sources abandoned per the dose equivalent to the lens of the eye. following reasons: requirement of 10 CFR 39.77(c); sealed These dose values are based on the • A sealed source as defined in NRC sources contained in labeled, rugged assumptions that the estimated release Regulatory Guide 10.10 is radioactive source housings; recovered sources with fraction ranges from 10 ±3 to 10 ±2 and material contained in a protective sufficient indication that doses in excess the uptake fraction ranges from 10 ±4 to envelope (capsule), contained in a foil, of the reporting thresholds specified in 10 ±3 from inhalation and/or ingestion or plated on an inactive surface that AO criteria I.A.1 and I.A.2 did not occur (average fraction-taken-in = 10 ±6). serves as a dispersion barrier. during the time the source was missing; In the ORISE study, the average • A source housing as defined in and unrecoverable sources lost under fraction-taken-in from inhalation and American National Standard Institute such conditions that doses in excess of (ANSI) N538 is an enclosure containing the reporting thresholds specified in AO 5 Daniel J. Strom, Ph.D., C.H.P., Staff Scientist, or incorporating the source, source criteria I.A.1 and I.A.2 were not known Operational Health Physics Group, Health holder, and a means of attenuation Protection Department, Pacific Northwest to have occurred. These reporting Laboratory, ‘‘Improper Transfer/Disposal Scenarios (shielding) of the radiation. thresholds are based on not exceeding for Generally Licensed Devices Study,’’ Task 7, June A source housing is generally an effective or committed effective dose 3, 1994. required to be designed and constructed 668 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 6 / Tuesday, January 9, 1996 / Notices with ‘‘rugged’’ characteristics so that its criteria I.A.1 and I.A.2 were not known could result in exceeding the dose limits integrity will be maintained under to have occurred is not significant from of 10 CFR Part 100 or 5 times the dose normal conditions of use and under the standpoint of public health and limits of 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix A, likely accident conditions and with safety. GDC 19, could occur from a postulated safety mechanisms installed to prevent Criterion I.C.2: No change to this transient or accident (e.g., loss of accidental access to the source. In criterion. emergency core cooling system, loss of addition, many general licensed Criterion I.C.3: No change to this control rod system). [10 CFR 50.34(a)(1) housings are designed to restrict access criterion. and 50.73(b)(2)(ii)(J)] to the source for other than its specific Criterion I.C.4: No change to this Criterion II.B.2 has been revised to intended use. criterion. include a reference to 5 times the dose • ANSI N538 3.4.1 recommends D. Other Events (i.e., those concerning limits in 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix A, sufficient shielding for shielded gauges design, analysis, construction, testing, GDC 19. This reference adds control to limit dose rates to 0.05 mSv (5 mrem) operation, use or disposal of licensed room habitability reporting per hour at 30 centimeters (cm) (11.8 facilities or regulated materials): requirements consistent with the AO inches), and 10 CFR 34.21(a) requires Criterion I.D.1: No change to this overexposure reporting requirements sufficient shielding for radiography criterion. established in Criterion I.A.1, ‘‘For All sources to limit exposure rates to 12.9 Criterion I.D.2: No change to this Licensees.’’ × 10 ±5 coulombs per kilogram (50 criterion. milliroentgen) per hour at 15.2 cm (6 Criterion I.D.3: No change to this III. For Fuel Cycle Licensees inches). Assuming a conversion factor of criterion. Criterion III.1: A required plant 1 roentgen to 1 rem, these shielding Criterion I.D.4: No change to this shutdown as a result of violating a recommendations will ensure that an criterion. license condition safety limit. [10 CFR effective dose equivalent of 50 mSv (5 II. For Commercial Nuclear Power Plant 50.36(c)] rem) is not exceeded, or in special cases, Licensees Criterion III.1 has been revised to a 0.15 Sv (15 rem) dose equivalent to the more appropriately reference all license lens of the eye from a 46-hour exposure A. Malfunction of Facilities, conditions rather than just TS. to these shielded sources at 1 meter. Structures, or Equipment: Criterion III.2: No change to this • The A1 values in 10 CFR Part 71, Criterion II.A.1: No change to this criterion. Appendix A, Table A–1, assumes that criterion. Criterion III.3: No change to this the shielding and containment are Criterion II.A.2: Serious degradation criterion. completely lost. This loss, however, on of fuel integrity, primary coolant IV. For Medical Licensees the basis of a historical review of 1991– pressure boundary, or primary 1993 events involving lost and stolen containment boundary. The criterion for AO reporting of sources that were later found, is Criterion II.A.2 was edited to better medical misadministrations to patients unlikely for sources contained in source paraphrase the wording in 10 CFR intended to receive a diagnostic or housings. 50.72(b)(B)(ii). therapeutic exposure has been revised • The source housings typically used Criterion II.A.3: Loss of plant as follows: in these applications make it difficult to capability to perform essential safety A medical misadministration that: access the source. functions such that a release of (a) results in a dose that is (1) equal • Source housings with the proper radioactive materials, which could to or greater than 1 gray (Gy) (100 rads) ‘‘radioactive labels’’ displayed have result in exceeding the dose limits of 10 to a major portion of the bone marrow, often been reported by members of the CFR Part 100 or 5 times the dose limits to the lens of the eye, or to the gonads, general public to the proper authorities. of 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix A, General or (2) equal to or greater than 10 Gy The radiation symbol is easily Design Criterion (GDC) 19, could occur (1000 rads) to any other organ; and identified, relatively well known, and from a postulated transient or accident (b) represents either (1) a dose or readily recognized as an indicator of a (e.g., loss of emergency core cooling dosage that is at least 50 percent greater safety hazard. system, loss of control rod system). [10 than that prescribed in a written • A review of the events reported for CFR Part 50.34(a)(1), 50.72(b)(2)(iii), and directive or (2) a prescribed dose or 1991–1993 that involved the loss or 50.73(a)(2)(v)] dosage that (i) is the wrong theft of portable gauges and radiography Criterion II.A.3 has been revised to radiopharmaceutical, or (ii) is delivered devices contained in rugged source include a reference to 5 times the dose by the wrong route of administration, or housings verified that no known limits in 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix A, (iii) is delivered to the wrong treatment exposure from the loss of these types of GDC 19. This reference adds control site, or (iv) is delivered by the wrong devices had occurred. room habitability reporting treatment mode, or (v) is from a leaking (e) Many lost or stolen sources are requirements consistent with the AO source(s). [10 CFR Part 35, International recovered with sufficient indication that overexposure reporting requirements Council on Radiation Protection (ICRP) doses in excess of the reporting established in Criterion I.A.1, ‘‘For All 41, and NCRP Commentary No. 7] thresholds specified in AO criteria I.A.1 Licensees.’’ Medical uses of radiation result in and I.A.2 did not occur during the time B. Design or Safety Analysis diagnostic or therapeutic exposures for the source was missing. A recovered Deficiency, Personnel Error, or the purpose of diagnosing or treating a source, without any indication of Procedural or Administrative disease, alleviating pain, and/or exceeding the dose thresholds specified Inadequacy: minimizing the spread of disease. With in AO criteria I.A.1 or I.A.2 is not Criterion II.B.1: No change to this this in mind, the AO reporting criterion significant from the standpoint of public criterion. has been revised to provide a simpler health and safety. Criterion II.B.2: Personnel error or method for evaluating medical (f) Any unrecoverable source lost procedural deficiencies that result in misadministrations, and to assure that under such conditions (e.g., plane crash, loss of plant capability to perform only those events determined to be fire, etc.) that doses in excess of the essential safety functions such that a significant from the standpoint of public reporting thresholds specified in AO release of radioactive materials, which health and safety are reported. The Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 6 / Tuesday, January 9, 1996 / Notices 669 threshold doses that were selected are may be seen from a single exposure. For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. sufficiently below the thresholds for [NCRP Commentary No. 7] John C. Hoyle, deterministic effects recognizing the (b) The reporting threshold of 10 Gy Secretary of the Commission. normal treatment practice of collimation (1000 rads) selected for all organs other [FR Doc. 96–283 Filed 1–8–96; 8:45 am] than bone marrow, lens of the eye, and and fractionation of doses, where one BILLING CODE 7590±01±P would expect to see permanent organ gonads, is based on the following: and tissue damage for most • It is below the threshold doses at radiosensitive organs in a typical adult, which one would expect to see [Docket Nos. 50±237 and 50±249] and provide a margin of error to identify permanent organ or tissue damage from the potential for harm. normal treatment practices for most Commonwealth Edison Company; Doses used for diagnostic purposes radiosensitive organs in adults. [NCRP Dresden Nuclear Power Station, Units are relatively small and result in limited Commentary No. 7] 2 and 3 Environmental Assessment risk of adverse health effects. However, • It provides a margin of safety for and Finding of No Significant Impact errors in established threshold doses for the risk, albeit small, that exists for The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory most radiosensitive organs in adults. selected diagnostic procedures has been Commission (the Commission) is considered during the selection of the • It is at the estimated threshold dose for some clinically detrimental considering issuance of an exemption reporting thresholds for the revised from certain requirements of its criterion. deterministic effects from conventionally fractionated therapeutic regulations to Facility Operating License Doses used for therapeutic purposes Nos. DPR–19 and DPR–25, issued to in treating cancer customarily approach irradiation that can result in permanent adverse health effects in 1 to 5 percent Commonwealth Edison Company or exceed the tolerance of normal tissue. (ComEd, the licensee), for operation of Therefore, because therapeutic radiation of the patients treated. The permanent the Dresden Nuclear Power Station, doses are intended to kill cells, harmful effects seen at this threshold dose Units 2 and 3, located in Grundy side-effects might be expected from the include the absence of development and County, Illinois. radiation dose prescribed. The arrested growth in the breast and difference between the intended and cartilage of children, respectively. Environmental Assessment most misadministered doses has little [NCRP Commentary No. 7] Identification of the Proposed Action added effect on long-term risk such as These values are based on the cancer. The demonstrated benefits from minimal normal tissue tolerance dose, The proposed action is in accordance the use of byproduct materials in which is defined as the dose to which with the licensee’s application dated medical applications and the long-term a given population of patients is November 20, 1995, for an exemption and/or short-term consequences as a exposed, under a standard set of from certain requirements of 10 CFR result of a medical misadministration, treatment conditions, resulting in no 73.55, ‘‘Requirements for Physical were considered in developing the more than a 5-percent severe Protection of Licensed Activities in revised criterion. complication rate within 5 years after Nuclear Power Reactors Against The criterion for medical licensees treatment. These threshold doses apply Radiological Sabotage.’’ The requested has been revised to consider dose limits to conditions of irradiation relevant to exemption would allow the that are applicable to teletherapy, radiotherapy, that is, doses of implementation of a hand geometry brachytherapy, gamma stereotactic conventionally fractionated ‘‘x’’ or biometric system of site access control radiosurgery, radiopharmaceutical gamma radiation that must be delivered in conjunction with photograph therapy, and sodium iodide and to tissue to cause a serious deterministic identification badges and would allow diagnostic misadministrations. A effect. In addition, these thresholds the badges to be taken off site. allow for a higher dose to be delivered medical misadministration (as defined The Need for the Proposed Action by 10 CFR 35.2) involving the wrong differentially to the tumor. [ICRP 41, individual will be considered for and NCRP Commentary No. 7] Pursuant to 10 CFR 73.55(a), the reporting as an AO under the revised V. Guidelines for ‘‘Other Events of licensee is required to establish and criteria for unintended exposure Interest’’ maintain an onsite physical protection (criteria I.A.1 and I.A.2) because it system and security organization. The Commission may determine that involves an individual who did not give In 10 CFR 73.55(d), ‘‘Access events other than AOs may be of interest prior consent to being exposed, and who Requirements,’’ it specifies in part that to Congress and the public and therefore is not expected to receive any benefit ‘‘The licensee shall control all points of should be included in an Appendix to from an exposure to radiation. However, personnel and vehicle access into a the AO report as ‘‘Other Events of an administration to the wrong protected area.’’ In 10 CFR 73.55(d)(5), Interest’’. The guidelines for ‘‘Other individual must meet the requirements it specifies in part that ‘‘A numbered Events of Interest’’ have been revised to for a medical misadministration as picture badge identification system shall include events that may be perceived by specified in 10 CFR 35.2 before being be used for all individuals who are the public to be of health and safety considered for reporting as an AO. authorized access to protected areas (a) The threshold dose of 1 Gy (100 significance and involve substantial without escort.’’ It further indicates that rads) for bone marrow, lens of the eye, regulatory response, but do not an individual not employed by the or gonads is based on the following: otherwise meet the AO criteria. An licensee (e.g., contractors) may be • It is below the threshold (1.5 Gy example is an event where upon final authorized access to protected areas [150 rads]) for bone marrow mortality evaluation by an NRC Incident without an escort provided the with minimum medical care. [NCRP Investigation Team, or an Agreement individual, ‘‘receives a picture badge Commentary No. 7] State equivalent response, a upon entrance into the protected area • It is equal to the threshold where determination is made that such event which must be returned upon exit from cataracts begin to form. [NCRP does not meet the criteria for an the protected area.’’ Commentary No. 7] abnormal occurrence. Currently, unescorted access for both • It is below the initial threshold (3 Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 3rd day employee and contractor personnel into Gy [300 rads]) where permanent sterility of January 1996. the Dresden Station, Units 2 and 3, is 670 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 6 / Tuesday, January 9, 1996 / Notices controlled through the use of picture The underlying purpose for requiring Agencies and Persons Consulted: badges. Positive identification of that individuals not employed by the In accordance with its stated policy, personnel who are authorized and licensee must receive and return their on January , 1996, the NRC staff request access into the protected areas is picture badges at the entrance/exit is to consulted with the Illinois State official, established by security personnel provide reasonable assurance that the Mr. Frank Niziolek, Head, Reactor making a visual comparison of the access badges could not be Safety Section, Division of Engineering, individual requesting access and that compromised or stolen with a resulting Illinois Department of Nuclear Safety, individual’s picture badge. The picture risk that an unauthorized individual regarding the environmental impact of badges are issued, stored, and retrieved could potentially enter the protected the proposed action. The State official at the entrance/exit location to the area. Although the proposed exemption had no comments. protected area. In accordance with 10 will allow individuals to take their CFR 73.55(d)(5), contractor personnel picture badges off site, the proposed Finding of no Significant Impact are not allowed to take their picture measures require not only that the Based upon the foregoing badges off site. In addition, in picture badge be provided for access to environmental assessment, the accordance with the plant’s physical the protected area, but also that Commission concludes that the security plan, the licensee’s employees verification of the hand geometry proposed action will not have a are also not allowed to take their picture registered with the badge be performed significant effect on the quality of the badges off site. The licensee proposes to as discussed above. Thus, the proposed human environment. Accordingly, the implement an alterative unescorted system provides an identity verification Commission has determined not to access control system which would process that is equivalent to the existing prepare an environmental impact eliminate the need to issue and retrieve process. statement for the proposed action. picture badges at the entrance/exit The change will not increase the For further details with respect to the location to the protected area. The probability or consequences of proposed action, see the licensee’s letter proposal would also allow contractors accidents, no changes are being made in dated November 20, 1995, which is who have unescorted access to keep the types of any effluents that may be available for public inspection at the their picture badges in their possession released offsite, and there is no Commission’s Public Document Room, when departing the Dresden site. In significant increase in the allowable 2120 L Street, NW., Washington, DC, addition, the site security plans will be individual or cumulative occupational and at the local public document room revised to allow implementation of the radiation exposure. Accordingly, the located at the Morris Public Library, 604 hand geometry system and to allow Commission concludes that there are no Liberty Street, Morris, Illinois 60451. significant radiological environmental employees and contractors with Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 3rd day unescorted access to keep their picture impacts associated with the proposed action. of January 1996. badges in their possession when leaving For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. the Dresden site. With regard to potential nonradiological impacts, the proposed George F. Dick Jr., Environmental Impacts of the Proposed action does involve features located Acting Director, Project Directorate III–2, Action entirely within the restricted area as Division of Reactor Projects—III/IV, Office of defined in 10 CFR Part 20. It does not Nuclear Reactor Regulation. The Commission has completed its affect nonradiological plant effluents [FR Doc. 96–284 Filed 1–8–96; 8:45 am] evaluation of the proposed action. The and has no other environmental impact. BILLING CODE 7590±01±P Commission has completed its Accordingly, the Commission concludes evaluation of the proposed action and that there are no significant concludes that the proposed exemption [Docket No. 70±820] nonradiological environmental impacts would not increase the probability or associated with the proposed action. consequences of accidents previously United Nuclear CorporationÐWood analyzed and would not affect facility Alternatives to the Proposed Action River Junction Site; Closing of Local Public Document Room radiation levels or facility radiological Since the Commission has concluded effluents. Under the proposed system, there is no measurable environmental Notice is hereby given that the all individuals with authorized impact associated with the proposed Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) unescorted access will have the physical action, any alternatives with equal or is closing the local public document characteristics of their hand (hand greater environmental impact need not room (LPDR) for records pertaining to geometry) registered with their picture be evaluated. The principal alternative the United Nuclear Corporation (UNC) badge number in a computerized access to the proposed action would be to deny Wood River Junction site located at the control system in addition to their the requested action. Denial of the Cross Mill Public Library, Charlestown, picture badges, Therefore, all authorized requested action would not significantly Rhode Island. This LPDR is no longer individuals must not only have their enhance the environment in that the needed and will close effective February picture badges to gain access into the proposed action will result in a process 2, 1996. protected area, but must also have their that is equivalent to the existing The Cross Mill Public Library has hand geometry confirmed. identification verification process. been the LPDR for the Wood River All other access process, including Junction site since September 1980 search function capability and access Alternative Use of Resources when it was established for the revocation, will remain the same. A This action does not involve the use licensee’s proposed decommissioning. security officer responsible for access of resources not previously considered Since that time the LPDR has remained control will continue to be positioned in connection with the Nuclear operational maintaining documents on within a bullet-resistant structure. The Regulatory Commission’s Final the termination of the UNC License No. proposed system is only for individuals Environmental Statement dated SNM–777. On October 12, 1995, the with authorized unescorted access and November 1973, related to the operation NRC terminated the license and released will not be used for individuals of the Dresden Nuclear Power Station, the UNC Wood River Junction site for requiring escorts. Units 2 and 3. unrestricted use. Therefore, effective Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 6 / Tuesday, January 9, 1996 / Notices 671

