3–24–00 Friday Vol. 65 No. 58 Mar. 24, 2000 Pages 15823–16116
VerDate 20-MAR-2000 20:38 Mar 23, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4710 Sfmt 4710 E:\FR\FM\24MRWS.LOC pfrm04 PsN: 24MRWS
1 II Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 58 / Friday, March 24, 2000
The FEDERAL REGISTER is published daily, Monday through SUBSCRIPTIONS AND COPIES Friday, except official holidays, by the Office of the Federal Register, National Archives and Records Administration, PUBLIC Washington, DC 20408, under the Federal Register Act (44 U.S.C. Subscriptions: Ch. 15) and the regulations of the Administrative Committee of Paper or fiche 202–512–1800 the Federal Register (1 CFR Ch. I). The Superintendent of Assistance with public subscriptions 512–1806 Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, DC 20402 is the exclusive distributor of the official edition. General online information 202–512–1530; 1–888–293–6498 Single copies/back copies: The Federal Register provides a uniform system for making available to the public regulations and legal notices issued by Paper or fiche 512–1800 Federal agencies. These include Presidential proclamations and Assistance with public single copies 512–1803 Executive Orders, Federal agency documents having general FEDERAL AGENCIES applicability and legal effect, documents required to be published Subscriptions: by act of Congress, and other Federal agency documents of public interest. Paper or fiche 523–5243 Assistance with Federal agency subscriptions 523–5243 Documents are on file for public inspection in the Office of the Federal Register the day before they are published, unless the issuing agency requests earlier filing. For a list of documents currently on file for public inspection, see http://www.nara.gov/ fedreg. FEDERAL REGISTER WORKSHOP The seal of the National Archives and Records Administration THE FEDERAL REGISTER: WHAT IT IS AND authenticates the Federal Register as the official serial publication established under the Federal Register Act. Under 44 U.S.C. 1507, HOW TO USE IT the contents of the Federal Register shall be judicially noticed. FOR: Any person who uses the Federal Register and Code of Federal The Federal Register is published in paper and on 24x microfiche. Regulations. It is also available online at no charge as one of the databases WHO: Sponsored by the Office of the Federal Register. on GPO Access, a service of the U.S. Government Printing Office. WHAT: Free public briefings (approximately 3 hours) to present: The online edition of the Federal Register is issued under the 1. The regulatory process, with a focus on the Federal Register authority of the Administrative Committee of the Federal Register system and the public’s role in the development regulations. as the official legal equivalent of the paper and microfiche editions 2. The relationship between the Federal Register and Code (44 U.S.C. 4101 and 1 CFR 5.10). It is updated by 6 a.m. each of Federal Regulations. day the Federal Register is published and it includes both text 3. The important elements of typical Federal Register and graphics from Volume 59, Number 1 (January 2, 1994) forward. documents. GPO Access users can choose to retrieve online Federal Register 4. An introduction to the finding aids of the FR/CFR system. documents as TEXT (ASCII text, graphics omitted), PDF (Adobe WHY: To provide the public with access to information necessary to Portable Document Format, including full text and all graphics), research Federal agency regulations which directly affect them. or SUMMARY (abbreviated text) files. Users should carefully check There will be no discussion of specific agency regulations. retrieved material to ensure that documents were properly downloaded. On the World Wide Web, connect to the Federal Register at http:/ WASHINGTON, DC /www.access.gpo.gov/nara. Those without World Wide Web access WHEN: April 18, 2000 can also connect with a local WAIS client, by Telnet to swais.access.gpo.gov, or by dialing (202) 512-1661 with a computer WHERE: Conference Room, Suite 700 and modem. When using Telnet or modem, type swais, then log Office of the Federal Register in as guest with no password. 800 North Capitol Street, NW. For more information about GPO Access, contact the GPO Access Washington, DC User Support Team by E-mail at [email protected]; by fax at (3 blocks north of Union Station Metro) (202) 512–1262; or call (202) 512–1530 or 1–888–293–6498 (toll RESERVATIONS: 202–523–4538 free) between 7 a.m. and 5 p.m. Eastern time, Monday–Friday, except Federal holidays. The annual subscription price for the Federal Register paper edition is $555, or $607 for a combined Federal Register, Federal Register Index and List of CFR Sections Affected (LSA) subscription; the microfiche edition of the Federal Register including the Federal Register Index and LSA is $220. Six month subscriptions are available for one-half the annual rate. The charge 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 in microfiche form. All prices include regular domestic postage 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, MasterCard or Discover. 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: 65 FR 12345.
.
VerDate 20-MAR-2000 20:38 Mar 23, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4710 Sfmt 4710 E:\FR\FM\24MRWS.LOC pfrm04 PsN: 24MRWS
2 III
Contents Federal Register Vol. 65, No. 58
Friday, March 24, 2000
Agricultural Marketing Service Defense Department RULES See Navy Department Federal seed testing and certification services; fee increases, 15830–15832 Education Department Spearmint oil produced in— NOTICES Far West, 15832–15835 Grants and cooperative agreements; availability, etc.: NOTICES Elementary and secondary education— Agency information collection activities: Safe and Drug-Free Schools and Communities National Proposed collection; comment request, 15888–15889 Programs, 16088–16091
Agriculture Department Employment Standards Administration See Agricultural Marketing Service NOTICES See Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service Minimum wages for Federal and federally-assisted See Commodity Credit Corporation construction; general wage determination decisions, See Farm Service Agency 15926–15927 See Forest Service RULES Energy Department Supplemental standards of ethical conduct for Agriculture See Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Department employees, 15825–15830 NOTICES Grants and cooperative agreements; availability, etc.: Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service Hybrid power systems, 15899–15900 PROPOSED RULES Interstate transportation of animals and animal products Environmental Protection Agency (quarantine): RULES Tuberculosis in cattle, bison, goats, and captive cervids— Air programs: State and zone designations; correction, 15877–15878 Outer Continental Shelf regulations— California; consistency update, 15867–15873 Antitrust Division Air quality implementation plans; approval and NOTICES promulgation; various States: Competitive impact statements and proposed consent California, 15864–15867 PROPOSED RULES judgments: Air quality implementation plans; approval and Cargill, Inc., and Continental Grain Co., 15982–16033 promulgation; various States: California, 15883–15884 Arts and Humanities, National Foundation Pesticide programs: See National Foundation on the Arts and the Humanities Pesticides and ground water strategy; State management plan regulation; metolachlor and S-metalachlor Blind or Severely Disabled, Committee for Purchase From equivalency, 15884–15885 People Who Are Toxic substances: See Committee for Purchase From People Who Are Blind or Methyl Tertiary Butyl Ether (MTBE); elimination or Severely Disabled limitation as a fuel additive in gasoline, 16094–16109 NOTICES Commerce Department Environmental statements; availability, etc.: See International Trade Administration Agency statements— See National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Comment availability, 15903 NOTICES Weekly receipts, 15903–15904 Electronic commerce; laws or regulations posing barriers, Reports and guidance documents; availability, etc.: 15898 Resource Conservation and Recovery Act cleanup reforms; corrective action guidance documents; Committee for Purchase From People Who Are Blind or schedule and comment request, 15904–15906 Severely Disabled Superfund; response and remedial actions, proposed NOTICES settlements, etc.: Procurement list; additions and deletions, 15896–15897 Colorado School of Mines Research Institute Site, CO, 15904 Commodity Credit Corporation NOTICES Equal Employment Opportunity Commission Cotton import quotas, special; announcements, 15889– NOTICES 15890 Agency information collection activities: Proposed collection; comment request, 15907 Commodity Futures Trading Commission NOTICES Executive Office of the President Meetings; Sunshine Act, 15898 See Presidential Documents
VerDate 20-MAR-2000 20:37 Mar 23, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4748 Sfmt 4748 E:\FR\FM\24MRCN.LOC pfrm04 PsN: 24MRCN IV Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 58 / Friday, March 24, 2000 / Contents
Farm Service Agency Federal Reserve System NOTICES NOTICES Meetings: Agency information collection activities: Beginning Farmers and Ranchers Advisory Committee, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, 15908–15910 15890 Banks and bank holding companies: Formations, acquisitions, and mergers, 15910 Federal Aviation Administration Permissible nonbanking activities, 15910–15911 RULES Meetings; Sunshine Act, 15911 Air traffic operating and flight rules, etc.: Serbia-Montenegro; flights within territory and airspace; Federal Trade Commission prohibition removed (SFAR No. 84), 16112 NOTICES Special visual flight rules, 16114–16116 Meetings: Airworthiness directives: Slotting allowances and other grocery marketing Eurocopter Deutschland, 15858–15859 practices; antitrust concerns; workshop, 15911–15912 Eurocopter France, 15857–15858 Class D airspace, 15859 Federal Transit Administration Class D and Class E airspace, 15860–15861 NOTICES Class E airspace, 15861 Transportation Equity Act for 21st Century; PROPOSED RULES implementation: Airworthiness directives: Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement Bell, 15882–15883 Program; correction, 15931–15932 Eurocopter France, 15880–15882 Pratt & Whitney, 15878–15880 Fish and Wildlife Service RULES Federal Bureau of Investigation Endangered and threatened species: NOTICES Canada lynx, 16052–16086 Meetings: PROPOSED RULES Criminal Justice Information Services Advisory Policy Endangered and threatened species: Board, 15923 California tiger salamander; Santa Barbara distinct population, 15887 Federal Communications Commission NOTICES PROPOSED RULES Environmental statements; availability, etc.: Radio stations; table of assignments: Incidental take permits— Nevada, 15885 Orange County, CA; coastal California gnatcatcher, Pennsylvania, 15886–15887 15914–15916 Washington, 15886 Natural resource restoration plans: NOTICES Saegertown Industrial Area Superfund Site, PA, 15916 Rulemaking proceedings; petitions filed, granted, denied, etc., 15907–15908 Forest Service NOTICES Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation Boundary establishment, descriptions, etc.: NOTICES East Fork of Jemez Wild and Scenic River, Santa Fe Meetings; Sunshine Act, 15908 National Forest, NM, 15890–15891 Peco Wild and Scenic River, Santa Fe National Forest, Federal Emergency Management Agency NM, 15891 NOTICES Environmental statements; notice of intent: Disaster and emergency areas: Caribou-Targhee National Forest, ID, 15891–15892 Kentucky, 15908 Kootenai National Forest, MT, 15892–15895 Virginia, 15908 Rogue River National Forest, OR, 15895 Tongass National Forest, AK, 15895–15896 Federal Energy Regulatory Commission NOTICES Health and Human Services Department Meetings: See Health Care Financing Administration Regional transmission organizations; regional collaborative workshops, 15902–15903 Health Care Financing Administration Applications, hearings, determinations, etc.: NOTICES Aquila Power Corp., 15900 Agency information collection activities: Commonwealth Edison Co. et al., 15900–15901 Submission for OMB review; comment request, 15912 El Paso Natural Gas Co., 15901 First Electric Cooperative Corp., 15901–15902 Housing and Urban Development Department Gleason Power I, L.L.C., et al., 15902 NOTICES Agency information collection activities: Federal Highway Administration Proposed collection; comment request, 15912–15913 NOTICES Submission for OMB review; comment request, 15913– Transportation Equity Act for 21st Century; 15914 implementation: Grants and cooperative agreements; availability, etc.: Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement Facilities to assist homeless— Program; correction, 15931–15932 Excess and surplus Federal property, 16036–16049
VerDate 20-MAR-2000 20:37 Mar 23, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4748 Sfmt 4748 E:\FR\FM\24MRCN.LOC pfrm04 PsN: 24MRCN Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 58 / Friday, March 24, 2000 / Contents V
Immigration and Naturalization Service National Foundation on the Arts and the Humanities RULES NOTICES Immigration: Meetings: Haitian nationals; status adjustment, 15835–15846 Humanities Panel, 15927–15928 Nicaraguan and Cuban nationals; status adjustment, 15846–15857 National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration NOTICES RULES Organization, functions, and authority delegations: Fishery conservation and management: Director of Nebraska Service Center, 15924–15925 Atlantic highly migratory species— Interior Department Swordfish, 15873–15874 See Fish and Wildlife Service See Land Management Bureau National Park Service See Minerals Management Service NOTICES See National Park Service Meetings: See Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement Office Concessions Management Advisory Board, 15921
Internal Revenue Service Navy Department RULES NOTICES Income taxes: Inventions, Government-owned; availability for licensing, Passive foreign investment companies— 15898–15899 Marketable stock definition; correction, 15862 Meetings: Procedural rules: Chief of Naval Operations Executive Panel, 15899 Penalty mail use in location and recovery of missing Patent licenses; non-exclusive, exclusive, or partially children; correction, 15862 exclusive: Ford Motor Co., 15899 International Trade Administration NOTICES Nuclear Regulatory Commission Meetings: NOTICES Africa Advisory Committee, 15898 Applications, hearings, determinations, etc.: International Trade Commission Commonwealth Edison Co.; correction, 15933 NOTICES Agency information collection activities: Parole Commission Proposed collection; comment request, 15922 NOTICES Meetings; Sunshine Act, 15925–15926 Justice Department See Antitrust Division Personnel Management Office See Federal Bureau of Investigation PROPOSED RULES See Immigration and Naturalization Service Pay administration: See Parole Commission Locality-based comparability payments, 15875–15877 NOTICES Pollution control; consent judgments: Presidential Documents Apex Engineering et al., 15922–15923 ADMINISTRATIVE ORDERS Sorenson Engineering, Inc., 15923 Computers, high-performance, exports to China; delegation Labor Department of authority under National Defense Authorization Act See Employment Standards Administration for Fiscal Year 2000 (Memorandum of January 5, 2000), 15823 Land Management Bureau NOTICES Securities and Exchange Commission Environmental statements; notice of intent: RULES Caribou-Targhee National Forest, ID, 15891–15892 Investment companies: Public land orders: Personal investment activities fraud prevention; adoption Colorado, 15917 of policies and codes of ethics; correction, 15933 Idaho, 15917–15918 NOTICES Montana, 15918–15919 Agency information collection activities: Oregon, 15920 Submission for OMB review; comment request, 15928– Oregon; correction, 15919 15929 Washington, 15919 Submission for OMB review; comment request; Wyoming, 15920 correction, 15933 Realty actions; sales, leases, etc.: Investment Company Act of 1940: California; correction, 15920–15921 Order applications— Medallion Financial Corp., 15929–15930 Minerals Management Service Self-regulatory organizations; proposed rule changes: RULES National Association of Securities Dealers, Inc.; Outer Continental Shelf; oil, gas, and sulphur operations: correction, 15933 Documents incorporated by reference; update; technical Applications, hearings, determinations, etc.: amendment, 15862–15864 Public utility holding company filings; correction, 15933
VerDate 20-MAR-2000 20:37 Mar 23, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4748 Sfmt 4748 E:\FR\FM\24MRCN.LOC pfrm04 PsN: 24MRCN VI Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 58 / Friday, March 24, 2000 / Contents
Small Business Administration Separate Parts In This Issue NOTICES Disaster loan areas: Part II Ohio, 15930–15931 Department of State, 15935–15979 Meetings; district and regional advisory councils: Florida, 15931 Part III Hawaii, 15931 Department of Justice, Antitrust Division, 15981–16033
State Department Part IV NOTICES Department of Housing and Urban Development, 16035– Gifts to Federal employees from foreign governments; list, 16049 15936–15979 Part V Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement Office Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, NOTICES 16051–16086 Environmental statements; availability, etc.: Fall Creek Falls State Park and Natural Area, TN; Part VI unsuitability for mining operations, 15921–15922 Department of Education, 16087–16091 Part VII Surface Transportation Board Environmental Protection Agency, 16093–16109 NOTICES Rail carriers: Part VIII Cost recovery procedures— Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Adjustment factor, 15932 Administration, 16111–16112
Transportation Department Part IX See Federal Aviation Administration Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation See Federal Highway Administration Administration, 16113–16116 See Federal Transit Administration See Surface Transportation Board Reader Aids Treasury Department Consult the Reader Aids section at the end of this issue for See Internal Revenue Service phone numbers, online resources, finding aids, reminders, and notice of recently enacted public laws.
VerDate 20-MAR-2000 20:37 Mar 23, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4748 Sfmt 4748 E:\FR\FM\24MRCN.LOC pfrm04 PsN: 24MRCN Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 58 / Friday, March 24, 2000 / Contents VII
CFR PARTS AFFECTED IN THIS ISSUE
A cumulative list of the parts affected this month can be found in the Reader Aids section at the end of this issue.
3 CFR Administrative Orders: Memorandum of January 5, 2000 ...... 15823 5 CFR Ch. LXXIII ...... 15825 Proposed Rules: 531...... 15875 7 CFR 75...... 15830 985...... 15832 8 CFR 3 (2 documents) ...... 15835, 15846 212 (2 documents) ...... 15835, 15846 240 (2 documents) ...... 15835, 15846 245 (2 documents) ...... 15835, 15846 274a (2 documents) ...... 15835, 15846 299 (2 documents) ...... 15835, 15846 9 CFR Proposed Rules: 77...... 15877 14 CFR 39 (2 documents) ...... 15857, 15858 71 (4 documents) ...... 15859, 15860, 15861 91 (2 documents) ...... 16112, 16114 Proposed Rules: 39 (3 documents) ...... 15878, 15880, 15882 26 CFR 1...... 15862 601...... 15862 30 CFR 250...... 15862 40 CFR 52...... 15864 55...... 15867 Proposed Rules: 52...... 15883 152...... 15884 156...... 15884 755...... 16094 47 CFR Proposed Rules: 73 (3 documents) ...... 15885, 15886 50 CFR 17...... 16052 635...... 15873 Proposed Rules: 17...... 15887
VerDate 20-MAR-2000 20:37 Mar 23, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4711 Sfmt 4711 E:\FR\FM\24MRLS.LOC pfrm04 PsN: 24MRLS 15823
Federal Register Presidential Documents Vol. 65, No. 58
Friday, March 24, 2000
Title 3— Memorandum of January 5, 2000
The President Delegation of Authority Under Section 1406 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2000 (Public Law 106–65)
Memorandum for the Secretary of Energy
By the authority vested in me by the Constitution and laws of the United States, including section 301 of title 3, United States Code, I hereby delegate to the Secretary of Energy and the Secretary of Defense the duties and responsibilities vested in the President by section 1406 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2000 (‘‘the Act’’) (Public Law 106–65). The Departments of Energy and Defense shall jointly prepare a report with the assistance of the Department of State, the Department of Commerce, and the Director of Central Intelligence. The Departments of Defense and Energy shall obtain concurrence on the report from the following agencies: the Department of State, the Department of Commerce, and the Director of Central Intelligence on behalf of the Intelligence Community prior to submission to the Congress. Any reference in this memorandum to the provisions of any Act shall be deemed to be a reference to such Act or its provisions as may be amended from time to time. You are authorized and directed to publish this memorandum in the Federal Register. œ–
THE WHITE HOUSE, Washington, January 5, 2000.
[FR Doc. 00–7426 Filed 3–23–00; 8:45 am] Billing code 6450–01–M
VerDate 20
Rules and Regulations Federal Register Vol. 65, No. 58
Friday, March 24, 2000
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER Department of Agriculture, Room 348– Section 8301.102 General Prior contains regulatory documents having general W—Stop 0122, 1400 Independence Approval Requirement for Outside applicability and legal effect, most of which Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20250– Employment are keyed to and codified in the Code of 0122, telephone (202) 720–2251. Federal Regulations, which is published under The Standards, at 5 CFR 2635.803, 50 titles pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 1510. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: specifically recognize that an agency may find it necessary or desirable to The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by I. Background issue a supplemental regulation the Superintendent of Documents. Prices of requiring its employees, or any category new books are listed in the first FEDERAL On August 7, 1992, OGE published of employees, to obtain approval before REGISTER issue of each week. the new Standards, which became engaging in outside employment. effective on February 3, 1993. The Department employees, pursuant to the standards, as corrected and amended, Department’s Employee Conduct and DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE are codified at 5 CFR part 2635. On Responsibilities regulations at 7 CFR 5 CFR Chapter LXXIII October 3, 1997, the Department’s part 0, long had been required to seek Employee Conduct and Responsibilities prior approval before engaging in RIN 3209±AA15 regulations were removed. See 62 FR outside employment. This regulatory 51759–51760. requirement lapsed after November 1, Supplemental Standards of Ethical 5 CFR 2635.105 authorizes agencies, 1996, upon the expiration of the last Conduct for Employees of the grace period extension granted by OGE with the concurrence of OGE, to publish Department of Agriculture for agency prior approval requirements agency-specific supplemental and agency prohibitions on holding or AGENCY: Department of Agriculture regulations that are necessary to (Department or USDA). acquiring financial interests in effect implement their respective ethics prior to the effective date of the ACTION: Interim rule. programs. The Department, with OGE Standards. concurrence, has determined that the SUMMARY: The Department of The Department found its prior Agriculture (Department or USDA), with following interim supplemental rules approval requirement particularly the concurrence of the Office of being codified in a new chapter LXXIII useful in ensuring that the outside Government Ethics (OGE), is issuing of 5 CFR, consisting of part 8301, are employment of USDA employees regulations for Department employees necessary to the success of its ethics conformed with all applicable laws and that supplement the Standards of program. regulations. At the same time, the former requirement for universal prior Ethical Conduct for Employees of the II. Analysis of the Regulations Executive Branch (Standards), as issued approval had been viewed as by OGE. The regulations set forth both Section 8301.101 General unnecessarily burdensome and a general requirement for certain intrusive, particularly in those instances Department employees to obtain prior Section 8301.101 explains that the in which the employee’s outside approval before engaging in outside regulations apply to all Department employment posed little danger to the employment and separate, more- employees and supplement the interests of USDA and its agencies, or extensive prior approval requirements executive branchwide Standards. In where there was little or no nexus for employees of the USDA Farm addition, this section notes that between the employee’s official duties Service Agency (FSA), Food Safety and employees of the Department are also and his or her outside employment. Inspection Service (FSIS), Office of the subject to the Standards at 5 CFR part In accordance with 5 CFR 2635.803, General Counsel (OGC), and Office of 2635, the executive branch financial USDA has determined that it is Inspector General (OIG). They also disclosure regulations at 5 CFR part necessary to the administration of its contain certain restrictions on financial 2634, and additional regulations on departmentwide ethics program to again interests applicable to FSA employees. employee responsibilities and conduct require certain of its employees to seek approval before engaging in any outside DATES: These regulations are effective at 5 CFR part 735. This section also March 24, 2000. Comments must be notes that agencies and components of employment. The Department has received or postmarked on or before the Department, with concurrence of the determined that all USDA employees who file either a public or confidential April 24, 2000. Designated Agency Ethics Official financial disclosure report (SF 278 or (DAEO), may issue explanatory ADDRESSES: Comments should be OGE Form 450), or an alternative form guidance, internal procedures, and submitted to the Office of Ethics, U.S. of reporting approved by OGE, must Department of Agriculture, Room 348– delegations of authority consistent with seek approval before engaging in any -W—Stop 0122, 1400 Independence 5 CFR 2635.105. Finally, to facilitate outside employment. Financial Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20250– agency employees, across the disclosure report filers occupy high 0122, telephone (202) 720–2251, Department, in accessing and utilizing level positions or otherwise hold Attention: John C. Surina, Director, applicable agency-specific guidance and positions that have a direct and Office of Ethics, or by e-mail at the procedures, the section provides that substantial effect on the interests of non- following address: the Deputy Ethics Official for each Federal entities. Accordingly, prior [email protected]. USDA agency or component shall retain approval of these employees’ outside FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John copies of all such guidance issued by employment is warranted. Approval, C. Surina, Director, Office of Ethics, U.S. that agency or component. however, merely constitutes an
VerDate 20
VerDate 20
VerDate 20
VerDate 20
VerDate 20
VerDate 20
Regulatory and Testing Branch, balance. Without a fee increase, FY 2000 $104,000, costs are projected at Livestock and Seed Program, AMS, revenues for seed testing and $108,000, and the trust fund balance Room 209, Building 306, BARC–E., certification services are projected at would be $78,000. With a fee increase, Beltsville, Maryland 20705–2325, $104,000, costs are projected at FY 2000 revenues are projected at Telephone (301) 504–9430, FAX (301) $108,000, and the trust fund balance $114,000, costs are projected at 504–8098. would be $78,000. With a fee increase, $113,000, and the trust fund balance SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: FY 2000 revenues are projected at would be $83,000. $114,000, costs are projected at The hourly fee for service is Executive Order 12866 $113,000, and the trust fund balance established by distributing the projected This final rule has been determined to would be $83,000. annual program operating costs over the be ‘‘not significant’’ for purposes of This action will raise the hourly rate Executive Order 12866, and therefore, charged to users of the seed testing and estimated hours of service—revenue has not been reviewed by the Office of certification services. The AMS hours—provided to users of the service. Management and Budget (OMB). estimates that this proposed rule will Revenue hours include the time spent yield an additional $10,000 during FY conducting tests, keeping sample logs, Executive Order 12988 2000. The hourly rate for seed testing preparing Federal Seed Analysis This final rule has been reviewed and certification services will increase Certificates and storing samples. As under Executive Order 12988, Civil by approximately 9.9 percent. The costs program operating costs continue to Justice Reform. It is not intended to to entities will be proportional to their rise, the hourly fees must be adjusted to have a retroactive effect. The rule will use of the service, so that costs are enable the program to remain not preempt any State or local laws, shared equitably by all users. The financially self-supporting as required regulations, or policies unless they increase in costs to individual firms will by law. Program operating costs include present an irreconcilable conflict with be, on average, approximately $6.70 per salaries and fringe benefits of seed this rule. Federal Seed Analysis Certificate analysts, supervision, training, and all There are no administrative issued. There will also be an increase of administrative costs of operating the procedures that must be exhausted prior $1.10 for each duplicate certificate program. to judicial challenge to the provision of issued. Employee salaries and benefits this rule. This action will result in no increase account for approximately 90 percent of to the previously approved information Regulatory Flexibility Act and the total budget. A general and locality collection requirements for the Paperwork Reduction Act salary increase of 3.68 percent for voluntary Federal seed testing and Federal employees involved in the seed The Administrator, AMS, has certified certification service. The information that this action will not have a testing and certification service became collection requirements that appear in effective in January 1999 and has significant impact on a substantial Part 75 of the regulations have been number of small entities as defined in materially affected program costs. previously approved by OMB and Another general and locality salary the Regulatory Flexibility Act. assigned OMB Control Number 0581– The AMS provides, under the increase of 4.94 percent became 0140 under the Paperwork Reduction effective in January 2000. authority of the Agricultural Marketing Act (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35). Act (AMA) of 1946, a voluntary, user-fee This fee increase is necessary to offset funded seed testing and certification Background increased program operating costs service to approximately 65 businesses The Secretary of Agriculture is resulting from: (1) salary increases for per year. Many of the users of the testing authorized by the AMA of 1946, as all Federal employees for 1999 and and certification services would be amended, 7 U.S.C. 1621 et seq., to 2000, (2) increases in rent, (3) increases considered small businesses under the provide voluntary Federal seed testing in costs of supplies needed for testing criteria established by the Small and certification services to facilitate the samples, and (4) purchases of Business Administration (13 CFR orderly marketing of seed and grain and replacement equipment needed to 121.601). Over ninety percent of the to enable consumers to obtain the provide the service. samples tested in this program represent quality of seed and grain they desire. In view of these increases in costs, the seed and grain scheduled for export. The AMA provides that reasonable fees Agency is increasing the hourly rate Grain is examined for the presence of be collected from users of the program charged to applicants for the service, specified weed and crop seeds upon services to cover, as nearly as including the issuance of Federal Seed request of the Department’s Grain practicable, the costs of services Analysis Certificates from $40.40 to Inspection, Packers and Stockyards rendered. $44.40. The fee for issuing additional Administration. A Federal Seed The AMS regularly reviews its user duplicate certificates will increase from Analysis Certificate, containing purity, fee financed programs to determine if $10.10 to $11.10. germination, noxious-weed seed the fees are adequate and if costs are examination, and other test results is reasonable. This action will increase the The action will fully recover all costs issued upon completion of the testing. hourly fee rate and changes for associated with providing the voluntary The Federal Seed Analysis Certificate is voluntary seed testing and certification testing service to the seed and grain required documentation for shipments services provided to the seed and grain industry. Although the user-fee increase of seed and grain from the United States industries to reflect the costs currently will increase costs to individual firms, entering certain countries. associated with providing the services. the cost for providing the seed testing The AMS regularly reviews its user A recent review of the current hourly and certification services will increase fee financed programs to determine if fee rate, effective October 1, 1998, by an average of only $6.70 per Federal the fees are adequate. The most recent revealed that anticipated revenue will Seed Analysis Certificate and $1.10 for review determined that the existing fee not cover increased program costs. each duplicate certificate. It is estimated schedule will not generate sufficient Without a fee increase FY 2000 that the total revenue generated will revenues to cover program costs while revenues for seed testing and increase by approximately $10,000 maintaining an adequate reserve certification services are projected at annually.
VerDate 20
Summary of Public Comment salable quantity by 102,311 pounds the Far West (Washington, Idaho, A notice of proposed rulemaking was from 1,125,755 pounds to 1,228,066 Oregon, and designated parts of Nevada, published in the Federal Register (64 pounds, and the allotment percentage and Utah), hereinafter referred to as the FR 58358) on October 29, 1998. by 5 percent from 55 percent to 60 ‘‘order.’’ This order is effective under Interested persons were invited to percent. This rule increases the Native the Agricultural Marketing Agreement submit comments until December 28, spearmint oil salable quantity by an Act of 1937, as amended (7 U.S.C. 601– 674), hereinafter referred to as the 1999. No comments were received. additional 81,849 pounds from 1,228,066 to 1,309,915 pounds, and the ‘‘Act.’’ List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 75 allotment percentage by an additional 4 The Department of Agriculture (Department) is issuing this rule in Administrative practice and percent from 60 percent to 64 percent. conformance with Executive Order procedure, Agricultural commodities, The Spearmint Oil Administrative Committee (Committee), the agency 12866. Reporting and record keeping This rule has been reviewed under requirements, Seeds, Vegetables. responsible for local administration of the marketing order for spearmint oil Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice For the reasons set forth in the produced in the Far West, Reform. Under the provisions of the preamble, 7 CFR Part 75 is amended as recommended this rule to avoid extreme marketing order now in effect, salable follows: fluctuations in supplies and prices, and, quantities and allotment percentages may be established for classes of PART 75ÐREGULATIONS FOR thus, help to maintain stability in the Far West spearmint oil market. spearmint oil produced in the Far West. INSPECTION AND CERTIFICATION OF This rule increases the quantity of DATES: Effective on March 25, 2000 QUALITY OF AGRICULTURAL AND Native spearmint oil produced in the VEGETABLE SEEDS through May 31, 2000; comments Far West that may be purchased from or received by April 24, 2000 will be handled for producers by handlers 1. The authority citation for Part 75 considered prior to issuance of a final continues to read as follows: during the 1999–2000 marketing year, rule. which ends on May 31, 2000. This rule Authority: 7 U.S.C. 1622 and 1624. ADDRESSES: Interested persons are will not preempt any State or local laws, § 75.41 [Amended] invited to submit written comments regulations, or policies, unless they concerning this rule. Comments must be present an irreconcilable conflict with 2. In § 75.41, ‘‘$40.40’’ is removed and sent to the Docket Clerk, Fruit and this rule. ‘‘$44.40’’ is added in its place. Vegetable Programs, AMS, USDA, room The Act provides that administrative § 75.47 [Amended] 2525–S, P.O. Box 96456, Washington, proceedings must be exhausted before DC 20090–6456; Fax: (202) 720–5698, or parties may file suit in court. Under 3. In § 75.47, ‘‘$10.10’’ is removed and E-mail: [email protected]. All section 608c(15)(A) of the Act, any ‘‘$11.10’’ is added in its place. comments should reference the docket handler subject to an order may file Dated: March 20, 2000. number and the date and page number with the Secretary a petition stating that Barry L. Carpenter, of this issue of the Federal Register and the order, any provision of the order, or Deputy Administrator, Livestock and Seed will be made available for public any obligation imposed in connection Program. inspection in the Office of the Docket with the order is not in accordance with [FR Doc. 00–7276 Filed 3–23–00; 8:45 am] Clerk during regular business hours. law and request a modification of the order or to be exempted therefrom. A BILLING CODE 3410±02±P FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Robert J. Curry, Northwest Marketing handler is afforded the opportunity for Field Office, Marketing Order a hearing on the petition. After the DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Administration Branch, Fruit and hearing the Secretary would rule on the Vegetable Programs, AMS, USDA, 1220 petition. The Act provides that the Agricultural Marketing Service SW Third Avenue, room 369, Portland, district court of the United States in any Oregon 97204–2807; telephone: (503) district in which the handler is an 7 CFR Part 985 326–2724, Fax: (503) 326–7440; or inhabitant, or has his or her principal place of business, has jurisdiction to [Docket No. FV00±985±3 IFR±A] George Kelhart, Technical Advisor, Marketing Order Administration review the Secretary’s ruling on the Marketing Order Regulating the Branch, Fruit and Vegetable Programs, petition, provided an action is filed not Handling of Spearmint Oil Produced in AMS, USDA, room 2525–S, P.O. Box later than 20 days after the date of the the Far West; Revision of the Salable 96456, Washington, DC 20090–6456; entry of the ruling. The U.S. production of spearmint oil Quantity and Allotment Percentage for telephone: (202) 720–2491, Fax: (202) is concentrated in the Far West, Class 3 (Native) Spearmint Oil for the 720–5698. primarily Washington, Idaho, and 1999±2000 Marketing Year Small businesses may request Oregon (part of the area covered by the information on complying with this AGENCY: Agricultural Marketing Service, order). Spearmint oil is also produced in regulation by contacting Jay Guerber, USDA. the Midwest. The production area Marketing Order Administration covered by the order normally accounts ACTION: Interim final rule with request Branch, Fruit and Vegetable Programs, for approximately 63 percent of the for comments. AMS, USDA, room 2525–S, P.O. Box annual U.S. production of Scotch 96456, Washington, DC 20090–6456; SUMMARY: This rule amends a prior spearmint oil and approximately 93 telephone (202) 720–2491; Fax: (202) interim final rule that increased the percent of the annual U.S. production of 720–5698, or E-mail: quantity of Class 3 (Native) spearmint Native spearmint oil. oil produced in the Far West that [email protected]. This rule amends an interim final rule handlers may purchase from, or handle SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This rule that was published in the Federal for, producers during the 1999–2000 is issued under Marketing Order No. Register on February 10, 2000 (65 FR marketing year. The prior interim final 985 (7 CFR Part 985), regulating the 6528). That rule, which was based on a rule increased the Native spearmint oil handling of spearmint oil produced in unanimous Committee recommendation
VerDate 20
VerDate 20
40,966 pounds of Native spearmint oil consideration by the Committee was acreage than would be planted to was available for market. During the given to historical sales, and changes spearmint during any given season. To past 5 years, the average sales of Native and trends in production and demand. remain economically viable with the spearmint oil from March 1 to May 31 Pursuant to requirements set forth in added costs associated with spearmint totaled 75,586 pounds, while the the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA), the oil production, most spearmint oil average sales for the period June 1 AMS has considered the economic producing farms would fall into the through February 29 totaled 1,087,385 impact of this action on small entities. category of large businesses. pounds. The Far West spearmint oil Accordingly, the AMS has prepared this Small spearmint oil producers industry has sold approximately initial regulatory flexibility analysis. represent a minority of farming 1,282,150 pounds of Native spearmint The purpose of the RFA is to fit operations and are more vulnerable to oil through February 23, 2000. This regulatory actions to the scale of market fluctuations. Such small farmers action has the effect of adding 73,545 business subject to such actions in order generally need to market their entire pounds of Native spearmint oil to the that small businesses will not be unduly annual crop and do not have the amount available for market, bringing or disproportionately burdened. resources to cushion seasons with poor the total available supply for the Marketing orders issued pursuant to the spearmint oil returns. Conversely, large remainder of this marketing year up to Act, and rules issued thereunder, are diversified producers have the potential approximately 114,511 pounds. unique in that they are brought about to endure one or more seasons of poor The Department, based on its analysis through group action of essentially spearmint oil markets because of of available information, has determined small entities acting on their own stronger incomes from alternate crops that the salable quantity and allotment behalf. Thus, both statutes have small which could support the operation for a percentage for Native spearmint oil for entity orientation and compatibility. period of time. Despite the advantage the 1999–2000 marketing year should be There are 7 spearmint oil handlers larger producers may have, increasing increased to 1,309,915 and 64 percent, subject to regulation under the the Native salable quantity and respectively. marketing order and approximately 119 allotment percentage will help both This amended rule further relaxes the producers of Scotch spearmint oil and large and small producers by improving regulation of Native spearmint oil and 105 producers of Native spearmint oil in returns. will allow producers to meet market the regulated production area. Small This rule amends an interim final rule needs and improve returns. In agricultural service firms are defined by that was published in the Federal conjunction with the issuance of this the Small Business Administration Register on February 10, 2000 (65 FR rule, the Committee’s revised marketing (SBA) (13 CFR 121.201) as those having 6528). That rule increased the salable policy statement for the 1999–2000 annual receipts of less than $5,000,000, quantity by 102,311 pounds from marketing year has been reviewed by and small agricultural producers have 1,125,755 pounds to 1,228,066 pounds, the Department. The Committee’s been defined as those whose annual and the allotment percentage by 5 marketing policy statement, a receipts are less than $500,000. percent from 55 percent to 60 percent. requirement whenever the Committee Based on the SBA’s definition of This amended interim final rule recommends implementing volume small entities, the Committee estimates increases the salable quantity an regulations or recommends revisions to that 2 of the 7 handlers regulated by the additional 81,849 pounds from existing volume regulations, meets the order could be considered small 1,228,066 pounds to 1,309,915 pounds, intent of section 985.50 of the order. entities. Most of the handlers are large and the allotment percentage an During its discussion of revising the corporations involved in the additional 4 percent from 60 percent to 1999–2000 salable quantities and international trading of essential oils 64 percent for Native spearmint oil for allotment percentages, the Committee and the products of essential oils. In the 1999–2000 marketing year. This rule considered: (1) The estimated quantity addition, the Committee estimates that relaxes the regulation of Native of salable oil of each class held by 25 of the 119 Scotch spearmint oil spearmint oil and will allow producers producers and handlers; (2) the producers and 7 of the 105 Native to meet market needs and improve estimated demand for each class of oil; spearmint oil producers would be returns. (3) prospective production of each class classified as small entities under the The Committee considered of oil; (4) total of allotment bases of each SBA definition. Thus, a majority of alternatives to the 4 percent increase class of oil for the current marketing handlers and producers of Far West based on projections and historical data year and the estimated total of allotment spearmint oil may not be classified as available at the meeting. Generally, bases of each class for the ensuing small entities. spearmint oil producers and buyers marketing year; (5) the quantity of The Far West spearmint oil industry attending the meeting recommended reserve oil, by class, in storage; (6) is characterized by producers whose that the Native spearmint oil salable producer prices of oil, including prices farming operations generally involve quantity be increased by at least an for each class of oil; and (7) general more than one commodity, and whose additional 55,000 pounds. The market conditions for each class of oil, income from farming operations is not Committee reached its recommendation including whether the estimated season exclusively dependent on the to increase the Native spearmint oil average price to producers is likely to production of spearmint oil. Crop salable quantity by an additional 81,849 exceed parity. Conformity with the rotation is an essential cultural practice pounds and the allotment percentage by Department’s ‘‘Guidelines for Fruit, in the production of spearmint oil for 4 percent after careful consideration of Vegetable, and Specialty Crop weed, insect, and disease control. A all available information, and believes Marketing Orders’’ has also been normal spearmint oil producing that the level recommended will reviewed and confirmed. operation would have enough acreage achieve the objectives sought. Without This increase in the 1999–2000 for rotation such that the total acreage the increase, the Committee believes the marketing year Native spearmint oil required to produce the crop would be industry will not be able to meet market salable quantity and allotment about one-third spearmint and two- needs. By recommending a greater percentage allows for anticipated market thirds rotational crops. An average increase than the market might needs for this class of oil. In spearmint oil producing farm would, otherwise demand, the Committee determining anticipated market needs, thus, have to have considerably more believes that any further unanticipated
VerDate 20
VerDate 20
Immigration Review: Chuck Adkins- (3) Haitian national children who HRIFA principal applicant, and is Blanch, Acting General Counsel, arrived in the United States without accompanied by either the correct fee or Executive Office for Immigration parents and have remained without a request for a fee waiver. Review, 5107 Leesburg Pike, Suite 2400, parents in the United States since such Some commenters felt that any Falls Church, VA 22041, telephone arrival; Haitian who entered the United States (703) 305–0470. (4) Haitian national children who prior to December 31, 1995, or who has SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: became orphaned subsequent to arrival been living in the United States since in the United States; and December 31, 1995, and any family What are the Basic Provisions of (5) Haitian children who were members of such an individual, should Section 902 of HRIFA and the Interim abandoned by their parents or guardians be allowed to adjust his or her status to Regulations Published on May 12, prior to April 1, 1998, and have that of permanent resident. Although 1999? remained abandoned since such the Department understands the desire On October 21, 1998, the President abandonment. of the commenters to have the benefits of permanent residence extended to as signed into law a Fiscal Year 1999 How Many Comments Were Received Omnibus Appropriations Act, Public many persons as possible, the from Interested Parties in Response to suggestion is contrary to the statute, Law 105–277 (112 Stat. 2681). Division the Interim Rule? A, title IX of that statute, the Haitian which requires that principal applicants A total of 46 comments were received Refugee Immigration Fairness Act of fall within one of the five categories set during the comment period. 1998 (HRIFA), contained a provision, forth above, be admissible to the United Commenters included Members of section 902, that allows certain States, and meet all other statutory Congress, the mayor of a major city, nationals of Haiti to adjust their status requirements. Accordingly, this representatives of a number of to that of lawful permanent resident. On suggestion cannot be adopted. nongovernmental organizations, private Some commenters wanted the May 12, 1999, the Department of Justice attorneys, and other interested regulations to provide that upon being (Department) published an interim rule, individuals. The Department granted lawful permanent residence, with requests for comments, that appreciates the contributions of all any HRIFA applicants who arrived in implemented section 902 of HRIFA. See individuals and groups who submitted the United States after being paroled 64 FR 25756. comments. from the U.S. Naval Base at Guantanamo Section 902 of HRIFA provides that Bay, Cuba (Guantanamo Bay), would the Attorney General shall adjust the What Comments Were Submitted and immediately become eligible to apply status of certain Haitian nationals who how is the Regulation Being Changed as for United States citizenship. This are physically present in the United a Result? suggestion cannot be adopted because States to that of lawful permanent The issues raised by the commenters the Act specifically requires an alien to resident. In order to be eligible for generally fell into 17 areas: reside in the United States for a specific benefits under HRIFA, an applicant 1. Issues Pertaining to Eligibility Under period ‘‘after being lawfully admitted must: for permanent residence.’’ See Sec. • the Statute, but not Related to Be a national of Haiti who was 316(a)(1) of the Act, 8 U.S.C. 1427(a)(1). Immigrant Visa Waivers present in the United States on In the rare instances in which the December 31, 1995; A number of commenters requested • Immigration and Naturalization Service Have been physically present in the that the Department extend the time (Service or INS) has recorded the date United States for a continuous period period for submission of applications by of admission for permanent residence as beginning not later than December 31, principal applicants beyond the March other than the actual date the 1995, and ending not earlier than the 31, 2000, deadline set by statute. Such application for such status was granted, date the application for adjustment is action would require new legislation, as it has only done so in accordance with filed (not including any absence or it is clearly beyond the rulemaking explicit statutory authority. absences amounting to 180 days or less authority of the Department. Some commenters suggested that the in the aggregate); Other commenters, recognizing that regulations provide that any Haitian • Properly file an application for such change would exceed the national who entered the United States adjustment before April 1, 2000; Department’s authority, requested that prior to December 31, 1995, and who • Be admissible to the United States the Department not reject any applied for asylum prior to December under all provisions of section 212(a) of applications as improperly filed during 31, 1997, should be eligible for the Immigration and Nationality Act the final 30 days of the filing period adjustment under HRIFA. This (the Act), 8 U.S.C. 1182(a), except those because of a lack of documentation to suggestion is contrary to statute and provisions specifically excepted by establish eligibility. In light of the beyond the rulemaking authority of the HRIFA; and relatively short filing period, the Department; it therefore cannot be • Fall within one of the five classes Department finds this suggestion to be adopted. of persons described in section 902(b)(1) both reasonable and within its Finally, some commenters suggested of HRIFA. rulemaking authority. Accordingly, 8 that any asylum application that was The five classes described in section CFR 245.15(c)(2) has been revised to mailed to the Service by December 31, 902(b)(1) of HRIFA are: provide that an Application to Register 1995, but rejected as not properly filed, (1) Haitian nationals who filed for Permanent Residence or Adjust Status be considered to have been timely filed asylum before December 31, 1995; (Form I–485) submitted to either the for HRIFA purposes. Congress could (2) Haitian nationals who were Nebraska Service Center or the have opened the category to those who paroled into the United States prior to Immigration Court by a principal ‘‘filed or attempted to file’’ the December 31, 1995, after having been applicant seeking adjustment of status application, or more simply to those identified as having a credible fear of under HRIFA will not be rejected as who ‘‘submitted’’ the application. persecution, or paroled for emergent improperly filed as long as it has been Instead, Congress required that the reasons or reasons deemed strictly in properly completed and signed by the applicant have ‘‘filed for asylum before the public interest; applicant, identifies the applicant as a December 31, 1995,’’ in order to fall
VerDate 20
VerDate 20
Manual (FAM), which reports that birth nonexistent Form I–94. The regulations to concede that, in light of the relatively certificates, marriage records, divorce have been amended to clarify this point. short filing period provided in the records, death certificates, and adoption However, the applicant is still required statute, it will be difficult—if not certificates are all generally available to meet the requirements set forth in 8 impossible—for many bona fide from Haiti. This is not to say, as it could CFR 245.15(i) pertaining to applicants to obtain the normally be said about any country in the world, documenting when the applicant’s required documentation in time to file that in an individual case, a particular physical presence in the United States an application for adjustment before the record may not have become lost or began. March 31, 2000, deadline. Accordingly, destroyed, or be otherwise unavailable. Some commenters suggested that the the Department is making a number of For this reason, the Department requires Department allow applicants to submit changes to the regulation that it believes an applicant to submit proof of the a list of documents already known to be will significantly alleviate, if not unavailability of primary in their Service files. While the eliminate, this problem. documentation from Haiti before regulations already contain this First, as previously stated, the considering secondary evidence. In provision, the relevant provision in 8 regulations will now allow an applicant short, the only way of knowing that CFR 245.15(m) has been revised to to file the application without the birth secondary evidence is the ‘‘best eliminate possible confusion on this record being included in the application evidence available,’’ and is therefore issue. package, if the applicant presents evidence that he or she is attempting to acceptable documentation, is to first 6. Documenting Haitian Nationality establish that the primary evidence is obtain the birth record. Once the birth unavailable. However, with regard to A number of commenters felt that it record has been received, such applications for adjustment of status was not reasonable for the Department applicant would present it at his or her to require applicants under HRIFA to under HRIFA, there is a very significant interview before a Service officer or submit evidence of nationality. Many factor that complicates the application hearing before an immigration judge. felt that any ‘‘evidence’’ of nationality of the ‘‘best evidence available’’ Second, the regulations will allow the already contained in the alien’s file standard: the March 31, 2000, HRIFA Service or Immigration Court to (including the applicant’s prior claims deadline for the filing of applications by consider secondary evidence of of Haitian nationality) should be more principal applicants. Because of this nationality, if the applicant submits than sufficient to prove that the deadline, the Department has evidence that he or she has applicant is Haitian. Additionally, some determined that it is best to temper this unsuccessfully attempted to obtain the commenters stated that it is standard so as to allow applicants to file standard documentation. Such an unreasonable to require the applicant to for adjustment of status using secondary unsuccessful attempt to obtain the submit evidence of the unavailability of standard documentation may be shown evidence as long as they also submit a document before the Service or by submitting a photocopy of a letter evidence that they have requested the Immigration Court will accept from the applicant to the keeper of primary evidence from an official secondary evidence in lieu of that records requesting the document in recordkeeper (e.g., the Haitian National document. Finally, some commenters question. If the primary evidence is Archives). This approach will avoid the expressed concerns that children born received prior to the interview or risk of persons being unable to apply for in Guantanamo Bay of Haitian parents hearing, the applicant can present it at adjustment under HRIFA, while at the would be unable to document either that time; otherwise, the adjudicating same time ensuring the integrity of the Haitian or Cuban nationality. officer or judge may make a documentation. In instances in which It is important to note that the determination based on the secondary the primary documentation arrives prior submission of evidence of nationality evidence. The secondary evidence to the applicant’s interview with an with the application for adjustment is a which may be taken into consideration immigration officer or hearing before an standard requirement for all applicants could include baptismal and other immigration judge, the applicant would for adjustment and not a special religious records, passports, and present the primary documentation at requirement placed upon applicants evidence or statements already such interview or hearing. Where the under HRIFA. Likewise, it is standard contained in the alien’s Service file. documentation does not arrive prior to practice to require evidence of the However, it must also be noted that all the interview or hearing, the unavailability of a document of record determinations as to the weight and interviewing officer or presiding judge before considering secondary evidence. credibility to be given to the secondary would make a determination whether to (As previously stated, the Department of evidence rest with the adjudicating make a decision based on the evidence State’s FAM reports that such officer or judge. available or to continue the case until documents are generally available in With regard to those children born in the primary documentation arrives. Haiti.) Furthermore, files that were Guantanamo Bay, there are at least three Some commenters were under the created upon an alien’s arrest or methods by which an applicant could mistaken impression that the submission of an application for document his or her birth. First, the regulations, see, e.g. 8 CFR 245.15(i), benefits may contain no documentary United States Naval authorities issued a always require that a Form I–94 be evidence of nationality, but may refer to certificate of live birth to the parents of submitted as proof of entry. If the alien the alien’s (perhaps self-serving) each child born on that naval base. is in possession of the Form I–94, he or statement of nationality. Despite some Second, the records of the Service she should submit it, but if the alien commenters’ contention to the contrary, would reflect the place of birth as being never received or lost the Form I–94, it while rare, it is not unheard of for a at Guantanamo Bay. Third, the records cannot be submitted. Where it is crucial non-Haitian alien to falsely claim to be of the voluntary agency that assisted in that the applicant establish the date of Haitian when it is to his or her the family’s resettlement would also arrival, as with children who arrived advantage. Accordingly, every prior show that the applicant was born at the without parents, secondary documents claim to Haitian nationality cannot U.S. Naval Base at Guantanamo Bay. may be submitted (such as automatically be presumed to be valid. Any of these records could be used in transportation company records or an However, even considering all of support of an application for adjustment affidavit) in lieu of a missing or these factors, the Department is willing under HRIFA.
VerDate 20
7. Documenting Presence in the United Department has determined that the as a result of the enactment of the Illegal States on December 31, 1995 guideline that had been intended to ease Immigration Reform and Immigrant Some commenters contend that the the burden on applicants by assisting Responsibility Act of 1996 (IIRIRA) in statutory requirement contained in them in gauging how much September 1996. These statutory section 902(b)(1) that limits the benefits documentation to submit has instead reforms applied prospectively only. See of HRIFA to nationals of Haiti who were become a hindrance that may result in IIRIRA section 309(c)(1). Accordingly, ‘‘present in the United States on some applicants believing that, without this suggestion will not be adopted. a certain minimum amount of December 31, 1995,’’ also applies to 10. Issues Pertaining to Applications documentation, they are ineligible to those who had been present in the Submitted by Children apply for or receive the benefit of United States at some time before that adjustment of status under HRIFA. A number of commenters felt that the date but had left and were not here on Accordingly, the guideline is being Department’s interpretation of ‘‘child that specific date. This contention is removed from the regulations and without parents in the United States’’ based on the commenters’ interpretation applicants should simply submit was too restrictive and undercut the of the requirement in section 902(b)(2) sufficient documentation to satisfy the legislative intent. Others mistakenly of HRIFA that the applicant must have adjudicating officer or immigration believed that the Department adopted been physically present in the United judge that they have maintained this position in order to combat possible States for a continuous period beginning continuous presence in the United fraud. In fact, the Department had not later than December 31, 1995, but States within the meaning of the statute. simply taken the common meaning of allows for absences of up to 180 days in The adjudicating officer or immigration the phrase since no definition was the aggregate during that period. The judge retains the right to request provided by the statute. According to commenters interpret the phrase additional documentation should the the commenters, the focus should be on ‘‘beginning not later than December 31, evidence submitted by the applicant whether there has been a sustainable 1995,’’ as applying not only to the prove insufficient to meet his or her parent-child relationship between the period of continuous presence, but also burden of proof. child and his or her parents in the to the absences. This would have been United States. In other words, who has a logical interpretation if section 9. Definition of the Term ‘‘Parole’’ or has had parental control over the 902(b)(1) of HRIFA had allowed Several commenters suggested that all child since his or her arrival into the applicants to have been present ‘‘on or Haitians released from Service custody United States? The Department agrees before December 31, 1995,’’ but it does before December 31, 1995, including that this interpretation better reflects the not. The only way to read both sections those released on bond or on their own legislative intent behind the provisions in concert is that persons who departed recognizance pursuant to section concerning children without parents. prior to December 31, 1995, and were 242(a)(1) of the Act, 8 U.S.C. 1252(a), as Therefore, the regulations have been not physically present on that date are it was in effect at that time, should amended by placing commas before and ineligible for benefits under HRIFA as qualify as ‘‘parolees’’ under HRIFA. In after the phrase ‘‘without parents’’ in 8 principal applicants. support of this suggestion, these CFR 245.15(b)(1)(iii)(A). A number of commenters felt that the 8. Documenting Presence in the United commenters cited an April 19, 1999, regulations unnecessarily and onerously States Since December 31, 1995 Service policy memorandum. That memorandum concerned the eligibility require children to show proof of their Many commenters were concerned of certain Cuban nationals for manner of arrival. Some commenters that the rough guideline for adjustment of status under the Cuban were under the mistaken impression documenting continuity of presence Adjustment Act, despite their having that the regulations required that a Form (one document for each 90-day period) arrived at a place other than a I–94 be submitted in all cases. Where an would be impossible for many bona fide designated port-of-entry. It has no applicant must establish his or her date applicants to meet due to cultural norms impact on the eligibility of a person of arrival, as with children who arrived unique to Haitians. Others contended seeking to adjust status under HRIFA as without parents, the Form I–94 should that due to other factors unique to a Haitian national who was paroled in be submitted whenever possible. Haitians, such as political, financial and the United States prior to December 31, However, as explained earlier, if the geographical constraints, it is unlikely 1995. The April 19, 1999, memorandum Form I–94 is not available, secondary that any Haitians departed from the provided in pertinent part that the documents may be submitted instead. In United States and returned since ‘‘release of an applicant for admission the case of a child arriving without December 31, 1995, and that even a from custody [pursuant to section 236 of parents, the secondary evidence may rough guideline of one document for the Act], without resolution of his or her include the child’s declaration which each 90 days is excessive. A few admissibility, is a parole.’’ (emphasis may be supported by other commenters argued that the Department added.) The release from custody of documentation (e.g., his or her should provide a more generous someone other than an applicant for attendance record at school shortly after guideline of one document for each 180 admission (e.g., an overstay) does not the claimed date of arrival). The days, since the statute allows applicants constitute a parole. In the HRIFA regulations have been amended to to have been outside the United States context, an alien who had entered the clarify this point. for up to 180 days without breaking United States without inspection, was A number of commenters made continuity of presence. detained by the Service, and was later suggestions regarding the Because the statute allows an released prior to December 31, 1995, documentation and level of proof applicant to be outside the United States cannot be seen as having been paroled required to prove eligibility as an for up to 180 days in the aggregate into the United States because the alien orphaned or abandoned child. Some without breaking continuity of presence, was not an applicant for admission at commenters suggested that an not absences of up to 180 days each, the the time of his or her release. The applicant’s declaration of orphanage Department finds that the argument that treatment of aliens present without should be sufficient proof of orphanage the guideline should be set at 180 days inspection as applicants for admission or abandonment. Several commenters is without merit. However, the was introduced to the immigration laws wanted secondary evidence to be
VerDate 20
VerDate 20
Immigration and Nationality Act is rather than to be granted or receive such exclusion, deportation, or removal codified as Chapter 12 of Title 8 of the stay, it is clear that the Department’s proceedings are terminated. Adding a U.S. Code. Accordingly, the interim regulation on this point is regulatory requirement that separate Immigration and Nationality Act within the scope of what is intended by notification to that effect be issued provides that an alien subject to section the statute. Accordingly, this suggestion could only add confusion and raise 241(a)(5) of the Act is barred from any will not be adopted. questions as to whether the order had relief provided under any provision of been canceled or the proceedings had 14. Procedural Issues the Act. been terminated. Some commenters contend that A number of commenters made section 241(a)(5), which was added to suggestions pertaining to the procedures 15. Advance Parole for Persons Outside the Act by the Illegal Immigration by which the Department adjudicates the United States Reform and Immigrant Responsibility HRIFA applications and otherwise A number of interested parties Act of 1996 (IIRIRA), Pub. L. 104–208, administers the program. Some wanted submitted comments regarding 110 Stat. 3546, applies only to an alien the Service to make more frequent use procedures involved in authorizing ordered removed from the United States of the interview waiver option and parole for persons who either have in post-IIRIRA proceedings, and not to clarify unresolved issues through applied for adjustment of status or wish an alien ordered excluded and deported, written correspondence. However, the to travel to the United States in order to or ordered deported, from the United decision on whether to waive an apply for adjustment of status. Section States in pre-IIRIRA proceedings. These interview is made solely on a case-by- 245.15(t)(1) of Title 8 of the Code of commenters fail to take into account case basis and is wholly dependent on Federal Regulations sets forth section 309(d)(2) of IIRIRA which states whether the adjudicating officer is procedures for persons who have that ‘‘any reference in law to an order satisfied that the application is already filed for adjustment of status of removal shall be deemed to include approvable (or deniable) without further and wish to depart from and return to a reference to an order of exclusion and examination. In making his or her the United States. Additionally, that deportation or an order of deportation.’’ determination, the officer takes into provision sets forth procedures for Id. at sec. 309(d)(2). consideration the information submitted otherwise eligible persons who are Other commenters are under the by the applicant (which may include outside the United States and wish to be impression that the Department holds that submitted in response to a request paroled into the country in order to file that, when a person who departed the for additional evidence from the the application for adjustment of status. United States with an advance parole Service), information contained in the For purposes of clarity, these will be (Form I–512) returns to the United alien’s file, and all other pertinent referred to as ‘‘t-1 parole’’ and ‘‘t-2 States, he or she is re-entering illegally information at the officer’s disposal. The parole’’ in this discussion. and is subject to section 241(a)(5) of the suggestion will not be adopted. Some commenters wanted t-1 parole Act. These commenters may be Some commenters wanted any authorization to be automatic for all confusing advance parole with the applications postmarked by March 31, persons who apply for adjustment of separate requirement that someone who 2000, to be considered to have been status under HRIFA. Upon departs the United States while under properly filed, even if received at the consideration, the Department finds that an order of exclusion, deportation, or Nebraska Service Center after that date. this suggestion is likely to create more removal obtain permission to reapply The Service has long held that an problems than it would solve. Many for admission after removal, even if that application may only be considered applicants under the HRIFA program person receives an advance parole properly filed when it is received in a are not in possession of acceptable document. (This ‘‘permission to Service office, provided it is properly travel documents and encouraging them reapply’’ issue is discussed in section 15 signed and executed and the requisite to travel without first obtaining advance of this preamble on advance parole.) fee is attached. See e.g. 8 CFR parole is likely to result in increased The Department would not, without 103.2(a)(7). The Department sees no difficulties at ports-of-entry and more, view a return to the United States reason to hold HRIFA applications to a departure both here and abroad. If this pursuant to an advance parole as an different standard. suggestion were to be adopted, it would illegal reentry that would trigger the Finally, some commenters wanted the also be all but impossible to determine provisions of section 241(a)(5) of the regulations to specify that the Service which returning applicants had filed Act. must provide notice of the cancellation bona fide applications and which had of an order of exclusion, deportation, or filed mala fide or frivolous ones. The 13. Stay of Removal removal, or a notice of termination of lack of a recognized advance parole Some commenters suggested that the removal, deportation or removal document would considerably regulation should provide for an proceedings, in addition to the notice of exacerbate problems for the applicants, automatic stay of removal which would approval, whenever adjustment of status as well as for government and airline take effect upon the filing of the is granted to an alien who is subject to officials, and would inevitably result in application for adjustment of status such order or in such proceedings. bona fide applicants being stranded under HRIFA. The Department While the Service will endeavor to outside the country. The Department considered this issue when drafting the provide such notification, the fact has decided not to adopt this interim rule and concluded that it remains that the regulations already suggestion. would not be appropriate. provide that regardless of whether such Some commenters wanted the The Department feels that the notification is sent (or if sent, received), Department to extend the time during Attorney General should have the upon final approval of the application which the alien can travel to the United flexibility of denying stay of removal for adjustment of status under HRIFA by States after receiving an advance t-2 requests where there are overriding the Service or the Executive Office for parole authorization beyond the current negative factors. Since the statute calls Immigration Review (EOIR) (depending 60 days. The Department feels that for regulations which allow the HRIFA on which agency has jurisdiction), any under all but the most abnormal applicant to apply for (or ‘‘seek’’) a stay pending order of exclusion, deportation circumstances, a 60-day period should of deportation, removal, or exclusion, or removal is canceled and any pending be sufficient for this purpose. The
VerDate 20
Department also notes that if the beyond March 31, 2000, the District promulgate regulations and eligible recipient feels that he or she will need Director in Mexico City will continue to applicants an opportunity to apply for additional time to obtain travel have such authority. It should also be both adjustment of status and new EADs documents and exit permits, he or she noted that the Service can extend the (as adjustment applicants). The Service can request that the Service Officer-in- authority of the Director of the Nebraska recently published a notice in the Charge in Port-au-Prince delay issuance Service Center to issue such parole Federal Register, at 64 FR 71151, which of the advance parole document until a authorizations through an internal re-extended the validity of these EADs later date. Accordingly, this suggestion Service memorandum. It need not be until September 30, 2000. Because this has not been adopted. done through the rulemaking process. matter has been addressed by separate Some commenters wanted the 60-day See 8 CFR 2.1. However, should the action, it will not be addressed here. t-2 parole issued upon the alien’s arrival authority of the Nebraska Service Center 17. Comments Relating to the to be ‘‘automatically extended’’ upon to issue such parole authorizations be Procedures of the Executive Office for the filing of the application for extended, the Service will publish a Immigration Review. adjustment. This suggestion cannot be notice to that effect in the Federal adopted for at least three reasons. First, Register. Many commenters suggested that technically, a parole is not extended, Finally, an explanation is in order Haitians eligible for HRIFA relief should although at the completion of a parole, regarding the effect of departure from be permitted to administratively close one option available to the district the United States while under an order their cases without the concurrence of director having jurisdiction over the of exclusion, deportation, or removal, the Service. Currently, those aliens in alien’s residence in the United States is including situations in which the alien proceedings before the Immigration to reparole the alien if such action is first obtains an advance parole Court or Board of Immigration Appeals warranted in accordance with the authorization, Form I–512. A Form I– (Board) may move to have these statutory requirements set forth in 512 is a document which authorizes an proceedings administratively closed for section 212(d)(5) of the Act. 8 U.S.C. immigration officer to parole the bearer the purpose of filing an application for 1182(d)(5). Second, the purpose of the t- into the United States upon inspection adjustment under HRIFA with the 2 parole is to allow the alien to file the at a port-of-entry. It neither contains nor Service; however, the Service must application for adjustment of status connotes any special benefits for the concur with the administrative closure under HRIFA, and that purpose has bearer at the point of his or her of the case. been accomplished once the alien files departure from the United States. The Department has decided not to the application for adjustment. Any Whenever an alien who is under an change this procedure because it is decision to reparole the alien would outstanding order of exclusion, established law that has been applied to have to be made (by that district deportation, or removal departs from the other types of proceedings and not just director) once the applicant for United States, he or she effects or those involving HRIFA-eligible aliens. adjustment requests reparole through executes that order. This is true Administrative closure is a convenience his or her local immigration office and regardless of whether he or she is in that allows for the removal of a case presents his or her receipt for filing the possession of an I–512 authorizing a from the calendar in appropriate application for adjustment at the parole upon his or her return. Once the situations. An immigration judge or the Nebraska Service Center. Third, even if exclusion, deportation, or removal order Board may not administratively close a the other objections were overcome, the has been executed, an alien must apply case if it is opposed by either party. See technology does not currently exist to for and be granted permission to reapply Matter of Lopez-Barrios, 20 I & N Dec. provide for automatic reparole, and the (Form I–212) before he or she embarks 203, 204 (BIA 1990). The Department cost of developing such technology or reembarks for his or her return travel does not find that aliens applying for would not be warranted by the to the United States. Failure to obtain HRIFA are in a substantially different relatively small number of persons who such permission results in the alien position from other aliens requesting would benefit from it. being inadmissible to the United States administrative closure of their cases. Some commenters wanted the and, therefore, ineligible for adjustment Therefore, an exception to the rule is regulations to extend the authority of of status in the United States. not warranted. the Director of the Nebraska Service Two groups suggested that the interim Center to adjudicate advance t-2 parole 16. Employment Authorization rule limits motions to reopen an EOIR requests. That authority currently Documents decision denying HRIFA relief after a expires on March 31, 2000. It must be Some commenters felt that the Service failure to appear by confining the noted that the authority to approve this should automatically extend the work motions to current reopening and type of parole request normally lies with authorization for persons who had been rescission standards. They argue that the District Director in Mexico City for granted Deferred Enforced Departure reopening and rescission standards for anyone in the Western Hemisphere, but (DED) under the Presidential directive certain applicants with final exclusion not at a United States port-of-entry. The to the Attorney General of December 23, and deportation orders are improper authority was extended to the Director 1997. That order allowed the Service to because aliens with pre-IMMACT 90 of the Nebraska Service Center primarily grant DED status, with work deportation cases or aliens in exclusion because of the anticipated volume of authorization, to eligible applicants proceedings predating IIRIRA’s fusion of requests under the HRIFA program. A until December 22, 1998. Shortly before exclusion and deportation are subject to decision will be made sometime during December 22, 1998, the Department the ‘‘reasonable cause’’ standard for March 2000 as to whether both the published a notice in the Federal reopening or rescission of a case before Director of the Nebraska Service Center Register which explained that although EOIR. and the Director in Mexico City should it could not extend the DED program The Department chose to apply have such authority, or if such authority itself, it was extending the validity of current rescission and reopening should be vested solely with the District the affiliated Employment standards in this particular situation Director at Mexico City. Regardless of Authorization Documents (EADs) for because it has created a new proceeding whether the authority of the Director of another year (until December 22, 1999) applicable exclusively to HRIFA-only the Nebraska Service Center is extended to give the Department time to relief. Rescission or reopening in 8 CFR
VerDate 20
245.15(s)(4) refers to 8 CFR 245.15(s)(1), appropriate to modify the regulations ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ under and only discusses the situation with respect to this group of cases to section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866. involving aliens with final orders who avoid a potentially harsh and Accordingly, this regulation has been applied for adjustment of status under irreversible result. Accordingly, the submitted to the Office of Management section 902 of HRIFA with the Service, regulations are being amended to afford and Budget for review. were denied that relief by the Service, an applicant whose HRIFA fee waiver and were then referred to the request is denied the opportunity to Executive Order 13132 Immigration Court on Form I–290C for submit the required fee within 30 days This regulation will not have adjudication of their eligibility for such of notice that the fee waiver request was substantial direct effects on the States, relief. The rescission or reopening of denied and thereby maintain a timely on the relationship between the national proceedings under 8 CFR 245.15(s)(4) filing date. Government and the States, or on the refers exclusively to the HRIFA-only In addition, in a case over which the distribution of power and proceeding and not the original Board has jurisdiction, an application responsibilities among the various deportation or exclusion proceeding. received by the Board before April 1, levels of government. Therefore, in Accordingly, the standard for 2000, that has been properly signed and accordance with section 6 of Executive determining whether an alien is eligible executed is considered to be filed before Order 13132, it is determined that this for rescission or reopening under this the statutory deadline without payment rule does not have sufficient federalism subsection refers not to the original of the fee or submission of a fee waiver implications to warrant the preparation proceeding and the old standard, but request. Upon remand by the Board, the of a federalism summary impact rather to the new proceedings and the payment of the fee or a request for a fee statement. current standard. Because the waiver is made upon submission of the Department created this new type of application to the Immigration Court in Small Business Regulatory Enforcement proceeding, it considered it appropriate accordance with 8 CFR 240.11(f). The Fairness Act of 1996 to choose a standard consistent with regulations are being amended to afford This rule is not a major rule as recent reopening standards for removal an applicant whose HRIFA adjustment defined by section 251 of the Small proceedings put in place by Congress. fee waiver request is denied the Business Regulatory Enforcement Act of Are Any Other Changes Being Made to opportunity to submit the required fee 1996. 5 U.S.C. 804. This rule will not The Regulation? within 30 days of the notice that the fee result in an annual effect on the waiver request was denied. If the economy of $100 million or more; a Section 245.15(d)(4) has been revised required fee is not paid within 30 days, major increase in costs or prices; or to clarify that in establishing the the applicant will no longer be relationship between a principal significant adverse effects on considered to have filed a timely HRIFA competition, employment, investment, beneficiary and a dependent adjustment application. beneficiary, the standards of productivity, innovation, or on the documentation set forth in 8 CFR 204.2 Good Cause Exception ability of United States-based companies to compete with foreign- apply. No other changes are being made The Department’s implementation of based companies in domestic and to the regulation, with the exception of this final rule effective upon publication export markets. minor editorial corrections. in the Federal Register is based upon It has come to the Department’s the ‘‘good cause’’ exception found at 5 Executive Order 12988: Civil Justice attention that the application of current U.S.C. 553(d)(3). By statute, all HRIFA Reform regulations (8 C.F.R. 103.2(a)(7)) and principal adjustment applicants must This final rule meets the applicable practice to HRIFA applications filed file their applications before April 1, standards set forth in sections 3(a) and with fee waiver requests may 2000. Immediate implementation of this 3(b)(2) of Executive Order 12988. inadvertently result in certain final rule is necessary to ensure that applicants later being deemed to have HRIFA applicants are able to avail Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of missed the application deadline due to themselves of the modifications made in 1995 no fault on the part of the applicant. this final rule as soon as possible before Currently an application submitted with the end of the application period. This rule will not result in the a fee waiver request is not considered Accordingly, delaying the effective date expenditure by State, local, and tribal properly filed and does not retain a of this final rule for 30 days would be governments, in the aggregate, or by the receipt date until the fee waiver is contrary to the public interest. private sector, of $100 million or more granted. In cases where a fee waiver is in any 1 year, and will not significantly denied, the application is returned to Regulatory Flexibility Act or uniquely affect small governments. the applicant with instructions to In accordance with the Regulatory Therefore, no actions were deemed resubmit the application with the Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 605(b), the necessary under the provisions of the appropriate fee at which time the Attorney General has reviewed this Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of application will be considered properly regulation and, by approving it, certifies 1995. filed and will be assigned a receipt date. that this regulation will not have a Paperwork Reduction Act Thus, under current regulations and significant economic impact upon a practice were the Service or substantial number of small entities. The information collection Immigration Court to deny a request for This rule allows certain Haitian requirement contained in this rule a waiver of the HRIFA application fee nationals to apply for adjustment of (Form I–485 Supplement C) has been after March 31, 2000, and return the status; it has no effect on small entities revised. Accordingly, it has been application, the alien could not file as that term is defined in 5 U.S.C. submitted and approved by the Office of another application with the fee because 601(6). Management and Budget (OMB) in the filing deadline would have already accordance with the Paperwork passed. Given the statutorily mandated Executive Order 12866 Reduction Act. The changes to the form filing deadline of March 31, 2000, the This rule is considered by the are effective with the issuance of this Department believes that it would be Department of Justice to be a rule.