February 2, 1996, the LPDR will be informed the Petitioner that the NRC requested NNECO to review the closed. would take appropriate action within a following: (1) That NNECO management Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 4th day reasonable time regarding the specific had shut off the site paging and site of January, 1996. concerns raised in the Petition. On the siren evacuation alarm system or For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. basis of a review of the issues raised by directed workers to shut off the system Carlton Kammerer, the Petitioner as discussed below, I have in the Unit 1 maintenance shop during concluded that no substantial health morning meetings, (2) that on several Director, Division of Freedom of Information and Publications Services, Office of and safety issues have been raised that occasions the system was not turned Administration. would warrant the action requested by back on for hours, and (3) that the on/ the Petitioner. [FR Doc. 96–285 Filed 1–8–96; 8:45 am] off switches for the speakers in question had been installed without a work BILLING CODE 7590±01±P II. Discussion order. In the Petition, the Petitioner raised a The licensee’s investigation into this [Docket No. 50±245] concern that on numerous occasions matter, which was described in its since January 1994, his department January 26, 1995, response to the NRC Northeast UtilitiesÐMillstone Nuclear manager had instructed the Petitioner’s request, confirmed that the site paging Power Station, Unit 1; Issuance of coworkers to shut off or turn down the and site siren evacuation alarm system Director's Decision Under 10 CFR volume on the site paging and site siren had been routinely turned off at one of 2.206 evacuation alarm system in the the two speakers located in the Millstone Unit 1 maintenance shop, and Millstone Unit 1 maintenance shop area In notice document 95–31255 the Petitioner’s first-line supervisor and during meetings, and that this practice beginning on page 66807, in the issue of coworker had complied with this was not consistent with Emergency Tuesday, December 26, 1995, the request in violation of TS 6.8.1 and complete text of the ‘‘Director’s Decision Preparedness Department guidance and NUREG–0654. 1 Pursuant to 10 CFR 2.206’’ (DD–95–23) Licensees for nuclear power plants are NUREG–0654. However, NNECO was not included. The complete text required to have emergency plans that management stated that it was confident follows this correction notice. meet the standards of 10 CFR 50.47(b) that personnel could still hear the other speaker. This configuration was also Dated at Rockville, Maryland this 3rd day and the requirements of 10 CFR Part 50, of January 1996. Appendix E. Under 10 CFR 50.47(b)(8), tested during a special test conducted by NNECO. The results of the test For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. adequate emergency facilities and equipment to support the emergency verified that one of the two speakers had James W. Andersen, sufficient capacity to support event Project Manager, Project Directorate I–3, response must be provided and maintained. Appendix E of Part 50 notification in the maintenance shop Division of Reactor Projects—I/II, Office of area. Since the single speaker could be Nuclear Reactor Regulation. establishes minimum requirements for emergency plans for use in attaining an heard, personnel in the maintenance I. Introduction acceptable state of emergency area would be alerted if an emergency On January 8, 1995, Mr. Anthony J. preparedness. Section IV.E.9, in part, existed. NNECO’s investigation also Ross (Petitioner) filed a Petition with requires at least one onsite concluded that the on/off switches were the Executive Director for Operations of communications system. installed without a work order in 1973 the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory NUREG–0654, ‘‘Criteria for consistent with work performance Commission (NRC) pursuant to 10 CFR Preparation and Evaluation of processes at that time. 2.206. In the Petition, the Petitioner Radiological Emergency Response Plans NNECO’s corrective actions to address raised concerns regarding the site and Preparedness in Support of Nuclear this concern included prohibiting the paging and site siren evacuation alarm Power Plants,’’ provides guidance for use of any switch that disables any system in the Millstone Nuclear Power developing radiological emergency feature of the site paging and site siren Station, Unit 1 maintenance shop. plans and improving emergency evacuation alarm system, removing the The Petitioner alleged that on preparedness. Section II.F.1.e states that two speaker switches, and performing a numerous occasions since January 1994, each emergency plan shall include walkdown of all other system speakers his department manager had instructed provisions for alerting or activating to verify that no other similar switches the Petitioner’s coworkers to shut off or emergency personnel in each response existed in the system. turn down the volume on the site paging organization. Section II.J.1 states that The NRC conducted a special safety and site siren evacuation alarm system each licensee shall establish the means inspection from May 15 through June in the Millstone Unit 1 maintenance and time required to warn or advise 23, 1995, at the Millstone station. shop, and the Petitioner’s first-line onsite individuals and individuals who During this inspection, the staff supervisor and coworker had complied may be in areas controlled by the reviewed a number of the concerns, the with this request in violation of licensee. Technical Specification 6.8.1, topic of this Petition being one of them, Technical Specification (TS) 6.8.1 and in part, requires that procedures be and issued the findings in Inspection NUREG–0654. The Petitioner requested established, implemented, and Report (IR) 50–245/95–22, 50–336/95– that the NRC impose at least three maintained covering emergency plan sanctions against his department implementation. 1 NUREG–0654, paragraph J.1, states that each manager, and impose sanctions against The topic of this Petition was one of licensee shall establish the means and time required the Petitioner’s coworker and the maintenance-related issues the NRC to warn or advise onsite individuals and individuals who may be in areas controlled by the maintenance first-line supervisor for staff raised to Northeast Nuclear Energy licensee. Emergency Preparedness Department engaging in deliberate misconduct in Company (NNECO), licensee for guidance (Emergency Plan Administrative violation of 10 CFR 50.5. Millstone Unit 1, in letters dated Procedure [EPAP] 1.15), at the time, required that On February 23, 1995, I informed the December 5 and 28, 1994. In those the unit services director monitor and maintain emergency preparedness facilities and equipment. Petitioner that the Petition had been letters, the NRC staff requested NNECO In Attachment 2 of EPAP 1.15, the Unit 1 public referred to me pursuant to 10 CFR 2.206 to review the issues and submit a announcement speakers and evacuation alarm were of the Commission’s regulations. I also written response. Specifically, the NRC included as emergency preparedness equipment. 672 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 6 / Tuesday, January 9, 1996 / Notices