VerDate 20
Plain Language in Government Writing PART 245ÐADJUSTMENT OF STATUS (2) The irrevocable and written TO THAT OF PERSON ADMITTED FOR release of all parental rights by the sole The President’s June 1, 1998, PERMANENT RESIDENCE parent, as that term is defined in Memorandum published at 63 FR § 204.3(b) of this chapter, based upon 31885, concerning Plain Language in 3. The authority citation for part 245 the inability of that parent to provide Government Writing, applies to this continues to read as follows: proper care (within the meaning of that proposed rule. Authority: 8 U.S.C. 1101, 1103, 1182, 1255; phrase in § 204.3(b) of this chapter) for List of Subjects sec. 202, Pub. L. 105–100, 111 Stat. 2160, the child, provided that at the time of 2193; sec. 902, Pub. L. 105–277, 112 Stat. such irrevocable release such parent is 8 CFR Part 3 2681; 8 CFR part 2. legally obligated to provide such care; or Administrative practice and 4. Section 245.15 is amended by: (3) The death or disappearance, as procedure, Immigration, Organization a. Revising the definitions of the that term is defined in § 204.3(b) of this and functions (Government agencies). terms ‘‘Abandoned and abandonment’’ chapter, of one parent and the and ‘‘Orphan and orphaned’’ in irrevocable and written release of all 8 CFR Part 212 paragraph (a); parental rights by the sole remaining b. Adding a new definition for the parent based upon the inability of that Administrative practice and term ‘‘Sole remaining parent’’ at the end parent to provide proper care (within procedure, Aliens, Passports and visas, of paragraph (a); the meaning of that phrase in § 204.3(b) Immigration, Reporting and c. Revising paragraph (b)(1)(iii)(A); of this chapter) for the child, provided recordkeeping requirements. d. Revising paragraph (c)(2); that at the time of such irrevocable 8 CFR Part 240 e. Revising paragraph (d)(4); release such parent is legally obligated f. Adding two new sentences at the to provide such care. Administrative practice and end of paragraph (e)(2); procedure, Aliens, Immigration. * * * * * g. Revising paragraph (h)(5); Sole remaining parent means a person 8 CFR Part 245 h. Revising paragraph (j)(1); who is the child’s only parent because: i. Revising paragraph (k)(3)(i); (1) The child’s other parent has died; Aliens, Immigration, Reporting and j. Revising paragraph (k)(3)(ii)(B); or recordkeeping requirements. k. Revising paragraphs (k)(4)(i) and (2) The child’s other parent has been (ii); 8 CFR Part 274a certified by competent Haitian l. Revising paragraphs (k)(5)(i) and authorities to be presumed dead as a Administrative practice and (ii); result of his or her disappearance, m. Revising paragraph (m); procedure, Aliens, Employment, within the meaning of that term as set n. Amending the last sentence in Penalties, Reporting and recordkeeping forth in § 204.3(b) of this chapter. requirements. paragraph (t)(2)(i) by removing the phrase ‘‘paragraph (f)’’ and adding in its * * * * * 8 CFR Part 299 place the phrase ‘‘paragraph (h)’’; and (b) * * * by (1) * * * Immigration, Reporting and o. Amending paragraph (u)(2) by (iii) * * * recordkeeping requirements. removing the phrase ‘‘paragraph (l)(2)’’ (A) Arrived in the United States Accordingly, the interim rule and adding in its place the phrase without parents in the United States and amending 8 CFR Parts 3, 212, 240, 245, ‘‘paragraph (t)(2)’’. has remained, without parents, in the 274a, and 299, which was published at The revised and added text reads as United States since his or her arrival; 64 FR 25756 on May 12, 1999, is follows: * * * * * adopted as a final rule with the (c) * * * following changes: § 245.15 Adjustment of Status of Certain (2) Proper application. The alien Haitian Nationals under the Haitian Refugee properly files an application for PART 212ÐDOCUMENTARY Immigrant Fairness Act of 1998 (HRIFA). adjustment of status in accordance with REQUIREMENTS: NONIMMIGRANTS; (a) * * * this section, including the evidence WAIVERS; ADMISSION OF CERTAIN Abandoned and abandonment mean described in paragraphs (h), (i), (j), and INADMISSIBLE ALIENS; PAROLE that both parents have, or the sole or (k) of this section. For purposes of surviving parent has, or in the case of § 245.15 of this chapter only, an 1. The authority citation for part 212 a child who has been placed into a Application to Register Permanent continues to read as follows: guardianship, the child’s guardian or Residence or Adjust Status (Form I–485) Authority: 8 U.S.C. 1101, 1102, 1103, 1182, guardians have, willfully forsaken all submitted by a principal applicant for 1184, 1187, 1225, 1226, 1227, 1228, 1252; 8 parental or guardianship rights, benefits under HRIFA may be CFR part 2. obligations, and claims to the child, as considered to have been properly filed well as all control over and possession if it: § 212.17 [Amended] of the child, without intending to (i) Is received not later than March 31, 2. Section 212.7 is amended by: transfer these rights to any specific 2000, at the Nebraska Service Center, person(s). the Board, or the Immigration Court a. Removing the phrase ‘‘§ 245.15(l)’’ * * * * * having jurisdiction; and adding in its place the phrase Orphan and orphaned refer to the (ii) Has been properly completed and ‘‘§ 245.15(t)’’ in both the heading and involuntary detachment or severance of signed by the applicant; the text of paragraph (a)(1)(iii); and by a child from his or her parents due to (iii) Identifies the provision of HRIFA b. Removing the phrase any of the following: under which the applicant is seeking ‘‘§ 245.15(l)(2)’’ and adding in its place (1) The death or disappearance of, adjustment of status; and the phrase ‘‘§ 245.15(t)(2)’’ in paragraph desertion by, or separation or loss from (iv) Is accompanied by either: (b)(2)(iv). both parents, as those terms are defined (A) The correct fee as specified in * * * * * in § 204.3(b) of this chapter; § 103.7(b)(1) of this chapter; or
VerDate 20
(B) A request for a fee waiver in adjustment of status under HRIFA who (k) * * * accordance with § 103.7(c) of this used counterfeit documents to travel (3) * * * chapter, provided such fee waiver from Haiti to the United States, the (i) Evidence, showing the date, request is subsequently granted; adjudicator shall, when weighing location, and manner of his or her however, if such a fee waiver request is discretionary factors, take into arrival in the United States, such as: subsequently denied and the applicant consideration the general lawlessness (A) A photocopy of the Form I–94 submits the require fee within 30 days and corruption which was widespread issued at the time of the alien’s arrival of the date of any notice that the fee in Haiti at the time of the alien’s in the United States; waiver request had been denied, the departure, the difficulties in obtaining (B) A copy of the airline or vessel application shall be regarded as having legitimate departure documents at that records showing transportation to the been filed before the statutory deadline. time, and other factors unique to Haiti United States; In addition, in a case over which the at that time which may have induced (C) Other similar documentation; or Board has jurisdiction, an application the alien to commit fraud or make (D) If none of the documents in received by the Board before April 1, willful misrepresentations. paragraphs (k)(3)(i)(A)–(C) of this section are available, a statement from 2000, that has been properly signed and * * * * * executed shall be considered filed (h) * * * the applicant, accompanied by whatever before the statutory deadline without (5) Police clearances. If the applicant evidence the applicant is able to submit payment of the fee or submission of a is 14 years old or older, a police in support of that statement; and fee waiver request. Upon remand by the clearance from each municipality where (ii) * * * Board, the payment of the fee or a the alien has resided for 6 months or (B) Evidence showing that the request for a fee waiver shall be made longer since arriving in the United applicant’s parents did not live in the upon submission of the application to States. If there are multiple local law United States with the applicant. Such the Immigration Court in accordance enforcement agencies (e.g., city police evidence may include, but is not limited with 8 CFR 240.11(f). If a request for a and county sheriff) with jurisdiction to, documentation or affidavits showing fee waiver is denied, the application over the alien’s residence, the applicant that the applicant’s parents have been shall be considered as having been may obtain a clearance from either continuously employed outside the properly filed with the Immigration agency. If the applicant resides or United States, are deceased, Court before the statutory deadline resided in a State where the State police disappeared, or abandoned the provided that the applicant submits the maintain a compilation of all local applicant prior to the applicant’s arrival, required fee within 30 days of the date arrests and convictions, a statewide or were otherwise engaged in activities of any notice that the fee waiver request clearance is sufficient. If the applicant showing that they were not in the has been denied. presents a letter from the local police United States, or (if they have been in agencies involved, or other evidence, to the United States) that the applicant and * * * * * his or her parents did not reside (d) * * * the effect that the applicant attempted to obtain such clearance but was unable to together. (4) Relationship. The qualifying (4) * * * do so because of local or State policy, relationship to the principal alien must (i) Evidence, showing the date, the director or immigration judge having have existed at the time the principal location, and manner of his or her jurisdiction over the application may was granted adjustment of status and arrival in the United States, such as: must continue to exist at the time the waive the local police clearance. (A) A photocopy of the Form I–94 dependent alien is granted adjustment Furthermore, if such local police agency issued at the time of the alien’s arrival of status. To establish the qualifying has provided the Service or the in the United States; relationship to the principal alien, Immigration Court with a blanket (B) A copy of the airline or vessel evidence must be submitted in statement that issuance of such police records showing transportation to the accordance with § 204.2 of this chapter. clearance is against local or State policy, United States; Such evidence should consist of the the director or immigration judge having (C) Other similar documentation; or documents specified in jurisdiction over the case may waive the (D) If none of the documents in § 204.2(a)(1)(i)(B), (a)(1)(iii)(B), (a)(2), local police clearance requirement paragraphs (k)(4)(i)(A)–(C) of this (d)(2), and (d)(5) of this chapter; regardless of whether the applicant section are available, a statement from * * * * * individually submits a letter from that the applicant, accompanied by whatever (e) * * * local police agency; evidence the applicant is able to submit (2) * * * In considering an * * * * * in support of that statement; and application for waiver under section (j) * * * (ii) Either: 212(g) of the Act by an otherwise (1) Evidence establishing presence. (A) The death certificates of both statutorily eligible applicant for Evidence establishing the continuity of parents (or in the case of a child having adjustment of status under HRIFA who the alien’s physical presence in the only one parent, the death certificate of was paroled into the United States from United States since December 31, 1995, the sole parent) showing that the death the U.S. Naval Base at Guantanamo Bay, may consist of any documentation or deaths occurred after the date of the for the purpose of receiving treatment of issued by any governmental or applicant’s arrival in the United States; an HIV or AIDS condition, the fact that nongovernmental authority, provided (B) Evidence from a State, local, or his or her arrival in the United States such evidence bears the name of the other court or governmental authority was the direct result of a government applicant, was dated at the time it was having jurisdiction and authority to decision to provide such treatment issued, and bears the signature, seal, or make decisions in matters of child should be viewed as a significant other authenticating instrument of the welfare establishing the disappearance positive factor when weighing authorized representative of the issuing of, the separation or loss from, or discretionary factors. In considering an authority, if the document would desertion by, both parents (or, in the application for waiver under section normally contain such authenticating case of a child born out of wedlock who 212(i) of the Act by an otherwise instrument. has not been legitimated, the sole statutorily eligible applicant for * * * * * parent); or
VerDate 20
(C) Evidence of: to be abandoned according to the laws affidavit to that effect in lieu of the (1) Either: of the State where he or she resides, or actual documentation. (i) The child having only a sole where he or she resided at the time of * * * * * parent, as that term is defined in the abandonment, had the issue been § 204.3(b) of this chapter; presented to the proper authorities. PART 274AÐCONTROL OF (ii) The death of one parent; or EMPLOYMENT OF ALIENS (iii) Certification by competent * * * * * Haitian authorities that one parent is (m) Secondary evidence. Except as 5. The authority citation for part 274a presumed dead as a result of his or her otherwise provided in this paragraph, if continues to read as follows: disappearance, within the meaning of the primary evidence required in this that term as set forth in § 204.3(b) of this section is unavailable, church or school Authority: 8 U.S.C. 1101, 1103, 1324a; 8 CFR part 2; Pub. L. 101–410, 104 Stat 890, chapter; and records, or other secondary evidence as amended by Pub. L. 104–34, 110 Stat 1321. (2) A copy of a written statement pertinent to the facts in issue, may be executed by the sole parent, or the sole submitted. If such documents are § 274a.12 [Amended] remaining parent, irrevocably releasing unavailable, affidavits may be 6. In § 274a.12, paragraph (c)(9) is all parental rights based upon the submitted. The applicant may submit as amended in the second sentence by inability of that parent to provide proper many types of secondary evidence as removing the words ‘‘§§ 245.13(j) and care for the child. necessary to establish birth, marriage, or 245.13(k) of this chapter’’ and adding in (5) * * * other relevant events. Documentary its place the words ‘‘§§ 245.13(j) and (i) Evidence, showing the date, evidence establishing that primary 245.15(n) of this chapter’’. location, and manner of his or her evidence is unavailable must arrival in the United States, such as: accompany secondary evidence of birth § 274a.13 [Amended] (A) A photocopy of the Form I–94 or marriage in the home country. The 7. In § 274a.13, paragraph (d) is issued at the time of the alien’s arrival unavailability of such documents may amended in the first sentence by in the United States; be shown by submission of a copy of the (B) A copy of the airline or vessel removing the words ‘‘insofar as it is records showing transportation to the written request for a copy of such governed by §§ 245.13(j) and 245.15(k) United States; documents which was sent to the of this chapter’’ and adding in its place (C) Other similar documentation; or official keeper of the records. In the words ‘‘insofar as it is governed by (D) If none of the documents in adjudicating the application for §§ 245.13(j) and 245.15(n) of this paragraphs (k)(5)(i)(A)–(C) of this adjustment of status under section 902 chapter’’. section are available, a statement from of HRIFA, the Service or immigration PART 299ÐIMMIGRATION FORMS the applicant, accompanied by whatever judge shall determine the weight to be evidence the applicant is able to submit given such secondary evidence. 8. The authority citation for part 299 in support of that statement; and Secondary evidence may not be continues to read as follows: (ii) Either: submitted in lieu of the documentation (A) Evidence from a State, local, or specified in paragraphs (i) or (j) of this Authority: 8 U.S.C. 1101, 1103; 8 CFR part other court or governmental authority section. However, subject to verification 2. having jurisdiction and authority to by the Service, if the documentation 9. Section 299.1 is amended in the make decisions in matters of child specified in this paragraph or in table by revising the entry for Form ‘‘I– welfare establishing such abandonment; paragraphs (h)(3)(i), (i), (j), (l)(1), and 485 Supplement C’’, to read as follows: or (l)(2) of this section is already contained (B) Evidence to establish that the in the Service’s file relating to the § 299.1 Prescribed forms. applicant would have been considered applicant, the applicant may submit an * * * * *
Form No. Edition date Title
******* I±485 Supplement C ...... 12±01±99 HRIFA Supplement to Form I±485 Instructions.
*******
Dated: March 17, 2000. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE ACTION: Final rule. Janet Reno, Attorney General. Immigration and Naturalization Service SUMMARY: This rule implements section [FR Doc. 00–7204 Filed 3–21–00; 3:47 pm] 202 of the Nicaraguan Adjustment and 8 CFR Parts 3, 212, 240, 245, 274a and BILLING CODE 4410±10±P Central American Relief Act (NACARA) 299 by establishing procedures for certain [INS No. 1893±97; AG Order No. 2293±2000] nationals of Nicaragua and Cuba who have been residing in the United States RIN 1115±AF04 to become lawful permanent residents of this country. This rule allows them to Adjustment of Status for Certain obtain lawful permanent resident status Nationals of Nicaragua and Cuba without applying for an immigrant visa AGENCY: Immigration and Naturalization at a United States consulate abroad, and Service, Justice, and Executive Office for waives many of the usual requirements Immigration Review, Justice. for this benefit.
VerDate 20
DATES: This final rule is effective March may file his or her application with the commenters suggested that the 24, 2000. immigration court, unless the Department create a family unity FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For immigration court administratively program for ineligible dependents and matters relating to the Immigration and closes such proceedings for the specific provide them with a blanket waiver of Naturalization Service—Suzy Nguyen, purpose of allowing the alien to apply section 212(a)(9)(B) of the Act (which Adjudications Officer, Office of for adjustment before the Immigration creates a 3-year bar for aliens who have Adjudications, Immigration and and Naturalization Service (Service or been unlawfully present for more than Naturalization Service, 425 I Street NW, INS). The regulation also added an 180 days and a 10-year bar for those Room 3214, Washington, DC 20536, eighth method to the seven contained in who have been unlawfully present for 1 telephone (202) 514–5014; For matters the statute for proving commencement year or more). While the Department is relating to the Executive Office for of physical presence in the United sympathetic to the problem faced by Immigration Review—Chuck Adkins- States. Additionally, it explained the non-Nicaraguan, non-Cuban Blanch, Acting General Counsel, process through which a NACARA dependents, section 202(d)(1)(A) of Executive Office for Immigration adjustment applicant may seek NACARA clearly states that the alien Review, 5107 Leesburg Pike, Suite 2400, authorization to work in the United spouse must be ‘‘a national of Nicaragua Falls Church, VA 22041, telephone States or to travel outside of the country. or Cuba.’’ While the courts have held (703) 305–0470. Finally, the regulation provided a that an agency has a certain amount of vehicle through which certain aliens latitude in drafting implementing SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: who are outside the United States may regulations if the statute is unclear on What Are the Basic Provisions of seek authorization to be paroled into the an issue, the agency has no such Section 202 of NACARA and the country for the purpose of applying for latitude where the statute is clear. Only Interim Regulation Published on May adjustment of status. a statutory change can redress the issue of eligibility for non-Nicaraguan and 21, 1998? How Many Comments Were Received non-Cuban dependents. Likewise, a The Nicaraguan Adjustment and From Interested Parties During the statutory change would be required to Central American Relief Act (NACARA), Comment Period? create a family unity program for enacted as title II of the District of There were 36 separate comments ineligible dependents and to waive the Columbia Appropriations Act, 1998, received from various organizations, provisions of section 212(a)(9)(B) of the Public Law 105–100 (111 Stat. 2160, individuals, and other interested Act. Accordingly, no changes are being 2193), was signed into law on November parties. That number included three made to the regulation on this point. 19, 1997. As amended by Public Law Members of Congress, one 105–139 (111 Stat. 2644), which was representative of a foreign government, 2. Other Statutory Issues signed into law the same day, section numerous nongovernmental Some commenters wanted 202 of NACARA allows certain organizations, and several attorneys and clarification in the regulation on Nicaraguan and Cuban nationals who law firms. Also included in that number whether sections 212(a)(6)(B), 240B(d), are physically present in the United are 2 petitions, 1 with 426 signatures 241(a)(5) (and also by extension States to adjust status to that of lawful and the other with 66 signatures, and 212(a)(9)(C)), and ‘‘the former section permanent resident. In order to be 124 identical letters signed by the 242B’’ of the Act applied to NACARA eligible for benefits under NACARA, an members of 1 organization, making a applicants. One party also requested applicant must be a national of total of 649 individuals and information regarding the number of Nicaragua or Cuba; must be admissible organizations who participated in the persons affected by section 241(a)(5) of to the United States under all provisions public comment process. The the Act. Although incorporating a of section 212(a) of the Immigration and Department wishes to thank all discussion of each of these provisions in Nationality Act (Act), other than those participants for their insightful 8 CFR 245.13 would unnecessarily provisions specifically excepted by comments. complicate the regulation, we have NACARA; must have been physically decided to address them in this present in the United States for a What Were the Specific Comments and supplementary information. continuous period beginning not later How Is the Department Amending the Section 212(a)(6)(B) of the Act than December 1, 1995, and ending not Regulation as a Result? provides that if an alien failed to attend earlier than the date the application for The issues raised by commenters a removal hearing, he or she is adjustment is filed (not counting generally fell into 14 areas, each of inadmissible for a period of 5 years from absences totaling 180 days or less); and which will be discussed separately, as his or her subsequent departure or must properly file an application before follows: removal. In order to be barred from April 1, 2000. In addition, certain family adjusting status under NACARA, an members of NACARA beneficiaries are 1. Treatment of an Ineligible Spouse or alien would (1) have to fail to attend a also eligible for adjustment of status Child removal hearing; (2) depart or be under NACARA. A significant number of commenters removed from the United States; (3) re- The interim regulation published in expressed concern about the enter the United States; and (4) apply the Federal Register by the Department requirement that a spouse or child of a for adjustment under NACARA. If any of Justice (Department) on May 21, principal applicant be a national of of these four steps is missing, the alien 1998, explained the forms, supporting Nicaragua or Cuba in order to qualify for would not be inadmissible under documentation, and process through the benefits of section 202 of NACARA. section 212(a)(6)(B) of the Act; if all four which a principal applicant, or an Some questioned whether the language are present, he or she would be applicant who is a dependent of a of the statute specified that the inadmissible and, therefore, ineligible principal applicant, may apply for dependent be a national of Nicaragua or for adjustment of status under section adjustment of status under section 202 Cuba, while others recognized that the 202 of NACARA. of NACARA. It provided that an alien language so specified, but felt that the If an alien was permitted to depart who is currently in exclusion, agency has the authority to ‘‘correct’’ the voluntarily but failed to do so, he or she deportation, or removal proceedings language through regulation. Still other would be barred by section 240B(d) of
VerDate 20
VerDate 20
VerDate 20
VerDate 20
VerDate 20
VerDate 20
‘‘What Happens if an Application is request for parole authorization. This considered to have filed a timely Denied by the Immigration Court?’’ to oversight has been corrected by making NACARA adjustment application. read: ‘‘If the Immigration Court denies slight modifications to §§ 212.2 and Good Cause Exception the NACARA adjustment application of 212.7. These modifications will allow an alien in exclusion, deportation, or such applicants to file Forms I–212 and The Department’s implementation of removal proceedings before the I–601 with the Director of the TSC this final rule effective upon publication Immigration Court, the decision may be concurrently with the Form I–131. in the Federal Register is based upon appealed to the Board along with and Finally, it has come to the the ‘‘good cause’’ exception found at 5 under the same procedures as all other Department’s attention that the U.S.C. 553(d)(3). By statute, all issues before the Immigration Court in application of current regulations (8 NACARA adjustment applicants must those proceedings.’’ The second notice CFR § 103.2(a)(7)) and practice to file their applications before April 1, corrected the reference in § 240.41 to NACARA applications filed with fee 2000. Immediate implementation of this read ‘‘Public Law 105–100’’ instead of waiver requests may inadvertently final rule is necessary to ensure that ‘‘Pub L. 100’’; it also corrected the result in certain applicants later being NACARA applicants are able to avail amendatory language for the appropriate deemed to have missed the application themselves of the modifications made in phrase in § 274a.13(d) to read deadline due to no fault on the part of this final rule as soon as possible before ‘‘§ 274a.12(c)(8), which is governed by the applicant. Currently an application the end of the application period. paragraph (a)(2) of this section, and submitted with a fee waiver request is Accordingly, delaying the effective date § 274a.12(c)(9) insofar as it is governed not considered properly filed and does of this final rule for 30 days would be by § 245.13(j) of this chapter.’’ not retain a receipt date until the fee contrary to the public interest. A second commenter requested that waiver is granted. In cases where a fee the Department incorporate into the waiver is denied, the application is Regulatory Flexibility Act regulation a number of issues that were returned to the applicant with In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 605(b), discussed in the supplementary instructions to resubmit the application the Attorney General certifies that this information. In particular, the with the appropriate fee at which time rule does not have a significant adverse commenter wanted the Department to the application will be considered economic impact on a substantial include in the regulation provisions properly filed and will be assigned a number of small entities. This rule specifying the procedure and language receipt date. Thus, under current allows certain Nicaraguan and Cuban used by the Service to notify an alien regulations and practice were the nationals to apply for adjustment of whose application has been approved of Service or Immigration Court to deny a status; it has no effect on small entities the delivery of the Permanent Residence request for a waiver of the NACARA as that term is defined in 5 U.S.C. Card and the process for obtaining application fee after March 31, 2000, 601(6). temporary evidence of alien registration. and return the application, the alien The commenter also wanted the could not file another application with Executive Order 12866 Department to include in the regulation the fee because the filing deadline This rule is considered by the provisions specifying the procedure and would have already passed. Given the Department of Justice to be a language used by the Service to notify statutorily mandated filing deadline of ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ under an alien whose application has been March 31, 2000, the Department Executive Order 12866, section 3(f), denied of the Service’s decision and the believes that it would be appropriate to Regulatory Planning and Review. right to renew the application for modify the regulations with respect to Accordingly, this regulation has been adjustment in proceedings before an this group of cases to avoid a potentially submitted to the Office of Management immigration judge. Finally, the harsh and irreversible result. and Budget for review. commenter requested that the regulation Accordingly, the regulations are being Executive Order 13132 contain more specificity regarding the amended to afford an applicant whose process by which the Board may NACARA fee waiver request is denied This regulation will not have remand a case to the immigration judge. the opportunity to submit the required substantial direct effects on the States, Several of these suggestions have been fee within 30 days of notice that the fee on the relationship between the adopted, especially where needed for waiver request was denied and thereby National Government and the States, or purposes of clarity. Other suggestions maintain a timely filing date. on the distribution of power and pertained to matters that are standard to In addition, in a case over which the responsibilities among the various the adjudication process and are either Board has jurisdiction, an application levels of government. Therefore, in already covered elsewhere in the received by the Board before April 1, accordance with section 6 of Executive regulation or are so basic as to not 2000, that has been properly signed and Order 13132, it is determined that this warrant special coverage in this executed is considered to be filed before rule does not have sufficient federalism particular section of the regulation. the statutory deadline without payment implications to warrant the preparation Additionally, the Department has of the fee or submission of a fee waiver of a federalism summary impact noted that in the interim regulation request. Upon remand by the Board, the statement. published on May 21, 1998, it failed to payment of the fee or a request for a fee provide a mechanism whereby persons waiver is made upon submission of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement outside the United States who are application to the Immigration Court in Fairness Act of 1996 seeking parole authorization pursuant to accordance with 8 CFR 240.11(f). The This rule is not a major rule as § 245.13(k)(2) and who must file either regulations are being amended to afford defined by section 251 of the Small an Application for Permission to an applicant whose NACARA Business Regulatory Enforcement Act of Reapply for Admission to the United adjustment fee waiver request is denied 1996. This rule will not result in an States After Deportation or Removal the opportunity to submit the required annual effect on the economy of $100 (Form I–212) or an Application for fee within 30 days of the notice that the million or more; a major increase in Waiver of Grounds of Excludability fee waiver request was denied. If the costs or prices; or significant adverse (Form I–601) could file such required fee is not paid within 30 days, effects on competition, employment, applications concurrently with the the applicant will no longer be investment, productivity, innovation, or
VerDate 20
VerDate 20
(5) * * * Service on or before December 1, 1995, (vii) Credit card statements showing (i) With the Service. * * * Absent and that lists the applicant as being the dates of purchase, payment, or other evidence of the applicant’s statutory physically present in the United States; transaction; ineligibility for adjustment of status (v) A certified copy of a Federal, State, (viii) Certified copies of records under section 202 of Public Law 105– or local governmental record that was maintained by organizations chartered 100 or significant negative discretionary created on or prior to December 1, 1995, by the government, such as public factors, a Form I–246 filed by a bona shows that the applicant was present in utilities, accredited private and fide applicant for adjustment under the United States at the time, and parochial schools, and banks; section 202 of Public Law 105–100 shall establishes that the applicant sought on (ix) If the applicant establishes that a be approved, and the removal of the his or her own behalf, or some other family unit was in existence and applicant shall be stayed until such time party sought on the applicant’s behalf, cohabiting in the United States, as the application for adjustment has a benefit from the Federal, State, or local documents evidencing the physical been adjudicated in accordance with governmental agency keeping such presence in the United States of another this section. record; member of that same family unit; and * * * * * (vi) A certified copy of a Federal, (x) If the applicant has had (e) Application and supporting State, or local governmental record that correspondence or other interaction documents. Each applicant for was created on or prior to December 1, with the Service, a list of the types and adjustment of status must file a Form I– 1995, shows that the applicant was dates of such correspondence or other 485, Application to Register Permanent present in the United States at the time, contact that the applicant knows to be Residence or Adjust Status. An and establishes that the applicant contained or reflected in Service applicant should complete Part 2 of submitted an income tax return, records; Form I–485 by checking box ‘‘h—other’’ property tax payment, or similar (5) A copy of the applicant’s birth and writing ‘‘NACARA—Principal’’ or submission or payment to the Federal, certificate; ‘‘NACARA—Dependent’’ next to that State, or local governmental agency (6) If the applicant is between 14 and block. Each application must be keeping such record; or 79 years of age, a completed Biographic accompanied by: (vii) In the case of an applicant who, Information Sheet (Form G–325A); (1) The fee prescribed in § 103.7(b)(1) while under the age of 21, attended a (7) A report of medical examination, of this chapter; private or religious school in the United as specified in § 245.5; (2) If the applicant is 14 years of age States on or prior to December 1, 1995, (8) Two photographs, as described in or older, the fee for fingerprinting a transcript from such private or the instructions to Form I–485; prescribed in § 103.7(b)(1) of this religious school, provided that the (9) If the applicant is 14 years of age chapter; school: or older, a police clearance from each (3) Evidence of commencement of (A) Is registered with, approved by, or municipality where the alien has physical presence in the United States licensed by, appropriate State or local resided for 6 months or longer since at any time on or before December 1, authorities; arriving in the United States. If there are (B) Is accredited by the State or 1995. Such evidence may relate to any multiple local law enforcement agencies regional accrediting body, or by the time at or after entry and may consist of (e.g., city police and county sheriff) with appropriate private school association; either: jurisdiction over the alien’s residence, (i) Documentation evidencing one or or (C) Maintains enrollment records in the applicant may obtain a clearance more of the activities specified in from either agency. If the applicant section 202(b)(2)(A) of Public Law 105– accordance with State or local requirements or standards; resides or resided in a State where the 100; State Police maintain a compilation of (ii) A copy of the Form I–94, Record (4) Evidence of continuity of physical all local arrests and convictions, a of Arrival and Departure, issued to the presence in the United States since the statewide clearance is sufficient. If the applicant at the time of his or her last date on or prior to December 1, applicant presents a letter from the local inspection and admission or parole; 1995, on which the applicant (iii) Other documentation issued by a established commencement of physical police agencies involved, or other Federal, State, or local authority presence in the United States. Such evidence, to the effect that the applicant provided such other documentation documentation may have been issued by attempted to obtain such clearance but bears the signature, seal, or other any governmental or nongovernmental was unable to do so because of local or authenticating instrument of such authority, provided such evidence bears State policy, the director or immigration authority (if the document normally the name of the applicant, was dated at judge having jurisdiction over the bears such instrument), was dated at the the time it was issued, and bears the application may waive the local police time of issuance, and bears a date of signature, seal, or other authenticating clearance. Furthermore, if such local issuance not later than December 1, instrument of the issuing authority or its police agency has provided the Service 1995. Examples of such other authorized representative, if the or the Immigration Court with a blanket documentation include, but are not document would normally contain such statement that issuance of such police limited to: authenticating instrument. Such clearance is against local or state policy, (A) A State driver’s license; documentation may include, but is not the director or immigration judge having (B) A State identification card issued limited to: jurisdiction over the case may waive the in lieu of a driver’s license to a (i) School records; local police clearance requirement nondriver; (ii) Rental receipts; regardless of whether the applicant (C) A county or municipal hospital (iii) Utility bill receipts; individually submits a letter from that record; (iv) Any other dated receipts; local police agency; (D) A public college or public school (v) Personal checks written by the (10) If the applicant is applying as the transcript; and applicant bearing a dated bank spouse of another Public Law 105–100 (E) Income tax records; cancellation stamp; beneficiary, a copy of their certificate of (iv) A copy of a petition on behalf of (vi) Employment records, including marriage and copies of documents the applicant that was submitted to the pay stubs; showing the legal termination of all
VerDate 20
Form No. Edition date Title
***** I±485 Supplement B ...... 12±01±99 NACARA Supplement to Form I±485 Instructions.
*****
VerDate 20
Dated: March 15, 2000. France, recently notified the FAA that after April 30, 2000, and this AD must Janet Reno, an unsafe condition may exist on be issued immediately. Attorney General. Eurocopter France Model SA330F, Since a situation exists that requires [FR Doc. 00–7205 Filed 3–21–00; 3:47 pm] SA330G, SA330J, AS332C, AS332L, the immediate adoption of this BILLING CODE 4410±10±P AS332L1, and AS332L2 helicopters. regulation, it is found that notice and The DGAC advises withdrawing tail opportunity for prior public comment rotor blades, part numbers (P/N) hereon are impracticable, and that good DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 332A12–0010, –0020, –0030, –0035, and cause exists for making this amendment –0045, and all dash numbers of these P/ effective in less than 30 days. Federal Aviation Administration N, from service by March 31, 2000, due The FAA estimates that 7 helicopters to an accident caused by a lightning will be affected by this AD, that it will 14 CFR Part 39 strike on a tail rotor blade, P/N 332A– take approximately 2 work hours to 12–0010, fitted on an AS332 helicopter. accomplish removing and replacing the [Docket No. 2000±SW±06±AD; Amendment 39±11645; AD 2000±06±05] Eurocopter France has issued Service tail rotor blades, and that the average Bulletins 01.57 for the Models SA330 labor rate is $60 per work hour. RIN 2120±AA64 and 01.00.59 for the Models AS332, Required parts will cost approximately both dated November 23, 1999, which $150,000 per helicopter. Based on these Airworthiness Directives; Eurocopter specify withdrawing tail rotor blades, P/ figures, the total cost impact of the AD France Model SA330F, SA330G, N 332A12–0010, –0020, –0030, –0035, on U.S. operators is estimated to be SA330J, AS332C, AS332L, AS332L1, –0045, and all dash numbers of these P/ $1,050,840 to replace the tail rotor and AS332L2 N, from service. The DGAC classified blades on the entire fleet. these service bulletins as mandatory and AGENCY: Federal Aviation Comments Invited Administration, DOT. issued AD’s 2000–002–081(A) and 2000–003–075(A), both dated January Although this action is in the form of ACTION: Final rule; request for 12, 2000, to ensure the continued a final rule that involves requirements comments. airworthiness of these helicopters in affecting flight safety and, thus, was not SUMMARY: This amendment adopts a France. preceded by notice and an opportunity new airworthiness directive (AD) These helicopter models are for public comment, comments are applicable to Eurocopter France Model manufactured in France and are type invited on this rule. Interested persons SA330F, SA330G, SA330J, AS332C, certificated for operation in the United are invited to comment on this rule by AS332L, AS332L1, and AS332L2 States under the provisions of section submitting such written data, views, or helicopters. This action requires 21.29 of the Federal Aviation arguments as they may desire. replacing certain tail rotor blades before Regulations (14 CFR 21.29) and the Communications should identify the further flight after April 30, 2000. This applicable bilateral airworthiness Rules Docket number and be submitted amendment is prompted by loss of agreement. Pursuant to this bilateral in triplicate to the address specified control of a helicopter due to a lightning airworthiness agreement, the DGAC has under the caption ADDRESSES. All strike on a tail rotor blade. This kept the FAA informed of the situation communications received on or before condition, if not corrected, could result described above. The FAA has the closing date for comments will be in loss of a tail rotor blade and examined the findings of the DGAC, considered, and this rule may be subsequent loss of control of the reviewed all available information, and amended in light of the comments helicopter. determined that AD action is necessary received. Factual information that for products of these type designs that supports the commenter’s ideas and DATES: Effective April 10, 2000. are certificated for operation in the suggestions is extremely helpful in Comments for inclusion in the Rules United States. evaluating the effectiveness of the AD Docket must be received on or before action and determining whether May 23, 2000. Since an unsafe condition has been identified that is likely to exist or additional rulemaking action would be ADDRESSES: Submit comments in develop on other Eurocopter France needed. triplicate to the Federal Aviation Model SA330F, SA330G, SA330J, Comments are specifically invited on Administration (FAA), Office of the AS332C, AS332L, AS332L1, and the overall regulatory, economic, Regional Counsel, Southwest Region, AS332L2 helicopters of the same type environmental, and energy aspects of Attention: Rules Docket No. 2000–SW– designs registered in the United States, the rule that might suggest a need to 06–AD, 2601 Meacham Blvd., Room this AD is being issued to prevent modify the rule. All comments 663, Fort Worth, Texas 76137. failure of a tail rotor blade due to a submitted will be available, both before The service information referenced in lightning strike. This AD requires and after the closing date for comments, this AD may be obtained from American removing from service any tail rotor in the Rules Docket for examination by Eurocopter Corporation, 2701 Forum blade, P/N 332A–12–0010, –0020, interested persons. A report that Drive, Grand Prairie, Texas 75053–4005, –0030, –0035, and –0045, and all dash summarizes each FAA-public contact telephone (972) 641–3460, fax (972) numbers of these P/N. The actions are concerned with the substance of this AD 641–3527. required to be accomplished in will be filed in the Rules Docket. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jim accordance with the service bulletins Commenters wishing the FAA to Grigg, Aerospace Engineer, FAA, described previously. The short acknowledge receipt of their comments Rotorcraft Directorate, Regulations compliance time involved is required submitted in response to this rule must Group, Fort Worth, Texas 76193–0111, because the previously described submit a self-addressed, stamped telephone (817) 222–5490, fax (817) critical unsafe condition can adversely postcard on which the following 222–5961. affect the controllability and structural statement is made: ‘‘Comments to SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The integrity of the helicopter. Therefore, Docket No. 2000–SW–06–AD.’’ The Direction Generale De L’Aviation Civile removing and replacing these tail rotor postcard will be date stamped and (DGAC), the airworthiness authority for blades are required before further flight returned to the commenter.
VerDate 20
The regulations adopted herein will accordance with paragraph (b) of this AD. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION not have a substantial direct effect on The request should include an assessment of the States, on the relationship between the effect of the modification, alteration, or Federal Aviation Administration the national Government and the States, repair on the unsafe condition addressed by or on the distribution of power and this AD; and if the unsafe condition has not 14 CFR Part 39 been eliminated, the request should include responsibilities among the various [Docket No. 98±SW±77±AD; Amendment specific proposed actions to address it. levels of government. Therefore, it is 39±11647; AD 2000±06±07] determined that this final rule does not Compliance: Required before further flight have federalism implications under after April 30, 2000, unless accomplished RIN 2120±AA64 previously. Executive Order 13132. Airworthiness Directives; Eurocopter The FAA has determined that this To prevent failure of a tail rotor blade due Deutschland GMBH Model MBB±BK regulation is an emergency regulation to a lightning strike and subsequent loss of 117 Helicopters that must be issued immediately to control of the helicopter, accomplish the correct an unsafe condition in aircraft, following: AGENCY: Federal Aviation and that it is not a ‘‘significant (a) Remove from service any tail rotor Administration, DOT. regulatory action’’ under Executive blade with a following part number (P/N), ACTION: Final rule. Order 12866. It has been determined including all dash numbers for each P/N: further that this action involves an 332A–12–0010 SUMMARY: This amendment adopts a emergency regulation under DOT 332A–12–0020 new airworthiness directive (AD), Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 332A–12–0030 applicable to Eurocopter Deutschland FR 11034, February 26, 1979). If it is 332A–12–0035 GMBH (ECD) Model MBB–BK 117 determined that this emergency 332A–12–0045 helicopters, that requires changing the regulation otherwise would be Replace with an airworthy tail rotor blade retirement life for the tail rotor (output) significant under DOT Regulatory with a following P/N: drive bevel gear (bevel gear). This Policies and Procedures, a final 332A–12–0050–01 or amendment is prompted by a fatigue regulatory evaluation will be prepared 332A–12–0055–01 analysis of the bevel gear conducted by and placed in the Rules Docket. A copy Note 2: Eurocopter France Service the manufacturer due to installation of of it, if filed, may be obtained from the Bulletins 01.57 for the Models SA330 and different tail rotor blades. The actions Rules Docket at the location provided 01.00.59 for the Models AS332, both dated specified by this AD are intended to under the caption ADDRESSES. November 23, 1999, pertain to the subject of prevent fatigue failure of the bevel gear, this AD. loss of tail rotor drive, and subsequent List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39 (b) An alternative method of compliance or loss of control of the helicopter. Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation adjustment of the compliance time that EFFECTIVE DATE: April 28, 2000. safety, Safety. provides an acceptable level of safety may be FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Adoption of the Amendment used if approved by the Manager, Regulations Shep Blackman, Aerospace Engineer, Group, Rotorcraft Directorate, FAA. FAA, Rotorcraft Directorate, Rotorcraft Accordingly, pursuant to the Operators shall submit their requests through Standards Staff, 2601 Meacham Blvd., authority delegated to me by the an FAA Principal Maintenance Inspector Fort Worth, Texas 76137, telephone Administrator, the Federal Aviation who may concur or comment and then send (817) 222–5296, fax (817) 222–5961. Administration amends part 39 of the it to the Manager, Regulations Group. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: A Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR Note 3: Information concerning the part 39) as follows: proposal to amend part 39 of the Federal existence of approved alternative methods of Aviation Regulations (14 CFR part 39) to compliance with this AD, if any, may be include an airworthiness directive (AD) PART 39ÐAIRWORTHINESS obtained from the Regulations Group. DIRECTIVES that is applicable to ECD Model MBB– (c) Special flight permits may be issued in BK 117 helicopters was published in the 1. The authority citation for part 39 accordance with sections 21.197 and 21.199 Federal Register on December 10, 1999 continues to read as follows: of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR (64 FR 69208). That action proposed to Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701. 21.197 and 21.199) to operate the helicopter require changing the retirement life for to a location where the requirements of this the bevel gear. § 39.13 [Amended] AD can be accomplished. Interested persons have been afforded 2. Section 39.13 is amended by (d) This amendment becomes effective on an opportunity to participate in the adding a new airworthiness directive to April 10, 2000. making of this amendment. No read as follows: Note 4: The subject of this AD is addressed comments were received on the in Direction Generale De L’Aviation Civile AD 2000–06–05 Eurocopter France: proposal or the FAA’s determination of (France) AD’s 2000–002–081(A) and 2000– Amendment 39–11645. Docket No. 2000– the cost to the public. The FAA has SW–06–AD. 003–075(A), both dated January 12, 2000. determined that air safety and the Applicability: SA330F, SA330G, SA330J, Issued in Fort Worth, Texas, on March 15, public interest require the adoption of AS332C, AS332L, AS332L1, and AS332L2 2000. the rule as proposed except that the part helicopters, certificated in any category. number of the affected bevel gear has Eric Bries, Note 1: This AD applies to each helicopter been added to the applicability identified in the preceding applicability Acting Manager, Rotorcraft Directorate, paragraph and the limitations paragraph provision, regardless of whether it has been Aircraft Certification Service. to more specifically identify the affected otherwise modified, altered, or repaired in [FR Doc. 00–7111 Filed 3–23–00; 8:45 am] part. The FAA has determined that the area subject to the requirements of this BILLING CODE 4910±13±U AD. For helicopters that have been modified, these changes will neither increase the altered, or repaired so that the performance economic burden on any operator nor of the requirements of this AD is affected, the increase the scope of the AD. owner/operator must request approval for an The FAA estimates that 130 alternative method of compliance in helicopters of U.S. registry will be
VerDate 20
VerDate 20
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Airport, LA; and revises the Class E this rule may be amended or withdrawn Airspace at Alexandria, LA. The closure in light of the comments received. Federal Aviation Administration of England AFB and subsequent name Factual information that supports the change to Alexandria International commenter’s ideas and suggestions is 14 CFR Part 71 Airport and closure of the air traffic extremely helpful in evaluating the [Airspace Docket No. 2000±ASW±10] control tower at Esler Regional Airport effectiveness of this action and have made this rule necessary. The determining whether additional Revision of Class D Airspace, intended effect of this proposal is to rulemaking action is needed. Alexandria England AFB, LA; provide adequate controlled airspace for Comments are specifically invited on Revocation of Class D Airspace, aircraft operating in the vicinity of the overall regulatory, economic, Alexandria Esler Regional Airport, LA; Alexandria International and Esler environmental, and energy aspects of and Revision of Class E Airspace, Regional Airports. the rule that might suggest a need to Alexandria, LA Class D and E airspace designations modify the rule. All comments are published in Paragraphs 5000 and submitted will be available, both before AGENCY: Federal Aviation 6005 respectively, of FAA Order and after the closing date for comments, Administration (FAA), DOT. 7400.9G, dated September 1, 1999, and in the Rules Docket for examination by ACTION: Direct final rule; request for effective September 16, 1999, which is interested persons. A report that comments. incorporated by reference in 14 CFR summarizes each FAA-public contact § 71.1. The Class D and E airspace concern with the substance of this SUMMARY: This amendment revises the designations listed in this document action will be filed in the Rules Docket. Class D Airspace at Alexandria England will be published subsequently in the Commenters wishing the FAA to Air Force Base (AFB), LA; revokes the order. acknowledge receipt of their comments Class D Airspace at Alexandria Esler submitted in response to this rule must The Direct Final Rule Procedure Regional Airport, LA; and revises the submit a self-addressed, stamped Class E Airspace at Alexandria, LA. The The FAA anticipates that this postcard on which the following closure of England AFB and subsequent regulation will not result in adverse or statement is made: ‘‘Comments to name change to Alexandria negative comment and therefore is Docket No. 2000–ASW–10.’’ The International Airport and closure of the issuing it as a direct final rule. A postcard will be date stamped and air traffic control tower at Esler Regional substantial number of previous returned to the commenter. Airport have made this rule necessary. opportunities provided to the public to The intended effect of this proposal is comment on substantially identical Agency Findings to provide adequate controlled airspace actions have resulted in negligible The regulations adopted herein will for aircraft operating in the vicinity of adverse comments or objections. Unless not have substantial direct effects on the Alexandria International and Esler a written adverse or negative comment, States, on the relationship between the Regional Airports. or a written notice of intent to submit national government and the States, or DATES: Effective 0901 UTC, August 10, an adverse or negative comment is on the distribution of power and 2000. Comments must be received on or received within the comment period, responsibilities among the various before May 8, 2000. the regulation will become effective on levels of government. Therefore, it is the date specified above. After the close ADDRESSES: Send comments on the rule determined that this final rule will not of the comment period, the FAA will in triplicate to Manager, Airspace have federalism implications under publish a document in the Federal Branch, Air Traffic Division, Federal Executive Order 13132. Register indicating that no adverse or Further, the FAA has determined that Aviation Administration, Southwest negative comments were received and this regulation is noncontroversial and Region, Docket No. 2000–ASW–10, Fort confirming the date on which the final unlikely to result in adverse or negative Worth, TX 76193–0520. The official rule will become effective. If the FAA comments and only involves an docket may be examined in the Office does receive, within the comment established body of technical of the Regional Counsel, Southwest period, an adverse or negative comment, regulations that require frequent and Region, Federal Aviation or written notice of intent to submit routine amendments to keep them Administration, 2601 Meacham such a comment, a document operationally current. Therefore, I Boulevard, Room 663, Fort Worth, TX, withdrawing the direct final rule will be certify that this regulation (1) is not a between 9 a.m. and 3 p.m., Monday published in the Federal Register, and ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ under through Friday, except Federal holidays. a notice of proposed rulemaking may be Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a An informal docket may also be published with a new comment period. ‘‘significant rule’’ under DOT examined during normal business hours Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 at the Airspace Branch, Air Traffic Comments Invited FR 11034; February 26, 1979); and (3) if Division, Federal Aviation Although this action is in the form of promulgated, will not have a significant Administration, Southwest Region, a final rule and was not preceded by a economic impact, positive or negative, Room 414, Fort Worth, TX. notice of proposed rulemaking, on a substantial number of small entities FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: comments are invited on this rule. under the criteria of the Regulatory Donald J. Day, Airspace Branch, Air Interested persons are invited to Flexibility Act. Since this rule involves Traffic Division, Southwest Region, comment on this rule by submitting routine matters that will only affect air Federal Aviation Administration, Fort such written data, views, or arguments traffic procedures and air navigation, it Worth, TX 76193–0520, telephone 817– as they may desire. Communications does not warrant preparation of a 222–5593. should identify the Rule Docket number Regulatory Flexibility Analysis because SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This and be submitted in triplicate to the the anticipated impact is so minimal. amendment to 14 CFR part 71 revises address specified under the caption the Class D Airspace at Alexandria ADDRESSES. All communications List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71 England AFB, LA; revokes the Class D received on or before the closing date Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Airspace at Alexandria Esler Regional for comments will be considered, and Navigation (air).
VerDate 20
Adoption of the Amendment Issued in Fort Worth, TX, on March 16, DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 2000. Accordingly, pursuant to the JoEllen Casilio, Federal Aviation Administration authority delegated to me, the Federal Assistant Manager, Air Traffic Division, Aviation Administration amends 14 Southwest Region. 14 CFR Part 71 CFR part 71 as follows: [FR Doc. 00–7347 Filed 3–23–00; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910±13±M [Airspace Docket No. 2000±ASW±02] PART 71ÐDESIGNATION OF CLASS A, CLASS B, CLASS C, CLASS D, AND Establishment of Class E Airspace; DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION CLASS E AIRSPACE AREAS; Stigler, OK AIRWAYS; ROUTES; AND REPORTING Federal Aviation Administration POINTS AGENCY: Federal Aviation 14 CFR Part 71 Administration (FAA), DOT. 1. The authority citation for 14 CFR part 71 continues to read as follows: [Airspace Docket No. 2000±ASW±01] ACTION: Direct final rule; confirmation of effective date. Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40103, 40113, Revision of Class E Airspace; 40120; E.O. 10854; 24 FR 9565, 3 CFR, 1959– Corsicana, TX 1963 Comp., p. 389. SUMMARY: This notice confirms the AGENCY: Federal Aviation effective date of a direct final rule which § 71.1 [Amended] Administration (FAA), DOT. establishes Class E airspace at Stigler, OK. 2. The incorporation by reference in ACTION: Direct final rule; confirmation of 14 CFR 71.1 of the Federal Aviation effective date. EFFECTIVE DATE: The direct final rule Administration Order 7400.9G, SUMMARY: This notice confirms the published at 65 FR 3381 is effective Airspace Designations and Reporting effective date of a direct final rule which 0901 UTC, April 20, 2000. Points, dated September 1, 1999, and revises Class E airspace at Corsicana, FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: effective September 16, 1999, is TX. Donald J. Day, Airspace Branch, Air amended as follows: EFFECTIVE DATE: The direct final rule Traffic Division, Southwest Region, Paragraph 5000 Class D airspace areas. published at 65 FR 3382 is effective Federal Aviation Administration, Fort * * * * * 0901 UTC, April 20, 2000. Worth, TX 76193–0520, telephone: 817– FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 222–5593. ASW LA D Alexandria, LA [Revised] Donald J. Day, Airspace Branch, Air SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The FAA Alexandria International Airport, LA Traffic Division, Southwest Region, (Lat. 31°19′55″ N., long. 92°32′55″ W.) Federal Aviation Administration, Fort published this direct final rule with a request for comments in the Federal That airspace extending upward from the Worth, TX 76193–0520, telephone: 817– surface to and including 2,600 feet MSL 222–5593. Register on January 21, 2000, (65 FR 3381). The FAA uses the direct final within a 4.7-mile radius of Alexandria SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The FAA International Airport. published this direct final rule with a rulemaking procedure for a noncontroversial rule where the FAA * * * * * request for comments in the Federal Register on January 21, 2000, (65 FR believes that there will be no adverse ASW LA D Alexandria Esler Regional 3382). The FAA uses the direct final public comment. This direct final rule Airport, LA [Revoked] rulemaking procedure for a advised the public that no adverse Paragraph 6005: Class E airspace areas noncontroversial rule where the FAA comments were anticipated, and that extending upward from 700 feet or more believes that there will be no adverse unless a written adverse comment, or a above the surface of the earth. public comment. This direct final rule written notice of intent to submit such * * * * * advised the public that no adverse an adverse comment, were received comments were anticipated, and that within the comment period, the ASW LA E5 Alexandria, LA [Revised] unless a written adverse comment, or a regulation would become effective on Alexandria International Airport, LA written notice of intent to submit such April 20, 2000. No adverse comments (Lat. 31°19′39″ N., long. 92°32′55″ W.) an adverse comment, were received were received, and, thus, this action Alexandria Esler Regional Airport, LA within the comment period, the confirms that this direct final rule will (Lat. 31°23′42″ N., long. 92°17′45″ W.) regulation would become effective on be effective on that date. Esler VORTAC April 20, 2000. No adverse comments Issued in Fort Worth, TX, on March 16, (Lat. 31°26′51″ N., long. 92°19′19″ W.) were received, and, thus, this action 2000. That airspace extending upward from 700 confirms that this direct final rule will feet above the surface within a 14-mile radius be effective on that date. JoEllen Casilio, of Alexandria International Airport and Issued in Fort Worth, TX, on March 16, Assistant Manager, Air Traffic Division, within a 7.7-mile radius of Esler Regional 2000. Southwest Region. Airport and within 1.7 miles each side of the JoEllen Casilio, [FR Doc. 00–7346 Filed 3–23–00; 8:45 am] ° 154 radial of the Esler VORTAC extending Assistant Manager, Air Traffic Division, BILLING CODE 4910±13±M from the 7.7-mile radius to 10.6 miles Southwest Region. southeast of the airport. [FR Doc. 00–7345 Filed 3–23–00; 8:45 am] * * * * * BILLING CODE 4910±13±M
VerDate 20
DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Internal Revenue Service Internal Revenue Service Minerals Management Service
26 CFR Part 1 26 CFR Part 601 30 CFR Part 250 Oil and Gas and Sulphur Operations in [TD 8848] [TD 8867] the Outer Continental ShelfÐUpdate of Revised/Reaffirmed Documents RIN 1545±AW69 RIN 1545±AX29 Incorporated by Reference Passive Foreign Investment Use of Penalty Mail in the Location and AGENCY: Minerals Management Service Companies; Definition of Marketable Recovery of Missing Children; (MMS), Interior. Stock; Correction Correction ACTION: Technical amendment. AGENCY: Internal Revenue Service (IRS), SUMMARY: This document makes AGENCY: Internal Revenue Service (IRS), Treasury. technical amendments to regulations Treasury. ACTION: Correction to procedural rules. that were published in a final rule on ACTION: Correction to final regulations. December 28, 1999 (64 FR 72756). This SUMMARY: This document contains a amendment incorporates the revision of SUMMARY: This document contains a correction to procedural rules which 10 documents previously incorporated correction to final regulations which were published in the Federal Register by reference in regulations governing oil were published in the Federal Register on Monday, December 13, 1999 (64 FR and gas and sulfur operations in the on Tuesday, January 25, 2000 (65 FR 69398), establishing the procedures Outer Continental Shelf (OCS). The 3817), relating to the new mark-to- under which the IRS may use penalty revised editions of these 10 documents market election for stock of a passive mail to aid in the location and recovery will ensure that lessees use the best foreign investment company. of missing children. available and safest technologies while DATES: This correction is effective operating in the OCS. Additionally, DATES: This correction is effective December 13, 1999. MMS is acknowledging the January 25, 2000. reaffirmation of 7 documents previously FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: incorporated by reference in regulations FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Randall Hall at (202) 283–7900 or Sandy governing oil and gas and sulfur Robert Laudeman at (202) 622–3840 (not Kopta at (202) 622–3726 (not toll-free operations in the OCS. The a toll-free call). numbers). reaffirmation dates issued by the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: American Petroleum Institute’s Manual of Petroleum Measurement Standards Background Background will be added to the 7 pertinent The final regulations that are the The procedural rules that are the documents incorporated by reference. subject of this correction are the result subject of this correction are under EFFECTIVE DATE: April 24, 2000. of the Juvenile Justice and Delinquency The incorporation by reference of section 1296 of the Internal Revenue Prevention Act of 1974. publications listed in the regulation is Code. approved by the Director of the Federal Need for Correction Need for Correction Register as of April 24, 2000. As published, the procedural rules FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: As published, the final regulations (TD 8848) contain a typographical error Frederick Gray at (703) 787–1027. (TD 8867) contain an error in the title that need correction to be corrected. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The of the official signing the document. Correction of Publication revised editions of the documents Correction of Publication previously incorporated by reference Accordingly, the publication of the are: (1) Fourth Edition of the American procedural rules (TD 8848), which were Accordingly, the publication of the Petroleum Institute (API) Recommended the subject of FR Doc. 99–32098, is final regulations (TD 8867), which were Practice for Operation and Maintenance corrected as follows: the subject of FR Doc. 00–1530, is of Offshore Cranes (API RP 2D); (2) corrected as follows: § 601.901 [Corrected] Sixth Edition of the API Specification for Quality Programs for the Petroleum 1. On page 69399, first column, 1. On page 3820, third column, at the and Natural Gas Industry (API Spec Q1); § 601.901, paragraph (e) is corrected to end of TD 8867, the title of the official (3) Second Edition of the API Manual of read as follows: signing the document, ‘‘Assistant Petroleum Measurement Standards Secretary of the Treasury.’’ is corrected § 601.901 Missing children shown on (MPMS), Chapter 4, Proving Systems, to read ‘‘Acting Assistant Secretary of penalty mail. Section 6, Pulse Interpolation (MPMS, the Treasury (Tax Policy).’’ * * * * * Chapter 4, Section 6); (4) Second Dale D. Goode, (e) Period of applicability. This Edition of the API MPMS, Chapter 4, section is applicable December 13, 1999 Proving Systems, Section 7, Field Federal Register Liaison, Assistant Chief Standard Test Measures (MPMS, Counsel (Corporate). through December 31, 2002. Chapter 4, Section 7); (5) American [FR Doc. 00–5237 Filed 3–23–00; 8:45 am] Dale D. Goode, Society for Testing and Materials BILLING CODE 4830±01±U Federal Register Liaison, Assistant Chief (ASTM) Standard Specification for Counsel (Corporate). Concrete Aggregates (ASTM Standard C [FR Doc. 00–5241 Filed 3–23–00; 8:45 am] 33–99a); (6) ASTM Standard BILLING CODE 4830±01±U Specification for Ready-Mixed Concrete
VerDate 20
(ASTM Standard C 94/C 94M–99); (7) according to the authority in 30 CFR Accordingly, 30 CFR Part 250 is ASTM Standard Specification for 250.198(a)(2). We are updating the amended by making the following Portland Cement (ASTM Standard C appropriate sections of other subparts to technical amendments: 150–99); (8) ASTM Standard reflect these document revisions. Specification for Lightweight Aggregates The regulations for cranes and other PART 250ÐOIL AND GAS AND for Structural Concrete (ASTM Standard material-handling equipment on fixed SULPHUR OPERATIONS IN THE C 330–99); (9) ASTM Standard platforms were recently revised under OUTER CONTINENTAL SHELF Specification for Blended Hydraulic § 250.108 for all operations on the OCS, Cements (ASTM Standard C 595–98); including those for sulphur. However, 1. The authority citation for part 250 and (10) 1999 Edition of the NACE crane operations for sulphur leases are continues to read as follows: International Sulfide Stress Cracking also regulated under § 250.1605(g). For Authority: 43 U.S.C. 1331 et seq. Resistant Metallic Materials for Oilfield consistency, this technical amendment Equipment (NACE Standard MR0175– simply revises § 250.1605(g) to specify 2. In § 250.198, in the table in 99). that sulphur operations follow the paragraph (e), the following changes are requirements in § 250.108 with respect made: MMS has reviewed these documents to crane operations. and has determined that the new A. Remove the entries for ASTM editions must be incorporated into the List of Subjects in 30 CFR Part 250 standards C33–93, C94–96, C150–95a, C330–89, C595–94, and NACE standard regulations to ensure the use of the best Continental shelf, Environmental MR.01–75–96. and safest technologies. Our review impact statements, Environmental shows that the changes between the old protection, Government contracts, B. Add entries for ASTM standards C and new editions result in safety Incorporation by reference, 33–99a, C 94/C 94M–99, C 150–99, C improvements or represent new Investigations, Mineral royalties, Oil 330–99, C 595–98 and NACE standard industry standard technology and will and gas development and production, MR0175–99 as set forth below. not impose undue cost on the offshore Oil and gas exploration, Oil and gas C. Revise the remaining entries as set oil and gas industry. Furthermore, the reserves, Penalties, Pipelines, Public forth below. old editions are not readily available to lands—mineral resources, Public the affected parties because they are out lands—rights-of-way, Reporting and § 250.198 Documents incorporated by reference. of publication. Therefore, we are recordkeeping requirements, Sulphur amending these documents to development and production, Sulphur * * * * * incorporate the updated editions exploration, Surety bonds. (e) * * *
Title of document Incorporated by reference at
******* API MPMS, Chapter 4, Section 6, Pulse Interpolation, Second Edition, May 1999, API Stock § 250.1202(a)(3) and (f)(1). No. H04062. API MPMS, Chapter, Section 7, Field Standard Test Measures, Second Edition, December § 250.1202(a)(3) and (f)(1). 1998, API Stock No. H04072.
******* API MPMS, Chapter 5, Section 2, Measurement of Liquid Hydrocarbons by Displacement Me- § 250.1202(a)(3). ters, Second Edition, November 1987, reaffirmed January 1997, API Stock No. H30102.
******* API MPMS, Chapter 5, Section 5, Fidelity and Security of Flow Measurement Pulsed-Data § 250.1202(a)(3). Transmission Systems, First Edition, June 1982, reaffirmed January 1997, API Stock No. H30105.
******* API MPMS, Chapter 6, Section 7, Metering Viscous Hydrocarbons, Sescond Edition, May § 250.1202(a)(3). 1991, reaffirmed July 1996, API Stock No. H30127.
******* API MPMS, Chapter 9, Density Determination, Section 1, Hydrometer Test Method for Density, § 250.1202(a)(3) and (1)(4). Relative Density (Specific Gravity), or API Gravity of Crude Petroleum and Liquid Petroleum Products, First Edition, June 1981, reaffirmed December 1998, API Stock No. H30181; also available as ANSI/ASTM D 1298.
API MPMS, Chapter 9, Section 2, Pressure Hydrometer Test Method for Density or Relative § 250.1202(a)(3) and (1)(4). Density, First Edition, April 1982, reaffirmed December 1998, API Stock No. H30182.
******* API MPMS, Chapter 11.2.2, Compressibility Factors for Hydrocarbons: 0.350±0.637 Relative § 250.1202(a)(3) and (g)(4). Density (60°F/60°F) and ¥50°F to 140°F Metering Temperature, Second Edition, October 1986, reaffirmed March 1997, API Stock No. H27307; also available as Gas Processors As- sociation (GPA) 8286.
VerDate 20
Title of document Incorporated by reference at
******* API MPMS, Chapter 14, Section 3, Part 3, Natural Gas Applications, Third Edition, August § 250.1203(b)(2). 1992, reaffirmed December 1998, API Stock No. H30353; also available as ANS/API 2530, Part 3.
******* API RP 2D, Recommended practice for Operation and Maintenance of Offshore Cranes, Fourth § 250.108(a)(1). Edition, August 1, 1999. API Stock No. G02D04.
******* API Spec Q1, Specification for Quality Programs for the Petroleum and Natural Gas Industry, § 250.806(a)(2)(ii). Sixth Edition, March 1, 1999. API Stock No. GQ1006.
******* ASTM Standard C 33±99a. Standard Specification for Concrete Aggregates ...... § 250.908(b)(4)(i). ASTM Standard C 94/C 94M±99, Standard Specification for Ready-Mixed Concrete ...... § 250.908(e)(2)(i). ASTM Standard C 150±99, Standard Specification for Portland Cement ...... § 250.908(b)(2)(i). ASTM Standard C 330±99, Standard Specification for Lightweight Aggregates for Structural § 250.908(b)(4)(i). Concrete. ASTM Standard C 595±98, Standard Specification for Blended Hydraulic Cements ...... § 250.908(b)(2)(i).
******* NACE Standard MR0175±99, Sulfide Stress Cracking Resistant Metallic Materials for Oilfield § 250.417(p)(2). Equipment, Revised January 1999, NACE Item No. 21302.