22, 50–423/95–22 (95–22), dated July to safety, such as the site paging and site (Indian Point Units 1, 2, and 3) CLI–75– 21, 1995. alarm siren evacuation system, would 8, 2 NRC 173, 175 (1975) and The NRC inspector reviewed the now require engineering and operations Washington Public Power Supply results of the monthly page and siren department review. It would also System (WPPSS Nuclear Project No. 2), tests, which were done in accordance require consideration of relevant DD–84–7 19 NRC 899, 924 (1984). This with Procedure C-OP–605, and the regulatory requirements. During these is the standard that has been applied to separate test conducted in the Millstone reviews it would be expected that the concerns raised by the Petitioner to Unit 1 maintenance shop area. The modifications of this type (i.e., done determine whether the action requested review of the last two monthly tests without such a work order) would be by the Petitioner, or other enforcement showed that the site alarm was audible rejected and not implemented. The NRC action, is warranted. over ambient noise in all the tested inspector concluded that NNECO’s On the basis of the above assessment, areas. The review of the separate current work control practices would I have concluded that no substantial Millstone Unit 1 maintenance shop test require an automated work order for this health and safety issues have been showed that either switch, when in the type of modification and that these raised regarding Millstone Nuclear off position, would not disable the switches could not have been installed Power Station, Unit 1, that would system and that with one of the speakers without such a work order under the require initiation of additional turned off, the other speaker had current work control procedures. enforcement action as requested by the sufficient capacity to support event Therefore, since a work order for this Petitioner. notification. modification was not required in 1973, The NRC has taken appropriate Emergency Preparedness Department no enforcement action is warranted. enforcement action for the events guidance (EPAP 1.15) required that The NRC inspector concluded in the referenced in the Petition. The emergency preparedness equipment be Inspection Report that turning off the Petitioner’s request for additional action maintained. The purpose of the site paging and site siren evacuation is denied. As provided in 10 CFR guidance, as it related to the speakers, alarm system speaker was in violation of 2.206(c), a copy of this Decision will be was to warn or advise onsite the licensee’s emergency preparedness filed with the Secretary of the individuals. Since the single speaker plan (and thus a violation of TS 6.8.1) Commission for the Commission’s could still be heard, the Petitioner’s and not in conformance with the review. This Decision will constitute the department manager stated in a meeting guidance in NUREG–0654. Therefore, final action of the Commission 25 days with the NRC inspectors that he this issue, and three others were after issuance unless the Commission, believed the Emergency Preparedness collectively cited as a Severity Level IV on its own motion, institutes review of Department guidance was still being violation.2 However, the Inspection the Decision in that time. met. Therefore, the Petitioner has not Report stated that since the operators in supported his assertion that the Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 19th day the maintenance shop were still able to of December 1995. department manager and, indirectly, his hear information provided by the other first-line supervisor and coworker, For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. speaker in the maintenance area, this William T. Russell, deliberately violated Millstone event was of low safety significance and procedures or technical specifications, Director, Office of Nuclear Reactor that it appeared NNECO had taken Regulation. 10 CFR 50.47(b), or 10 CFR Part 50, effective corrective action to correct the [FR Doc. 96–286 Filed 1–8–96; 8:45 am] Appendix E, or failed to meet the problem. guidance in NUREG–0654. The NRC staff has concluded that the BILLING CODE 7590±01±P The inspector reviewed NNECO’s enforcement action already taken is corrective actions and confirmed that a sufficient in this case and, therefore, no work order had been processed to additional enforcement action is SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE disconnect and remove the cutoff warranted. The NRC staff has also COMMISSION switches and that this work was concluded that although the Petitioner’s completed. The inspector reviewed [Release No. 34±36668 ; File No. SR±BSE± department manager turned off or had several Millstone site daily news articles 95±16] the Petitioner’s coworkers turn off one (‘‘To the Point’’) that reinforced the of the speakers, the Petitioner has not Self-Regulatory Organizations; Notice message of not adjusting speaker supported his assertion that his of Filing and Order Granting volume. The articles clearly stated that department manager and coworkers Accelerated Approval of Proposed management expectations and deliberately violated NRC regulations or Rule Change by the Boston Stock emergency preparedness guidance were Exchange, Inc. Relating to its that personnel were not to tamper with the Millstone Unit 1 operating license and, thereby, violated the provisions of Specialist Performance Evaluation emergency preparedness equipment. Program The inspector also discussed the results 10 CFR 50.5. of a walkdown of the entire system with III. Conclusion January 22, 1996. a licensee representative. The The institution of proceedings Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the representative stated that one additional pursuant to 10 CFR 2.206 is appropriate Securities Exchange Act of 1934 speaker on/off switch had been found in only if substantial health and safety (‘‘Act’’),1 and Rule 19b–4 thereunder,2 the Unit 3 instrumentation and controls issues have been raised. See notice is hereby given that on December area. This speaker’s on/off switch was Consolidated Edison Co. of New York 14, 1995, the Boston Stock Exchange, subsequently removed. Inc. (‘‘BSE’’ or ‘‘Exchange’’) filed with NNECO’s investigation had also 2 The three other issues involved violations of the Securities and Exchange concluded that the switches were Millstone Procedure ACP-QA–4.02B, ‘‘Receipt, Commission (‘‘Commission’’) the installed in 1973 without the use of a Control and Identification of QA Material,’’ ACP- proposed rule change as described in work order. The work control process QA–4.01A, ‘‘System and Component Items I and II below, which Items have Housekeeping,’’ and DC–1, ‘‘Administration of has been enhanced significantly at Millstone Procedures and Forms.’’ (NRC Inspection Millstone Unit 1 since 1973. Performing Report 50–245/95–22, 50–336/95–22, 50–423/95– 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). modifications to equipment important 22, dated July 21, 1995) 2 17 CFR 240.19b–4. Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 6 / Tuesday, January 9, 1996 / Notices 673 been prepared by the self-regulatory incoming orders routed to a specialist limit orders (all sizes included) 5 that organization. The Commission is for execution. A record of all action on are held without action for greater than publishing this notice to solicit these orders is accumulated in a 25 seconds. As in the Turnaround Time comments on the proposed rule change separate file from which four calculation, a stop, cancellation, from interested persons. calculations are run. execution or partial execution stops the clock. The same exclusions which apply I. Self-Regulatory Organization’s Selection criteria for eligible orders in the Turnaround Time calculation also Statement of the Terms of Substance of include regulator buy and sell market apply here.6 Thus, if a specialist the Proposed Rule Change and marketable limit orders only. Orders marked buy minus or sell plus receives a total of 100 market and The BSE seeks a twelve-month are excluded, as are crosses and all marketable limit orders and holds 10 of extension of its Specialist Performance orders with qualifiers (e.g., market-on- them for more than 25 seconds, his or Evaluation Program (‘‘SPEP’’).3 close, stop, stop limit, all or none, etc.). her raw score of 10% would receive II. Self-Regulatory Organization’s The order entry date must equal the nine points as it falls in the six to 10 Statement of the Purpose of, and order execution date. percent range. This calculation will Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule For each of the measures, including comprise 15% of the overall evaluation Change the Specialist Performance Evaluation program. Questionnaire, a 10 point scale will be In its filing with the Commission, the HOLDING ORDERS WITHOUT ACTION self-regulatory organization included applied to a range of scores. Based on the raw score for each measure, the statements concerning the purpose of Percentage of orders Points and basis for the proposed rule change respective specialist will receive an and discussed any comments it received associated score between one and 10 0±5 ...... 10 on the proposed rule change. The text points, which will be weighted as 6±10 ...... 9 of these statements may be examined at indicated for each measure. 11±15 ...... 8 the places specified in Item III below. The first measure is turnaround Time, 16±20 ...... 7 which calculates the average number of 21±25 ...... 6 The self-regulatory organization has 26±30 ...... 5 prepared summaries, set forth in seconds for all eligible orders based on the number of seconds between the 31±35 ...... 4 Sections A, B, and C below, of the most 36±40 ...... 3 significant aspects of such statements. receipt of a guaranteed market or 41±45 ...... 2 marketable limit order in BEACON (i.e., 46 and up ...... 1 A. Self-Regulatory Organization’s for 1299 shares or less) and the Statement of the Purpose of, and execution, partial execution, stopping or The third measure is Trading Between Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule cancellation of the order. An order that the Quote, which measures the number Change is moved from the auto-ex screen to the of market and marketable limit orders 1. Purpose manual screen will accumulate time that are executed between the best until executed, partially executed, consolidated bid and offer where the The purpose of the proposed rule stopped or cancelled. This calculation spread is greater than 1⁄8th. Thus, if a change is to incorporate certain will not be in effect until the individual specialist receives 10 market and objective measures into the Exchange’s stock has opened on the primary marketable limit orders where the SPEP. The evaluation program, using market. Certain situations, such as spread between the best consolidated the BEACON system,4 looks at all trading halts and periods where the bid and offer is greater than 1⁄8th, and BEACON system is off auto-ex such specialist executes five of the 3 The SEC initially approved the BSE’s SPEP pilot floorwide, will result in blocks of time program in Securities Exchange Act Release No. orders between the bid and offer, his or 22993 (March 10, 1986), 51 FR 8298 (March 14, being excluded from the calculation. A her raw score would be 50% and would 1986) (File No. SR–BSE–84–04). The SEC specialist who averaged a raw score of receive nine points as it falls in the 46 subsequently extended the pilot program in 25 seconds will receive seven points as to 50 percent range. This calculation Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 26162 it falls in the 21 to 25 second range. This (October 6, 1988), 53 FR 40301 (October 14, 1988) will comprise 25% of the overall (File No. SR–BSE–87–06); 27656 (January 30, 1990), calculation will comprise 15% of the evaluation program. 55 FR 4296 (February 7, 1990) (File No. SR–BSE– overall evaluation program. 90–01); 28919 (February 26, 1991), 56 FR 9990 TRADING BETWEEN THE QUOTE (March 8, 1991) (File No. SR–BSE–91–01); and TURNAROUND TIME 30401 (February 24, 1992), 57 FR 7413 (March 2, 1992) (File No. SR–BSE–92–01). The BSE was Percentage of orders Points permitted to incorporate objective measures of Time in seconds Points specialist performance into its pilot program in 51 and up ...... 10 Securities Exchange Act Release No. 31890 1±10 ...... 10 46±50 ...... 9 (February 19, 1993), 58 FR 11647 (February 26, 11±15 ...... 9 41±45 ...... 8 1993) (File No. SR–BSE–92–04) (‘‘February 1993 16±20 ...... 8 36±40 ...... 7 Approval Order’’), at which point the initial pilot 21±25 ...... 7 31±35 ...... 6 program ceased to exist as a separate program. The 26±30 ...... 6 26±30 ...... 5 current pilot program was subsequently extended in 21±25 ...... 4 Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 33341 31±35 ...... 5 (December 15, 1993), 58 FR 67875 (December 22, 36±40 ...... 4 1993) (‘‘December 1993 Approval Order’’); and 41±45 ...... 3 5 Unlike Turnaround Time, Holding Orders 35187 (December 30, 1994), 60 FR 2406 (January 9, 46±50 ...... 2 Without Action is not limited to those orders 1995). SEC approval of the current pilot program 51 and up ...... 1 guaranteed automatic execution through BEACON. expires on December 31, 1995. 6 The Holding Orders Without Action calculation 4 BEACON is the BSE’s automated order-routing The second measure is Holding will not be in effect until the individual stock has and execution system. BEACON provides a opened on the primary market. In addition, certain guarantee of execution for market and marketable Orders Without Action, which measures situations, such as trading halts and periods where limit orders up to and including 1,299 shares. In the number of market and marketable the BEACON system is off auto-ex floorwide, will addition, BEACON can be used to transmit orders result in blocks of time being excluded from the not subject to automatic execution See BSE Rules, Holding Orders Without Action calculation. See Ch. XXXIII, ¶¶ 2654–55. December 1993 Approval Order. 674 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 6 / Tuesday, January 9, 1996 / Notices

TRADING BETWEEN THE QUOTEÐ Using the examples from each Overall Evaluation Score—at or above Continued measure above, the following weighted weighted score of 5.80 point totals would result in an overall Turnaround Time—below 21.0 seconds (8 points) Percentage of orders Points program score of 7.45: Holding Orders Without Action—below 16±20 ...... 3 21.0% (7 points) Measure Points Weighted 11±15 ...... 2 points Trading Between the Quote—at or above 0±10 ...... 1 26.0% (5 points) Turnaround Executions in Size > BBO—at or above 76.0% The fourth measure is Executions in Time (15%) ... 7 1.05 (6 points) Holding Orders Questionnaire—at or above weighted score of Size Greater than BBO, which measures 50.0 (4 points) the number of market and marketable Without Action (15%) ...... 9 1.35 Due to the subjectiveness of the limit orders which exceed the BBO size Trading Between and are executed in size larger than the questionnaire, a specialist who is the Quote deficient on the questionnaire alone will BBO size. Thus, if a specialist receives (25%) ...... 9 2.25 a total of 10 market and marketable limit Executions in be subject to review by Exchange staff orders which exceed the BBO size and Size > BBO to determine if there is sufficient reason executes nine of the orders in size larger (25%) ...... 8 2.00 to warrant informing the PIAC of than the BBO size, his or her raw score Questionnaire potential performance problems. would be 90% and would receive eight (20%) ...... 4 0.80 However, a deficient score on the questionnaire may result in a points as it falls in the 86 to 90 percent 7.45 range. This calculation will comprise performance improvement action when it lowers the overall program score 25% of the overall evaluation program. The rule has been amended to reflect below 5.80. that any specialist who is deficient 7 in EXECUTIONS IN SIZE GREATER THAN The Exchange requests an extension any one of the objective measures for of the current pilot program for a BBO two out of three consecutive review twelve-month period to begin on periods will be required to appear January 1, 1995. This twelve-month Percentage of orders Points before the Performance Improvement period will enable the Exchange to Action Committee (‘‘PIAC’’) to discuss 96±100 ...... 10 further evaluate the appropriateness of ways of improving performance. If 91±95 ...... 9 the measures and their respective performance does not improve in the 86±90 ...... 8 weights, as well as the effectiveness of subsequent period, the specialist will 81±85 ...... 7 the overall evaluation program. 76±80 ...... 6 appear before the Market Performance 71±75 ...... 5 Committee (‘‘MPC’’) for appropriate 2. Statutory Basis 66±70 ...... 4 8 action, as described below. Section 6(b)(5) of the Act 11 is the 61±65 ...... 3 Any specialist who falls below the basis of the proposed rule change in that 56±60 ...... 2 threshold level for the overall the SPEP results weigh heavily in stock 55 and below ...... 1 evaluation program for two out of three allocation decisions and, as a result, consecutive review periods will be In addition, several changes have specialists are encouraged to improve required to appear before the MPC, been made to the Specialist Performance their market quality and administrative which will take action to address the Evaluation Questionnaire in view of the duties, thereby promoting just and deficient performance as provided for in adoption of the objective measures equitable principles of trade and aiding the Supplemental Material to the SPEP.9 which have made some questions in the perfection of a free and open A specialist who is ranked in the bottom obsolete. The minimum acceptable raw market and a national market system. 10% of the overall evaluation program score for each question remains at 4.5. but who is above the threshold level for Thus, if a specialist receives a raw score B. Self-Regulatory Organization’s the overall program will be subject to of 4.5 for each question for a weighted Statement on Burden on Competition staff review to determine if there is raw score (based on the weights for each The Exchange does not believe that sufficient reason to warrant informing question within the questionnaire) of the proposed rule change will impose the PIAC of potential performance 50.0052, he or she would receive four any burden on competition. problems. points as it falls in the 50 to 54 weighted The following threshold scores have C. Self-Regulatory Organization’s score range. The questionnaire will been set at which a specialist will be Statement on Comments on the comprise 20% of the overall evaluation deemed to have adequately Proposed Rule Change Received From program. performed: 10 Members, Participants or Others No written comments were either QUESTIONNAIRE 7 A specialist is deficient in any measure if he or solicited or received. she scores below the minimum adequate Weighted raw score Points performance thresholds set forth below. See infra III. Solicitation of Comments text accompanying note 10. 83 and above ...... 10 8 The SEC notes that, in the event a specialist’s Interested persons are invited to 77±82 ...... 9 performance does not improve, the Supplemental submit written data, views and 72±76 ...... 8 Material to the SPEP authorizes the MPC to take the arguments concerning the foregoing. following actions: suspending the specialist’s 66±71 ...... 7 Persons making written submissions 61±65 ...... 6 trading account privilege, suspending his or her 55±60 ...... 5 alternate specialist account privilege, or reallocating should file six copies thereof with the his or her specialty stocks. See BSE Rules, Ch. XV, Secretary, Securities and Exchange 50±54 ...... 4 ¶ 2156.10–2156.60. 44±49 ...... 3 9 See supra note 8. 38±43 ...... 2 deemed to be deficient in that measure. See supra 37 and below ...... 1 10 A specialist who receives a score that is below note 7. a minimum adequate performance threshold will be 11 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5). Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 6 / Tuesday, January 9, 1996 / Notices 675

Commission, 450 Fifth Street, N.W., In September 1993, October 1994, and time, the BSE should assess whether Washington, D.C. 20549. Copies of the December 1995, the BSE submitted to each measure, as well as the submission, all subsequent the Commission monitoring reports questionnaire, is assigned an amendments, all written statements regarding its amended SPEP. The appropriate weight.15 Moreover, the with respect to the proposed rule reports describe the BSE’s experience Commission expects the Exchange to change that are filed with the with the pilot program during 1993, conduct an on-going examination of its Commission, and all written 1994, and the first two review periods minimum adequate performance communications relating to the of 1995. In terms of the overall scope of thresholds, in order to ensure that they proposed rule change between the the SPEP, the Commission continues to continue to be set at appropriate levels. Commission and any person, other than believe that objective measures, together The Commission also continues to those that may be withheld from the with a floor broker questionnaire, believe that relative performance public in accordance with the should generate sufficiently detailed rankings that subject the bottom 10% of provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be information to enable the Exchange to all specialist units to review by an available for inspection and copying at make accurate assessments of specialist Exchange committee are an important the Commission’s Public Reference performance. In this regard, the part of an effective evaluation program. Section, 450 Fifth Street, N.W., objective criteria have been useful in Finally, the BSE should closely monitor Washington, D.C. 20549. Copies of such identifying how well specialists carry the conditions for review and should filing will also be available for out certain aspects (i.e., timeliness of take steps to ensure that all specialists inspection and copying at the principal execution, price improvement and whose performance is deficient and/or office of the Exchange. All submissions market depth) of their responsibilities as diverges widely from the best units will should refer to File No. SR–BSE–95–16 specialists. be subject to meaningful review. In the and should be submitted by January 30, The Commission also has reviewed Commission’s opinion, a meaningful 1996. the BSE’s experience with its minimum review process would ensure that adequate performance thresholds. adequate corrective actions are taken IV. Commission’s Findings and Order Although it appears that these standards with respect to each deficient specialist. Granting Accelerated Approval of have been helpful in identifying some The Commission would have difficulty Proposed Rule Change specialists with potential performance granting permanent approval to a SPEP The Commission believes that problems, as well as providing an that did not include a satisfactory specialists play a crucial role in incentive for improved market making response to the concerns described providing stability, liquidity, and performance, the Commission notes that above. continuity to the trading of stocks. the acceptable levels of performance The Commission therefore requests Among the obligations imposed upon have not been revised since the that the BSE submit a report to the specialists by the Exchange, and by the inception of the pilot and, as discussed Commission, by September 16, 1996, Act and the rules promulgated below, should be reviewed. describing its experience with the pilot. thereunder, is the maintenance of fair Finally, the Commission continues to At a minimum, this report should and orderly markets in their designated believe that, taking the SPEP as a whole, contain data, for the last review period securities.12 To ensure that specialists most potential performance problems of 1995 and the first two review periods fulfill these obligations, it is important should be brought to the attention of the of 1996, on (1) the number of specialists that the Exchange conduct effective appropriate committee. In terms of the who fell below acceptable levels of oversight of their performance. The BSE’s response to the deficiencies it performance for each objective BSE’s SPEP is critical to this oversight. identified, the BSE should examine its measure,16 the questionnaire and the SPEP to ensure that adequate corrective overall program, and the specific In its order approving the actions are taken with respect to each measures in which each such specialist incorporation of objective measures of deficient specialist. was deficient; (2) the number of performance,13 the Commission asked In conclusion, although the specialists who, as a result of the the Exchange to monitor the Commission believes the BSE should objective measures, appeared before the effectiveness of the amended SPEP. evaluate means to strengthen its PIAC for informal counseling; (3) the Specifically, the Commission requested performance oversight program, the number of such specialists then referred information about the number of pilot has been a positive first step to the MPC and the type of action taken; specialists who fell below acceptable towards developing a more effective (4) the number of specialists who, as a levels of performance for each objective SPEP. Accordingly, the Commission result of the overall program, appeared measure, the questionnaire and the believes that it is appropriate to extend before the MPC and the type of action overall program; and about the specific the current pilot program for an taken; (5) the number of specialists who, measures in which each such specialist additional twelve-month period, as a result of the questionnaire or falling was deficient. The Commission also expiring December 31, 1996. This in the bottom 10% were referred by the requested information about the number twelve-month period will allow the of specialists who, as a result of each Exchange to respond to the (excluding quotes for 100 shares). Another possible condition for review, were referred to Commission’s concerns about the SPEP, objective criteria could measure quote performance the PIAC and/or the MPC; and about the (i.e., how often the BSE specialist’s quote, in price, as set forth below. First, the type of action taken with respect to each is alone at or tied with the BBO). Commission expects the BSE to evaluate 15 such deficient specialist. In this regard, because of the substantial the incorporation of additional objective overlap between Turnaround Time and Holding criteria, so that the Exchange can Orders Without Action, the SEC recommends that 12 Rule 11b–1, 17 CFR 240.11b–1; BSE Rules Ch. the BSE consider either having only one measure XV, ¶ 2155.01. conduct a thorough analysis of in this category (i.e., timeliness of execution) or 14 13 For a description of the Commission’s rationale specialist performance. At the same reducing the weights of the existing measures, for approving the incorporation of objective which together account for 30% of the current measures of performance into the BSE’s SPEP on a 14 For example, the BSE could develop additional SPEP. pilot basis, see February 1993 Approval Order, measures of market depth, such as how often the 16 For each objective measure, the SEC also supra note 3. The discussion in the aforementioned specialist’s quote exceeds 500 shares or how often requests that the BSE provide the mean and median order is incorporated by reference into this order. the BSE quote, in size, is larger than the BBO scores. 676 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 6 / Tuesday, January 9, 1996 / Notices

Exchange staff to the PIAC and the type that it is consistent with the Act to II. Self-Regulatory Organization’s of action taken (this should include the accelerate approval of the proposed rule Statement of the Purpose of, and number of specialists then referred to change. Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule the MPC and the type of action taken by It is therefore ordered, pursuant to Change that Committee); and (6) a list of stocks Section 19(b)(2) 21 that the proposed In its filing with the Commission, reallocated due to substandard rule change is hereby approved on a SCCP included statements concerning performance and the particular unit pilot basis until December 31, 1996. the purpose of and basis for the involved. The report also should discuss For the Commission, by the Division of proposed rule change and discussed any the specific action taken by the BSE to Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated comments it received on the proposed develop additional objective measures, authority.22 rule change. The text of these statements revise the minimum adequate Margaret H. McFarland, may be examined at the places specified performance thresholds and the in Item IV below. SCCP has prepared assigned weights for each measure, and Deputy Secretary. summaries, set forth in sections (A), (B), address the other concerns noted above. [FR Doc. 96–236 Filed 1–8–96; 8:45 am] and (C) below, of the most significant Any requests to modify this pilot, to BILLING CODE 8010±01±M aspects of such statements. extend its effectiveness or to seek permanent approval for the SPEP (A) Self-Regulatory Organization’s should be submitted to the Commission Statement of the Purpose of, and [Release No. 34±36671; File No. SR±SCCP± Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule by September 16, 1996, as a proposed 95±06] rule change pursuant to Section 19(b) of Change the Act. Self-Regulatory Organizations; Stock 1. Introduction For the reasons discussed above, the Clearing Corporation of Philadelphia; The proposed rule change sets forth Commission finds that the BSE’s Notice of Filing of a Proposed Rule the rules and procedures governing proposal to extend its SPEP pilot Change to Convert the Settlement SCCP’s SDFS system service. SCCP program for an additional twelve-month System for Securities Transactions to intends to support the Philadelphia period is consistent with the a Same-Day Funds Settlement System Depository Trust Company (‘‘Philadep’’) requirements of Sections 6 and 11 of the to provide participants full SDFS Act and the rules and regulations January 3, 1996. depository and clearing services for all thereunder applicable to a national eligible securities. SCCP has made a securities exchange. Specifically, the Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the substantial commitment to designing Commission finds that the proposed Securities Exchange Act of 1934 1 and building the data processing and rule change is consistent with the (‘‘Act’’), notice is hereby given that on computer network that will be the Section 6(b)(5)17 requirement that the November 3, 1995, the Stock Clearing Corporation of Philadelphia (‘‘SCCP’’) foundation for SCCP’s SDFS system. rules of the Exchange be designed to Throughout this major industry promote just and equitable principles of filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (‘‘Commission’’) the conversion, SCCP has worked closely trade, to remove impediments to and with Philadep, other registered clearing proposed rule change (File No. SR– perfect the mechanism of a free and agencies, the Commission and the Board SCCP–95–06) as described in Items I, II, open market and a national market of Governors of the Federal Reserve and III below, which items have been system, and, in general, to protect System (‘‘Federal Reserve’’). investors and the public interest. prepared primarily by SCCP. On In assessing the impact of an Further, the Commission finds that December 19, 1995, SCCP filed an expanded SDFS environment, the the proposal is consistent with Section amendment to the proposed rule operational requirements, risk, liquidity 11(b) of the Act 18 and Rule 11b–1 change.2 The Commission is publishing 19 needs, among other matters, were thereunder which allow securities this notice to solicit comments on the evaluated on a joint SCCP/Philadep exchanges to promulgate rules relating proposed rule change from interested basis. Operationally, both wholly- to specialists in order to maintain fair persons. owned subsidiaries of the Philadelphia and orderly markets and to remove Stock Exchange, Inc. (‘‘PHLX’’) are I. Self-Regulatory Organization’s impediments to and perfect the integrally-related. Both registered Statement of the Terms of Substance of mechanism of a national market system. clearing agencies have a substantial The Commission finds good cause for the Proposed Rule Change overlap of participants as well as approving the proposed rule change SCCP proposes to amend Rules 4, 10 strategic business objectives. prior to the thirtieth day after the date Many links or tie-ins between SCCP of publication of notice thereof in the and 27 and adopt Rule 4(A) and certain SCCP Procedures.3 The proposed rule and Philadep exist by bylaw, rule and Federal Register. This will permit the agreement. For example, pursuant to a pilot program to continue on an change reflects a planned industry conversion to an expanded same-day long-standing joint agency agreement uninterrupted basis and allow the BSE between SCCP and Philadep, SCCP, on funds settlement (‘‘SDFS’’) time to consider improvements to its behalf of Philadep, effects, among other environment. program. In addition, the rule change things, daily money settlements on that implemented the pilot program was behalf of Philadep participants for 21 published in the Federal Register for 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2). securities received into and delivered 22 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12). the full comment period, and no out of their accounts; processing of CNS 20 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1) (1988). comments were received. movements from one participant to Accordingly, the Commission believes 2 Letter from Keith Kessel, Compliance Officer, SCCP and Philadep to Peter R. Geraghty, Esq., another; processing of all SCCP/ Division of Market Regulation, Commission Philadep dividend and reorganization 17 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5). (December 14, 1995). settlements; and the preparation, 18 15 U.S.C. 78k(b). 3 The text of these proposals is attached as Exhibit 19 17 CFR 240.11b–1. B to File No. SR–SCCP–95–06. The file is available rendering and collection of bills to 20 See February 1993 Approval Order, supra note for review in the Commission’s Public Reference Philadep participants for depository 3. Room and at the principal office of SCCP. services. Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 6 / Tuesday, January 9, 1996 / Notices 677

In addition to these services, the transition of SCCP and its SCCP will recalculate the Participants Philadep, on behalf of SCCP, facilitates participants to the SDFS environment, Fund deposit requirements at the end of book-entry movements through a joint SCCP will implement these changes on each month based on the previous three SCCP and Philadep allocation system in or before February 1996. months prior to the most recent month. order to assure continuous net SCCP will calculate the required cash SCCP will notify its participants of any settlements for the accounts of SCCP deposit according to a participant’s required deposit increases and the participants. Philadep also has activity 5 in accordance with the amount of such additional deposit contractually agreed to provide SCCP following formulae: within ten (10) business days of the end with the means to pledge collateral to (a) Inactive Account 6—The contributions of the month. Participants whose banks so that SCCP may obtain secured of Inactive Participants are set at a uniform deposit requirements have decreased loans from such respective banks. rate of $10,000. Inactive is defined as 20 or will be notified at least quarterly, In addition to these arrangements, fewer trades on average per month. although they may inquire and SCCP will make several modifications (b) Full Service (‘‘CNS’’) Account—The withdraw excess deposits monthly. In in its Rules and Procedures to contributions of CNS Participants are based this way, participants may leave excess upon the larger of: (1) A participant’s cash deposits in the Participants Fund accommodate SDFS. First and foremost, monthly average of trading activity during SCCP will revise Rule 10 related to the preceding quarter, $1,000 for every 25 and reduce the level of monthly money settlements to provide that all trading units of 100 shares (with a $10,000 administration that would otherwise be payments must be sent by Federal minimum and a $75,000 maximum necessary. Funds instead of by next-day funds or contribution); or (2) a participant’s aggregate SCCP estimates that at the time of check. Second, SCCP will modify Rule dollar amount of all long trades at their implementing the foregoing 27 to further clarify that SCCP will serve execution price for each quarter divided by modifications to the risk management the number of days in such quarter times two controls, SCCP and Philadep will have as the agent for money settlements of all percent (with a minimum $10,000 participants transacting business with combined liquidity resources of over contribution and a maximum $1,000,000 $60 million, comprising $7 million in either SCCP or Philadep. SCCP Rule 27 contribution). The required contributions are currently provides that SCCP will act to rounded upward to $5,000 increments. combined cash deposits to the effect daily money settlements on behalf (c) Regional Interface Operations (‘‘RIO’’) Participants Fund (under the revised of those organizations or entities which Accounts—The contribution of RIO formulae), $4.7 million in unrestricted are participants of both SCCP and Participants are based upon a participant’s capital and $50 million in lines of 7 Philadep. monthly average of trading activity during credit, altogether designed to support the preceding quarter, $1,000 for every 25 the new SDFS system. SCCP/Philadep SCCP and its participants have trading units of 100 shares (with a $10,000 directly benefited from the will routinely monitor these amounts minimum and a $75,000 maximum and assess the need to increase them interrelationship between SCCP and contribution). The required contributions are Philadep. They will continue to directly rounded upward to $5,000 increments. RIO over time based on SCCP and Philadep benefit from this relationship, most is defined as a participant account whereby activity levels. SCCP believes that the proposed rule notably now in the risk management the participant elects to settle with a clearing change is consistent with Section 17A and control areas as described more corporation other than SCCP or Philadep. under the Exchange Act in that it fully in SR–Philadep–95–08. (d) Layoff Account—The contributions of Layoff Participants are set at a uniform rate promotes the prompt and accurate 2. Revised Participants Fund of $25,000. Layoff is defined as a participant clearance and settlement of securities account whereby the participant elects to transactions in securities and funds. To compensate for the risks in a SDFS settle with a clearing corporation other than environment and to respond to SCCP’s SCCP’s Rules and Procedures are SCCP or Philadep for trades not executed on designed to promote efficiencies and liquidity needs, SCCP will modify its the Philadelphia Stock Exchange. Participants Fund in its form and size. (e) Specialist Margin Account—The protect Philadep and its participants in SCCP will maintain an all cash contributions of Specialist Margin an expanded SDFS environment. Participants Fund. Participants are set at a uniform rate of (B) Self-Regulatory Organization’s $35,000. The all cash requirement applies to (f) Non-Specialist Margin Account—The Statement on Burden on Competition both the minimum and any additional, contributions of Non-Specialist Margin SCCP does not believe that the voluntary deposits. If participants Participants are set at a uniform rate of proposed rule change will impact or decide to make voluntary, additional $35,000. impose a burden on competition. deposits, they will accomplish two (g) A participant shall be only responsible objectives: first, it allows them to for making the highest deposit amount (C) Self-Regulatory Organization’s increase the level of activities that may required by any single formula above. The Statement on Comments on the occur without potential disruption and, formulae, therefore, are not additive. Proposed Rule Change Received From second, they will receive interest rebates Members, Participants, or Others 5 For Participants that utilize the RIO interface for from SCCP/Philadep for deposits in settlement, half of the SCCP Clearing Fund deposit No written comments have been excess of $50,000. requirement shall be allocated to Philadep’s solicited or received. SCCP will notify Each SCCP participant must deposit a Participants Fund to protect against potential the Commission of any written minimum amount of $10,000.4 Whereas settlement defaults for securities not eligible for the comments received by SCCP. some inactive participants will only RIO interface. Similarly, those Philadep Participants that clear and settle through CNS III. Date of Effectiveness of the maintain a required deposit of $10,000, accounts at SCCP shall have their respective many participants will have to deposit Philadep and SCCP Participants Fund deposits Proposed Rule Change and Timing for additional amounts based upon the type combined and then divided equally and allocated Commission Action between Philadep and SCCP to satisfy the Fund Within thirty-five days of the date of and extent of their clearing and deposit requirement at each clearing corporation. depository activities. In order to effect 6 For SCCP Inactive Participants that are also publication of this notice in the Federal Philadep Inactive Participants, the SCCP 4 See Exhibits B1 and B3 to File No. SR–SCCP– Participants Fund deposit shall be $5,000. For SCCP 7 As of the date of this filing, SCCP/Philadep has 95–06. The file is available for review in the Inactive Participants that are also Philadep Active secured $30 million in such credit lines and Commission’s Public Reference Room and at the Participants, no additional SCCP Participants Fund projects to secure $20 to $40 million in additional principal office of SCCP. deposit will be required. lines. 678 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 6 / Tuesday, January 9, 1996 / Notices