*******
3. In § 250.417, paragraph (p)(2) is applicable provisions of the ACI ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION revised to read as follows: publication, ACI Standard 318, Building AGENCY Code Requirements for Reinforced § 250.417 Hydrogen sulfide. Concrete, plus Commentary. 40 CFR Part 52 * * * * * (p) * * * * * * * * [CA 040±0223a FRL±6563±3] (2) Use BOP system components, (e) * * * Approval and Promulgation of wellhead, pressure-control equipment, (2) * * * Implementation Plans; California State and related equipment exposed to H2S- Implementation Plan Revision, Ventura bearing fluids that conform to NACE (i) Mixing of concrete must conform to the requirements of ACI Standard 318 County Air Pollution Control District, Standard MR0175–99. Monterey Bay Unified Air Pollution * * * * * and ASTM Standard C 94/C 94M–99, Standard Specification for Ready-Mixed Control District, and Santa Barbara 4. In § 250.908, paragraphs (b)(2)(i), Concrete; County Air Pollution Control District (b)(4)(i), and (e)(2)(i) are revised to read as follows: * * * * * AGENCY: Environmental Protection 5. In § 250.1605, paragraph (g) is Agency (EPA). § 250.908 Concrete-gravity platforms. revised to read as follows: ACTION: Direct final rule. * * * * * (b) * * * § 250.1605 Drilling requirements. SUMMARY: EPA is taking direct final (2) * * * action on revisions to the California * * * * * (i) Cement must be equivalent to Type State Implementation Plan (SIP). The I, II, or III portland cement as specified (g) Crane operations. You must revisions concern rules from the by ASTM Standard C 150–99, Standard operate a crane installed on fixed following districts: Ventura County Air Specification for Portland Cement, or platforms according to § 250.108 of this Pollution Control District (VCAPCD), portland-pozzolan cement as specified subpart. Monterey Bay Unified Air Pollution by ASTM Standard C 595–98, Standard * * * * * Control District (MBUAPCD), and Santa Specification for Blended Hydraulic Barbara County Air Pollution Control Cements. However, the suitability of Dated: March 16, 2000. District (SBCAPCD). This approval Type III cement to serve its intended E. P. Danenberger, action will incorporate these rules into function must be demonstrated. Chief, Engineering and Operations Division. the federally approved SIP. The (4) * * * [FR Doc. 00–7267 Filed 3–23–00; 8:45 am] intended effect of approving these rules (i) Aggregates must conform to the BILLING CODE 4310±MR±P is to regulate emissions of volatile requirements of ASTM Standard C 33– organic compounds (VOCs) in 99a, Standard Specification for Concrete accordance with the requirements of the Aggregates. Lightweight aggregates Clean Air Act, as amended in 1990 conforming to ASTM Standard C 330– (CAA or the Act). The revised rules 99, Standard Specification for control VOC emissions from Lightweight Aggregates for Structural architectural coatings. Thus, EPA is Concrete, will only be permitted if they finalizing the approval of these do not pose durability problems and revisions into the California SIP under where they are used according to the provisions of the CAA regarding EPA
VerDate 20
VerDate 20
25, 1993. MBUAPCD submitted Rule IV. Administrative Requirements determined to be ‘‘economically 426, Architectural Coatings includes the significant’’ as defined under Executive A. Executive Order 12866 following significant changes from the Order 12866, and (2) concerns an current SIP: The Office of Management and Budget environmental health or safety risk that • (OMB) has exempted this regulatory EPA has reason to believe may have a Addition of a VOC limit to the action from Executive Order 12866, Table of Standards; disproportionate effect on children. If entitled ‘‘Regulatory Planning and the regulatory action meets both criteria, • References to other MBUAPCD Review.’’ the Agency must evaluate the rules; B. Executive Order 13132 environmental health or safety effects of • Addition of three and revision of the planned rule on children, and Federalism (64 FR 43255, August 10, five definitions; and explain why the planned regulation is 1999) revokes and replaces Executive preferable to other potentially effective • Addition of a test method for Orders 12612, Federalism and 12875, and reasonably feasible alternatives determining the gloss of non-flat Enhancing the Intergovernmental considered by the Agency. coatings. Partnership. Executive Order 13132 This rule is not subject to Executive On July 14, 1995, EPA approved into requires EPA to develop an accountable Order 13045 because it does not involve the SIP a version of Rule 323, process to ensure ‘‘meaningful and decisions intended to mitigate Architectural Coatings, that had been timely input by State and local officials environmental health or safety risks. adopted by the SBCAPCD on March 16, in the development of regulatory D. Executive Order 13084 1995. SBCAPCD submitted Rule 323, policies that have federalism Architectural Coatings includes the implications.’’ ‘‘Policies that have Under Executive Order 13084, following significant change from the federalism implications’’ is defined in Consultation and Coordination with current SIP: the Executive Order to include Indian Tribal Governments, EPA may • regulations that have ‘‘substantial direct not issue a regulation that is not Deletion of the definition of reactive effects on the States, on the relationship required by statute, that significantly organic compound found in Section C27 between the national government and affects or uniquely affects the of the SIP to maintain consistency with the States, or on the distribution of communities of Indian tribal the definition in SBCAPCD Rule 102, power and responsibilities among the governments, and that imposes Definitions. various levels of government.’’ Under substantial direct compliance costs on EPA has evaluated the submitted Executive Order 13132, EPA may not those communities, unless the Federal rules and has determined that they issue a regulation that has federalism government provides the funds strengthen the applicable SIP and are implications, that imposes substantial necessary to pay the direct compliance consistent with the CAA and EPA direct compliance costs, and that is not costs incurred by the tribal policy. Therefore, VCAPCD Rule 74.2, required by statute, unless the Federal governments. If the mandate is Architectural Coatings; MBUAPCD Rule government provides the funds unfunded, EPA must provide to the 426, Architectural Coatings; and necessary to pay the direct compliance OMB, in a separately identified section SBCAPCD Rule 323, Architectural costs incurred by State and local of the preamble to the rule, a Coatings are being approved under governments, or EPA consults with description of the extent of EPA’s prior section 110(k)(3) of the CAA. State and local officials early in the consultation with representatives of EPA is publishing this rule without process of developing the proposed affected tribal governments, a summary prior proposal because the Agency regulation. EPA also may not issue a of the nature of their concerns, and a views this as a noncontroversial regulation that has federalism statement supporting the need to issue amendment and anticipates no adverse implications and that preempts State the regulation. In addition, Executive Order 13084 comments. However, in the proposed law unless the Agency consults with requires EPA to develop an effective rules section of this Federal Register State and local officials early in the process permitting elected and other publication, EPA is publishing a process of developing the proposed representatives of Indian tribal separate document that will serve as the regulation. This rule will not have substantial governments ‘‘to provide meaningful proposal to approve these SIP revisions direct effects on the States, on the and timely input in the development of should adverse comments be filed. This relationship between the national regulatory policies on matters that rule will be effective May 23, 2000 government and the States, or on the significantly or uniquely affect their without further notice unless the distribution of power and communities.’’ Today’s rule does not Agency receives adverse comments by responsibilities among the various significantly or uniquely affect the April 24, 2000. levels of government, as specified in communities of Indian tribal If the EPA receives such comments, Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, governments. Accordingly, the then EPA will publish a timely August 10, 1999), because it merely requirements of section 3(b) of withdrawal in the Federal Register approves a state rule implementing a Executive Order 13084 do not apply to informing the public that the rule will federal standard, and does not alter the this rule. not take effect. All public comments relationship or the distribution of power E. Regulatory Flexibility Act received will then be addressed in a and responsibilities established in the subsequent final rule based on the Clean Air Act. Thus, the requirements of The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) proposed rule. The EPA will not section 6 of the Executive Order do not generally requires an agency to conduct institute a second comment period. Any apply to this rule. a regulatory flexibility analysis of any parties interested in commenting on this rule subject to notice and comment rule should do so at this time. If no such C. Executive Order 13045 rulemaking requirements unless the comments are received, the public is Protection of Children from agency certifies that the rule will not advised that this rule is effective on May Environmental Health Risks and Safety have a significant economic impact on 23, 2000 and no further action will be Risks (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), a substantial number of small entities. taken on the proposed rule. applies to any rule that: (1) is Small entities include small businesses,
VerDate 20
VerDate 20
County Air Pollution Control District, Obispo County APCD, South Coast and reasonably feasible alternatives San Luis Obispo County Air Pollution AQMD, Ventura County APCD, and considered by the Agency. Control District, South Coast Air Quality State of California. These requirements This rule is not subject to Executive Management District, and Ventura are being promulgated in response to Order 13045 because it does not involve County Air Pollution Control District the submittal of rules from local air decisions intended to mitigate are the designated COAs and pollution control agencies and the State environmental health or safety risks. requirements submitted by the State of of California. EPA has evaluated the C. Executive Order 13084 California. The intended effect of proposed requirements to ensure that approving the requirements contained they are rationally related to the Under Executive Order 13084, in ‘‘Santa Barbara County Air Pollution attainment or maintenance of federal or Consultation and Coordination with Control District Requirements state ambient air quality standards or Indian Tribal Governments, EPA may Applicable to OCS Sources’ (February, Part C of title I of the Act, that they are not issue a regulation that is not 2000), ‘‘San Luis Obispo County Air not designed expressly to prevent required by statute, that significantly Pollution Control District Requirements exploration and development of the affects or uniquely affects the Applicable to OCS Sources’’ (February, OCS and that they are applicable to OCS communities of Indian tribal 2000), ‘‘South Coast Air Quality sources. 40 CFR 55.1. EPA has also governments, and that imposes Management District Requirements evaluated the rules to ensure that they substantial direct compliance costs on Applicable to OCS Sources’ (Part I, II are not arbitrary or capricious. 40 CFR those communities, unless the Federal and III) (February, 2000), ‘‘Ventura 55.12(e). In addition, EPA has excluded government provides the funds County Air Pollution Control District administrative or procedural rules. necessary to pay the direct compliance Requirements Applicable to OCS A 30-day public comment period was costs incurred by the tribal governments. If the mandate is Sources’ (February, 2000), and ‘‘State of provided in each Proposed Rule, and no unfunded, EPA must provide to the California Requirements Applicable to comments were received. OCS Sources’’ (February, 2000) is to Office of Management and Budget, in a regulate emissions from OCS sources in EPA Action separately identified section of the accordance with the requirements In this document, EPA takes final preamble to the rule, a description of onshore. action to incorporate the proposed the extent of EPA’s prior consultation changes into 40 CFR part 55. No with representatives of affected tribal DATES: This action is effective April 24, governments, a summary of the nature 2000. changes were made to the Proposed Rules listed in table 1. EPA is approving of their concerns, and a statement ADDRESSES: Copies of the documents supporting the need to issue the relevant to this action are available for the proposed actions as modified under section 328(a)(1) of the Act, 42 U.S.C. regulation. public inspection during normal In addition, Executive Order 13084 7627. Section 328(a) of the Act requires business hours at the following requires EPA to develop an effective that EPA establish requirements to locations: process permitting elected and other control air pollution from OCS sources Rulemaking Section (A–5–3), Air and representatives of Indian tribal located within 25 miles of states’ Toxics Division, U.S. Environmental governments ‘‘to provide meaningful seaward boundaries that are the same as Protection Agency, Region IX, 75 and timely input in the development of onshore requirements. To comply with Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA regulatory policies on matters that this statutory mandate, EPA must 94105. significantly or uniquely affect their incorporate applicable onshore rules Environmental Protection Agency communities.’’ Today’s rule does not into Part 55 as they exist onshore. (LE–6102), 401 ‘‘M’’ Street, SW, Room significantly or uniquely affect the M–1500, Washington, D.C. 20460. Administrative Requirements communities of Indian tribal FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: governments. Accordingly, the A. Executive Order 12866 Christine Vineyard, Air and Toxics requirements of section 3(b) of Division (AIR–4), U.S. EPA Region IX, The Office of Management and Budget Executive Order 13084 do not apply to 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA (OMB) has exempted this regulatory this rule. 94105, Telephone: (415) 744–1197. action from Executive Order 12866, D. Executive Order 13132 SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: entitled ‘‘Regulatory Planning and Review.’’ Executive Order 13132, entitled Background Federalism (64 FR 43255, August 10, B. Executive Order 13045 1999) revokes and replaces Executive TABLE 1 Executive Order 13045, entitled Orders 12612, Federalism and 12875, Protection of Children from Enhancing the Intergovernmental Date of Proposed Federal Register cita- Rule tion Environmental Health Risks and Safety Partnership. Executive Order 13132 Risks (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), requires EPA to develop an accountable November 19, 1999 .. 64 FR 63271. applies to any rule that: (1) Is process to ensure ‘‘meaningful and August 19, 1999 ...... 64 FR 45217. determined to be ‘‘economically timely input by State and local officials May 27, 1999 ...... 64 FR 29775. significant’’ as defined under Executive in the development of regulatory August 6, 1998 ...... 63 FR 41991. Order 12866, and (2) concerns an policies that have federalism January 19, 1998 ...... 63 FR 8642. August 23, 1997 ...... 62 FR 45604. environmental health or safety risk that implications.’’ ‘‘Policies that have July 16, 1997 ...... 62 FR 38047. EPA has reason to believe may have a federalism implications’’ is defined in December 16, 1996 .. 61 FR 66003. disproportionate effect on children. If the Executive Order to include July 9, 1996 ...... 61 FR 36012. the regulatory action meets both criteria, regulations that have ‘‘substantial direct the Agency must evaluate the effects on the States, on the relationship On the dates listed in Table 1, EPA environmental health or safety effects of between the national government and proposed to approve requirements into the planned rule on children, and the States, or on the distribution of the OCS Air Regulations pertaining to explain why the planned regulation is power and responsibilities among the Santa Barbara County APCD, San Luis preferable to other potentially effective various levels of government.’’ Under
VerDate 20
Executive Order 13132, EPA may not F. Unfunded Mandates and applicable when developing issue a regulation that has federalism Under Section 202 of the Unfunded programs and policies unless doing so implications, that imposes substantial Mandates Reform Act of 1995 would be inconsistent with applicable direct compliance costs, and that is not (‘‘Unfunded Mandates Act’’), signed law or otherwise impractical. The EPA believes that VCS are required by statute, unless the Federal into law on March 22, 1995, EPA must inapplicable to this action. Today’s government provides the funds prepare a budgetary impact statement to action does not require the public to necessary to pay the direct compliance accompany any proposed or final rule perform activities conducive to the use costs incurred by State and local that includes a Federal mandate that of VCS. governments, or EPA consults with may result in estimated annual costs to State and local officials early in the State, local, or tribal governments in the I. Petitions for Judicial Review process of developing the proposed aggregate; or to private sector, of $100 Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean regulation. EPA also may not issue a million or more. Under Section 205, Air Act, petitions for judicial review of regulation that has federalism EPA must select the most cost-effective this action must be filed in the United implications and that preempts State and least burdensome alternative that States Court of Appeals for the law unless the Agency consults with achieves the objectives of the rule and appropriate circuit by May 23, 2000. State and local officials early in the is consistent with statutory Filing a petition for reconsideration by process of developing the proposed requirements. Section 203 requires EPA the Administrator of this final rule does regulation. to establish a plan for informing and not affect the finality of this rule for the This rule will not have substantial advising any small governments that purposes of judicial review nor does it direct effects on the States, on the may be significantly or uniquely extend the time within which a petition relationship between the national impacted by the rule. for judicial review may be filed, and government and the States, or on the EPA has determined that the approval shall not postpone the effectiveness of distribution of power and action promulgated does not include a such rule or action. This action may not responsibilities among the various Federal mandate that may result in be challenged later in proceedings to levels of government, as specified in estimated annual costs of $100 million enforce its requirements. (See section Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, or more to either State, local, or tribal 307(b)(2).) governments in the aggregate, or to the August 10, 1999), because it merely List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 55 approves a state rule implementing a private sector. This Federal action approves pre-existing requirements federal standard, and does not alter the Environmental protection, under State or local law, and imposes relationship or the distribution of power Administrative practice and procedures, no new requirements. Accordingly, no and responsibilities established in the Air pollution control, Hydrocarbons, additional costs to State, local, or tribal Clean Air Act. Thus, the requirements of Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen governments, or to the private sector, section 6 of the Executive Order do not dioxide, Nitrogen oxides, Outer result from this action. apply to this rule. Continental Shelf, Ozone, Particulate G. Submission to Congress and the matter, Permits, Reporting and E. Regulatory Flexibility Act Comptroller General recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur oxides. The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) The Congressional Review Act, 5 generally requires an agency to conduct U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small Dated: March 15, 2000. a regulatory flexibility analysis of any Business Regulatory Enforcement Felicia Marcus, rule subject to notice and comment Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides Regional Administrator, Region IX. rulemaking requirements unless the that before a rule may take effect, the Title 40, Chapter I of the Code of agency certifies that the rule will not agency promulgating the rule must Federal Regulations, Part 55, is to be have a significant economic impact on submit a rule report, which includes a amended as follows: a substantial number of small entities. copy of the rule, to each House of the Small entities include small businesses, Congress and to the Comptroller General PART 55Ð[AMENDED] small not-for-profit enterprises, and of the United States. EPA will submit a 1. The authority citation for part 55 small governmental jurisdictions. report containing this rule and other continues to read as follows: This final rule will not have a required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of Representatives, and Authority: Section 328 of the Clean Air Act significant impact on a substantial (42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.) as amended by Public the Comptroller General of the United number of small entities because Law 101–549. consistency updates under section States prior to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule 2. Section 55.14 is amended by 328(a) of the Clean Air Act do not create cannot take effect until 60 days after it revising paragraphs (e)(3)(i)(A), any new requirements but simply is published in the Federal Register. (e)(3)(ii)(E), (e)(3)(ii)(F), (e)(3)(ii)(G), and approve requirements that the State is This rule is not a ‘‘major’’ rule as (e)(3)(ii)(H) to read as follows: already imposing. Therefore, because defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). the consistency update approval does § 55.14 Requirements that apply to OCS not create any new requirements, I H. National Technology Transfer and sources located within 25 miles of States certify that this action will not have a Advancement Act seaward boundaries, by State. * * * * * significant economic impact on a Section 12 of the National Technology substantial number of small entities. (e) * * * Transfer and Advancement Act (3) * * * Moreover, due to the nature of the (NTTAA) of 1995 requires Federal (i) * * * Federal-State relationship under the agencies to evaluate existing technical (A) State of California Requirements Clean Air Act, preparation of flexibility standards when developing a new Applicable to OCS Sources. analysis would constitute Federal regulation. To comply with NTTAA, (ii) * * * inquiry into the economic EPA must consider and use ‘‘voluntary (E) San Luis Obispo County Air reasonableness of state action. consensus standards’’ (VCS) if available Pollution Control District Requirements
VerDate 20
Applicable to OCS Sources, February Rule 108 Severability (Adopted 11/13/84) Rule 201 Permits Required (Adopted 4/17/ 2000. Rule 113 Continuous Emissions 97) (F) Santa Barbara County Air Monitoring, except F. (Adopted 7/5/77) Rule 202 Exemptions to Rule 201 (Adopted Pollution Control District Requirements Rule 201 Equipment not Requiring a 4/17/97) Applicable to OCS Sources, February Permit, except A.1.b. (Revised 4/26/95) Rule 203 Transfer (Adopted 4/17/97) Rule 202 Permits, except A.4. and A.8. Rule 204 Applications (Adopted 4/17/97) 2000. (Adopted 11/5/91) Rule 205 Standards for Granting (G) South Coast Air Quality Rule 203 Applications, except B. (Adopted Applications (Adopted 4/17/97) Management District Requirements 11/5/91) Rule 206 Conditional Approval of Applicable to OCS Sources (Part I , II Rule 204 Requirements, except B.3. and C. Authority to Construct or Permit to Operate and Part III), February 2000. (Adopted 8/10/93) (Adopted 10/15/91) (H) Ventura County Air Pollution Rule 209 Provision for Sampling and Rule 207 Denial of Application (Adopted Control District Requirements Testing Facilities (Adopted 11/5/91) 10/23/78) Applicable to OCS Sources, February Rule 210 Periodic Inspection, Testing and Rule 210 Fees (Adopted 4/17/97) 2000. Renewal of Permits to Operate (Adopted Rule 212 Emission Statements (Adopted 10/ 11/5/91) 20/92) * * * * * Rule 213 Calculations, except E.4. and F. Rule 301 Circumvention (Adopted 10/23/ 3. Appendix A to CFR Part 55 is (Adopted 8/10/93) 78) amended by revising paragraphs (a)(1) Rule 302 Schedule of Fees (Adopted 6/18/ Rule 302 Visible Emissions (Adopted 10/ and (b)(5), (6), (7), and (8) under the 97) 23/78) Rule 305 Fees for Major Non-Vehicular heading ‘‘California’’ to read as follows: Rule 304 Particulate Matter-Northern Zone Sources (Adopted 9/15/92) (Adopted 10/23/78) Appendix A to 40 CFR Part 55—Listing Rule 401 Visible Emissions (Adopted 8/6/ Rule 305 Particulate Matter Concentration- of State and Local Requirements 76) Southern Zone (Adopted 10/23/78) Incorporated by Reference Into Part 55, Rule 403 Particulate Matter Emissions Rule 306 Dust and Fumes-Northern Zone (Adopted 8/6/76) by State (Adopted 10/23/78) Rule 404 Sulfur Compounds Emission Rule 307 Particulate Matter Emission * * * * * Standards, Limitations and Prohibitions Weight Rate-Southern Zone (Adopted 10/ (Revised 12/6/76) California 23/78) Rule 405 Nitrogen Oxides Emission Rule 308 Incinerator Burning (Adopted 10/ (a) State Requirements Standards, Limitations and Prohibitions 23/78) (1) The following requirements are (Adopted 11/16/93) Rule 309 Specific Contaminants (Adopted contained in State of California Rule 406 Carbon Monoxide Emission 10/23/78) Requirements Applicable to OCS Sources, Standards, Limitations and Prohibitions Rule 310 Odorous Organic Sulfides February 2000. (Adopted 11/14/84) (Adopted 10/23/78) Barclays California Code of Regulations Rule 407 Organic Material Emission Standards, Limitations and Prohibitions Rule 311 Sulfur Content of Fuels (Adopted The following sections of Title 17 10/23/78) Subchapter 6: (Adopted 5/22/96) Rule 411 Surface Coating of Metal Parts and Rule 312 Open Fires (Adopted 10/2/90) 17 § 92000 Definitions (Adopted 5/31/91) Rule 316 Storage and Transfer of Gasoline 17 § 92100 Scope and Policy (Adopted 5/ Products (Adopted 1/28/98) Rule 416 Degreasing Operations (Adopted (Adopted 4/17/97) 31/91) Rule 317 Organic Solvents (Adopted 10/23/ 17 § 92200 Visible Emission Standards 6/18/79) Rule 417 Control of Fugitive Emissions of 78) (Adopted 5/31/91) Rule 318 Vacuum Producing Devices or 17 § 92210 Nuisance Prohibition (Adopted Volatile Organic Compounds (Adopted 2/ 9/93) Systems-Southern Zone (Adopted 10/23/ 5/31/91) 78) 17 § 92220 Compliance with Performance Rule 419 Petroleum Pits, Ponds, Sumps, Rule 321 Solvent Cleaning Operations Standards (Adopted 5/31/91) Well Cellars, and Wastewater Separators (Adopted 9/18/97) 17 § 92400 Visible Evaluation Techniques (Revised 7/12/94) Rule 322 Metal Surface Coating Thinner (Adopted 5/31/91) Rule 422 Refinery Process Turnarounds and Reducer (Adopted 10/23/78) 17 § 92500 General Provisions (Adopted 5/ (Adopted 6/18/79) 31/91) Rule 425 Storage of Volatile Organic Rule 323 Architectural Coatings (Adopted 17 § 92510 Pavement Marking (Adopted 5/ Compounds (Adopted 7/12/94) 7/18/96) 31/91) Rule 427 Marine Tanker Loading (Adopted Rule 324 Disposal and Evaporation of 17 § 92520 Stucco and Concrete (Adopted 4/26/95) Solvents (Adopted 10/23/78) 5/31/91) Rule 429 Oxides of Nitrogen and Carbon Rule 325 Crude Oil Production and 17 § 92530 Certified Abrasive (Adopted 5/ Monoxide Emissions from Electric Power Separation (Adopted 1/25/94) 31/91) Generation Boilers (Revised 11/12/97) Rule 326 Storage of Reactive Organic Liquid 17 § 92540 Stucco and Concrete (Adopted Rule 430 Control of Oxides of Nitrogen Compounds (Adopted 12/14/93) 5/31/91) from Industrial, Institutional, Commercial Rule 327 Organic Liquid Cargo Tank Vessel Boilers, Steam Generators, and Process Loading (Adopted 12/16/85) Health and Safety Code Heaters (Adopted 7/26/95) Rule 328 Continuous Emission Monitoring The following section of Division 26, Part Rule 431 Stationary Internal Combustion (Adopted 10/23/78) 4, Chapter 4, Article 1: Health and Safety Engines (Adopted 11/13/96) Rule 330 Surface Coating of Miscellaneous Code § 42301.13 of seq. Stationary sources: Rule 501 General Burning Provisions Metal Parts and Products (Adopted 4/21/ demolition or removal (chaptered 7/25/96) (Adopted 1/10/89) 95) * * * * * Rule 503 Incinerator Burning, except B.1.a. Rule 331 Fugitive Emissions Inspection and (b) Local Requirements. (Adopted 2/7/89) Maintenance (Adopted 12/10/91) * * * * * Rule 601 New Source Performance Rule 332 Petroleum Refinery Vacuum (5) The following requirements are Standards (Adopted 5/28/97) Producing Systems, Wastewater Separators contained in San Luis Obispo County Air (6) The following requirements are and Process Turnarounds (Adopted 6/11/ Pollution Control District Requirements containing in Santa Barbara County Air 79) Applicable to OCS Sources, February 2000: Pollution Control District Requirements Rule 333 Control of Emissions from Rule 103 Conflicts Between District, State Applicable to OCS Sources, February 2000: Reciprocating Internal Combustion Engines and Federal Rules (Adopted 8/6/76) Rule 102 Definitions (Adopted 5/20/99) (Adopted 4/17/97) Rule 105 Definitions (Adopted 1/24/96) Rule 103 Severability (Adopted 10/23/78) Rule 342 Control of Oxides of Nitrogen Rule 106 Standard Conditions (Adopted 8/ Rule 106 Notice to Comply for Minor (NOX) from Boilers, Steam Generators and 6/76) Violations (Adopted 7/15/99) Process Heaters) (Adopted 4/17/97)
VerDate 20
Rule 343 Petroleum Storage Tank Degassing Rule 208 Permit for Open Burning Rule 518.1 Permit Appeal Procedures for (Adopted 12/14/93) (Adopted 1/5/90) Title V Facilities (Adopted 8/11/95) Rule 344 Petroleum Sumps, Pits, and Well Rule 209 Transfer and Voiding of Permits Rule 518.2 Federal Alternative Operating Cellars (Adopted 11/10/94) (Adopted 1/5/90) Conditions (Adopted 1/12/96) Rule 352 Natural Gas-Fired Fan-Type Rule 210 Applications (Adopted 1/5/90) Rule 701 Air Pollution Emergency Central Furnaces and Residential Water Rule 212 Standards for Approving Permits Contingency Actions (Adopted 6/13/97) Heaters (Adopted 9/16/99) (Adopted 12/7/95) except (c)(3) and (e) Rule 702 Definitions (Adopted 7/11/80) Rule 353 Adhesives and Sealants (Adopted Rule 214 Denial of Permits (Adopted 1/5/ Rule 704 Episode Declaration (Adopted 7/ 8/19/99) 90) 9/82) Rule 359 Flares and Thermal Oxidizers (6/ Rule 217 Provisions for Sampling and Rule 707 Radio—Communication System 28/94) Testing Facilities (Adopted 1/5/90) (Adopted 7/11/80) Rule 370 Potential to Emit—Limitations for Rule 218 Stack Monitoring (Adopted 8/7/ Rule 708 Plans (Adopted 7/9/82) Part 70 Sources (Adopted 6/15/95) 81) Rule 708.1 Stationary Sources Required to Rule 505 Breakdown Conditions Sections Rule 219 Equipment Not Requiring a File Plans (Adopted 4/4/80) A., B.1,. and D. only (Adopted 10/23/78) Written Permit Pursuant to Regulation II Rule 708.2 Content of Stationary Source Rule 603 Emergency Episode Plans (Adopted 12/13/96) Curtailment Plans (Adopted 4/4/80) (Adopted 6/15/81) Rule 220 Exemption—Net Increase in Rule 708.4 Procedural Requirements for Rule 702 General Conformity (Adopted 10/ Emissions (Adopted 8/7/81) Plans (Adopted 7/11/80) 20/94) Rule 221 Plans (Adopted 1/4/85) Rule 709 First Stage Episode Actions Rule 801 New Source Review (Adopted 4/ Rule 301 Permit Fees (Adopted 5/9/97) (Adopted 7/11/80) 17/97) except (e)(6) and Table IV Rule 710 Second Stage Episode Actions Rule 802 Nonattainment Review (Adopted Rule 304 Equipment, Materials, and (Adopted 7/11/80) 4/17/97) Ambient Air Analyses (Adopted 5/9/97) Rule 711 Third Stage Episode Actions Rule 803 Prevention of Significant Rule 304.1 Analyses Fees (Adopted 5/9/97) (Adopted 7/11/80) Deterioration (Adopted 4/17/97) Rule 305 Fees for Acid Deposition Rule 712 Sulfate Episode Actions (Adopted Rule 804 Emission Offsets (Adopted 4/17/ (Adopted 10/4/91) 7/11/80) 97) Rule 306 Plan Fees (Adopted 5/9/97) Rule 715 Burning of Fossil Fuel on Episode Rule 805 Air Quality Impact Analysis and Rule 309 Fees for Regulation XVI Plans Days (Adopted 8/24/77) Modeling (Adopted 4/17/97) (Adopted 5/9/97) Regulation IX—New Source Performance Rule 808 New Source Review for Major Rule 401 Visible Emissions (Adopted 4/7/ Standards (Adopted 1/9/98) Sources of Hazardous Air Pollutants 89) Rule 1106 Marine Coatings Operations (Adopted 5/20/99) (Adopted 1/13/95) Rule 403 Fugitive Dust (Adopted 2/14/97) Rule 1301 Part 70 Operating Permits— Rule 1107 Coating of Metal Parts and Rule 404 Particulate Matter—Concentration General Information (Adopted 4/17/97) Products (Adopted 3/8/96) (Adopted 2/7/86) Rule 1302 Part 70 Operating Permits— Rule 1109 Emissions of Oxides of Nitrogen Rule 405 Solid Particulate Matter—Weight Permit Application (Adopted 11/09/93) for Boilers and Process Heaters in (Adopted 2/7/86) Rule 1303 Part 70 Operating Permits— Petroleum Refineries (Adopted 8/5/88) Permits (Adopted 11/09/93) Rule 407 Liquid and Gaseous Air Rule 1110 Emissions from Stationary Rule 1304 Part 70 Operating Permits— Contaminants (Adopted 4/2/82) Internal Combustion Engines Issuance, Renewal, Modification and Rule 408 Circumvention (Adopted 5/7/76) (Demonstration) (Adopted 11/14/97) Reopening (Adopted 11/09/93) Rule 409 Combustion Contaminants Rule 1110.1 Emissions from Stationary Rule 1305 Part 70 Operating Permits— (Adopted 8/7/81) Internal Combustion Engines (Adopted 10/ Enforcement (Adopted 11/09/93) Rule 429 Start-Up and Shutdown 4/85) Provisions for Oxides of Nitrogen (Adopted (7) The following requirements are Rule 1110.2 Emissions from Gaseous- and 12/21/90) contained in South Coast Air Quality Liquid-Fueled Internal Combustion Rule 430 Breakdown Provisions, (a) and (e) Management District Requirements Engines (Adopted 11/14/97) Applicable to OCS Sources (Part I, II and III), only (Adopted 7/12/96) Rule 1113 Architectural Coatings (Adopted February 2000: Rule 431.1 Sulfur Content of Gaseous Fuels 11/8/96) (Adopted 11/17/95) Rule 1116.1 Lightering Vessel Operations- Rule 102 Definition of Terms (Adopted 6/ Rule 431.2 Sulfur Content of Liquid Fuels 13/97) Sulfur Content of Bunker Fuel (Adopted (Adopted 5/4/90) 10/20/78) Rule 103 Definition of Geographical Areas Rule 431.3 Sulfur Content of Fossil Fuels (Adopted 1/9/76) Rule 1121 Control of Nitrogen Oxides from (Adopted 5/7/76) Rule 104 Reporting of Source Test Data and Residential-Type Natural Gas-Fired Water Rule 441 Research Operations (Adopted 5/ Analyses (Adopted 1/9/76) Heaters (Adopted 3/10/95) 7/76) Rule 108 Alternative Emission Control Rule 1122 Solvent Degreasers (Adopted 7/ Rule 442 Usage of Solvents (Adopted 3/5/ Plans (Adopted 4/6/90) 11/97) Rule 109 Recordkeeping for Volatile 82) Rule 1123 Refinery Process Turnarounds Organic Compound Emissions (Adopted 3/ Rule 444 Open Fires (Adopted 10/2/87) (Adopted 12/7/90) 6/92) Rule 463 Organic Liquid Storage (Adopted Rule 1129 Aerosol Coatings (rescinded 3/8/ Rule 118 Emergencies (Adopted 12/7/95) 3/11/94) 96) Rule 201 Permit to Construct (Adopted 1/5/ Rule 465 Vacuum Producing Devices or Rule 1134 Emissions of Oxides of Nitrogen 90) Systems (Adopted 11/1/91) from Stationary Gas Turbines (Adopted 8/ Rule 201.1 Permit Conditions in Federally Rule 468 Sulfur Recovery Units (Adopted 8/97) Issued Permits to Construct (Adopted 1/5/ 10/8/76) Rule 1136 Wood Products Coatings 90) Rule 473 Disposal of Solid and Liquid (Adopted 6/14/96) Rule 202 Temporary Permit to Operate Wastes (Adopted 5/7/76) Rule 1140 Abrasive Blasting (Adopted 8/2/ (Adopted 5/7/76) Rule 474 Fuel Burning Equipment-Oxides 85) Rule 203 Permit to Operate (Adopted 1/5/ of Nitrogen (Adopted 12/4/81) Rule 1142 Marine Tank Vessel Operations 90) Rule 475 Electric Power Generating (Adopted 7/19/91) Rule 204 Permit Conditions (Adopted 3/6/ Equipment (Adopted 8/7/78) Rule 1146 Emissions of Oxides of Nitrogen 92) Rule 476 Steam Generating Equipment from Industrial, Institutional, and Rule 205 Expiration of Permits to Construct (Adopted 10/8/76) Commercial Boilers, Steam Generators, and (Adopted 1/5/90) Rule 480 Natural Gas Fired Control Devices Process Heaters (Adopted 5/13/94) Rule 206 Posting of Permit to Operate (Adopted 10/7/77); Addendum to Rule 1146.1 Emission of Oxides of Nitrogen (Adopted 1/5/90) Regulation IV (Effective 1977) from Small Industrial, Institutional, and Rule 207 Altering or Falsifying of Permit Rule 518 Variance Procedures for Title V Commercial Boilers, Steam Generators, and (Adopted 1/9/76) Facilities (Adopted 8/11/95) Process Heaters (Adopted 5/13/94)
VerDate 20
Rule 1146.2 Emissions of Oxides of Rule 2100 Registration of Portable Rule 33.2 Part 70 Permits—Application Nitrogen from Large Water Heaters and Equipment (Adopted 7/11/97) Contents (Adopted 10/12/93) Small Boilers (Adopted 1/9/98) XXX Title V Permits Rule 33.3 Part 70 Permits—Permit Content Rule 1148 Thermally Enhanced Oil Rule 3000 General (Adopted 11/14/97) (Adopted 10/12/93) Recovery Wells (Adopted 11/5/82) Rule 3001 Applicability (Adopted 11/14/ Rule 33.4 Part 70 Permits—Operational Rule 1149 Storage Tank Degassing 97) Flexibility (Adopted 10/12/93) (Adopted 7/14/95) Rule 3002 Requirements (Adopted 11/14/ Rule 33.5 Part 70 Permits—Time frames for Rule 1168 Adhesive Applications (Adopted 97) Applications, Review and Issuance 2/13/98) Rule 3003 Applications (Adopted 11/14/97) (Adopted 10/12/93) Rule 1171 Solvent Cleaning Operations Rule 3004 Permit Types and Content Rule 33.6 Part 70 Permits—Permit Term (Adopted 9/13/96) (Adopted 11/14/97) and Permit Reissuance (Adopted 10/12/93) Rule 1173 Fugitive Emissions of Volatile Rule 3005 Permit Revisions (Adopted 11/ Rule 33.7 Part 70 Permits—Notification Organic Compounds (Adopted 5/13/94) 14/97) (Adopted 10/12/93) Rule 1176 VOC Emissions from Wastewater Rule 3006 Public Participation (Adopted Rule 33.8 Part 70 Permits—Reopening of Systems (Adopted 9/13/96) 11/14/97) Permits (Adopted 10/12/93) Rule 1301 General (Adopted 12/7/95) Rule 3007 Effect of Permit (Adopted 10/8/ Rule 33.9 Part 70 Permits—Compliance Rule 1302 Definitions (Adopted 12/7/95) 93) Provisions (Adopted 10/12/93) Rule 1303 Requirements (Adopted 5/10/96) XXXI Acid Rain Permit Program (Adopted Rule 33.10 Part 70 Permits—General Part 70 Rule 1304 Exemptions (Adopted 6/14/96) 2/10/95) Permits (Adopted 10/12/93) Rule 1306 Emission Calculations (Adopted (8) The following requirements are Rule 34 Acid Deposition Control (Adopted 6/14/96) contained in Ventura County Air Pollution 3/14/95) Rule 1313 Permits to Operate (Adopted 12/ Control District Requirements Applicable to Rule 35 Elective Emission Limits (Adopted 7/95) OCS Sources, February 2000: 11/12/96) Rule 1403 Asbestos Emissions from Rule 36 New Source Review—Hazardous Demolition/Renovation Activities Rule 2 Definitions (Adopted 11/10/98) Rule 5 Effective Date (Adopted 5/23/72) Air Pollutants (Adopted 10/6/98) (Adopted 4/8/94) Rule 42 Permit Fees (Adopted 6/22/99) Rule 1605 Credits for the Voluntary Repair Rule 6 Severability (Adopted 11/21/78) Rule 7 Zone Boundaries (Adopted 6/14/77) Rule 44 Exemption Evaluation Fee of On-Road Vehicles Identified Through (Adopted 9/10/96) Remote Sensing Devices (Adopted 10/11/ Rule 10 Permits Required (Adopted 6/13/ 95) Rule 45 Plan Fees (Adopted 6/19/90) 96) Rule 45.2 Asbestos Removal Fees (Adopted Rule 1610 Old-Vehicle Scrapping (Adopted Rule 11 Definition for Regulation II 8/4/92) 5/9/97) (Adopted 6/13/95) Rule 47 Source Test, Emission Monitor, and Rule 1612 Credits for Clean On-Road Rule 12 Application for Permits (Adopted Call-Back Fees (Adopted 6/22/99) Vehicles (Adopted 9/8/95) 6/13/95) Rule 50 Opacity (Adopted 2/20/79) Rule 1620 Credits for Clean Off-Road Rule 13 Action on Applications for an Rule 52 Particulate Matter-Concentration Mobile Equipment (Adopted 9/8/95) Authority to Construct (Adopted 6/13/95) Rule 1701 General (Adopted 1/6/89) Rule 14 Action on Applications for a Permit (Adopted 5/23/72) Rule 1702 Definitions (Adopted 1/6/89) to Operate (Adopted 6/13/95) Rule 53 Particulate Matter-Process Weight Rule 1703 PSD Analysis (Adopted 10/7/88) Rule 15.1 Sampling and Testing Facilities (Adopted 7/18/72) Rule 1704 Exemptions (Adopted 1/6/89) (Adopted 10/12/93) Rule 54 Sulfur Compounds (Adopted 6/14/ Rule 1706 Emission Calculations (Adopted Rule 16 BACT Certification (Adopted 6/13/ 94) 1/6/89) 95) Rule 56 Open Fires (Adopted 3/29/94) Rule 1713 Source Obligation (Adopted 10/ Rule 19 Posting of Permits (Adopted 5/23/ Rule 57 Combustion Contaminants— 7/88) 72) Specific (Adopted 6/14/77) Regulation XVII Appendix (effective 1977) Rule 20 Transfer of Permit (Adopted 5/23/ Rule 60 New Non-Mobile Equipment-Sulfur Rule 1901 General Conformity (Adopted 9/ 72) Dioxide, Nitrogen Oxides, and Particulate 9/94) Rule 23 Exemptions from Permits (Adopted Matter (Adopted 7/8/72) Rule 2000 General (Adopted 4/11/97) 7/9/96) Rule 62.7 Asbestos—Demolition and Rule 2001 Applicability (Adopted 2/14/97) Rule 24 Source Recordkeeping, Reporting, Renovation (Adopted 6/16/92) Rule 2002 Allocations for Oxides of and Emission Statements (Adopted 9/15/ Rule 63 Separation and Combination of Emissions (Adopted 11/21/78) Nitrogen (NOX) and Oxides of Sulfur (Sox) 92) Emissions (Adopted 2/14/97) Rule 26 New Source Review (Adopted 10/ Rule 64 Sulfur Content of Fuels (Adopted Rule 2004 Requirements (Adopted 7/12/96) 22/91) 4/13/99) except (l) Rule 26.1 New Source Review—Definitions Rule 67 Vacuum Producing Devices Rule 2005 New Source Review for (Adopted 1/13/98) (Adopted 7/5/83) RECLAIM (Adopted 2/14/97) except (i) Rule 26.2 New Source Review— Rule 68 Carbon Monoxide (Adopted 6/14/ Rule 2006 Permits (Adopted 12/7/95) Requirements (Adopted 1/13/98) 77) Rule 2007 Trading Requirements (Adopted Rule 26.3 New Source Review—Exemptions Rule 71 Crude Oil and Reactive Organic 12/7/95) (Adopted 1/13/98) Compound Liquids (Adopted 12/13/94) Rule 2008 Mobile Source Credits (Adopted Rule 26.6 New Source Review— Rule 71.1 Crude Oil Production and 10/15/93) Calculations (Adopted 1/13/98) Separation (Adopted 6/16/92) Rule 2010 Administrative Remedies and Rule 26.8 New Source Review—Permit To Rule 71.2 Storage of Reactive Organic Sanctions (Adopted 10/15/93) Operate (Adopted 10/22/91) Compound Liquids (Adopted 9/26/89) Rule 2011 Requirements for Monitoring, Rule 26.10 New Source Review—PSD Rule 71.3 Transfer of Reactive Organic Reporting, and Recordkeeping for Oxides (Adopted 1/13/98) Compound Liquids (Adopted 6/16/92) of Sulfur (SOX) Emissions (Adopted 4/11/ Rule 28 Revocation of Permits (Adopted 7/ Rule 71.4 Petroleum Sumps, Pits, Ponds, 97) 18/72) and Well Cellars (Adopted 6/8/93) Appendix A Volume IV—(Protocol for Rule 29 Conditions on Permits (Adopted Rule 71.5 Glycol Dehydrators (Adopted 12/ oxides of sulfur) (Adopted 3/10/95) 10/22/91) 13/94) Rule 2012 Requirements for Monitoring, Rule 30 Permit Renewal (Adopted 5/30/89) Rule 72 New Source Performance Standards Reporting, and Recordkeeping for Oxides Rule 32 Breakdown Conditions: Emergency (NSPS) (Adopted 9/10/96) of Nitrogen (NOX) Emissions (Adopted 4/ Variances, A., B.1., and D. only. (Adopted Rule 74 Specific Source Standards 11/97) 2/20/79) (Adopted 7/6/76) Appendix A Volume V—(Protocol for Rule 33 Part 70 Permits—General (Adopted Rule 74.1 Abrasive Blasting (Adopted 11/ oxides of nitrogen) (Adopted 3/10/95) 10/12/93) 12/91) Rule 2015 Backstop Provisions (Adopted 2/ Rule 33.1 Part 70 Permits—Definitions Rule 74.2 Architectural Coatings (Adopted 14/97) except (B)(1)(G) and (b)(3)(B) (Adopted 10/12/93) 08/11/92)
VerDate 20