Register or within such longer period (i) SUMMARY: Under the provisions of the and local governments (airport as the Commission may designate up to Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, and operators); the estimated annual burden ninety days of such date if it finds such 5 CFR Part 1320, Reporting and is 54,900 hours. longer period to be appropriate and Recordkeeping Requirements, the FAA 6. 2120–0570, Simulator Rule—Part publishes its reasons for so finding, or invites public comment on six currently 142 Certificated Training Centers, the (ii) as to which SCCP consents, the approved public information collections respondents are an estimated 42 Commission will: being submitted to OMB for renewal. businesses and state and local (a) By order approve such proposed DATES: Comments must be received on governments; the estimated annual rule change, or or before March 11, 1996. burden is 5,450 hours. (b) Institute proceedings to determine ADDRESSES: Comments on any of these Issued in Washington, DC., on December whether the proposed rule change collections may be mailed or delivered 21, 1995. should be disapproved. in duplicate copies to the FAA at the Steve Hopkins, IV. Solicitation of Comments following address: Ms. Judith Street, Acting Manager, Corporate Information Federal Aviation Administration, Division, ABC–100. Interested persons are invited to Corporate Information Division, ABC– submit written data, views, and [FR Doc. 96–276 Filed 1–8–96; 8:45 am] 100, 800 Independence Ave., SW., arguments concerning the foregoing. BILLING CODE 4910±13±M Washington, DC 20591. Persons making written submissions should file six copies thereof with the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Notice of Passenger Facility Charge Secretary, Securities and Exchange Ms. Judith Street, Federal Aviation (PFC) Approvals and Disapprovals Commission, 450 Fifth Street, N.W., Administration, Corporate Information Division, ABC–100, 800 Independence Washington, D.C. 20549. Copies of the AGENCY: Federal Aviation submission, all subsequent Ave., SW., Washington, DC 20591, (202) Administration (FAA), DOT. 267–9895. amendments, all written statements ACTION: Monthly notice of PFC with respect to the proposed rule Interested persons can receive copies of the justification packages by approvals and disapprovals. In change that are filed with the November 1995, there were 11 Commission, and all written contacting Ms. Street at this same address or phone number. applications approved. Additionally, communications relating to the four approved amendments to SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The FAA proposed rule change between the previously approved applications are solicits comments in order to: Evaluate Commission and any person, other than listed. those that may be withheld from the the necessity of the collection; accuracy public in accordance with the of the agency’s estimate of the burden; SUMMARY: The FAA publishes a monthly provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be the quality, utility, and clarity of the notice, as appropriate, of PFC approvals available for inspection and copying in information to be collected; and and disapprovals under the provisions the Commission’s Public Reference possible ways to minimize the burden of of 49 U.S.C. 40117 (Pub. L. 103–272) Section, 450 Fifth Street, N.W., the collection and Part 158 of the Federal Aviation Washington, D.C. 20549. Copies of such The six currently approved public Regulations (14 CFR Part 158). This filing will also be available for information collection activities, the notice is published pursuant to inspection and copying at the principal respondents, and the associated burden paragraph d of § 158.29. hours being submitted to OMB for office of SCCP. All submissions should PFC Applications Approved refer to the file number SR–SCCP–95–06 renewal are as follows: and should be submitted by January 30, 1. 2120–0003, Malfunction or Defect Public Agency: Columbus Municipal 1996. Report; FAA Form 8010–4; the Airport Authority, Columbus, Ohio. respondents are an estimated 20,490 Application Number: 95–04–U–00– For the Commission by the Division of repair stations certificated under part CMH. Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated 145 and Air Taxi operators certificated authority.8 Application Type: Use PFC revenue. under part 135; the estimated annual PFC Level: $3.00. Margaret H. McFarland, burden is 6,147 hours. Total Net PFC Revenue Approved for Deputy Secretary. 2. 2120–0005, General Operating and Use in This Application: $17,466,087. [FR Doc. 96–264 Filed 1–8–96; 8:45 am] Flight Rules; the respondents are all in Charge Effective Date: October 1, BILLING CODE 8010±01±M the aviation community who must 1992. adhere to the provision of FAR part 91; Estimated Charge Expiration Date: the estimated annual burden is 231,064 May 1, 1996. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION hours. Class of Air Carriers not Required to 3. 2120–0042, Aircraft Registration; Collect PFC’s: No change from previous Federal Aviation Administration Aeronautical Center Forms AC 8050–1, approvals. AC 8050–2, AC 8050–4, AC 8050–81, Brief Description of Projects Approved Notice of Intent to Request Renewal AC 8050–98, and AC 8050–117; the for Use at Port Columbus International From the Office of Management and respondents are an estimated 73,002 Airport (CMH): Budget (OMB) of Current Public wishing to register an aircraft; the Wonderland acquisition/relocation, Collections of Information estimated annual burden is 73,847 Relocate taxiway B from taxiway A to AGENCY: Federal Aviation hours. C–3 (engineering), Administration (FAA), DOT. 4. 2120–0514, Aviation Insurance, the Southeast cargo apron, taxiway to respondents are an estimated 45 ACTION: Notice of intent to renew six runway 13/31, and tug road, airlines; the estimated annual burden is currently approved public information Runway 5 essements, 68 hours. Relocate taxiway B from taxiway A to collection activities. 5. 2120–0517, FAR Part 150—Airport C–3 (construction), Noise Compatibility Planning; the Maintenance runup pad, 8 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12) (1994). respondents are an estimated 17 state Southeast cargo apron (construction), Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 6 / Tuesday, January 9, 1996 / Notices 679

Relocate taxiway B (phase II) operating at the airport and revised the two additional planning studies (engineering), funding plan be included in an contained in this project was provided Relocate taxiway B (phase II) application for which the imposition of in this application in accordance with (construction), PFC funds for a project is requested. sections 158.23(b), the requirement for a Stabilized shoulders runway 28L/10R, Emergency preparedness equipment/ consultation meeting, and 158.25(b) (11) Stablilized shoulder—runway 28L/10R communications. and (13), which requires a summary of and runway 10R blast pad Determination: The rehabilitation of consultation with air carriers and (construction), the airport command post vehicle and foreign air carriers operating at the Relocate lights taxiway G, the purchase of an automated airport and revised funding plan be Replace runway 5/23 lighting cable, emergency notification system, included in an application for which the Communication and closed circuit information transaction equipment, imposition of PFC funds for a project is television system, portable light stands, and emergency requested. Electronic monitoring/airfield lighting radio equipment portions of this project Decision Date: November 8, 1995. (construction), are approved. The safety self-inspection FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sawyer Road rehabilitation vehicle, aircraft rescue and firefighting Mary W. Jagiello, Detroit Airports (engineering/construction—east), proximity suits, and the installation of District Office, (313) 487–7296. Airfield guidance signs, security equipment including a turnstile at a security checkpoint and a lock and Public Agency: Maryland Aviation Master plan/Part 150 amendments, Administration, Baltimore, Maryland. Ramp sweeper, key system are not approved. No evidence of consultation with the air Application Number: 95–03–U–00– Airfield fencing phase II, BWI. Relocate control room, carriers on the purchase of additional equipment or construction of this Application Type: Use PFC revenue. Land acquisition/relocation—west side PFC Level: $3.00. project was provided in this application properties, Total Net PFC Revenue Approved For in accordance with sections 158.23(b), Land acquisition/relocation— Use in This Appication: $2,261,000 the requirement for a consultation Englewood Heights, Charge Effective Date: October 1, meeting, and 158.25(b)(11) and (13), Residential soundproofing—phase I, 1992. Terminal building modification, which requires a summary of Estimated Charge Expiration Date: consultation with air carriers and Gate 17 ramp expansion. April 1, 2009. foreign air carriers operating at the Class of Air Carriers Not Required to Brief Description of Projects Approved airport and revised funding plan be For Use at Bolton Field: T-hangar apron Collect PFC’s: No change from previous included in an application for which the decisions. and taxiway. imposition of PFC funds for a project is Brief Description of Partially Brief Description of Project Approved requested. For Use: New aircraft rescue and Approved Projects For Use at Port North concourse expansion. Columbus International Airport (CMH): Determination: The 147,751 square firefighting (ARFF) facility. North concourse apron. foot terminal expansion on the north Decision Date: November 14, 1995. Determination: The apron overlay end of the terminal building portion of FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: portion of this project is approved. The this project is approved. The 8,103 Robert Mendez, Washington Airports apron expansion, Swayer Road square foot increase to accommodate District Office, (703) 285–2570. relocation, triturator building relocation, commuter airline operations, renovation Public Agency: Houghton County gas station and east cargo building of 29,950 square feet of the existing Airport Committee, Hancock, Michigan. demolition, and FAA employee parking terminal, construction of additional Application Number: 95–03–U–00– lot are not approved. No evidence of airline operations, renovation of 29,950 CMX. consultation with the air carriers on square feet of the existing terminal, Application Type: Use PFC revenue. these new projects was provided in this construction of additional airline PFC Level: $3.00. application in accordance with sections operations and office/support areas, and Total Net PFC Revenue Approved For 158.23(b), the requirement for a relocation of the triturator building, taxi Use in This Application: $76,747. consultation meeting, and 158.25(b)(11), staging area, and an FAA employee Charge Effective Date: July 1, 1993. which requires a summary of parking lot are not approved. No Estimated Charge Expiration Date: consultation with air carriers and evidence of consultation with the air July 1, 1996. foreign air carriers operating at the carriers on these new projects was Class of Air Carriers Not Required to airport be included in an application for provided in this application in Collect PFC’s: No change from previous which the imposition of PFC funds for accordance with sections 158.23(b), the decisions. a project is requested. requirement for a consultation meeting, Brief Description of Project Approved Relocate taxiway D, construct runway and 158.25 (b)(11) and (13), which For Use: Construct partial parallel 28L runup apron. requires a summary of consultation with taxiway C. Determination: Only the design air carriers and foreign air carriers Decision Date: November 14, 1995. portion of this project is a approved. operating at the airport and revised FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jon The actual construction portion as funding plan be included in an B. Gilbert, Detroit Airports District revised and included in this application application for which the imposition of Office, (313) 487–7281. is not approved. No evidence of PFC funds for a project is requested. Public Agency: Dubuque Airport consultation with the air carriers on the Terminal curb front improvements— Commission, Dubuque, Iowa. construction of this project was planning study. Application Number: 95–03–C–00– provided in this application in Determination: The curbside DBQ. accordance with sections 158.23(b), the improvement study is approved. The Application Type: Impose and use a requirement for a consultation meeting, south ramp settlement study and the PFC. and 158.25(b)(11) and (13), which skycap and parking toll booth planning PFC Level: $3.00. requires a summary of consultation with studies are not approved. No evidence Total Approved Net PFC Revenue: air carriers and foreign air carriers of consultation with the air carriers on $394,694. 680 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 6 / Tuesday, January 9, 1996 / Notices

Estimated Charge Effective Date: total annual enplanements at Estimated Charge Expiration Date: February 1, 1996. Philadelphia International Airport. August 1, 2001. Estimated Charge Expiration Date: Brief Description of Project Approved Class of Air Carriers Not Required to November 1, 1999. For Collection and Use: Design and Collect PFC’s: None. Class of Air Carriers Not Required to construct new commuter runway. Brief Description of Projects Approved Collect PFC’s: None. Decision Date: November 21, 1995. For Collection and Use: Brief Description of Projects Approved FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: L. Airfield electrical reconstruction (phase For Collection and Use: W. Walsh, Harrisburg Airports District I), Runway 13/31 rehabilitation, Office, (717) 730–2835. Airfield electrical reconstruction (phase Airport emergency generator, Public Agency: Huntsville-Madison II), Reconstruct taxilane area, County Airport Authority, Huntsville, Land acquisition and fencing; airfield Airport landside lighting, Alabama. crack repair and slurry seal; Terminal area sidewalk replacement, Application Number: 95–05–U–00– reconstruct airfield storm water Runway broom. HSV. intakes, Decision Date: November 17, 1995. Application Type: Use PFC revenue. Airfield directional signage; slurry seal FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: PFC Level: $3.00. runways (phase II), Lorna Sandrige, Central Region Airports Total Net PFC Revenue Approved For Modify terminal to meet Americans Division, (816) 426–4730. Use in This Application: $1,563,128. with Disabilities Act requirements; seal coat taxiways A, B, and C; install Public Agency: Airport Board, City of Charge Effective Date: June 1, 1992. runway and taxiway edge drains; Springfield, Missouri. Estimated Charge Exportation Date: reconstruct airfield storm water inlet Application Number: 95–02–U–00– December 1, 2007. (phase II), SGF. Class of Air Carriers Not Required to Purchase snow blower; ARFF radio Application Type: Use PFC revenue. Collect PFC’s: No changes from previous communications system, PFC Level: $3.00. approvals. Purchase snow broom; front end loader, Total Net PFC Revenue Approved For Brief Description of Projects Approved For Use: Acquire high speed snow plow, Use in This Application: $1,830,157. Pavement overlay; terminal security Charge Effective Date: November 1, Land acquisition (23 acres). fence and gates; expand snow removal 1993. Air cargo apron expansion. Runway 18R/36L rehabilitation. equipment building, Estimated Charge Expiration Date: Utility improvements; purchase sander Decision Date: November 22, 1995. August 1, 1997. truck and motor grader. Class of Air Carriers Not Required to FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Decision Date: November 29, 1995. Collect PFC’s: No change from previous Elton E. Jay, Jackson Airports District FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: decision. Office, (601) 965–4628. Brief Description of Projects Lorna Sandridge, Central Region Public Agency: Milwaukee County Airports Division, (816) 426–4730. Approved For Use: Airport Division, Milwaukee, Remove hangars and expand apron, Public Agency: Kenton County Wisconsin. Airport Board (Board), Covington, Construct snow removal equipment Application Number: 95–02–U–00– building, Kentucky. MKE. Application Number: 95–02–C–00– Construct partial parallel taxiway to Application Type: use PFC revenue. CVG runway 2/20, PFC Level: $3.00. Application Type: Impose and use a Rehabilitate air carrier apron. Total Net PFC Revenue Approved For PFC. Use in This Application: $2,287,000. Decision Date: November 17, 1995. PFC Level: $3.00. Charge Effective Date: May 1, 1995. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Total Approved net PFC Revenue: Estimated Charge Expiration Date: Lorna Sandridge, Central Region $111,930,000. January 1, 1999. Airports Division, (816) 426–4730. Earliest Charge Effective Date: Class of Air Carriers Not Required to February 1, 1996. Public Agency: Department of Collect PFC’s: No changes from previous Estimated Charge Expiration Date: Commerce, Division of Aviation, City of approvals. September 1, 2000. Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. Brief Description of Projects Approved Classes of Air Carriers Not Required Application Number: 95–05–C–00– For Use: PHL. to Collect PFC’s: (1) Part 121 Application Type: Impose and use a Sales assistance in runway C–1 area, supplemental operators which operate PFC. Realign runway 7L/25R. at Cincinnati/Northern Kentucky PFC Level: $3.00. Decision Date: November 24, 1995. International Airport (CVG) without an Total Approved Net PFC Revenue: FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: operating agreement with the Board and $14,000,000. Franklin D. Benson, Minneapolis enplane less than 1,500 passengers per Estimated Charge Effective Date: Airports District Office, (612) 725–4221. year; (2) Part 135 on-demand air taxis, January 1, 1997. Public Agency: Mason City Airport both fixed wing and rotary. Estimated Charge Expiration Date: Commission, Mason City, Iowa. Determination: Approved. Based on September 1, 1997. Application Number: 95–01–C–00– information contained in the Board’s Class of Air Carriers Not Required to MCW. application, the FAA has determined Collect PFC’s: Air taxi/commercial Application Type: Impose and use a that each proposed class accounts for operators. PFC. less than 1 percent of the total annual Determination: Approved. Based on PFC Level: $3.00. enplanements at CVG. information contained in the public Total Approved Net PFC Revenue: Brief Description of Projects Approved agency’s application, the FAA has $302,790. For Collection and Use: determined that the proposed class Earliest Charge Effective Date: Noise compatibility land use measure accounts for less than 1 percent of the February 1, 1996. (phase 2), Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 6 / Tuesday, January 9, 1996 / Notices 681

Runway 18R/36L extension—1,500 feet Total Approved Net PFC Revenue: Taxiway B and C reconstruction, and related rehabilitation. $755,028. Snow removal equipment building Decision Date: November 29, 1995. Earliest Charge Effective Date: expansion (design only), February 1, 1996. Taxiway/apron improvements, FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Estimated Charge Expiration Date: Snow removal equipment building Peggy S. Kelley, Memphis Airports September 1, 2005. expansion (construction), District Office, (901) 544–3495. Class of Air Carriers Not Required to Airport snow removal vehicle (II), Public Agency: Chippewa Valley Collect PFC’s: None. PFC administration. Regional Airport, Eau Claire, Wisconsin. Brief Description of Projects Approved Decision Date: November 29, 1995. Application Number: 95–01–C–00– For Collection and Use: EAU. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Terminal building improvements, Franklin D. Benson, Minneapolis Application Type: Impose and use a Taxiway/apron improvements (design Airports District Office, (612) 725–4221. PFC. only), PFC Level: $3.00. Airport snow removal vehicle (I), Amendments to PFC Approvals

Amend- Original Amended ment ap- Amended ap- Original ap- estimated estimated Amendment No. city, state proved proved net PFC proved net PFC charge charge date revenue revenue exp. date exp. date

93±01±C±01±TPA, Tampa, FL ...... 10/03/95 $93,007,614 $87,102,000 09/01/99 08/01/99 93±01±C±01±TYS, Knoxville, TN ...... 11/13/95 5,067,227 122,505,681 01/01/97 02/01/97 92±01±C±02±MEI, Meridian, MS ...... 11/20/95 122,500 122,500 06/01/94 06/01/94 93±02±C±01±MEI, Meridian, MS ...... 11/20/95 155,223 155,223 08/01/96 08/01/96

Issued in Washington, D.C. on January 3, 1996. Donna P. Taylor, Manager, Passenger Facility Charge Branch. [FR Doc. 96–277 Filed 1–8–96; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910±13±M 682

Sunshine Act Meetings Federal Register Vol. 61, No. 6

Tuesday, January 9, 1996

This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER The Board meeting will be followed by FEDERAL RETIREMENT THRIFT INVESTMENT contains notices of meetings published under a closed meeting of the Board of BOARD the ``Government in the Sunshine Act'' (Pub. Directors of RFE/RL, Inc., a private L. 94-409) 5 U.S.C. 552b(e)(3). nonprofit grantee of the BBG. TIME AND DATE: 10:00 a.m. (EST), January CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION: 16, 1996. Persons interested in obtaining more BROADCASTING BOARD OF GOVERNORS PLACE: information should contact Barbara 4th Floor, Conference Room, 1250 H Street, N.W., Washington, D.C. DATE AND TIME: January 9, 1996; 9:00 Floyd at (202) 401–3736. a.m. Dated: January 5, 1996. STATUS: Open. PLACE: Cohen Building, 330 David W. Burke, MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED: Independence Avenue, S.W., Visitors Chairman. Center, Washington, D.C. 20547. [FR Doc. 96–390 Filed 1–5–96; 2:48 pm] 1. Approval of the minutes of the December 18, 1995, Board meeting. CLOSED MEETING: The members of the BILLING CODE 6155±01±M Broadcasting Board of Governors (BBG) 2. Thrift Savings Plan activity report by the will meet in closed session to address Executive Director. internal procedural issues, as well as FEDERAL HOUSING FINANCE BOARD 3. Review of audit report: ‘‘Pension and Welfare Benefits Administration Review of sensitive foreign policy and personnel ``FEDERAL REGISTER '' CITATION OF the Thrift Savings Plan C and F Fund issues relating to potential options in PREVIOUS ANNOUNCEMENT: 61 FR 230, Investment Management Operations at Wells the U.S. international broadcasting field. January 3, 1996. Fargo Institutional Trust Company and Wells This meeting is closed because if open PREVIOUSLY ANNOUNCED TIME AND DATE OF Fargo Nikko Investment Advisors.’’ it likely would either disclose matters THE MEETING: 10:00 A.M. Wednesday, that would be properly classified to be January 10, 1996. CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION: kept secret in the interest of foreign Thomas J. Trabucco, Director, Office of CHANGES IN THE MEETING: Cancellation of policy under the appropriate executive External Affairs, (202) 942–1640. order (5 U.S.C. 552b.(c)((1)) or would Meeting. Matters previously scheduled for disclose information the premature Dated: January 4, 1996. consideration will be published in the disclosure of which would be likely to Roger W. Mehle, Federal Register when rescheduled. significantly frustrate implementation of Executive Director, Federal Retirement Thrift a proposed agency action. (5 U.S.C. CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION: Investment Board. 552b. (c)(9)(B)) In addition, part of the Elaine L. Baker, Secretary to the Board, [FR Doc. 96–333 Filed 1–5–96; 10:47 am] (202) 408-2837. discussion will relate solely to the BILLING CODE 6760±01±M internal personnel rules and practices, Rita I. Fair, and personnel, of the BBG, the Managing Director. International Broadcasting Bureau, and [FR Doc. 96–352 Filed 1–5–96; 12:14 pm] USIA. (5 U.S.C. 552b. (c) (2) and (6)) BILLING CODE 6725±01±M federal register January 9,1996 Tuesday Final Rule Mortgagee ReviewBoard;Streamlined 24 CFRPart25 Office oftheSecretary Development Housing andUrban Department of Part II 683 684 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 6 / Tuesday, January 9, 1996 / Rules and Regulations

DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND unnecessary to repeat them in the Code Findings and Other Matters of Federal Regulations. URBAN DEVELOPMENT National Environmental Policy Act Therefore, this rule removes several Office of the Secretary redundant provisions from the MRB In accordance with 40 CFR 1508.4 of the regulations of the Council on 24 CFR Part 25 regulations. This rule revises § 25.3 to remove the following definitions: Environmental Quality and 24 CFR [Docket No. FR±3979±F±01] administrative action, cease and desist 50.20(k) of HUD regulations, the order, letter of reprimand, notice of policies and procedures contained in RIN 2501±AC09 charges, party, probation, reasonable this rule relate only to administrative cause, suspension, and withdrawal. The decisions, which do not constitute Mortgagee Review Board; Streamlined development decisions and do not affect rule revises § 25.5 (Administrative Final Rule the physical condition of a project area actions) and removes § 25.12 (Cease and or building. Therefore, this rule is desist orders). The rule also revises AGENCY: Office of the Secretary, HUD. categorically excluded from the § 25.14 concerning the requirement to ACTION: Final rule. requirements of the National notify GNMA of withdrawal actions, Environmental Policy Act. SUMMARY: This rule further streamlines and removes § 25.15 concerning annual HUD’s regulations on the Mortgagee reports to the Secretary. In place of the Regulatory Flexibility Act Review Board (MRB). This rule is part redundant statutory language, this rule In accordance with the Regulatory of HUD’s efforts to comply with the includes the references to the Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 605(b)), the President’s regulatory reform initiatives appropriate statutory provisions. Secretary hereby certifies that this rule by producing concise regulations that Although the statutory provisions are would not have a significant economic are easy to use and understand. This accessible and are referenced in the new impact on a substantial number of small rule will not change the substantive rule text, HUD seeks to ensure that this entities. The rule streamlines the requirements of the MRB regulations, rule is easy to use. Therefore, HUD Mortgagee Review Board regulations by but it will eliminate provisions that are intends to provide mortgagees with a removing language from the Code of redundant of the MRB statute. copy of the MRB statute along with the Federal Regulations that is redundant of EFFECTIVE DATE: February 8, 1996. copies of the updated regulatory text language that appears in the United FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: that HUD routinely provides. States Code. It will have no adverse or Emmett N. Roden, Assistant General This rule also amends the regulations disproportionate economic impact on Counsel for Administrative Proceedings, to correct three minor errors. First, this small businesses. Office of General Counsel, Department rule corrects a typographical error in of Housing and Urban Development, Executive Order 12606, The Family § 25.9(l); the word ‘‘inquiries’’ should 451 7th Street, S.W., Room 10251, appear instead of ‘‘inquires.’’ Second, The General Counsel, as the Washington, D.C. 20410, telephone this rule corrects § 25.9(p) to refer to Designated Official under Executive (202) 708–2350. The telephone number Order 12606, The Family, has prudent ‘‘mortgagees’’ rather than for the hearing impaired (TDD) is (202) determined that this final rule does not ‘‘lenders.’’ HUD had intended to use the 708–9300. These are not toll-free have potential for significant impact on term ‘‘mortgagees’’ in this paragraph, in numbers. family formation, maintenance, and conformance with the definition of that SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The general well-being. No significant term in § 25.3. Third, this rule restores Mortgagee Review Board (MRB or the change in existing HUD policies or language in § 25.5(d) regarding the effect Board) final rule was published in the programs will result from promulgation of a suspension upon Title I lenders that Federal Register on August 1, 1995 (60 of this rule, as those policies and was inadvertently deleted from FR 39236). The August 1, 1995 final rule programs relate to family concerns. § 202.9(a)(3) in the August 1, 1995 final streamlined the hearing procedures to Therefore, the rule is not subject to rule. allow the Board to delegate its hearing review under the Order. authority to a hearing official. This new Justification for Final Rulemaking Executive Order 12612, Federalism process is much less time-consuming and expensive, and it is consistent with HUD generally publishes a rule for The General Counsel, as the the President’s regulatory reform public comment before issuing a final Designated Official under Section 6(a) of initiatives expressed in Executive Order rule for effect, in accordance with its Executive Order 12612, Federalism, has 12866 and the President’s memorandum regulations on rulemaking (24 CFR part determined that the policies contained of March 4, 1995 to all Federal 10). However, part 10 provides in this rule will not have substantial departments and agencies. exceptions from the general rule if HUD direct effects on States or their political However, HUD has determined that it finds good cause to omit advance notice subdivisions, or the relationship can further streamline the regulations by and public participation. The good between the Federal Government and removing language that is redundant of cause requirement is satisfied when the States, or on the distribution of the MRB statute (12 U.S.C. 1708(c)–(d)). prior public procedure is power and responsibilities among the For example, the statute fully describes ‘‘impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary various levels of government. As a the types of administrative actions that to the public interest’’ (24 CFR 10.1). result, the final rule is not subject to the Board may take against mortgagees, HUD finds that good cause exists to review under the Order. the Board’s authority to request the publish this rule for effect without first List of Subjects in 24 CFR Part 25 Secretary to issue cease and desist soliciting public comment. Since this orders to mortgagees, and the rule does not alter any rights or Administrative practice and requirement to notify GNMA of responsibilities of parties affected by the procedure, Loan programs—housing withdrawal actions. Since these rule nor any substantive requirements of and community development, statutory provisions are nearly self- the rule, such prior public procedure is Organization and functions explanatory and widely accessible, it is unnecessary. (Government agencies). Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 6 / Tuesday, January 9, 1996 / Rules and Regulations 685