Rule 74.6 Surface Cleaning and Degreasing Rule 220 General Conformity (Adopted 5/9/ carryover adjustments to the 12-month (Adopted 11/10/98) 95) directed catch quota for the North Rule 74.6.1 Cold Cleaning Operations * * * * * Atlantic swordfish fishery must to be (Adopted 7/9/96) [FR Doc. 00–7327 Filed 3–23–00; 8:45 am] apportioned equally between the two Rule 74.6.2 Batch Loaded Vapor Degreasing BILLING CODE 6560±50±P semiannual periods. Under 50 CFR Operations (Adopted 7/9/96) 635.27(c)(2)(ii), incidental catch for Rule 74.7 Fugitive Emissions of Reactive North Atlantic swordfish may be Organic Compounds at Petroleum DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE reallocated to the directed catch quota if Refineries and Chemical Plants (Adopted not expected to be taken in the 10/10/95) incidental fishery before the end of the Rule 74.8 Refinery Vacuum Producing National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration fishing year. Systems, Waste-water Separators and There is no ICCAT recommendation Process Turnarounds (Adopted 7/5/83) to modify the South Atlantic swordfish Rule 74.9 Stationary Internal Combustion 50 CFR Part 635 quota based on over or under harvests Engines (Adopted 12/21/93) [I.D. 102299B] Rule 74.10 Components at Crude Oil in prior years. Therefore, the annual quota for South Atlantic swordfish Production Facilities and Natural Gas Atlantic Highly Migratory Species; remains at the current quota level of 289 Production and Processing Facilities Swordfish Quota Adjustment (Adopted 3/10/98) mt dw. There is no incidental catch Rule 74.11 Natural Gas-Fired Residential AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries quota in the South Atlantic swordfish Water Heaters-Control of NOX (Adopted 4/ Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and fishery. 9/85) Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Adjusted Catch Quotas Rule 74.11.1 Large Water Heaters and Small Commerce. The adjusted annual directed fishery Boilers (Adopted 9/14/99) ACTION: Adjustment of annual catch quota for North Atlantic swordfish for Rule 74.12 Surface Coating of Metal Parts quotas. and Products (Adopted 9/10/96) the 1998 fishing year was 2,392.3 mt Rule 74.15 Boilers, Steam Generators and SUMMARY: NMFS adjusts the June 1, dw. The adjusted quota for incidental Process Heaters (5MM BTUs and greater) 1999, through May 31, 2000, directed harvests of North Atlantic swordfish for (Adopted 11/8/94) category quota for North Atlantic the 1998 fishing year was 314.6 mt dw Rule 74.15.1 Boilers, Steam Generators and swordfish to account for underharvest (64 FR 4059, January 27, 1999). Process Heaters (1–5MM BTUs) (Adopted from the prior fishing year. The directed The initial annual directed fishery 6/13/95) category annual quota is adjusted to quota for North Atlantic swordfish for Rule 74.16 Oil Field Drilling Operations 2,427.38 metric tons dressed weight (mt the 1999 fishing year (June 1, 1999, (Adopted 1/8/91) dw). The 1999–2000 season for North through May 31, 2000) was previously Rule 74.20 Adhesives and Sealants Atlantic swordfish incidental catch established at 2033.2 mt dw and is (Adopted 1/14/97) category quota remains at 300 mt dw. divided into two equal semiannual Rule 74.23 Stationary Gas Turbines quotas of 1016.6 mt dw, one for June 1 (Adopted 10/10/95) The annual directed catch category quota for the South Atlantic swordfish through November 30, 1999, and the Rule 74.24 Marine Coating Operations other for December 1, 1999, through (Adopted 9/10/96) fishery remains at 289 mt dw. This action is required under management May 31 of 2000 (63 FR 31710, June 10, Rule 74.24.1 Pleasure Craft Coating and 1998). The initial catch quota for Commercial Boatyard Operations (Adopted measures adopted in the Fishery incidental harvests of North Atlantic 11/10/98) Management Plan for Atlantic Tunas, Rule 74.26 Crude Oil Storage Tank Swordfish, and Sharks (HMS FMP), and swordfish for the 1999 fishing year is Degassing Operations (Adopted 11/8/94) is consistent with the criteria for 300 mt dw. Rule 74.27 Gasoline and ROC Liquid swordfish quota transfers established at The harvest of North Atlantic Storage Tank Degassing Operations 50 CFR part 635. swordfish in the directed catch category for the 1998 fishing year is estimated to (Adopted 11/8/94) DATES: Effective March 21, 2000. Rule 74.28 Asphalt Roofing Operations be 2,308.3 mt dw, or 84.0 mt dw below FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: (Adopted 5/10/94) the directed catch quota of 2,392.3 mt Rule 74.30 Wood Products Coatings Steve Meyers or Jill Stevenson at 301– dw. Additionally, the harvest of North (Adopted 9/10/96) 713–2347; Fax: 301–713–1917. Atlantic swordfish in the incidental Rule 75 Circumvention (Adopted 11/27/78) SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Analysis catch category for the 1998 fishing year Rule 76 Federally Enforceable Limits on of reported landings for the directed was 4.4 mt dw, or 310.2 mt dw below Potential to Emit (Adopted 10/10/95) North Atlantic swordfish fishery, the the incidental catch quota of 314.6 mt Rule 100 Analytical Methods (Adopted 7/ North Atlantic incidental swordfish dw. 18/72) fishery, and the South Atlantic directed The 84.0 mt dw underage from the Rule 101 Sampling and Testing Facilities swordfish fishery indicate that the directed catch quota and the 310.2 mt (Adopted 5/23/72) quotas for those fisheries were not dw underage from the incidental catch Rule 102 Source Tests (Adopted 11/21/78) exceeded during the 1998 fishing year quota for the 1998 fishing year are Rule 103 Continuous Monitoring Systems (June 1, 1998, through May 31, 1999). added to the directed catch quota for the (Adopted 2/9/99) Under 50 CFR 635.27(c)(3)(ii), if total 1999 fishing year, for a revised North Rule 154 Stage 1 Episode Actions (Adopted landings are above or below the specific Atlantic swordfish directed catch quota 9/17/91) Rule 155 Stage 2 Episode Actions (Adopted North Atlantic swordfish annual quotas, of 2,427.4 mt dw. This adjusted annual 9/17/91) they must be subtracted from, or added quota is divided into 2 equal Rule 156 Stage 3 Episode Actions (Adopted to, the following year’s quota for that semiannual catch quotas of 1,213.7 mt 9/17/91) management area, provided quota dw, one for June 1, 1999, through Rule 158 Source Abatement Plans (Adopted modifications are consistent with November 30, 1999, and the other for 9/17/91) applicable International Commission for December 1, 1999, through May 31, Rule 159 Traffic Abatement Procedures the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas 2000. NMFS is currently examining (Adopted 9/17/91) (ICCAT) recommendations. Further, any landings reports from the first semi-
VerDate 20
VerDate 20
Proposed Rules Federal Register Vol. 65, No. 58
Friday, March 24, 2000
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER of Executive Order 13106 of December Section 5304(g) of title 5, United contains notices to the public of the proposed 7, 1998, delegated the President’s States Code, provides that locality rates issuance of rules and regulations. The authority under section 5304(g) of title approved for certain categories of non- purpose of these notices is to give interested 5, United States Code, to determine GS employees specified in 5 U.S.C. persons an opportunity to participate in the 5304(h)(1)(A)–(E), including members of rule making prior to the adoption of the final such limitations to the President’s Pay rules. Agent. To provide consistent treatment the SES and ALJs, are capped at the rate between General Schedule (GS) and for level III of the Executive Schedule. non-GS employees receiving locality Section 5304(g) provides that a level III OFFICE OF PERSONNEL payments, OPM proposes to provide locality pay cap applies to ‘‘any MANAGEMENT that (1) non-GS positions whose positions under subsection (h)(1)(F) maximum scheduled annual rate of pay which the President may determine.’’ 5 CFR Part 531 is less than or equal to the maximum Subsection (h)(1)(F) is a catch-all RIN 3206±AI81 payable scheduled annual rate of pay for category of non-GS positions to which GS–15 will be subject to a locality pay locality pay may be extended. This Locality-Based Comparability cap equal to the rate for level IV of the catch-all category includes Executive Payments Executive Schedule, and (2) non-GS agency positions not otherwise listed in positions whose maximum scheduled the law whose rates of basic pay are AGENCY: Office of Personnel annual rate of pay exceeds the limited to not more than the rate for Management. maximum payable scheduled annual level IV of the Executive Schedule. If ACTION: Proposed rule with request for rate of pay for GS–15, but is not more the President determines that a level III comments. than the rate for level IV of the cap does not apply to a particular category of non-GS positions, the SUMMARY: The Office of Personnel Executive Schedule, will be subject to a Management is issuing proposed locality pay cap equal to the rate for locality pay cap for those positions is regulations to clarify and redefine the level III of the Executive Schedule. (See automatically set at level IV of the limitations on locality rates of pay for the definition of scheduled annual rate Executive Schedule (i.e., the locality categories of non-General Schedule of pay in 5 CFR 531.602, as revised in pay cap for GS employees). (See 5 employees approved by the President’s these proposed regulations.) U.S.C. 5304(g)(1).) Pay Agent to receive locality-based Since the inception of locality pay in Background comparability payments. This proposed January 1994, the President’s Pay Agent has approved locality pay for a number change was prompted by a recent Locality-based comparability of non-GS categories of positions under Executive order that delegated the payments are authorized under 5 U.S.C. its delegated authority. However, President’s authority to establish such 5304. By law, locality payments Executive Order 12883 did not delegate limitations to the President’s Pay Agent. automatically apply to General The proposed regulations would ensure to the Pay Agent the President’s Schedule employees. The maximum authority to determine whether the level that all employees receiving locality rate of basic pay (excluding locality payments are treated consistently. IV or level III locality pay cap should payments) for GS employees is the rate apply to any group of non-GS positions DATES: Comments must be received on for GS–15, step 10, subject to a cap or before May 23, 2000. under 5 U.S.C. 5304(h)(1)(F) to whom linked to the rate of pay for level V of locality pay is extended. Locality pay ADDRESSES: Comments may be sent or the Executive Schedule. (See 5 U.S.C. extension decisions for these positions delivered to Donald J. Winstead, 5303(f).) GS rates of basic pay adjusted were interpreted as automatically Assistant Director for Compensation by locality payments are capped at the carrying a level III cap. (See 5 CFR Administration, Workforce rate of pay for level IV of the Executive 531.604(c).) Section 8 of Executive Compensation and Performance Service, Schedule. (See 5 U.S.C. 5304(g)(1).) Order 13106 of December 7, 1998, has Office of Personnel Management, Room The locality pay law provides that the now delegated to the Pay Agent the 7H31, 1900 E Street NW., Washington, President may extend locality payments President’s authority to determine when DC 20415–8200 (FAX: (202) 606–0824 to various groups outside the GS pay the level III cap should apply to such or email: [email protected]). system, such as members of the Senior non-GS employees. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Executive Service (SES), administrative Proposed Regulations Vincent Donahue, (202) 606–2858, FAX: law judges (ALJs), and other groups for (202) 606–0824, or email: which basic pay is limited to no more The proposed regulations provide a [email protected]. than the rate of pay for level IV of the rule for determining the locality pay cap SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Office Executive Schedule. (See 5 U.S.C. for non-GS positions for which the of Personnel Management (OPM) 5304(h).) Executive Order 12883 of President’s Pay Agent approves the proposes to revise the locality pay November 29, 1993, provided that the extension of locality payments. We regulations in subpart F of part 531 of President’s Pay Agent (the Secretary of propose to amend 5 CFR 531.604 to title 5, Code of Federal Regulations, to Labor and the Directors of the Office of clarify that a locality rate of pay may not clarify and redefine the limitations on Management and Budget and the Office exceed the rate for level III of the locality rates of pay for categories of of Personnel Management) may act for Executive Schedule for categories of non-General Schedule employees the President in exercising the authority positions specified in 5 U.S.C. approved by the President’s Pay Agent to extend locality payments to such 5304(h)(1)(A)–(E) (e.g., members of the to receive locality payments. Section 8 non-GS groups. SES and ALJs). The proposed revision of
VerDate 20
§ 531.604 also provides that, for consultants appointed under 5 U.S.C. Subpart C also issued under 5 U.S.C. 5304, categories of non-GS employees under 5 3109 may not exceed the daily rate for 5305, and 5553; sections 302 and 404 of U.S.C. 5304(h)(1)(F), locality rates of GS–15, step 10 (excluding locality pay FEPCA, Pub. L. 101–509, 104 Stat. 1462 and pay may not exceed (1) the rate for level or any other additional pay). (See 5 CFR 1466; and section 3(7) of Pub. L. 102–378, 106 Stat. 1356; IV of the Executive Schedule, if the 304.105.) Subpart D also issued under 5 U.S.C. maximum scheduled annual rate of pay The proposed regulations also clarify 5335(g) and 7701(b)(2); for such positions is less than or equal the definition of employee in § 531.602 Subpart E also issued under 5 U.S.C. 5336; to the maximum payable scheduled to include positions in the Federal Subpart F also issued under 5 U.S.C. 5304, annual rate of pay for GS–15, or (2) the Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and Drug 5305(g)(1), and 5553; E.O. 12883, 58 FR rate for level III of the Executive Enforcement Administration (DEA) SES 63281, 3 CFR, 1993 Comp., p. 682; and E.O. Schedule, if the maximum scheduled under 5 U.S.C. 5304(h)(1)(C) and other 13106, 63 FR 68151, 3 CFR, 1998 Comp., p. annual rate of pay for such positions non-GS employee categories under 224. § 5304(h)(1)(F) for which the President’s Subpart G also issued under 5 U.S.C. 5304, exceeds the maximum payable 5305, and 5553; section 302 of the Federal scheduled annual rate of pay for GS–15, Pay Agent has authorized locality Employees Pay Comparability Act of 1990 but is not more than the rate for level payments. The regulations also amend (FEPCA), Pub. L. 101–509, 104 Stat. 1462; IV of the Executive Schedule. (See the paragraph (4) in the definition of and E.O. 12786, 56 FR 67453, 3 CFR, 1991 definition of scheduled annual rate of scheduled annual rate of pay in Comp., p. 376. pay in 5 CFR 531.602, as revised in § 531.602 to include the rates of basic these proposed regulations.) pay for employees in the FBI and DEA Subpart FÐLocality-Based This proposed rule would fulfill the SES and other categories of non-GS Comparability Payments original intent of the locality pay law by positions for which the Pay Agent has 2. In § 531.602, paragraph (2) of the not automatically providing a level III authorized locality pay. The proposed definition of employee and paragraph cap on locality payments for all groups regulations clarify that the scheduled (4) of the definition of scheduled annual of non-GS employees. This change annual rate of pay for such employees rate of pay are revised to read as would also provide for more consistent must exclude any locality-based pay follows: and equitable treatment of GS and non- adjustments, special basic pay GS employees receiving locality adjustments analogous to special salary § 531.602 Definitions payments. For example, non-GS rates established under 5 U.S.C. 5305, or * * * * * employees with a maximum scheduled other additional pay of any kind. Employee * * * annual rate of pay that is no higher than This rule has been reviewed and (2) An employee in a category of the rate of basic pay for GS–15, step 10, approved by the President’s Pay Agent positions described in 5 U.S.C. would have the same locality pay cap as (the Secretary of Labor and the Directors 5304(h)(1)(A)–(F) for which the GS employees. of the Office of Management and Budget President (or designee) has authorized The proposed regulations include pay and the Office of Personnel locality-based comparability payments protection for any employee who Management). under 5 U.S.C. 5304(h)(2) and whose otherwise would suffer a reduction in E.O. 12866, Regulatory Review official duty station is located in a his or her locality rate of pay under the locality pay area. proposed locality pay cap provisions. This rule has been reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget in * * * * * Although no employee would suffer an Scheduled annual rate of pay *** accordance with Executive Order 12866. immediate reduction in pay, it is (4) For an employee in a category of possible that the locality pay cap for a Regulatory Flexibility Act positions described in 5 U.S.C. group of non-GS employees could be I certify that these regulations would 5304(h)(1)(A)–(F) for which the reduced from level III to level IV of the President (or designee) has authorized Executive Schedule as GS rates of basic not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities locality-based comparability payments pay increase. This could occur if the under 5 U.S.C. 5304(h)(2), the rate of rate of basic pay for GS–15, step 10, because they would apply only to Federal agencies and employees. basic pay fixed by law or administrative becomes equal to or exceeds the action, exclusive of any locality-based maximum scheduled annual rate of pay List of Subjects in 5 CFR Part 531 adjustments (including adjustments for a non-GS group. To prevent Government employees, Law equivalent to local special rate reductions in pay that would otherwise enforcement officers, Wages. adjustments under 5 U.S.C. 5305) or occur, the regulations cap an affected other additional pay of any kind. employee’s locality rate at the higher of Office of Personnel Management. 3. In § 531.604, paragraph (c) is (1) his or her locality rate on the day revised and a new paragraph (d) is Janice R. Lachance, before the scheduled annual rate of pay added to read as follows: for GS–15, step 10, becomes equal to or Director. exceeds the maximum scheduled Accordingly, OPM is proposing to § 531.604 Determining locality rates of annual rate of pay for the group of non- amend part 531 of title 5 of the Code of pay. GS employees or (2) the rate for level IV Federal Regulations as follows: * * * * * of the Executive Schedule. This means (c)(1) Locality rates of pay approved that the employee’s locality rate would PART 531ÐPAY UNDER THE by the President (or designee) for be frozen until it is exceeded by the rate GENERAL SCHEDULE employees in a category of positions for level IV of the Executive Schedule. 1. The authority citation for part 531 described in 5 U.S.C. 5304(h)(1)(A)–(E) The proposed regulations exclude is revised to read as follows: may not exceed the rate for level III of experts and consultants appointed the Executive Schedule. under 5 U.S.C. 3109 from the locality Authority: 5 U.S.C. 5115, 5307, and 5338; (2) Locality rates of pay approved by sec. 4 of Pub. L. 103–89, 107 Stat. 981; and pay limitations. Unless otherwise E.O. 12748, 56 FR 4521, 3 CFR, 1991 Comp., the President (or designee) for authorized by law, the aggregate pay p. 316; employees in a category of positions (including basic pay, locality pay, and Subpart B also issued under 5 U.S.C. described in 5 U.S.C. 5304(h)(1)(F) may premium pay) for experts and 5303(g), 5333, 5334(a), and 7701(b)(2); not exceed—
VerDate 20
(i) The rate for level IV of the 1, Regulatory Analysis and modified accredited States and zones, Executive Schedule, when the Development, PPD, APHIS, Suite 3C03, § 77.28(a) and (b) for accreditation maximum scheduled annual rate of pay 4700 River Road, Unit 118, Riverdale, preparatory States and zones, and (excluding any retained rate) for such MD 20737–1238. § 77.30(a) and (b) for nonaccredited positions is less than or equal to the Please state that your comment refers States and zones. As set forth in the maximum payable scheduled annual to Docket No. 99–038–1. proposed rule, all States and zones are rate of pay for GS–15; or You may read any comments that we classified as either modified accredited (ii) The rate for level III of the receive on Docket No. 99–038–1 in our or accreditation preparatory, and that is Executive Schedule, when the reading room. The reading room is not correct. As explained in the maximum scheduled annual rate of pay located in room 1141 of the USDA SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of (excluding any retained rate) for such South Building, 14th Street and the proposed rule, only some States and positions exceeds the maximum payable Independence Avenue, SW., zones should be classified as modified scheduled annual rate of pay for GS–15, Washington, DC. Normal reading room accredited or accreditation preparatory but is not more than the rate for level hours are 8 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday for captive cervids. The remainder IV of the Executive Schedule. through Friday, except holidays. To be should be classified as accredited-free or (3) If application of paragraph (c)(2) of sure someone is there to help you, modified accredited advanced. this section would otherwise reduce an please call (202) 690–2817 before This document corrects proposed employee’s existing locality rate of pay, coming. §§ 77.10(b), 77.22(a) and (b), 77.24(a), the employee’s locality rate of pay will APHIS documents published in the 77.26(a) and (b), and 77.28(a) as follows be capped at the higher of— Federal Register, and related so that they are consistent with the (i) The amount of his or her locality information, including the names of explanations in the SUPPLEMENTARY rate of pay on the day before paragraph organizations and individuals who have INFORMATION section of the proposed (c)(2) of this section is applied, or commented on APHIS dockets, are rule. (ii) The rate for level IV of the available on the Internet at http:// Executive Schedule. www.aphis.usda.gov/ppd/rad/ PART 77Ð[CORRECTED] (d) Paragraph (c) of this section does webrepor.html. 1. On page 11928, column 1, not apply to experts and consultants FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. § 77.10(b) is corrected to read as follows: appointed under 5 U.S.C. 3109 if the Joseph Van Tiem, Senior Staff pay for those experts and consultants is Veterinarian, VS, APHIS, USDA, 4700 § 77.10 Interstate movement from modified limited to the highest rate payable under River Road Unit 43, Riverdale, MD accredited advanced States and zones. 5 U.S.C. 5332 (i.e., the unadjusted 20737–1231; (301) 734–7716. * * * * * maximum GS–15 rate). Pay limitations SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: We for such experts and consultants must (b) Cattle or bison may be moved published in the Federal Register on interstate if they are steers or spayed be determined in accordance with March 7, 2000, (65 FR 11912–11940, § 304.105 of this chapter. heifers, or are officially identified Docket No. 99–038–1), a proposed rule sexually intact heifers moved to an [FR Doc. 00–7256 Filed 3–23–00; 8:45 am] to amend the bovine tuberculosis approved feedlot. All cattle and bison so BILLING CODE 6325±01±U regulations (9 CFR part 77). moved that are not individually There are several errors in that identified by a registration name and document. The first is in proposed number must be officially identified. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE § 77.10(b), which sets forth the * * * * * requirements for the interstate Animal and Plant Health Inspection movement of certain cattle and bison 2. On page 11931, column 3, Service from States and zones listed as modified § 77.22(a) and (b) are corrected to read accredited advanced with regard to as follows: 9 CFR Part 77 tuberculosis. It provides that if cattle or § 77.22 Accredited-free States or zones. [Docket No. 99±038±2] bison to be moved interstate from a modified accredited advanced State or (a) The following are accredited-free Tuberculosis in Cattle, Bison, Goats, zone are steers or spayed heifers, or are States: Alaska, Colorado, Hawaii, Idaho, and Captive Cervids; State and Zone officially identified sexually intact Indiana, Louisiana, Maine, Minnesota, Designations; Correction heifers to be moved to an approved Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New feedlot, the animals may be moved Hampshire, New York, North Dakota, AGENCY: Animal and Plant Health interstate without restriction. Oklahoma, Oregon, South Carolina, Inspection Service, USDA. However, as explained in the South Dakota, Texas, Utah, ACTION: Proposed rule; correction. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of Vermont,Virginia, Washington, and the proposed rule, any such animals Wyoming. SUMMARY: We are correcting an error in moved interstate, if they are not (b) The following are accredited-free a proposed rule that would amend the individually identified by a registration zones: That part of Michigan other than bovine tuberculosis regulations. This name and number, would be required to the zone described in § 77.26(b). proposed rule was published in the be officially identified. * * * * * Federal Register on March 7, 2000 (65 The other errors are in subpart C, 3. On page 11932, column 1, FR 11912–11940, Docket No. 99–038–1). ‘‘Captive Cervids,’’ in the lists of States § 77.24(a) is corrected to read as follows: DATES: We invite you to comment on the and zones with regard to tuberculosis proposed rule (Docket No. 99–038–1), as risk classifications for captive cervids. § 77.24 Modified accredited advanced corrected by this document. We will These classifications appear in States or zones. consider all comments that we receive § 77.22(a) and (b) for accredited free (a) The following are modified by April 21, 2000. States and zones, § 77.24(a) and (b) for accredited advanced States: Arizona, ADDRESSES: Please send your comment modified accredited advanced States California, Florida, Georgia, Kansas, and three copies to: Docket No. 99–038– and zones, § 77.26(a) and (b) for Kentucky, Mississippi, Missouri, New
VerDate 20
Jersey, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, broken front pylon mount bolts, proposed rule. The proposals contained Tennessee, and Wisconsin. replacement, if necessary, with new in this notice may be changed in light * * * * * bolts, and establishment of a new cyclic of the comments received. 4. On page 11932, column 3, life limit. This action would add initial Comments are specifically invited on § 77.26(a) and (b) are corrected to read and repetitive torque checks of new the overall regulatory, economic, as follows: material MP159 front pylon mount environmental, and energy aspects of bolts. In addition, this action would add the proposed rule. All comments § 77.26 Modified accredited States or initial and repetitive visual inspections submitted will be available, both before zones. of the primary mount thrust load path. and after the closing date for comments, (a) The following are modified This proposal is prompted by the in the Rules Docket for examination by accredited States: None. introduction into service of the new interested persons. A report (b) The following are modified MP159 front pylon mount bolts and the summarizing each FAA-public contact accredited zones: A zone in Michigan determination through fatigue testing concerned with the substance of this delineated by starting at the juncture of that the forward engine mount bearing proposal will be filed in the Rules State Route 55 and Interstate 75, then housings have insufficient fatigue life Docket. heading northwest and north along expectancy. The actions specified by the Commenters wishing the FAA to Interstate 75 to the Straits of Mackinac, proposed AD are intended to prevent acknowledge receipt of their comments then southeast and south along the front pylon mount bolt and primary submitted in response to this notice shoreline of Michigan to the eastern mount thrust load path failure, which must submit a self-addressed, stamped terminus of State Route 55, then west could result in engine separation from postcard on which the following along State Route 55 to Interstate 75. the aircraft. statement is made: ‘‘Comments to * * * * * DATES: Comments must be received by Docket Number 97–ANE–44.’’ The 5. On page 11933, column 2, April 24, 2000. postcard will be date stamped and returned to the commenter. § 77.28(a) is corrected to read as follows: ADDRESSES: Submit comments to the § 77.28 Accreditation preparatory States or Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Availability of NPRMs zones. New England Region, Office of the Any person may obtain a copy of this (a) The following are modified Regional Counsel, Attention: Rules NPRM by submitting a request to the accredited States: Alabama, Arkansas, Docket No. 97-ANE–44, 12 New FAA, New England Region, Office of the Connecticut, Delaware, Illinois, Iowa, England Executive Park, Burlington, MA Regional Counsel, Attention: Rules Maryland, Massachusetts, New Mexico, 01803–5299. Comments may also be Docket No. 97–ANE–44, 12 New Ohio, Puerto Rico, Rhode Island, the sent via the Internet using the following England Executive Park, Burlington, MA Virgin Islands of the United States, and address: ‘‘[email protected]’’. 01803–5299. West Virginia. Comments sent via the Internet must contain the docket number in the Discussion * * * * * subject line. Comments may be On February 6, 1998, the Federal Done in Washington, DC, this 21st day of inspected at this location between 8 Aviation Administration (FAA) issued March 2000. a.m. and 4:30 p.m., Monday through airworthiness directive AD 98–04–14, Bobby R. Acord, Friday, except Federal holidays. Amendment 39–10326 (63 FR 9730, Acting Administrator, Animal and Plant The service information referenced in February 26, 1998), applicable to Pratt & Health Inspection Service. the proposed rule may be obtained from Whitney (PW) PW4164, PW4168, and [FR Doc. 00–7445 Filed 3–23–00; 8:45 am] Pratt & Whitney, 400 Main St., East PW4168A series turbofan engines. That BILLING CODE 3410±34±U Hartford, CT 06108; telephone (860) AD requires initial and repetitive 565–8860, fax (860) 565–4503. This inspections for loose or broken front information may be examined at the pylon mount bolts, replacement, if DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FAA, New England Region, Office of the necessary, with new bolts, and Regional Counsel, 12 New England establishment of a new cyclic life limit Federal Aviation Administration Executive Park, Burlington, MA. of 11,000 cycles in service (CIS) for FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tara INCO 718 material bolts. That action 14 CFR Part 39 Goodman, Aerospace Engineer, Engine was prompted by flight testing that [Docket No. 97±ANE±44] Certification Office, FAA, Engine and revealed higher than predicted loads for Propeller Directorate, 12 New England front pylon mount bolts, resulting in RIN 2120±AA64 Executive Park, Burlington, MA 01803– decreased service life. That condition, if 5299; telephone (781) 238–7130, fax Airworthiness Directives; Pratt & not corrected, could result in front (781) 238–7199. Whitney PW4164, PW4168, and pylon mount bolt failure, which could PW4168A Series Turbofan Engines SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: result in engine separation from the aircraft. Comments Invited AGENCY: Federal Aviation Events Since the Issuance of the AD Administration, DOT. Interested persons are invited to ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking participate in the making of the Since the issuance of that AD, PW (NPRM). proposed rule by submitting such introduced a new material bolt to written data, views, or arguments as address the fatigue life shortfall of the SUMMARY: This document proposes the they may desire. Communications original INCO 718 material bolts, part supersedure of an existing airworthiness should identify the Rules Docket number (P/N) 54T670. MP159 material directive (AD), applicable to Pratt & number and be submitted to the address bolts, P/N 51U615, do not require a life Whitney PW4164, PW4168, and specified above. All communications limit. However, in a bolt-out PW4168A series turbofan engines. AD received on or before the closing date configuration, fatigue testing indicated 98–04–14 currently requires initial and for comments, specified above, will be that there was insufficient margin to repetitive torque checks for loose or considered before taking action on the meet the 8,000 cycles-in-service (CIS)
VerDate 20
VerDate 20
VerDate 20
FAA, Office of the Regional Counsel, is found. The actions would be required PART 39ÐAIRWORTHINESS Southwest Region, Attention: Rules to be accomplished in accordance with DIRECTIVES Docket No. 99–SW–82–AD, 2601 the service bulletin described 1. The authority citation for part 39 Meacham Blvd., Room 663, Fort Worth, previously. continues to read as follows: Texas 76137. The FAA estimates that 1 helicopter Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701. Discussion of U.S. registry would be affected by this The Direction Generale De L’Aviation proposed AD, that it would take § 39.13 [Amended] Civile (DGAC), which is the approximately 1 work hour per 2. Section 39.13 is amended by airworthiness authority for France, helicopter to accomplish the adding a new airworthiness directive to notified the FAA that an unsafe inspections, 80 work hours to read as follows: condition may exist on Eurocopter accomplish the shim replacements and Eurocopter France: Docket No. 99–SW–82– France Model AS332L2 helicopters. The the plate repair, if necessary, and AD. DGAC advises that interference between installation of Eurocopter France MOD Applicability: Model AS332L2 helicopters, the plate and the shims on the 0725946 and MOD 0726012, and that certificated in any category. transmission deck can cause damage, the average labor rate is $60 per work Note 1: This AD applies to each helicopter which can lead to incipient slat cracks. hour. Required parts would cost identified in the preceding applicability provision, regardless of whether it has been Eurocopter France has issued approximately $4,126 for a forward Eurocopter AS 332 Service Bulletin No. otherwise modified, altered, or repaired in shim; $4,052 for an aft shim; and the area subject to the requirements of this 05.00.54, dated July 8, 1999, which $53,022 for a plate. Based on these AD. For helicopters that have been modified, specifies ensuring that there is no figures, the total cost impact of the altered, or repaired so that the performance interference between the plate and the proposed AD on U.S. operators is of the requirements of this AD is affected, the shims on the transmission deck and estimated to be $66,060 to accomplish owner/operator must request approval for an ensuring that there are no broken slats. the inspections and all the replacements alternative method of compliance in If broken slats are found, the service accordance with paragraph (d) of this AD. and repair, if necessary, and installation bulletin specifies procedures for The request should include an assessment of of both MODs. replacing the plate. If interference is the effect of the modification, alteration, or found, it specifies procedures for The regulations proposed herein repair on the unsafe condition addressed by would not have a substantial direct this AD; and if the unsafe condition has not replacing the shims and repairing the been eliminated, the request should include plate or replacing the plate if slat effect on the States, on the relationship specific proposed actions to address it. damage is beyond repair limits. The between the national Government and Compliance: Required within 50 hours DGAC classified this service bulletin as the States, or on the distribution of time-in-service (TIS) or within 50 hours TIS mandatory and issued AD 1999–329– power and responsibilities among the after accumulating 1,000 hours TIS on the 015(A), dated August 11, 1999, to various levels of government. Therefore, transmission flexible mounting plate (plate), ensure the continued airworthiness of it is determined that this proposal whichever occurs last, unless accomplished these helicopters in France. would not have federalism implications previously. This helicopter model is under Executive Order 13132. To prevent cracking of the plate slats, manufactured in France and is type increased helicopter vibration, loss of certificated for operation in the United For the reasons discussed above, I transmission mounting integrity, and certify that this proposed regulation (1) subsequent loss of control of the helicopter, States under the provisions of section accomplish the following: 21.29 of the Federal Aviation is not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ under Executive Order 12866; (2) is not (a) Inspect for interference between the Regulations (14 CFR 21.29) and the plate, part number (P/N) 332A38–0106–00, applicable bilateral airworthiness a ‘‘significant rule’’ under the DOT the forward shim, P/N 332A22307420, and agreement. Pursuant to this bilateral Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 the aft shim (shim), P/N 332A22307020, in airworthiness agreement, the DGAC has FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and (3) if accordance with paragraph 2.B.1 of the kept the FAA informed of the situation promulgated, will not have a significant Accomplishment Instructions in Eurocopter described above. The FAA has economic impact, positive or negative, AS 332 Service Bulletin No. 05.00.54, dated examined the findings of the DGAC, on a substantial number of small entities July 8, 1999 (SB). If interference is found, replace the shims and repair the plate in reviewed all available information, and under the criteria of the Regulatory accordance with paragraph 2.B.3 of the determined that AD action is necessary Flexibility Act. A copy of the draft Accomplishment Instructions in the SB for products of this type design that are regulatory evaluation prepared for this before further flight. certificated for operation in the United action is contained in the Rules Docket. (b) Visually inspect the plate for a broken States. A copy of it may be obtained by slat. If a broken slat is found, replace the Since an unsafe condition has been contacting the Rules Docket at the plate and the shims with an airworthy plate identified that is likely to exist or location provided under the caption and shims in accordance with paragraph develop on other Eurocopter France 2.B.3 of the SB before further flight. Replace ADDRESSES. the plate with an airworthy plate if slat Model AS332L2 helicopters of the same List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39 damage beyond repair limits is found. type design registered in the United (c) Install Eurocopter France MOD 0725946 States, the proposed AD would require Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation and Eurocopter France MOD 0726012 at the inspecting for interference between the next major inspection or when the safety, Safety. plate, part number (P/N) 332A38–0106– transmission is next removed, whichever 00, the forward shim, P/N The Proposed Amendment occurs first. Installation of both MOD’s is 332A22307420, and the aft shim, P/N considered a terminating action for the 332A22307020, and replacing shims Accordingly, pursuant to the requirements of this AD. authority delegated to me by the (d) An alternative method of compliance or and repairing the plate if interference is adjustment of the compliance time that found; and inspecting the plate for Administrator, the Federal Aviation provides an acceptable level of safety may be broken slats and repairing the plate if Administration proposes to amend part used if approved by the Manager, Regulations broken slats are found or replacing the 39 of the Federal Aviation Regulations Group, Rotorcraft Directorate, FAA. plate if slat damage beyond repair limits (14 CFR part 39) as follows: Operators shall submit their requests through
VerDate 20
VerDate 20
$8,862. Based on these figures, the total UH–1A, UH–1B, UH–1E, UH–1F, UH–1H, ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION cost impact of the proposed AD on U.S. UH–1L, and UH–1P; and Southwest Florida AGENCY operators is estimated to be $709,650 to Aviation SW204, SW204HP, SW205, and replace all the masts in the fleet. SW205A–1 helicopters with a main rotor 40 CFR Part 52 mast (mast) assembly, part number (P/N) The regulations proposed herein [CA 040±0223b; FRL±6563±4] would not have a substantial direct 205–011–450–001 or –005, installed, effect on the States, on the relationship certificated in any category. Approval and Promulgation of State between the national Government and Note 1: This AD applies to each helicopter Implementation Plans; California State the States, or on the distribution of identified in the preceding applicability Implementation Plan Revision, Ventura power and responsibilities among the provision, regardless of whether it has been County Air Pollution Control District, various levels of government. Therefore, otherwise modified, altered, or repaired in Monterey Bay Unified Air Pollution it is determined that this proposal the area subject to the requirements of this Control District, and Santa Barbara would not have federalism implications AD. For helicopters that have been modified, County Air Pollution Control District under Executive Order 13132. altered, or repaired so that the performance For the reasons discussed above, I of the requirements of this AD is affected, the AGENCY: Environmental Protection certify that this proposed regulation (1) owner/operator must request approval for an Agency (EPA). is not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ alternative method of compliance in ACTION: Proposed rule. under Executive Order 12866; (2) is not accordance with paragraph (b) of this AD. SUMMARY: EPA is proposing revisions to The request should include an assessment of a ‘‘significant rule’’ under the DOT the California State Implementation the effect of the modification, alteration, or Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 Plan (SIP) which concern the control of repair on the unsafe condition addressed by FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and (3) if volatile organic compound (VOC) promulgated, will not have a significant this AD; and if the unsafe condition has not been eliminated, the request should include emissions from architectural coatings. economic impact, positive or negative, The intended effect of this action is to specific proposed actions to address it. on a substantial number of small entities regulate emissions of VOCs in under the criteria of the Regulatory Compliance: Required within 25 hours accordance with the requirements of the Flexibility Act. A copy of the draft time-in-service (TIS), unless accomplished Clean Air Act, as amended in 1990 regulatory evaluation prepared for this previously. (CAA or the Act). In the Final Rules action is contained in the Rules Docket. To prevent fatigue failure of the mast and Section of this Federal Register, the A copy of it may be obtained by subsequent loss of control of the helicopter, EPA is approving the state’s SIP contacting the Rules Docket at the accomplish the following: submittal as a direct final rule without location provided under the caption (a) Remove any mast assembly, part prior proposal because the Agency ADDRESSES. number (P/N) 204–011–450–001 or –005, views this as a noncontroversial from service. Replace with an airworthy mast List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39 revision and anticipates no adverse assembly. Neither P/N 204–011–450–001 nor comments. A detailed rationale for this Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation 204–011–450–005 are eligible for installation approval is set forth in the direct final safety, Safety. on any affected helicopter. rule. If no adverse comments are (b) An alternative method of compliance or The Proposed Amendment received, no further activity is adjustment of the compliance time that Accordingly, pursuant to the contemplated. If EPA receives adverse provides an acceptable level of safety may be comments, the direct final rule will be authority delegated to me by the used if approved by the Manager, Rotorcraft withdrawn and all public comments Administrator, the Federal Aviation Certification Office, Rotorcraft Directorate, received will be addressed in a Administration proposes to amend part FAA. Operators shall submit their requests subsequent final rule based on this 39 of the Federal Aviation Regulations through an FAA Principal Maintenance proposed rule. The EPA will not (14 CFR part 39) as follows: Inspector, who may concur or comment and then send it to the Manager, Rotorcraft institute a second comment period. Any PART 39ÐAIRWORTHINESS Certification Office. parties interested in commenting should do so at this time. DIRECTIVES Note 2: Information concerning the DATES: Written comments must be existence of approved alternative methods of 1. The authority citation for part 39 received by April 24, 2000. continues to read as follows: compliance with this AD, if any, may be obtained from the Rotorcraft Certification ADDRESSES: Comments should be Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701. Office. addressed to: Andrew Steckel, Rulemaking Office [AIR–4], Air § 39.13 [Amended] (c) Special flight permits may be issued in Division, U.S. Environmental Protection 2. Section 39.13 is amended by accordance with sections 21.197 and 21.199 Agency, Region IX, 75 Hawthorne adding a new airworthiness directive to of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR 21.197 and 21.199) to operate the helicopter Street, San Francisco, CA 94105–3901. read as follows: Copies of the rule revisions and EPA’s to a location where the requirements of this Firefly Aviation Helicopter Services evaluation report of each rule are (Previously Erickson Air Crane Co.); Garlick AD can be accomplished. Helicopters, Inc.; Hawkins and Powers available for public inspection at EPA’s Issued in Fort Worth, Texas, on March 17, Aviation, Inc.; International Helicopters, Region IX office during normal business Inc.; Tamarack Helicopters, Inc. (Previously 2000. hours. Copies of the submitted rule Ranger Helicopter Services, Inc.); Robinson Eric Bries, revisions are also available for Air Crane, Inc.; Williams Helicopter Acting Manager, Rotorcraft Directorate, inspection at the following locations: Corporation (Previously Scott Paper Co.); Aircraft Certification Service. California Air Resources Board, Smith Helicopters; Southern Helicopter, Inc.; [FR Doc. 00–7339 Filed 3–23–00; 8:45 am] Stationary Source Division, Rule Southwest Florida Aviation; Utah State University; Western International Aviation, BILLING CODE 4910±13±P Evaluation Section, 2020 ‘‘L’’ Street, Inc.; and U.S. Helicopter, Inc.; Docket No. Sacramento, CA 95812. 2000–SW–01–AD. Ventura County Air Pollution Control Applicability: Bell Helicopter Textron Inc.- District, 669 County Square Drive, manufactured Model HH–1K, TH–1F, TH–1L, 2nd Floor, Ventura, CA 93003.