Accordingly, 24 CFR part 25 is Failure to comply with a directive in the section, then withdrawal shall be amended as follows: letter of reprimand may result in any effective either: other administrative action under this (A) Upon the expiration of the 30-day PART 25ÐMORTGAGEE REVIEW part that the Board finds appropriate. period specified in § 25.8, if the BOARD (c) Probation. Probation shall be mortgagee has not requested a hearing; 1. The authority citation for part 25 effective upon receipt of the notice of or continues to read as follows: probation by the mortgagee. Failure to (B) Upon receipt of the Board’s comply with the terms of probation may decision under § 25.8, if the mortgagee Authority: 12 U.S.C. 1708 (c)–(d)), 1709(s), result in any other administrative action requests a hearing. 1715b, and 1735 (f)–14; 42 U.S.C. 3535(d). under this part that the Board finds 4. Section 25.9 is amended by revising 2. Section 25.3 is amended by appropriate. paragraphs (l) and (p) to read as follows: removing the definitions for the (d) Suspension. A suspension shall be following terms: ‘‘administrative § 25.9 Grounds for an administrative based upon adequate evidence and shall action. action’’, ‘‘cease and desist order’’, be effective upon receipt of the notice of * * * * * ‘‘letter of reprimand’’, ‘‘notice of suspension by the mortgagee. During the charges’’, ‘‘party’’, ‘‘probation’’, (l) Failure of a mortgagee to respond period of suspension, HUD will not to inquiries from the Board; ‘‘reasonable cause’’, ‘‘suspension’’, and endorse any mortgage originated by the ‘‘withdrawal’’; and by revising the suspended mortgagee unless prior to the * * * * * definitions for the terms ‘‘lender’’, ‘‘loan date of suspension a firm commitment (p) Business practices which do not correspondent’’, and ‘‘mortgagee’’, to has been issued relating to any such conform to generally accepted practices read as follows: mortgage, or a Direct Endorsement of prudent mortgagees or which demonstrate irresponsibility; § 25.3 Definitions. underwriter has approved the mortgagor for any such mortgage. During the * * * * * * * * * * period of suspension, a lender or loan Lender. A financial institution as § 25.12 [Removed] correspondent may not originate new defined in § 202.2(a) of this title. title I loans under their Title I Contracts 5. Section 25.12 is removed. Loan correspondent. A financial of Insurance or apply for a new Contract institution as defined in § 202.2(b) of § 25.13 [Redesignated as § 25.12] of Insurance. this title. 6. Section 25.13 is redesignated as Mortgagee. For purposes of the (e)(1) Withdrawal. During the period § 25.12. regulations in this part, the term of withdrawal, HUD will not endorse 7. Section 25.14 is redesignated as ‘‘mortgagee’’ includes: any mortgage originated by the § 25.13, and is revised to read as (1) The original lender withdrawn mortgagee unless prior to the follows: under the mortgage, as that term is date of withdrawal a firm commitment defined at sections 201(a) and 207(a)(1) has been issued relating to any such § 25.13 Notifying GNMA of withdrawal actions. of the National Housing Act (12 U.S.C. mortgage, or a Direct Endorsement 1707(a), 1713(a)(1)); underwriter has approved the mortgagor When the Board issues a notice of (2) A lender or loan correspondent as for any such mortgage. During the violation that could lead to withdrawal defined in this section; period of withdrawal, a lender or loan of a mortgagee’s approval, or is notified (3) A branch office or subsidiary of correspondent may not originate new by GNMA of an action that could lead the mortgagee, lender, or loan title I loans under their Title I Contracts to withdrawal of GNMA approval, the correspondent; or of Insurance or apply for a new Contract Board shall proceed in accordance with (4) Successors and assigns of the of Insurance. The Board may limit the 12 U.S.C. 1708(d). mortgagee, lender, or loan geographical extent of the withdrawal, (Approved by the Office of Management and correspondent, as are approved by the or limit its scope (e.g., to either the Budget under Control Number 2502–0450.) Commissioner. single family or multifamily activities of a withdrawn mortgagee). Upon the § 25.15 [Removed] * * * * * expiration of the period of withdrawal, 8. Section 25.15 is removed. 3. Section 25.5 is revised to read as the mortgagee may file a new follows: application for approval under 24 CFR § 25.16 [Redesignated as § 25.14] § 25.5 Administrative actions. part 202. 9. Section 25.16 is redesignated as § 25.14. (a) General. The Board is authorized (2) Effective date of withdrawal. (i) If to take the following administrative the Board determines that immediate § 25.18 [Redesignated as § 25.15] actions: letter of reprimand, probation, action is in the public interest or in the 10. Section 25.18 is redesignated as suspension, withdrawal, or settlement best interests of the Department, then § 25.15. agreement. These actions are described withdrawal shall be effective upon at 12 U.S.C. 1708(c)(3), and as further receipt of the Board’s notice of Dated: December 15, 1995. set out in this section. withdrawal. Henry G. Cisneros, (b) Letter of reprimand. A letter of (ii) If the Board does not determine Secretary. reprimand shall be effective upon that immediate action is necessary [FR Doc. 96–113 Filed 1–8–96; 8:45 am] receipt of the letter by the mortgagee. according to paragraph (e)(2)(i) of this BILLING CODE 4210±32±P federal register January 9,1996 Tuesday Hazardous Materials;ProposedRule Fiber DrumPackagingforLiquid Extension ofAuthorityforOpen-Head 49 Part171 Administration Research andSpecialPrograms Transportation Department of Part III 687 688 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 6 / Tuesday, January 9, 1996 / Proposed Rules

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION use of certain non-specification toxicity poisons that had not previously packagings (including fiber drums) for been regulated. Research and Special Programs shipping certain categories of hazardous To allow for an orderly transition to Administration materials, such as flammable liquids the HM–181 rules, RSPA authorized with a flash point above 73° F, liquid packagings meeting the HM–181 49 CFR Part 171 cleaning compounds and other liquid performance standards to be used [Docket No. HM±221A; Notice No. 96±1] corrosives, and hazardous wastes and immediately but provided a five-year hazardous substances not included in phase-out period (ending on September RIN 2137±AC77 another hazard class. In general, these 30, 1996) for previously authorized Extension of Authority for Open-Head specific authorizations had been added packagings. RSPA specified that on Fiber Drum Packaging for Liquid to the HMR when a material posing a October 1, 1996, requirements in parts 172 Hazardous Materials low or moderate hazard, which had not and 173 of [49 CFR] for maintenance and use been previously regulated, was first of packagings that were not previously in AGENCY: Research and Special Programs included within the HMR’s effect are effective * * *. [P]ackaging Administration (RSPA), DOT. classification of hazardous materials. In authorizations removed from part 173 of [49 CFR] by [HM–181] may no longer be used in ACTION: Notice of Proposed Rulemaking. these cases, DOT had permitted the place of new packaging requirements. continued use of packagings then being SUMMARY: In accordance with Section used for shipping the material. These 49 CFR 171.14(a)(1)(iii), previously 406 of the ‘‘Interstate Commerce packagings were required to be only located at 49 CFR 171.14(b)(8). Commission Sunset Act’’ (the Act), ‘‘strong, tight packages’’ that were On December 29, 1995, the President RSPA is proposing to extend for one ‘‘designed and constructed, [with their] signed the Act (Pub. L. 104–88). Section year, until September 30, 1997, the contents so limited, that under 406 of the Act reads as follows: authority to ship certain liquid conditions normally incident to SEC. 406. FIBER DRUM PACKAGING hazardous materials in open-head fiber transportation: (a) IN GENERAL.—In the administration of drums that do not meet performance- chapter 51 of title 49, United States Code, the oriented packaging standards for (1) There will be no significant release of the hazardous materials to the environment; Secretary of Transportation shall issue a final hazardous materials in Packing Group rule within 60 days after the date of the (2) The effectiveness of the package will enactment of this Act authorizing the III. The Act provides that a final rule not be substantially reduced; and continued use of fiber drum packaging with must be issued by February 27, 1996. (3) There will be no mixture of gases or a removable head for the transportation of DATES: Comments must be received on vapors in the package which could, through liquid hazardous materials with respect to or before February 5, 1996. any credible spontaneous increase of heat or those liquid hazardous materials transported ADDRESSES: Address comments to pressure, or through an explosion, by such drums pursuant to regulations in Dockets Unit (DHM–30), Office of significantly reduce the effectiveness of the effect on September 30, 1991, if— packaging. Hazardous Materials Safety, Research (1) the packaging is in compliance with regulations of the Secretary under the and Special Programs Administration, 49 CFR 173.24(a), (b) (1990 ed.) U.S. Department of Transportation, Hazardous Materials Transportation Act as in effect on September 30, 1991; and Washington, DC 20590–0001. On December 21, 1990, RSPA issued (2) the packaging will not be used for the Comments should identify the docket a final rule in Docket No. HM–181 (55 transportation of hazardous materials that (Docket No. HM–221A) and be FR 52401; revisions and response to include materials which are poisonous by submitted, when possible, in five petitions for reconsideration, 56 FR inhalation or materials in Packing Groups I copies. Persons wishing to receive 66124 [Dec. 20, 1991]; further and II. confirmation of receipt of their corrections and amendments, 57 FR (b) EXPIRATION.—The regulation referred comments should include a self- 45442, 45446 [Oct. 1, 1992], 46624 [Oct. to in subsection (a) shall expire on the later 9, 1992]). In this rulemaking, RSPA of September 30, 1997, or the date on which addressed stamped postcard. The funds are authorized to be appropriated to Dockets Unit is located in Room 8421 of adopted performance-oriented carry out chapter 51 of title 49, United States the Nassif Building, 400 Seventh Street, packaging standards for non-bulk Code (relating to transportation of hazardous SW, Washington, DC 20590–0001. packagings (up to 450 liters [119 materials), for fiscal years beginning after Office hours are 8:30 a.m. to 5:30 p.m., gallons] capacity or 400 kg [882 lbs.] net September 30, 1997. Monday through Friday except Federal mass). Hazardous materials have been (c) STUDY.— holidays, when the office is closed. assigned to Packing Groups I, II, or III, (1) IN GENERAL.—Within 90 days after the based on their level of hazard (with date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: shall contract with the National Academy of Frazer C. Hilder, Office of the Chief Packing Group I indicating those Sciences to conduct a study— Counsel, Research and Special Programs materials posing the greatest hazards), (A) to determine whether the requirements Administration, U.S. Department of and minimum levels of performance of section 5103(b) of title 49, United States Transportation, 400 Seventh Street, SW, were established for each Packing Code (relating to regulations for safe Washington, DC 20590–00001; Group. These ‘‘HM–181 performance transportation), as they pertain to fiber drum telephone 202–366–4400. standards’’ are intended to simulate the packaging with a removable head can be met normal transportation environment and for the transportation of liquid hazardous SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: A central materials (with respect to those liquid tenet of DOT’s regulation of hazardous to achieve international uniformity. hazardous materials transported by such materials is the assurance that In the HM–181 rulemaking, RSPA drums pursuant to regulations in effect on packagings will retain their contents eliminated most instances where the September 30, 1991) with standards during normal conditions of HMR previously authorized the use of (including fiber drum industry standards set transportation. Prior to 1991, the non-specification packagings, including forth in a June 8, 1992, exemption Hazardous Materials Regulations (HMR, packagings for more than 200 application submitted to the Department of Transportation), other than the performance- 49 CFR Parts 171–180) generally environmentally hazardous substances oriented packaging standards adopted under specified the use of packagings (such as polychlorinated biphenyls docket number HM–181 contained in part manufactured to design specifications. (PCBs)). In addition, RSPA classified as 178 of title 49, Code of Federal Regulations; However, the HMR also authorized the hazardous materials certain lower and Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 6 / Tuesday, January 9, 1996 / Proposed Rules 689

(B) to determine whether a packaging copy of this Notice to each person who requirements are ‘‘substantively the standard (including such fiber drum industry submitted comments in RSPA’s same as’’ the Federal requirements. standards), other than performance-oriented rulemaking proceeding in Docket No. RSPA lacks discretion in this area, and packaging standards, will provide an equal or HM–221, Alternate Standards for Open- preparation of a federalism assessment greater level of safety for the transportation of liquid hazardous materials than would be Head Fiber Drum Packaging is not warranted. provided if such performance-oriented (Termination Notice, 60 FR 50714 [Sept. Section 5125(b)(2) of 49 U.S.C. packaging standards were in effect. 29, 1995]). Although RSPA will provides that if DOT issues a regulation (2) COMPLETION.—The study shall be consider late-filed comments to the concerning any of the covered subjects completed before March 1, 1997, and shall be extent practicable, in accordance with after November 16, 1990, DOT must transmitted to the Committee on Commerce, 49 CFR 106.23, the Act’s requirement determine and publish in the Federal Science, and Transportation of the Senate that a final rule be issued within 60 Register the effective date of Federal and the Transportation and Infrastructure days of enactment will make it Committee of the House of Representatives. preemption. That effective date may not (d) SECRETARIAL ACTION.—By extremely difficult for RSPA to consider be earlier than the 90th day, and not September 30, 1997, the Secretary shall issue comments received after February 5, later than two years, following the date final regulations to determine what standards 1996. of issuance of the final rule. RSPA should apply to fiber drum packaging with a Regulatory Analyses and Notices proposes that October 1, 1996, would be removable head for transportation of liquid the effective date of Federal preemption hazardous materials (with respect to those A. Executive Order 12866 and DOT for the continued authorization of these liquid hazardous materials transported by Regulatory Policies and Procedures fiber drums. such drums pursuant to regulations in effect on September 30, 1991) after September 30, This notice of proposed rulemaking is C. Regulatory Flexibility Act 1997. In issuing such regulations, the not considered a significant regulatory Secretary shall give full and substantial action under section 3(f) of Executive This proposed rule would continue consideration to the results of the study Order 12866 and was not reviewed by until September 30, 1997, authority for conducted in subsection (c). the Office of Management and Budget. shipment of certain liquid hazardous To carry out the mandate in Sections This notice of proposed rulemaking is materials in open-head fiber drums that (a) and (b) of the Act, RSPA is proposing not considered significant under the do not meet the performance standards to add a new paragraph (a)(2)(iii) to 49 regulatory policies and procedures of in the HMR. I certify that the rule CFR 171.14. Interested parties are the Department of Transportation (44 FR proposed in this notice will not have a invited to submit comments on this 11034; February 26, 1979). significant economic impact on a proposal. Comments are specifically substantial number of small entities. B. Executive Order 12612 invited with regard to the possibility This certification is subject to that, under Section (b) of the Act, the This notice of proposed rulemaking modification as a result of a review of transition period for continued use of has been analyzed in accordance with comments received in response to this non-specification open-head fiber the principles and criteria in Executive proposal. drums for certain liquid hazardous Order 12612 (‘‘Federalism’’). The D. Paperwork Reduction Act materials may extend to a future date Federal hazardous material (beyond September 30, 1997) that is transportation law (49 U.S.C. 5101– There are no new information now uncertain. 5127) contains an express preemption requirements in this proposed rule. RSPA considers that this eventuality provision that preempts State, local and E. Regulations Identifier Number (RIN) may best be dealt with, if necessary, in Indian tribe requirements on certain the ‘‘final regulations’’ to be issued by covered subjects. Covered subjects are: A regulation identifier number (RIN) September 30, 1997, under Section (d) (i) the designation, description, and is assigned to each regulatory action of the Act. At that time, further classification of hazardous material; listed in the Unified Agenda of Federal appropriations for fiscal years beginning (ii) the packing, repacking, handling, Regulations. The Regulatory Information after September 30, 1997, may have marking, and placarding of hazardous Service Center publishes the Unified been authorized, and the transition material; Agenda in April and October of each period would end on September 30, (iii) the preparation, execution, and year. The RIN number contained in the 1997. Otherwise, RSPA and interested use of shipping documents pertaining to heading of this document can be used parties should have a better hazardous material and requirements to cross-reference this action with the appreciation at that time for the date related to the number, contents, and Unified Agenda. when further appropriations may be placement of those documents; List of Subjects in 49 CFR Part 171 authorized. However, RSPA will (iv) the written notification, consider alternatives that commenters recording, and reporting of the Exports, Hazardous materials wish to suggest for handling the unintentional release in transportation; transportation, Hazardous waste, uncertain length of this extended and Imports, Incorporation by reference, transition period for the continued use (v) the design, manufacturing, Reporting and recordkeeping of non-specification open-head fiber fabricating, marking, maintenance, requirements. drums for certain liquid hazardous reconditioning, repairing, or testing of a In consideration of the foregoing, 49 materials. packaging or a container represented, CFR part 171 would be amended as Because the Act requires the present marked, certified, or sold as qualified follows: rulemaking to be completed by February for use in transporting hazardous 27, 1996, RSPA is specifying a deadline material. PART 171ÐGENERAL INFORMATION, for comments that is less than the 60 This proposed rule concerns the REGULATIONS, AND DEFINITIONS days recommended in Executive Order packaging authorized for certain 12866. To encourage interested parties hazardous materials. If adopted, this 1. The authority citation for part 171 to submit comments, and somewhat rule would preempt State, local, or would continue to read as follows: compensate for a shortened comment Indian tribe requirements concerning Authority: 49 U.S.C. 5101–5127; 49 CFR period, RSPA is mailing a typewritten this subject unless the non-Federal 1.53. 690 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 6 / Tuesday, January 9, 1996 / Proposed Rules

2. In § 171.14, a new paragraph (iii) Non-specification fiber drums. Issued in Washington, DC on January 4, (a)(2)(iii) would be added to read as Until September 30, 1997, a non- 1996, under authority delegated in 49 CFR follows: specification fiber drum with a Part 106. removable head is authorized for a Alan I. Roberts, § 171.14 Transitional provisions for liquid hazardous material in Packing Associate Administrator for Hazardous implementing requirements based on the Group III that is not poisonous by Materials Safety. UN Recommendations. inhalation for which this packaging was [FR Doc. 96–337 Filed 1–8–96; 8:45 am] * * * * * authorized under the requirements of BILLING CODE 4910±60±P (a) * * * Part 172 or Part 173 in effect on September 30, 1991. (2) * * * * * * * * i

Reader Aids Federal Register Vol. 61, No. 6 Tuesday, January 9, 1996

CUSTOMER SERVICE AND INFORMATION CFR PARTS AFFECTED DURING JANUARY

Federal Register/Code of Federal Regulations At the end of each month, the Office of the Federal Register General Information, indexes and other finding 202±523±5227 publishes separately a List of CFR Sections Affected (LSA), which aids lists parts and sections affected by documents published since Public inspection announcement line 523±5215 the revision date of each title. 563...... 575 Laws 3 CFR 563b...... 575 Public Laws Update Services (numbers, dates, etc.) 523±6641 Proclamations 563c ...... 575 For additional information 523±5227 6860...... 381 563d...... 575 Executive Orders: Presidential Documents 565...... 575 12543 (Continued by 566...... 575 523±5227 Executive orders and proclamations Notice of January 3, 567...... 575 The United States Government Manual 523±5227 1996) ...... 383 571...... 575 Other Services 12544 (Continued by 574...... 575 Notice of January 3, Electronic and on-line services (voice) 523±4534 575...... 575 1996) ...... 383 583...... 575 Privacy Act Compilation 523±3187 Administrative Orders: 584...... 575 523±5229 TDD for the hearing impaired Notice of January 3, 707...... 114 1996 ...... 383 ELECTRONIC BULLETIN BOARD 12944 (Superseded by 14 CFR EO 12984)...... 235 23...... 1, 252 Free Electronic Bulletin Board service for Public Law numbers, 12984...... 235 35...... 114, 254 Federal Register finding aids, and list of documents on public 39 ...... 116, 511, 613, 617, 622, inspection. 202±275±0920 5 CFR 623, 625, 627 FAX-ON-DEMAND 1201...... 1 71...3, 120, 121, 232, 255, 513, Proposed Rules: 514 You may access our Fax-On-Demand service. You only need a fax 330...... 546 73...... 4 machine and there is no charge for the service except for long 333...... 546 91...... 629 distance telephone charges the user may incur. The list of 335...... 546 Proposed Rules: documents on public inspection and the daily Federal Register’s 731...... 394 table of contents are available using this service. The document 39 ...... 131, 133, 134, 634, 636, 732...... 394 637, 640 numbers are 7050-Public Inspection list and 7051-Table of 736...... 394 Contents list. The public inspection list will be updated 71 ...... 513, 548, 549, 550, 551 7 CFR immediately for documents filed on an emergency basis. 15 CFR 97...... 247 NOTE: YOU WILL ONLY GET A LISTING OF DOCUMENTS ON 990...... 440 FILE AND NOT THE ACTUAL DOCUMENT. Documents on 928...... 99 public inspection may be viewed and copied in our office located 979...... 248 17 CFR at 800 North Capitol Street, N.W., Suite 700. The Fax-On-Demand 989...... 100 Proposed Rules: telephone number is: 301±713±6905 997...... 102 1773...... 104 210...... 578 3017...... 250 228...... 578 FEDERAL REGISTER PAGES AND DATES, JANUARY 229...... 578 Proposed Rules: 239...... 578 930...... 21 1±98...... 2 240...... 578 1789...... 21 99±246...... 3 249...... 578 247±380...... 4 10 CFR 381±510...... 5 19 CFR 50...... 232 511±612...... 8 162...... 258 Proposed Rules: 613±690...... 9 61...... 633 21 CFR 26...... 27 30...... 295 173...... 385, 631 31...... 295 510 ...... 258, 259, 514 32...... 295 522...... 260 40...... 295 558...... 514 70...... 295 573...... 5 Proposed Rules: 12 CFR 101...... 296 268...... 251 506...... 575 24 CFR 510...... 575 25...... 684 512...... 575 516...... 575 26 CFR 543...... 575 1...... 6, 260, 262, 515, 517, 552 544...... 575 20...... 515 545...... 575 23...... 515 550...... 575 24...... 515 552...... 575 25...... 515 556...... 575 27...... 515 ii Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 6 / Tuesday, January 9, 1996 / Reader Aids

33...... 515 1252...... 273, 391 COMMERCE DEPARTMENT promulgation; various 38...... 515 1253...... 273 National Oceanic and States: 301...... 260, 515 Proposed Rules: Atmospheric Administration Pennsylvania; comments 602 ...... 6, 260, 262, 515, 517 31...... 234 Fishery conservation and due by 1-12-96; published Proposed Rules: management: 12-13-95 1 ...... 28, 338, 552 49 CFR Bering Sea and Aleutian South Carolina; comments 301...... 338 573...... 274 Islands groundfish; due by 1-10-96; published 576...... 274 comments due by 1-10- 12-11-95 27 CFR 577...... 274 96; published 12-11-95 Washington; comments due 4...... 522 Proposed Rules: COMMODITY FUTURES by 1-8-96; published 12-8- 171...... 688 95 28 CFR 195...... 342 TRADING COMMISSION 540...... 90 Commodity Exchange Act: Air quality implementation 391...... 606 √ √ 542...... 86 553...... 145 Futures commission plans; A approval and 545...... 90, 378 merchants; minimum promulgation; various States; air quality planning Proposed Rules: 50 CFR financial requirements, purposes; designation of 540...... 92 222...... 17 subordinated debt areas: 545...... 92 227...... 17 prepayment, and gross 611...... 279 collection of exchange-set Florida; comments due by 29 CFR 625...... 291, 292 margin for omnibus 1-8-96; published 12-7-95 215...... 386 641...... 17 accounts; comments due New Jersey; comments due 652...... 293 by 1-12-96; published 12- by 1-8-96; published 12-7- 31 CFR 663...... 279 13-95 95 1...... 386 675...... 20 DEFENSE DEPARTMENT Clean Air Act: Proposed Rules: Proposed Rules: Acquisition regulations: State operating permits 256...... 552 17...... 35 Ground and aircraft flight programs-- 356...... 402 risk; comments due by 1- California; comments due 32 CFR REMINDERS 12-96; published 11-13-95 by 1-8-96; published 12-7-95 40b...... 541 Multiyear contracting and The rules and proposed rules California; comments due 69...... 271 other miscellaneous in this list were editorially by 1-8-96; published 234...... 541 provisions; comments due compiled as an aid to Federal by 1-12-96; published 11- 12-7-95 Proposed Rules: Register users. Inclusion or 13-95 California; comments due 199...... 339 exclusion from this list has no Federal Acquisition Regulation by 1-8-96; published legal significance. 33 CFR (FAR): 12-7-95 Contingent fee California; comments due Ch. 1 ...... 8 Rules Going Into Effect 81...... 8 representation; comments by 1-8-96; published 165...... 544 Today due by 1-12-96; published 12-7-95 11-13-95 Hazardous waste: Proposed Rules: FEDERAL Employee stock ownership 165...... 136 COMMUNICATIONS Military munitions rule; plans; comments due by 207...... 33 COMMISSION explosives emergencies; 1-8-96; published 11-7-95 redefinition of on-site; 36 CFR Radio stations; table of EDUCATION DEPARTMENT comments due by 1-8-96; 1253...... 390 assignments: published 11-8-95 Missouri; published 12-5-95 Postsecondary education: Student support services Pesticides; tolerances in food, 40 CFR HEALTH AND HUMAN program; clarification and animal feeds, and raw 86...... 122 SERVICES DEPARTMENT simplification; comments agricultural commodities: 88...... 122, 129 Food and Drug due by 1-12-96; published Imidacloprid; comments due Proposed Rules: Administration 12-13-95 by 1-12-96; published 12- 85...... 140 Food additives: 13-95 ENERGY DEPARTMENT 86...... 140 N- Federal Energy Regulatory Superfund program: 88...... 140 butoxypoly(oxyethylene) Commission National oil and hazardous 41 CFR poly(oxypropylene) glycol; substances contingency published 1-9-96¶ Natural gas companies 201±1...... 10 (Natural Gas Act): plan-- 201±2...... 10 Comments Due Next Outer Continental Shelf; gas National priorities list 201±3...... 10 Week pipeline facilities and update; comments due 201±4...... 10 services; agency's by 1-11-96; published 12-20-95 201±6...... 10 AGRICULTURE jurisdiction; comments due 201±7...... 10 DEPARTMENT by 1-12-96; published 12- Toxic substances: 201±17...... 10 Agricultural Marketing 11-95 Significant new uses-- 201±18...... 10 Service ENVIRONMENTAL Ethane, 1,1,1,2,2- 201±20...... 10 Okra (frozen); grade PROTECTION AGENCY pentafluoro-; comments 201±21...... 10 standards; comments due due by 1-12-96; 201±22...... 10 Air pollutants, hazardous; by 1-8-96; published 12-7- published 12-13-95 201±24...... 10 national emission standards: 95 201±39...... 10 Chromium emissions from FEDERAL Onions grown in-- hard and decorative COMMUNICATIONS 48 CFR Texas; comments due by 1- chromium electroplating COMMISSION 225...... 130 11-96; published 12-12-95 and anodizing tanks, etc.; Common carrier services: 252...... 130 Peas, field and black-eye comments due by 1-12- Hearing aid compatible 1213...... 391 (frozen); grade standards; 96; published 12-13-95 wireline telephones in 1215...... 273 comments due by 1-8-96; Air quality implementation workplaces, confined 1237...... 391 published 12-7-95 plans; approval and settings, etc.; comments Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 6 / Tuesday, January 9, 1996 / Reader Aids iii

due by 1-12-96; published INTERIOR DEPARTMENT TRANSPORTATION Teledyne Continental 12-12-95 Surface Mining Reclamation DEPARTMENT Motors; comments due by Radio stations; table of and Enforcement Office Coast Guard 1-12-96; published 11-13- 95 assignments: Indian lands program: Anchorage regulations: Maine; comments due by 1- Abandoned mine land Louisiana; comments due by Airworthiness standards: 8-96; published 12-4-95 reclamation plan-- 1-12-96; published 11-13- Special conditions-- Television broadcasting: 95 Hopi Tribe; comments due Beech model 200 Cable Television Consumer International Convention on by 1-8-96; published airplane, etc.; comments Protection and Standards of Training, 12-7-95 due by 1-8-96; Competition Act of 1992-- Certification and Rate regulation; Permanent program and published 12-7-95 abandoned mine land Watchkeeping for Seafarers comments due by 1-12- Class E airspace; comments reclamation plan (STCW 78) 96; published 12-11-95 due by 1-8-96; published submissions: Comment request; FEDERAL EMERGENCY comments due by 1-12- 12-1-95 MANAGEMENT AGENCY Colorado; comments due by 1-8-96; published 12-7-95 96; published 11-13-95 Rulemaking petitions; Flood insurance programs: Ports and waterways safety: summary and disposition; LABOR DEPARTMENT Insurance coverage and Boon Island, ME; sunken comments due by 1-8-96; rates; comments due by Occupational Safety and vessel M/V EMPIRE published 11-8-95 1-8-96; published 11-9-95 Health Administration KNIGHT; safety zone; TRANSPORTATION FEDERAL RESERVE Safety and health standards, comments due by 1-12- DEPARTMENT SYSTEM etc.: 96; published 11-13-95 Transactions with affiliates; Respiratory protection; Federal Highway TRANSPORTATION Administration conformity of capital stock comments due by 1-8-96; DEPARTMENT and surplus definition to published 11-7-95 Federal Aviation Engineering and traffic unimpaired capital stock and PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT Administration operations: surplus definition, etc.; OFFICE Emergency relief program; comments due by 1-8-96; Airworthiness directives: comments due by 1-12- published 12-4-95 Federal claims collection: de Havilland; comments due 96; published 11-13-95 HEALTH AND HUMAN Claims collections by 1-12-96; published 11- SERVICES DEPARTMENT standards; delegation of 14-95 TRANSPORTATION authority; comments due Food and Drug Airbus; comments due by 1- DEPARTMENT by 1-8-96; published 11-9- Administration 8-96; published 11-9-95 95 National Highway Traffic Medical devices: British Aerospace; Safety Administration Medical device user facilities POSTAL RATE COMMISSION comments due by 1-12- 96; published 11-13-95 Motor vehicle safety and manufacturers; Practice and procedure rules: standards: adverse events reporting; Rate and classification Fokker; comments due by certification and changes; expedition, 1-8-96; published 11-28- Child restraint systems-- registration; comments flexibility, and innovation; 95 Booster seat safety; due by 1-10-96; published comments due by 1-8-96; Hamilton; comments due by comments due by 1-11- 12-11-95 published 12-18-95 1-8-96; published 11-8-95 96; published 12-12-95