VerDate 20
Monterey Bay Unified Air Pollution respect to leaching and potential ground The official record consists of the Control District, 24580 Silver Cloud water contamination. EPA is seeking documents specifically referenced in Court, Monterey, CA 93940. comment on the specific information this action, any public comments Santa Barbara County Air Pollution that is being made available, which is received during an applicable comment Control District, 26 Castilian Drive, described in this document, and is period, and other information related to Suite B–23, Goleta, CA 93117. extending the original comment period this action, including any information FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: by 30 days. claimed as Confidential Business Yvonne Fong, Rulemaking Office [AIR– DATES: Comments, identified by the Information (CBI). This official record 4], Air Division, U.S. Environmental docket control number OPP–36190B, includes the documents that are Protection Agency, Region IX, 75 must be received on or before April 24, physically located in the docket, as well Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA 2000. as the documents that are referenced in 94105–3901, Telephone: (415) 744– ADDRESSES: Comments may be those documents. The public version of 1199. submitted by mail, electronically, or in the official record does not include any SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: person. Please follow the detailed information claimed as CBI. The public This document concerns Ventura instructions for each method as version of the official record, which County Air Pollution Control District provided in Unit I. of the includes printed, paper versions of any Rule 74.2, Architectural Coatings, SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION. To ensure electronic comments submitted during submitted to EPA by the California Air proper receipt by EPA, it is imperative an applicable comment period, is Resources Board (CARB) on November that you identify docket control number available for inspection in the Public 12, 1992; Monterey Bay Unified Air OPP–36190B in the subject line on the Information and Records Integrity Pollution Control District Rule 426, first page of your response. Branch (PIRIB), Rm. 119, Crystal Mall #2, 1921 Jefferson Davis Hwy., Architectural Coatings, and Santa FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Arlington, VA, from 8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m., Barbara County Air Pollution Control Arthur-Jean B. Williams, Field and Monday through Friday, excluding legal District Rule 323, Architectural Coatings External Affairs Division (7506C), Office holidays. The PIRIB telephone number both submitted to EPA by the CARB on of Pesticide Programs, Environmental is (703) 305–5805. March 3, 1997. For further information, Protection Agency, Ariel Rios Bldg., please see the information provided in 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., C. How and to Whom Do I Submit the direct final action that is located in Washington, DC 20460; telephone Comments? the rules section of this Federal number: 703–305–5239; fax number: Register. You may submit your comments 703–308–3259; e-mail address: through the mail, in person, or Dated: March 10, 2000. [email protected]. electronically. Please follow the Felicia Marcus, SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: instructions that are provided below. Do Regional Administrator, Region IX. I. General Information not submit any information [FR Doc. 00–7228 Filed 3–23–00; 8:45 am] electronically that you consider to be BILLING CODE 6560±50±P A. Does this Action Apply to Me? CBI. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, This supplemental notice of data be sure to identify docket control availability and request for comment is number OPP–36190B in the subject line ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION directed to the public in general. It may, on the first page of your response. AGENCY however, be of particular interest to you 1. By mail. Submit your comments to: Public Information and Records 40 CFR Part 152 and 156 if you register, distribute, apply, or manage the application of a pesticide Integrity Branch (PIRIB), Information [OPP±36190B; FRL±6551±1] that contains optically active isomeric Resources and Services Division active ingredients and, in particular, a (7502C), Office of Pesticide Programs RIN 2070±AC46 product enriched for one (usually more (OPP), Environmental Protection pesticidally active) optical isomer. In Agency, Ariel Rios Bldg., 1200 Equivalency of Pesticides Metolachlor addition, persons commenting on the Pennsylvania Ave NW, Washington, DC and S-metolachlor With Respect to Ground Water and Pesticide 20460. Ground Water Contamination; Management Plan proposal (61 FR 2. In person or by courier. Deliver Supplemental Notice of Availability 33260, June 26, 1996) (FRL–4981–9) your comments to: Public Information and Extension of Comment Period may be particularly interested in some and Records Integrity Branch (PIRIB), AGENCY: Environmental Protection or all of these data. Since others may Information Resources and Services Agency (EPA). also be interested, the Agency has not Division (7502C), Office of Pesticide Programs (OPP), Environmental ACTION: Supplemental Notice of attempted to describe all the specific Availability and extension of comment entities that may be affected by this Protection Agency, Rm. 119, Crystal period. action. If you have any questions Mall #2, 1921 Jefferson Davis Highway, regarding the applicability of this action Arlington, VA. The PIRIB is open from SUMMARY: The Agency is providing to a particular entity, consult the person 8 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through supplemental information for an listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION Friday, excluding legal holidays. The existing Notice of Availability and CONTACT. PIRIB telephone number is 703–305– Request for Comment (65 FR 8925, 5805. February 23, 2000) and an extension of B. How Can I Get Additional 3. Electronically. You may submit the original comment period. The Information, Including Copies of this your comments electronically by e-mail original Notice provided an opportunity Document and Other Related to: ‘‘[email protected],’’ or you can for the public and affected parties to Documents? submit a computer disk as described submit comments on whether additional In person. The Agency has established above. Do not submit any information information shows that metolachlor and an official record for this action under electronically that you consider to be S-metolachlor are equivalent with docket control number OPP–36190B. CBI. Avoid the use of special characters
VerDate 20
VerDate 20
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS restriction of 27 kilometers (16.8 miles) ACTION: Proposed rule. COMMISSION north at petitioner’s requested site; and Channel 300A can be allotted to South SUMMARY: The Commission requests 47 CFR Part 73 Bend with a site restriction of 3.5 comments on a petition filed by kilometers (2.2 miles) southwest to Keymarket Licenses, LLC, proposing the [DA 00±543; MM Docket No. 00±41, RM± reallotment of Channel 252A from 9369] avoid a short-spacing to licensed sites of Station KNDD(FM), Channel 299C, Charleroi to Duquesne, Pennsylvania, Radio Broadcasting Services; Oakville, Seattle, Washington, and Station and the modification of Station WOGI– Raymond and South Bend, WA KHPE(FM), Channel 300C, Albany, FM’s license accordingly. Channel 252A Oregon. The coordinates for Channel can be reallotted to Duquesne in AGENCY: Federal Communications 289C2 at Raymond are 46–55–53 North compliance with the Commission’s Commission. Latitude and 123–44–02 West minimum distance separation ACTION: Proposed rule. Longitude; and the coordinates for requirements with a site restriction of Channel 300A at South Bend are 46–38– 3.1 kilometers (1.9 miles) east at SUMMARY: The Commission requests 19 North Latitude and 123–49–54 West petitioner’s requested site. The comments on a petition filed by Jodesha Longitude. Since Oakville, Raymond, coordinates for Channel 252A at Broadcasting, Inc., proposing the and South Bend are located with 320 Duquesne are 40–21–52 North Latitude reallotment of Channel 249C1 from kilometers of the U.S.-Canadian border, and 79–48–49 West Longitude. Since Raymond to Oakville, Washington, and concurrence of the Canadian Duquesne is located within 320 the modification of Station KFMY(FM)’s government has been requested, with kilometers (200 miles) of the U.S.- license accordingly; the reallotment of concurrence of the Oakville allotment Canadian border, concurrence of the Channel 289C2 from South Bend to requested as a specially negotiated, Canadian government has been Raymond, Washington, and the short-spaced allotment. In accordance requested. In accordance with Section modification of Station KJET(FM)’s with the provisions of Section 1.420(i) 1.420(i) of the Commission’s Rules, we license accordingly; and the allotment of the Commission’s Rules, we will not will not accept competing expressions of Channel 300A at South Bend, accept competing expressions of interest of interest for the use of Channel 252A Washington. Channel 249C1 can be in the use of Channel 249C1 at Oakville, at Duquesne, Pennsylvania. reallotted to Oakville in compliance Washington, or Channel 289C2 at DATES: Comments must be filed on or with the Commission’s minimum Raymond, Washington. before May 3, 2000, reply comments on distance separation requirements with Provisions of the Regulatory or before May 18, 2000. respect to all domestic allotments at Flexibility Act of 1980 do not apply to ADDRESSES: Federal Communications petitioner’s requested site. The this proceeding. Commission, Washington, DC 20554. In coordinates for Channel 249C1 at Members of the public should note addition to filing comments with the Oakville are 46–57–14 North Latitude that from the time a Notice of Proposed FCC, interested parties should serve the and 123–29–21 West Longitude. See Rule Making is issued until the matter petitioner, or its counsel or consultant, Supplementary Information, infra. is no longer subject to Commission as follows: Allan G. Moskowitz, Esq., DATES: Comments must be filed on or consideration or court review, all ex Kaye, Scholer, Fierman, Hays & before May 1, 2000, reply comments on parte contacts are prohibited in Handler, LLP, 901 15th Street, NW., or before May 18, 2000. Commission proceedings, such as this Suite 1100, Washington, DC 20005 ADDRESSES: Federal Communications one, which involve channel allotments. (Counsel for Petitioner). Commission, Washington, DC 20554. In See 47 CFR 1.1204(b) for rules FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: addition to filing comments with the governing permissible ex parte contacts. Sharon P. McDonald, Mass Media FCC, interested parties should serve the For information regarding proper Bureau, (202) 418–2180. petitioner, or its counsel or consultant, filing procedures for comments, see 47 SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a as follows: David Tillotson, Esq., 4606 CFR 1.415 and 1.420. synopsis of the Commission’s Notice of Charleston Terrace, NW., Washington, List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 73 Proposed Rule Making, MM Docket No. DC 20007 (Counsel for Petitioner). 00–42, adopted March 1, 2000, and FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Radio broadcasting. released March 10, 2000. The full text Sharon P. McDonald, Mass Media Federal Communications Commission. of this Commission decision is available Bureau, (202) 418–2180. John A. Karousos, for inspection and copying during SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a Chief, Allocations Branch, Policy and Rules normal business hours in the FCC synopsis of the Commission’s Notice of Division, Mass Media Bureau. Reference Information Center (Room Proposed Rule Making, MM Docket No. [FR Doc. 00–7258 Filed 3–23–00; 8:45 am] CY–A257), 445 12th Street, SW., 00–41, adopted March 1, 2000, and BILLING CODE 6712±01±P Washington, DC. The complete text of released March 10, 2000. The full text this decision may also be purchased of this Commission decision is available from the Commission’s copy contractor, for inspection and copying during FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS International Transcription Service, normal business hours in the FCC COMMISSION Inc., (202) 857–3800, 1231 20th Street, Reference Information Center (Room NW., Washington, DC 20036. CY–A257), 445 12th Street, SW., 47 CFR Part 73 Provisions of the Regulatory Washington, DC. The complete text of Flexibility Act of 1980 do not apply to this decision may also be purchased [DA 00±544; MM Docket No. 00±42, RM± this proceeding. from the Commission’s copy contractor, 9826] Members of the public should note International Transcription Service, Radio Broadcasting Services; that from the time a Notice of Proposed Inc., (202) 857–3800, 1231 20th Street, Charleroi and Duquesne, PA Rule Making is issued until the matter NW., Washington, DC 20036. is no longer subject to Commission Additionally, Channel 289C2 can be AGENCY: Federal Communications consideration or court review, all ex allotted to Raymond with a site Commission. parte contacts are prohibited in
VerDate 20
Commission proceedings, such as this hearing will be held from 6:00 p.m. the DATES and ADDRESSES sections one, which involve channel allotments. until 8:00 p.m. on April 20, 2000, in above. See 47 CFR 1.1204(b) for rules Santa Maria, California. Anyone wishing to make an oral governing permissible ex parte contacts. ADDRESSES: The public hearing will be statement for the record is encouraged For information regarding proper held at the Santa Maria Inn, 801 South to provide a written copy of their filing procedures for comments, see 47 Broadway, Santa Maria, California. statement and present it to the Service CFR 1.415 and 1.420. Written comments and materials should at the hearing. In the event there is a List of Subjects in CFR Part 73 be sent to Diane Noda, Field Supervisor, large attendance, the time allotted for U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Ventura oral statements may be limited. Oral and Radio broadcasting. Fish and Wildlife Office, 2493 Portola written statements receive equal Federal Communications Commission. Road, Suite B, Ventura, California consideration. There are no limits to the John A. Karousos, 93003. Comments and materials length of written comments presented at Chief, Allocations Branch, Policy and Rules received will be available for public the hearing or mailed to the Service. Division, Mass Media Bureau. inspection, by appointment, during Legal notices announcing the date, time, [FR Doc. 00–7259 Filed 3–23–00; 8:45 am] normal business hours at the above and location of the hearing will be Service address. BILLING CODE 6712±01±P published in newspapers concurrently FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Carl with the Federal Register notice. Benz, at the above Ventura, California Comments from the public regarding address, phone 805–644–1766, facsimile the accuracy of this proposed rule are DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 805–644–3958. sought, especially regarding: Fish and Wildlife Service SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: (1) Biological, commercial trade, or Background other relevant data concerning any 50 CFR Part 17 threat (or lack thereof) to the species On January 19, 2000, the Fish and listed above; Wildlife Service (Service) published a RIN 1018±AF81 (2) The location of any additional notice in the Federal Register (65 FR populations of the species and the Endangered and Threatened Wildlife 3110) proposing to list the Santa Barbara reasons why any habitat should or and Plants; Reopening of Comment County distinct vertebrate population should not be determined to be critical Period and Notice of Public Hearing on segment of the California tiger habitat as provided by section 4 of the Proposed Rule To List the Santa salamander, Ambystoma californiense, Act; Barbara County Distinct Population of as endangered pursuant to the the California Tiger Salamander as Endangered Species Act (Act) of 1973, (3) Additional information concerning Endangered as amended (Act). An emergency rule the range, distribution, and population listing the population was published sizes of the species; and AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, concurrently in the same issue of the (4) Current or planned activities in the Interior. Federal Register. The Santa Barbara subject area and their possible impacts ACTION: Proposed rule; reopening of County population segment of the on the species. comment period and notice of public California tiger salamander is endemic Reopening of the comment period hearing. to low elevation (typically below 300 will enable the Service to respond to the meters (1,000 feet)) vernal pools and request for a public hearing on the SUMMARY: The U.S. Fish and Wildlife seasonal ponds and the surrounding proposed action. The comment period Service (Service) gives notice of a public grasslands, oak woodlands, and coastal on this proposal now closes on May 4, hearing on the proposed rule to list the scrub of Santa Barbara County, 2000. Written comments should be Santa Barbara distinct population of the California; and is imperiled primarily by submitted to the Service office listed in California tiger salamander. In addition, habitat loss from conversion of natural the ADDRESSES section. the comment period which originally habitat to intensive agriculture and Author: The primary author of this closed on March 20, 2000, will be urban development, habitat notice is Carl Benz (see ADDRESSES). reopened. The new comment period and fragmentation, and agricultural Authority: The authority for this action is hearing will allow all interested parties contaminants. to submit oral or written comments on the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as Section 4(b)(5)(E) of the Act (16 U.S.C. amended (16 U.S.C. 1531–1544). the proposal. 1531 et seq.), requires that a public DATES: The comment period for this hearing be held if it is requested within Elizabeth H. Stevens, proposal now closes on May 4, 2000. 45 days of the publication of a proposed Acting Manager—California/Nevada Any comments received by the closing rule. In response to three such requests, Operations Office. date will be considered in the final the Service will hold a public hearing [FR Doc. 00–7169 Filed 3–23–00; 8:45 am] decision on this proposal. The public on the date and at address described in BILLING CODE 4310±55±P
VerDate 20
Notices Federal Register Vol. 65, No. 58
Friday, March 24, 2000
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER Washington and Wisconsin, Marketing diversions, and other information contains documents other than rules or Order No. 930. needed to effectively carry out the proposed rules that are applicable to the OMB Number: 0581–0177. requirements of the order, and their use public. Notices of hearings and investigations, Expiration Date of Approval: January is necessary to fulfill the intent of the committee meetings, agency decisions and 31, 2001. AMAA. Since this order regulates the rulings, delegations of authority, filing of petitions and applications and agency Type of Request: Extension and canned and frozen form of tart cherries, statements of organization and functions are revision of a currently approved reporting requirements will be in effect examples of documents appearing in this information collection. all year. A USDA form is used to allow section. Abstract: Marketing order programs growers to vote on amendments or provide an opportunity for producers of continuance of the marketing order. In fresh fruits, vegetables and specialty addition, tart cherry producers and DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE crops, in a specified production area, to handlers who are nominated by their work together to solve marketing peers to serve as representatives on the Agricultural Marketing Service problems that cannot be solved Board must file nomination forms with individually. Order regulations help the Secretary. [Docket No. FV00±930±1NC] ensure adequate supplies of high quality Formal rulemaking amendments to product and adequate returns to the order must be approved in referenda Notice of Request for Extension and producers. Under the Agricultural conducted by the Secretary. Also, the Revision of a Currently Approved Marketing Agreement Act of 1937 Secretary may conduct a continuance Information Collection (AMAA), as amended (7 U.S.C. 601– referendum to determine industry AGENCY: Agricultural Marketing Service, 674) industries enter into marketing support for continuation of the order. USDA. order programs. The Secretary of Handlers are asked to sign an agreement Agriculture is authorized to oversee the to indicate their willingness to abide by ACTION: Notice and request for order operations and issue regulations the provisions of the order whenever the comments. recommended by a committee of order is amended. These forms are SUMMARY: In accordance with the representatives from each commodity included in this request. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 industry. The forms covered under this U.S.C. Chapter 35), this notice The information collection information collection require the announces the Agricultural Marketing requirements in this request are minimum information necessary to Service’s (AMS) intention to request an essential to carry out the intent of the effectively carry out the requirements of extension for and revision to a currently AMAA, to provide the respondents the the order, and their use is necessary to approved information collection for tart type of service they request, and to fulfill the intent of the AMAA as cherries grown in the States of administer the program, which has expressed in the order, and the rules Michigan, New York, Pennsylvania, operated since 1996. and regulations issued under the order. Oregon, Utah, Washington and The tart cherry marketing order The information collected is used Wisconsin, Marketing Order No. 930. regulates the handling of tart cherries in only by authorized representatives of DATES: Comments on this notice must be the states of Michigan, New York, the USDA, including AMS, Fruit and received by May 23, 2000. Pennsylvania, Oregon, Utah, Vegetable Programs’ regional and Washington, and Wisconsin, hereinafter headquarter’s staff, and authorized ADDITIONAL INFORMATION OR COMMENTS: referred to as the ‘‘order.’’ The order employees of the Board. Authorized Contact Valerie L. Emmer-Scott, authorizes volume controls that provide Board employees and the industry are Marketing Specialist, Marketing Order for a reserve pool in times of heavy the primary users of the information, Administration Branch, Fruit and cherry supplies. Other major marketing and AMS is the secondary user. Vegetable Programs, AMS, USDA, room order provisions, not currently in use, Estimate of Burden: Public reporting 2525–S., P.O. Box 96456, Washington, include minimum grade and size burden for this collection of information DC 20090–6456; Tel: (202) 205–2829, regulations and authorization for market is estimated to average .191 hours per Fax: (202) 720–5698, or E-mail: research and development projects, response. [email protected]. including paid advertising. Respondents: Tart cherry producers Small businesses may request The order, and rules and regulations and for-profit businesses handling fresh information on this notice by contacting issued thereunder, authorize the Cherry and processed tart cherries produced in Jay Guerber, Regulatory Fairness Industry Administrative Board (Board), Michigan, New York, Pennsylvania, Representative, Marketing Order the agency responsible for local Oregon, Utah, Washington, and Administration Branch, Fruit and administration of the order, to require Wisconsin. Vegetable Programs, AMS, USDA, room handlers and producers to submit Estimated Number of Respondents: 2525–S, P.O. Box 96456, Washington, certain information. Much of this 943. D.C., 20090–6456; telephone (202) 720– information is compiled in aggregate Estimated Number of Responses per 2491, Fax: (202) 720–5698, or E-mail: and provided to the industry to assist in Respondent: 4.93 [email protected]. carrying out marketing decisions. Estimated Total Annual Burden on SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Board has developed forms as a Respondents: 887.63 hours. Title: Tart Cherries Grown in the means for persons to file required Comments: Comments are invited on: States of Michigan, New York, information with the Board relating to (1) Whether the proposed collection of Pennsylvania, Oregon, Utah, tart cherry inventories, shipments, the information is necessary for the
VerDate 20
Secretary of Agriculture's cot- News 90-day 180-day Quota ton import quota announce- HTS sub- release Quota purchase import amount 3-month consumption base ment heading date start date date date (kilograms) period
Number 21 ...... 9903.52.21 7/15/99 7/22/99 10/19/99 1/17/00 42,388,357 March±May 1999. Number 22 ...... 9903.52.22 7/22/99 7/29/99 10/26/99 1/24/00 42,388,357 March±May 1999. Number 23 ...... 9903.52.23 7/29/99 8/05/99 11/02/99 1/31/00 42,645,766 April±June 1999. Number 24 ...... 9903.52.24 8/05/99 8/12/99 11/09/99 2/07/00 42,645,766 April±June 1999. Number 25 ...... 9903.52.25 8/12/99 8/19/99 11/16/99 2/14/00 42,645,766 April±June 1999. Number 26 ...... 9903.52.26 8/19/99 8/26/99 11/23/99 2/21/00 42,645,766 April±June 1999. Number 1 ...... 9903.52.01 8/26/99 9/02/99 11/30/99 2/28/00 42,282,225 May±July 1999. Number 2 ...... 9903.52.02 9/02/99 9/09/99 12/07/99 3/06/00 42,282,225 May±July 1999. Number 3 ...... 9903.52.03 9/09/99 9/16/99 12/14/99 3/13/00 42,282,225 May±July 1999. Number 4 ...... 9903.52.04 9/16/99 9/23/99 12/21/99 3/20/00 42,282,225 May±July 1999. Number 5 ...... 9903.52.05 9/23/99 9/30/99 12/28/99 3/27/00 42,282,225 May±July 1999. Number 6 ...... 9903.52.06 9/30/99 10/07/99 1/04/00 4/03/00 41,677,786 June±August 1999. Number 7 ...... 9903.52.07 10/07/99 10/14/99 1/11/00 4/10/00 41,677,786 June±August 1999. Number 8 ...... 9903.52.08 10/14/99 10/21/99 1/18/00 4/17/00 41,677,786 June±August 1999. Number 9 ...... 9903.52.09 10/21/99 10/28/99 1/25/00 4/24/00 41,677,786 June±August 1999. Number 10 ...... 9903.52.10 10/28/99 11/04/99 2/01/00 5/01/00 40,830,552 July±September 1999.
VerDate 20
[FR Doc. 00–7277 Filed 3–23–00; 8:45 am] Committee is comprised of 16 members DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE BILLING CODE 3410±05±P appointed by the Secretary. Members represent the following groups: (1) FSA; Forest Service (2) State beginning farmer programs; (3) DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE commercial lenders; (4) private East Fork of the Jemez Wild and nonprofit organizations with active Scenic River, Santa Fe National Forest, Farm Service Agency beginning farmer programs; (5) the Sandoval County, New Mexico; Boundary Establishment Public Meetings of Advisory Cooperative State Research, Education, Committee on Beginning Farmers and and Extension Service; (6) educational AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA. Ranchers institutions with demonstrated experience in training beginning farmers ACTION: Notice of Availability. AGENCY: Farm Service Agency, USDA. or ranchers; (7) other entities providing SUMMARY: In accordance with 16 U.S.C. ACTION: Notice of public meetings. lending or technical assistance to 1274, the USDA Forest Service has qualified beginning farmers or ranchers; SUMMARY: The Farm Service Agency transmitted the final boundary of the and (8) farmers and ranchers. The East Fork of the Jemez Wild and Scenic (FSA) is issuing this notice to advise the Committee meets at least once a year public that meetings of the Advisory River to the Senate and House of and all meetings are open to the public. Representatives. Committee on Beginning Farmers and The duration of the Committee is Ranchers (Committee) will be held to indefinite. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: discuss ways to increase new farming The initial meetings of the Committee, Information may be obtained by and ranching opportunities for these contacting Diane Tafoya, Recreation producers, including the review of held August 31–September 2, 1999, provided an opportunity for members to Staff Officer, Jemez Ranger District, P.O. proposals and recommendations drafted Box 98, Jemez Springs, NM 87025, 505– at previous meetings. exchange ideas on ways to increase opportunities for beginning farmers and 829–3535. DATES: The public meetings will be held ranchers through Federal-State SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The April 11–12, 2000, from 8:30 a.m. to 5 partnerships and to encourage more detailed legal description and map of p.m. at the Westin Crown Center Hotel, State participation. Members discussed the East Fork of the Jemez Wild and 1 Pershing Road, Kansas City, Missouri various issues and drafted numerous Scenic River boundary are available for (telephone (816) 474–4400). All times recommendations, six of which the public inspection in the following noted are Central Standard Time (CST). Committee determined were priorities Forest Service offices: USDA Forest ADDRESSES: Mark Falcone, Designated and were submitted to the Secretary in Service Auditors Building, 201 14th St. Federal Official for the Advisory writing. During the April meetings, SW at Independence Ave. SW, Committee on Beginning Farmers and members will discuss the Secretary’s Washington, DC; USDA–FS Ranchers, Farm Service Agency, U.S. response to the six recommendations Southwestern Regional Office, 517 Gold Department of Agriculture, 1400 and review other draft proposals. Guest Ave SW, Albuquerque, NM; USDA–FS Independence Avenue, SW., Room speakers from the Iowa State Santa Fe National Forest, 1474 Rodeo 5438-S, STOP 0522, Washington, DC University’s Beginning Farmer Center Rd., Santa Fe, NM; USDA–FS Jemez 20250–0522; telephone (202) 720–1632; and the National Council of State Ranger Station, Jemez Springs, NM. FAX (202) 690–1117; e-mail l Agricultural Finance Programs will The Wild and Scenic Rivers Act, mark [email protected]. address relevant issues. Public Law 90–542, as amended by FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Attendance is open to all interested Public Law 101–306 on June 6, 1990 Mark Falcone at (202) 720–1632. persons but limited to space available. designated the 11-mile segment of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Section 5 Anyone wishing to make an oral East Fork of the Jemez River, from the of the Agricultural Credit Improvement statement should submit their request in Santa Fe National Forest boundary to its Act of 1992 (Pub. L. 102–554) required writing (letter, fax, or e-mail) to Mark confluence with the Rio San Antonio, to the Secretary of Agriculture to establish Falcone at the above address. be administered by the Secretary of the Committee for the purpose of Statements should be received no later Agriculture in the following advising the Secretary on the following: than April 6, 2000. Requests should classifications: (a) The 2-mile segment (1) The development of a program of include the name and affiliation of the for the Santa Fe National Forest coordinated financial assistance to individual who will make the boundary to the second crossing of State qualified beginning farmers and presentation and an outline of the issues Highway 4, near Las Conchas trailhead, ranchers required by section 309 (i) of to be addressed. The floor will be open as a recreational river; and (b) the 4-mile the Consolidated Farm and Rural to oral presentations beginning at 1:00 segment from the second crossing of Development Act (Federal and State p.m. CST on April 11, 2000. Comments State Highway 4, near Las Conchas beginning farmer programs provide joint will be limited to 5 minutes, and trailhead, to the third crossing of State financing to beginning farmers and presenters will be approved on a first- Highway 4 approximately one and one- ranchers); (2) methods of maximizing come, first-served basis. quarter miles upstream from Jemez the number of new farming and Persons with disabilities who require Falls, as a wild river; and (c) the 5-mile ranching opportunities created through special accommodations to attend or segment from the third crossing of State the program; (3) methods of encouraging participate in the meetings should Highway 4, approximately one and one- States to participate in the program; (4) contact Mark Falcone by April 6, 2000. quarter miles upstream from Jemez the administration of the program; and Falls, to its confluence with the Rio San (5) other methods of creating new Signed in Washington, DC, on March 17, Antonio, as a scenic river. The final 2000. farming or ranching opportunities. boundary for the designated segments Departmental Regulation 1042–119 Keith Kelly, approximately follows the original dated November 25, 1998, formally Administrator, Farm Service Agency. corridor boundary of 1⁄4-mile of the established the Committee and [FR Doc. 00–7278 Filed 3–23–00; 8:45 am] ordinary high water mark on each side designated FSA to provide support. The BILLING CODE 3410±05±P of the river, with adjustments made in
VerDate 20
VerDate 20
South, Soda Springs, Idaho 83276, reviewers of draft EISs must structure Linda Matthews, JBR Environmental phone (208) 547–4356. their participation in the environmental Consultants, Inc., (801) 943–4144, SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The review of the proposal so that it is ([email protected]). meaningful and alerts an agency to proposed mining activities would Public Input Requested consist of two open pits, known as reviewer’s position and contentions. Panels B and C, topsoil stockpiles, mine Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corp. v. The BLM and FS are seeking equipment parking areas, access and NRDC, 435 U.S. 519,553 (1978). Also, information and written comments from haul roads, a power line extension, environmental objections that could be Federal, State and local agencies as well external overburden storage areas, and raised at the draft EIS stage but that are as individuals and organizations who runoff/sediment control facilities. not raised until after completion of the may be interested in, or affected by, the Mining would include best management final EIS may be waived or dismissed by proposed action. To assist the BLM and practices for control of releases of the courts. City of Angoon v. Hodel, 803 FS in identifying and considering issues sediment and dissolved metals. The F. 2d 1016, 1022 (9th Cir. 1986) and and concerns related to the proposed proposed open pits would be located on Wisconsin Heritages, Inc. v. Harris, 490 action, comments for scoping, and later either side of Smoky Creek. The creek F. Supp. 1334, 1338 (E.D. Wis. 1980). for the Draft SEIS, should be as specific would be crossed in two locations by Because of these court rulings, it is very as possible. Referring to specific pages road fills. One of these road fills already important that those interested in this or chapters of the SEIS or the merits of exists for the mine access road and proposed action participate by the close the alternatives formulated and would be widened to accommodate the of the 60-day comment period for the discussed in the SEIS is most helpful. 100-foot width of a new haul road. A draft SEIS so that substantive comments Dated: March 15, 2000. and objections are made available to the second, new haul road fill would be Jeff Steele, constructed across Smoky Creek in a BLM and FS at a time when it can meaningfully consider them and Manager, Pocatello Field Office, Bureau of separate location. The existing Forest Land Management. respond to them in the final SEIS. Service road in Smoky Canyon would Harold Klein, cross the proposed haul roads at grade Preliminary Issues Acting Forest Supervisor, Caribou-Targhee in two locations. The public road would Initially identified issues include National Forest. be protected with traffic controls posted potential effects on: ground water and [FR Doc. 00–7110 Filed 2–23–00; 8:45 am] on either side. A culvert or retaining surface water quantity and quality, BILLING CODE 4310±84±P, 3410±11±P wall would be installed in Smoky Creek wildlife and their habitats, livestock along the mining area to protect water grazing, wetlands and riparian habitat, quality during mining and would be socio-economics, and development of DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE removed along with any road fills not best management practices for mine required for continued access road operations. Forest Service requirements during reclamation activities. Possible Alternatives Gold/Boulder/Sullivan; Kootenai Existing mine, maintenance, The SEIS will analyze the Proposed National Forest, Lincoln County, administrative, and milling facilities Action and No Action Alternatives. Montana would be used during the mine period. Other alternatives to be considered AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA. Ore from the new panels would be would include altering portions of the ACTION: Notice of intent to prepare an beneficiated in the existing mill proposed mining facilities or sequence environmental impact statement. facilities and tailings would be and design parameters to provide deposited in the existing tailings mitigation for resources of concern. SUMMARY: The USDA–Forest Service disposal facilities. Ore concentrate Tentative SEIS Project Schedule will prepare an Environmental Impact would be transferred to the Don Plant in Statement (EIS) for the Gold/Boulder/ Pocatello, Idaho via the existing slurry The tentative project schedule is as Sullivan Project to disclose the effects of follows: pipeline transportation system. Water • vegetative management through timber usage would continue as in the past Begin Public Comment Period— harvest and prescribed fire, and road with no increase in water consumption March, 2000 management including road • Hold Public Scoping Meetings— for the operations. maintenance, reconstruction, and Disturbed lands directly resulting April, 2000 • Estimated date for Draft SEIS— decommissioning. The Gold/Boulder/ from the proposed activities would total February, 2001 Sullivan project area encompasses the 656 acres. The new pits would include • Public Comment Period on Draft Gold Creek, Boulder Creek, and Sullivan 353 acres and the rest of the disturbed SEIS—60 days from when the Notice of Creek drainages approximately 12 miles acreage would be for roads, overburden Availability is published in the Federal southwest of Eureka, Montana. disposal areas, and other support Register The proposed activities are facilities. Approximately 605 acres of considered together because they the proposed disturbance would be Public Scoping Meetings represent either connected or reclaimed by backfilling most of the Two public scoping meetings will be cumulative actions as defined by the proposed open pit areas, regrading fill held, each an open house type, from 7 Council on Environmental Quality (40 slopes, spreading topsoil, planting of pm–9 pm. The open houses will include CFR 1508.23). The purpose and need for appropriate vegetation, and installation displays explaining the project and a action is to achieve desirable and and maintenance of runoff and sediment forum for commenting on the project. sustainable conditions in forest stands, control facilities. The meetings will be held as follows: improve big game winter range The BLM and FS believe, at this early • Star Valley High School, Afton, conditions, improve visual quality, stage, it is important to give reviewers Wyoming improve water quality, and provide notice of several court rulings, related to • BLM Field Office, Pocatello, Idaho goods and services. public participation in the Information on the dates for the The EIS will tier to the Kootenai environmental review process. First, scoping meetings can be obtained from National Forest Land Resource
VerDate 20
Management Plan, as amended, and the in individual delineated management edges to improve the visual setting for Final Environmental Impact Statement areas (MAs). Most of the proposed outdoor recreation. (FEIS), and Record of Decision (ROD) of timber harvest activities encompass five Removal of trees would be September 1987, which provides overall predominant MAs: 11, 12, 15, 16, 17. accomplished by a variety of methods guidance for forest management of the Briefly described, MA 11 is managed to including: helicopter, tractor, and line area. maintain or enhance the winter range skidding operations. Temporary roads DATES: Written comments and habitat effectiveness for big game may be needed to access some units to suggestions should be received on or species and produce a programmed be harvested with ground-based before April 24, 2000. yield of timber. MA 12 is managed to systems. These temporary roads would be decommissioned after timber sale ADDRESSES: The Responsible Official is maintain or enhance the summer range Bob Castaneda, the Kootenai National habitat effectiveness for big game activities are accomplished. The proposal also includes Forest Supervisor, 1101 Hwy 2 West, specifies and produce a programmed approximately 2,528 acres of prescribed Libby, Montana 59923. Written yield of timer. MA 15 focuses upon in association with commercial timber comments and suggestions concerning timber production using various harvest and approximately 3,316 acres the scope of the analysis should be sent silvicultural practices while providing of prescribed burning without to Glen M. McNitt, District Ranger, for other resource values. MA 16 is commercial timber harvest. Prescribed Rexford Ranger District, 1299 Hwy 93 N, managed to produce timber while burning without timber harvest is Eureka, MT 59917. providing for a pleasing view. MA 17 is proposed within management area 13 FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: managed to maintain or enhance a (designated old growth). Contact Ron Komac, Acting NEPA natural appearing landscape and produce a programmed yield of timber. The proposed action would result in Coordinator, Rexford Ranger District, four additional openings over 40 acres, Phone: (406) 296–2536. Minor amounts of timber harvest and/or other proposed activities such as ranging from 49 to 83 acres. The size of SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The prescribed burning are found in other seven other large openings would be project area is approximately 37,000 MAs, including 2 (roadless recreation); increased, ranging from 55 to 464 acres. acres and has a favorable climate and 5 (viewing areas); 10 (big game winter The proposal also includes .1 mile of good site conditions for forest range); 13 (old growth), 19 (steep temporary road construction, 64 miles vegetation. Proposed activities within slopes), 21 (research natural area), and of reconstruction to meet Best the decision area include portions of the 24 (low productivity areas). Management Practices requirements and following areas: T34–36N; R28–30W. decommissioning of four closed roads to Average annual precipitation ranges Purpose and Need restore natural drainage patterns. from 14 to 1000 inches. At higher Implementation of this proposal The primary purpose and need for the elevations, most precipitation falls as would require opening several miles of project is to: (1) Achieve desirable and snow. The decision area contains a road currently restricted to public sustainable conditions in forest stands combination of open-grown ponderosa access. It is expected that public access by reducing stand densities and species pine and Douglas-fir in the lower would be allowed on a portion of these competition, and salvage of mortality elevations, adjacent to Lake Koocanusa; roads while management activities are due to insects or disease; (2) improve upland areas contain multistoried occurring. Restrictions for motorized big game winter range conditions western larch/Douglas-fir intermixed access would be restored following the through the use of prescribed fire to with lodgepole pine, as well as uniform conclusion of the management rejuvenate browse species; (3) improve lodgepole pine stands. activities. Wildfire historically played a role in water quality by reducing road effects The proposed action includes interrupting forest succession and through road maintenance and precommercial thinning of sapling-sized creating much of the vegetative diversity reconstruction, and road trees on 2600 acres within managed that is apparent on the landscape today. decommissioning; (4) improve visual plantations and natural stands that have Since the early 1900’s, a policy of quality through feathering edges to regenerated after wildfire. wildfire suppression has been in place reduce line and form; and (5) respond Precommercial thinning would not on National Forest lands, interrupting to the social and economic desires of the occur in lynx habitat. the natural vegetation cycle. Existing surrounding area by providing a range stands in the lower elevations have a of products from the forested Forest Plan Amendments higher stocking level than occurred environment, while maintaining a The proposed action includes a naturally and are dominated by resilient, sustainable forest environment project-specific forest plan amendments Douglas-fir which is susceptible to bark over time. and a programmatic amendment to meet beetles and root disease when stressed. Proposed Activities the goals of the Kootenai National Forest Lodgepole pine in the upper elevations Plan. have experienced a high level of The Forest Service proposes to A programmatic amendment to allow mortality due to mountain pine beetles harvest between 18100 and 35600 CCF long-term MA 12 open road density to and are not contributing toward a (hundred cubic feet), equivalent to be managed at 1.1 miles/square mile, desired condition of forest health. A between 9.1 and 17.8 MMBF (million which exceeds the facilities standard of portion of the Decision Area is highly board feet) of timber through the 0.75 miles/square mile. The roads visible from the Tobacco Valley as well application of a variety of harvest currently open access high-use as the Scenic Byway (State Highway 37). methods on approximately 2528 acres of recreation facilities or are important A portion of the Mount Henry forestland. Silvicultural systems include access routes for forest users and have Inventoried Roadless Area is included 826 acres of regeneration harvest, 1423 been managed as open roads for several within the project area. There are no acres of improvement harvest, 118 acres decades. There is a social need to treatments proposed for this area. of salvage, and 161 acres of removal of maintain these roads as open to The Kootenai National Forest Land small diameter material. Some motorized access. and Resource Management Plan treatments would feather or thin stands A project specific amendment to provides overall management objectives adjacent to existing units with abrupt allow harvest adjacent to existing
VerDate 20
VerDate 20
VerDate 20
VerDate 20
VerDate 20
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE to allow a reasonable, but limited, time 5. Discuss Commercial Law for interested parties to augment their Development Programs in Africa. Office of the General Counsel; Laws or previous comments, or to file original 6. Review status and prospects for Regulations Posing Barriers to comments, in light of the comments of passage of the African Growth and Electronic Commerce other parties, which have been routinely Opportunity Act. AGENCY: Department of Commerce. posted on our Web site at http:// PUBLIC PARTICIPATION: The meeting will www.ecommerce.gov/ebarriers/review as ACTION: Notice, 30-day re-opening of be open to public participation. Seating soon as practicable after their receipt. comment period. will be available on a first-come first- Comments filed after April 24, 2000, served basis. Members of the public SUMMARY: The Department of will not be considered by the Subgroup. who plan to attend are requested to Commerce, on behalf of the Subgroup Detailed background information advise Ms. Alicia Robinson, Office of on Legal Barriers to Electronic concerning the original request for Africa, tel: 202–482–5148, fax: 202– Commerce (‘‘Legal Barriers Subgroup’’) comments is contained in the above- 482–5198, e-mail: of the U.S. Government Working Group cited Federal Register notice, a copy of [email protected] by March on Electronic Commerce, re-opens for which is also posted at http:// 28, 2000. an additional 30 days the response www.ecommerce.gov/ebarriers/fedreg1. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. period for our request for public A copy of this notice can be found at Alicia Robinson, Office of Africa, Room comments and suggestions concerning http://www.ecommerce.gov/ebarriers/ 2037, U.S. Department of Commerce; policies, laws or regulations that need to fedreg2. tel: 202–482–5148, fax: 202–482–5198, be adapted in order to eliminate barriers Publication: e-mail: alicia [email protected]. to and promote electronic commerce, electronic services, and electronic Comments will be published online at Dated: March 20, 2000. transactions. The original notice was http://www.ecommerce.gov/ebarriers/ Sally Miller, published on February 1, 2000, with review. Respondents should not submit Director, Office of Africa. comments to be provided by March 17, materials that they do not desire to be [FR Doc. 00–7273 Filed 3–23–00; 8:45 am] 2000 (65 FR 4801). made public. BILLING CODE 3510±DA±P DATES: Comments are requested by Authority: April 24, 2000. Presidential Memorandum, ADDRESSES: Comments may be COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING ‘‘Facilitating the Growth of Electronic COMMISSION submitted via the Web at http:// Commerce,’’ dated November 29, 1999. www.ecommerce.gov/ebarriers/respond. Alternatively, electronic submissions Dated: March 21, 2000. Sunshine Act Meeting may be sent as documents attached to E- Andrew J. Pincus, AGENCY: Commodity Futures Trading mail messages addressed to General Counsel, Department of Commerce. Commission. [email protected]. Submissions [FR Doc. 00–7404 Filed 3–23–00; 8:45 am] ``FEDERAL REGISTER'' CITATION OF made as E-mail attachments or BILLING CODE 3510±BW±U submitted on floppy disks should be in PREVIOUS ANNOUNCEMENT: 65 FR 11988. WordPerfect, Microsoft Word or ASCII PREVIOUSLY ANNOUNCED TIME AND DATE OF format. Diskettes should be labeled with DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE MEETING: 10:00 a.m., Wednesday, March the name of the party and the name and 29, 2000. version of the word processing program International Trade Administration CHANGES IN THE MEETING: The Commodity Futures Trading used to create the document. Paper Advisory Committee on Africa; Notice Commission has cancelled the meeting submissions may be mailed to the of Open Meeting Subgroup on Legal Barriers to Electronic on proposed regulation 1.41(z). Commerce, U.S. Department of AGENCY: International Trade CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION: Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Administration/Deputy Assistant Jean A. Webb, 418–5100. Avenue, NW., Room 2815, Washington Secretary for Africa, Commerce. Jean A. Webb, DC 20230. If possible, paper SUMMARY: The Advisory Committee on submissions should include floppy Africa was established to advise the Secretary of the Commission. disks in WordPerfect, Microsoft Word or Secretary of Commerce and the Deputy [FR Doc. 00–7409 Filed 3–22–00; 10:28 am] ASCII format. Except for floppy disks Secretary of Commerce on commercial BILLING CODE 6351±01±M with paper submissions, duplicate policy issues in Sub-Saharan Africa. copies should not be submitted. TIME AND PLACE: March 30, 2000 from FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 9 a.m. to 12 noon. The meeting will take DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE Kenneth Clark, phone: 202–482–3843; place at the Main Department of Department of the Navy E-mail [email protected]. Commerce Building, Room 4830, 14th SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Street and Constitution Avenue, NW., Government-Owned Invention Washington, DC 20230. Background Available for Licensing AGENDA: The Department of Commerce has 1. Review of recent trends in U.S. AGENCY: Department of the Navy, DOD. determined that it is appropriate to re- trade with Africa. ACTION: Notice. open the record for comments 2. Discuss proposals for a Workshop concerning the above-described request for African Trade Ministers on the SUMMARY: The Department of the Navy for public comments for an additional World Trade Organization. hereby gives notice of the general 30-day period in order: (1) To officially 3. Discuss commercial implications of availability of exclusive or partially accommodate the significant number of the coup d’etat in Cote d’Ivoire. exclusive licenses under the following comments being filed somewhat beyond 4. Discuss actions U.S. firms are pending patent. Any license granted the original comment deadline; and (2) taking to combat HIV/AIDS in Africa. shall comply with 35 U.S.C. 209 and 37
VerDate 20
CFR part 404. Applications will be DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE Ford Motor Company, a revocable, non- evaluated utilizing the following assignable, partially exclusive license in criteria: (1) Ability to manufacture and Department of the Navy the field of use of all automotive market the technology; (2) applications for cars and trucks under Meeting of the Chief of Naval manufacturing and marketing ability; (3) 30,000 pounds gross vehicle weight in Operations (CNO) Executive Panel time required to bring technology to the United States to practice the market and production rate; (4) AGENCY: Department of the Navy, DOD. Government-owned inventions described in U.S. Patent No. 5,705,863 royalties; (5) technical capabilities; and ACTION: Notice. (6) small business status. entitled ‘‘Hight Speed Magnetostrictive SUMMARY: The CNO Executive Panel is Linear Motor.’’ Serial No. 94/39011 entitled ‘‘A to conduct the final briefing of the Navy DATES: Anyone wishing to object to the Recombinant Polypeptide For Use in the and Alliance Structures II Short Study granting of this license must file written Manufacture of Vaccines Against to the Chief of Naval Operations. This objections along with supporting Campylobacter-induced Diarrhea and to meeting will consist of discussions evidence, if any, not later than May 23, Reduce Colonization’’ by Lee, Guerry, relating to national security issues 2000. Berg and Trust filed 15 July 1997. This associated with coalition and alliance ADDRESSES: Written objections are to be technology represents an effective relationships. filed with the Carderock Division, Naval vaccine and treatment against DATES: The meeting will be held on Surface Warfare Center, Code 004, 9500 Campylobacter diarrhea and comprises April 17, 2000 from 10:00 a.m. to 11:00 MacArthur Blvd., West Bethesda, a recombinant fusion protein of the a.m. Maryland 20817–5700. maltose binding protein (MBP) of E.coli ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. fused to amino acids 5–337 of the FlaA the office of the Chief of Naval Dick Bloomquist, Director Technology flagellin of Campylobacter coli VC167. Operations, 2000 Navy Pentagon, Transfer, Carderock Division, Naval This fusion protein has provided Washington, DC 20350–2000. Surface Warfare Center, Code 0117, evidence of immunogenicity and 9500 MacArthur Blvd, West Bethesda, FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONCERNING protective efficacy against challenge by Maryland 20817–5700, telephone (301) THIS MEETING CONTACT: Commander a heterologous strain of Campylobacter 227–4299. Christopher Agan, CNO Executive jejuni 81–176 in mammals. The Panel, 4401 Ford Avenue, Suite 601, Authority: 35 U.S.C. 207, 37 CFR Part 404. technology avoids the technical problem Alexandria, Virginia 22302–0268, (703) Dated: March 15, 2000. of inducing the autoimmune Guillain 681–6205. J.L. Roth, Barre Syndrome (GBS), a post-infection SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuant Lieutenant Commander, Judge Advocate polyneuropathy caused by to the provisions of the Federal General’s Corps, U.S. Navy, Federal Register Campylobacter molecular mimicry of Advisory Committee Act (5 U.S.C. App. Liaison Officer. human gangliosides. The technology 2), these matters constitute classified [FR Doc. 00–7283 Filed 3–23–00; 8:45 am] includes a recombinant DNA construct information that is specifically BILLING CODE 3810±FF±U encoding the immunodominant region authorized by Executive Order to be of flagellin conserved across the kept secret in the interest of national Campylobacter species; expression— defense and are, in fact, properly DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY systems; methods for inducing an classified pursuant to such Executive immune response through injectable, Order. Accordingly, the Secretary of the National Energy Technology intranasal, and oral formulations; and a Navy has determined in writing that the Laboratory; Notice of Financial method for reducing Campylobacter public interest requires that all sessions Assistance Solicitation intestinal colonization. of the meeting be closed to the public AGENCY: National Energy Technology because they will be concerned with DATES: Laboratory, Department of Energy Applications for an exclusive or matters listed in section 552b(c)(1) of (DOE). partially exclusive license may be title 5, United States Code. submitted at any time from the date of ACTION: Notice. this notice. Dated: March 13, 2000. J.L. Roth, SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given of the ADDRESSES: Navy Medical Research Lieutenant Commander, Judge Advocate intent to issue Financial Assistance Center (NMRC), 503 Robert Grant Ave, General’s Corps, Federal Register Liaison Solicitation No. DE–PS26–00NT40779 Silver Spring, MD 20910–7500. Officer. entitled ‘‘Hybrid Power Systems.’’ The [FR Doc. 00–7318 Filed 3–23–00; 8:45 am] goal of this procurement is to aid the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: CDR BILLING CODE 3810±FF±P development of systems that will Charles J. Schlagel, Office of Technology produce affordable, safe, Transfer, NMRC, phone (301) 319–7427, environmentally-friendly electrical fax (301) 319–7432, e-mail DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE power with a goal of eventually being [email protected]. 70+ percent efficient (lower heating Dated: March 10, 2000. Department of the Navy value) from fossil fuels. The work will J.L. Roth, focus on proof-of-concept systems of Notice of Intent To Grant Partially suppliers’ market entry product. The Lieutenant Commander, Judge Advocate Exclusive License; Ford Motor system shall contain any combination of General’s Corps, U.S. Navy, Federal Register Company Liaison Officer. existing or ‘‘near-term’’ power industry fuel-to-electricity conversion [FR Doc. 00–7319 Filed 3–23–00; 8:45 am] AGENCY: Department of the Navy, DOD. equipment. One of these components ACTION: Notice. BILLING CODE 3810±FF±P must be a high-temperature fuel cell. SUMMARY: The Department of the Navy DATES: The solicitation will be available hereby gives notice of its intent to grant on the DOE/NETL’s Internet address at
VerDate 20
VerDate 20
Any person desiring to be heard or to Point Facilities). El Paso states that DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY protest such filing should file a motion these facilities were required by El Paso to intervene or protest with the Federal to facilitate the sale and delivery of Federal Energy Regulatory Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 natural gas to Westar for resale to Commission First Street, NE, Washington, DC 20426, Energas Company, a Division of Atmos [Docket Nos. ER00±1258±000 and EL00±37± in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 Energy Corporation (Energas), a local 000] of the Commission’s Rules of Practice distribution company. El Paso further and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and states that El Paso owns, operates and First Electric Cooperative Corporation; 385.214). All such motions and protests 1 Notice of Issuance of Order maintains the 4 ⁄2-inch O.D., Fuel Line should be filed on or before March 31, from Phillips-Seninole Plant to Riley 2000. Protests will be considered by the March 20, 2000. Compressor Station (Line No. 6018), First Electric Cooperative Corporation Commission to determine the commencing in the Section 328, appropriate action to be taken, but will (First Electric) made a rate filing in C.C.S.D. & R.G.N.G.R.R. Co. Block G, Docket No. ER00–1258–000 pertaining be considered by the Commission to extending approximately 8.4 miles to to arrangements under which it determine the appropriate action to be provides facilities to Arkansas Electric taken, but will not serve to make the northeast, and terminating in Cooperative Corporation to provide protestants parties to the proceedings. Section 229, Waxahachie Tap R.R. Co., wheeling services to Entergy Arkansas Any person wishing to become a party Block G, all in Gaines County Texas. El and C&L Cooperative. Also, in Docket must file a motion to intervene. Copies Paso reports that El Paso and GPM have No. EL00–37–000, First Electric filed a of this filing are on file with the agreed to the conveyance of line No. request for certain waivers of the Commission and are available for public 6018 to GPM contingent upon El Paso’s Commission’s regulations. In particular, inspection. This filing may also be abandonment of the Delivery Point First Electric requested that the viewed on the Internet at http:// Facilities and the natural gas service Commission grant blanket approval www.ferc.fed.us/online/rims.htm (call they provide. El Paso further reports under 18 CFR Part 34 of all future 202–208–2222 for assistance). that by letter agreement dated October 21, 1999, Westar and Energas have issuances of securities and assumptions David P. Boergers, of liabilities by First Electric. On March consented to abandonment of the 15, 2000, the Commission issued an Secretary. Delivery Point Facilities and GPM and Order Granting Request for Waivers Of [FR Doc. 00–7316 Filed 3–23–00; 8:45 am] Westar will provide natural gas service, BILLING CODE 6717±01±M Order Nos. 888 And 889, Addressing pursuant to appropriate State regulatory Requests for Other Waivers And requirements. Accepting Rate Filing (Order), in the DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY El Paso states that the abandonment above-docketed proceedings. would not cause any material change in The Commission’s March 15, 2000 Federal Energy Regulatory El Paso’s cost of service. El Paso Order granted the request for blanket Commission continues the proposed abandonment approval under Part 34, subject to the [Docket No. CP00±125±000] would not result in or cause any conditions found in Ordering interruption, reduction or termination of Paragraphs (C), (D), and (H): El Paso Natural Gas Company; Notice the transportation service presently (C) Within 30 days of the date of this of Request Under Blanket rendered to the customers of the order, any person desiring to be heard Authorization Delivery Point Facilities. or to protest the Commission’s blanket approval of issuances of securities or March 20, 2000. Any person or the Commission’s staff assumptions of liabilities by First Take notice that on March 15, 2000, may, within 45 days after the Electric should file a motion to El Paso Natural Gas Company (El Paso), Commission has issued this notice, file intervene or protest with the Federal Post Office Box 1492, El Paso, Texas pursuant to Rule 214 of the Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 79987, filed a request with the Commission’s Procedural Rules (18 CFR First Street, N.E., Washington, D.C. Commission in Docket No. CP00–125– 385.214) a motion to intervene or notice 20426, in accordance with Rules 211 000, pursuant to Sections 157.216(b) of of intervention and pursuant to Section and 214 of the Commission’s Rules of the Commission’s Regulations under the 157.205 of the Regulations under the Practice And Procedure, 18 CFR 385.211 Natural Gas Act (NGA) for authorization NGA (18 CFR 157.205) a protest to the and 385.214. to abandon, by conveyance to GPM Gas request. If no protest is filed within the (D) Absent a request to be heard Corporation (GPM), seven taps serving allowed time, the proposed activity within the period set forth in Ordering Westar Transmission Company (Westar) shall be deemed to be authorized Paragraph (C) above, First Electric is and the service rendered by means effective the day after the time allowed hereby authorized to issue securities thereof authorized in blanket certificate for filing a protest. If a protest is filed and assume obligations and liabilities as issued in Docket No. CP82–435–000, all and not withdrawn within 30 days after guarantor endorser, surety or otherwise as more fully set forth in the request on the time allowed for filing a protest, the in respect of any security of another file with the Commission and open to person; provided that such issue or instant request shall be treated as an public inspection. This filing may be assumption is for some lawful object application for authorization pursuant viewed on the web at http:// within the corporate purposes of First www.ferc.fed.us/online/rims.htm (call to Section 7 of the NGA. Electric, compatible with the public 202–208–2222 for assistance). David P. Boergers, interest, and reasonably necessary or El Paso proposes to abandon seven Secretary. appropriate for such purposes. taps known as the Hanslik & Emens (H) The Commission reserves the right [FR Doc. 00–7317 Filed 3–23–00; 8:45 am] Tap, the Anna McCollum Tap, the Paul to modify this order to require a further McCollum Tap, the Howard D. Oliver BILLING CODE 6717±01±M showing that neither public nor private Tap, the Fred Belt Tap, the Bob J. Spears interests will be adversely affected by Tap and the R.T. Bedwell Tap (Delivery continued Commission approval of First
VerDate 20
Electric’s issuances of securities or or to protest the Commission’s blanket ER95–1001–000, EL95–17–000, ER95–1615– assumptions of liabilities***. approval of issuances of securities or 000, ER96–2709–000, TX97–7–000, ER00– Notice is hereby given that the assumptions of liabilities by the 1526–000, ER00–1381–000, ER00–1695–000, deadline for filing motions to intervene Applicants should file a motion to ER00–1743–000, ER00–536–000, ER00– or protests, as set forth above, is April 1820–000, EC98–40–000, ER98–2770–000, intervene or protest with the Federal ER98–2786–000, and EL99–57–000; Midwest 14, 2000. Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 Independent Transmission System Operator, Copies of the full text of the Order are First Street, N.E, Washington, D.C. Inc., The Cincinnati Gas & Electric Company, available from the Commission’s Public 20426, in accordance with Rules 211 Commonwealth Edison Company, Reference Branch, 888 First Street, N.E., and 214 of the Commission’s Rules of Commonwealth Edison Company of Indiana, Washington, D.C. 20426. The Order may Practice and Procedure, 18 CFR 385.211 Illinois Power Company, PSI Energy, Inc., also be viewed on the Internet at and 385.214. Wisconsin Electric Power Company, Union http://www.ferc.fed.us/online rims. htm (3) Absent a request to be heard Electric Company, Central Illinois Public (call 202–208–2222 for assistance). within the period set forth in Ordering Service Company, Louisville Gas & Electric Paragraph (2) above, if the Applicants Company, Kentucky Utilities Company, David P. Boergers, Alliance Companies; American Electric have requested such authorization, the Secretary. Power Service Corporation, Consumers Applicants are hereby authorized to [FR Doc. 00–7313 Filed 3–23–00; 8:45 am] Energy Company, Detroit Edison Company, issue securities and assume obligations FirstEnergy Corporation, Virginia Electric BILLING CODE 6717±01±M and liabilities as guarantor, indorser, and Power Company, Commonwealth Edison surety or otherwise in respect of any Company, Commonwealth Edison Company DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY security of another person; provided of Indiana, Inc., IES Utilities Inc., Interstate that such issue or assumption is for Power Company, MidAmerican Energy Federal Energy Regulatory some lawful object within the corporate Company, Midwest Independent purposes of the Applicants, compatible Transmission, System Operator, Inc., Mid- Commission Continent Area Power Pool, Southwest with the public interest, and reasonably Power Pool, Inc., UtiliCorp United Inc. and [Docket Nos. ER00±1139±000 and ER00± necessary or appropriate for such 1140±000, ER00±1141±000, ER00±1147±000, St. Joseph Light & Power Company, UtiliCorp ER00±1171±000 (Not consolidated)] purposes. United Inc. and The Empire District Electric (5) The Commission reserves the right Company, Commonwealth Edison Company Gleason Power I, L.L.C., West Fork to modify this order to require a further and PECO Energy Company, UtiliCorp Land Development Company, L.L.C., showing that neither public nor private United Inc. v. City of Harrisonville, Missouri, Des Plaines Green Land Development, interests will be adversely affected by Entergy Power Marketing Corporation v. L.L.C., AES Londonderry, LLC and continued Commission approval of the Southwest Power Pool, Central Power and Applicants’ issuances of securities or Light Company, West Texas Utilities Tiverton Power Associates Limited Company, Public Service Company of Partnership; Notice of Issuance of assumptions of liabilities. Notice is hereby given that the Oklahoma, Southwestern Electric Power Order Company, Prairieland Energy, Inc., Entergy deadline for filing motions to intervene Services, Inc., Central Power and Light March 20, 2000. or protests, as set forth above, is April Company, West Texas Utilities Company, Gleason Power I, L.L.C., West Fork 17, 2000. Public Service Company of Oklahoma, Land Development Company, L.L.C., Copies of the full text of the Order are Southwestern Electric Power Company, Des Plaines Green Land Development available from the Commission’s Public Northern States Power Company, et al. Company, L.L.C., AES Londonderry, Reference Branch, 888 First Street, NE., (Minnesota); Cheyenne Light, Fuel and LLC, and Tiverton Power Associates Washington, DC 20426. This issuance Power Company, et al., Northern States Limited Partnership (hereafter, ‘‘the may also be viewed on the Internet at Power Company, et al. (Minnesota), New Applicants’’) filed with the Commission http://www.ferc.fed.us/online/rims.htm Century Services, Inc., Mid-Continent Area rate schedules in the above-captioned (call 202–208–2222 for assistance.) Power Pool, Entergy Services, Inc., Mid- proceedings, respectively, under which Continent Area Power Pool, Entergy Services, Inc., Entergy Services, Inc. and Entergy the Applicants will engage in wholesale David P. Boergers, Secretary. Power, Inc., Entergy Power Marketing Corp., electric power and energy transactions Entergy Services, Inc., Missouri Basin at market-based rates, and for certain [FR Doc. 00–7314 Filed 3–23–00; 8:45 am] Municipal Power Agency, Reliant Energy waivers and authorizations. In BILLING CODE 6717±01±M Services, Inc., Ameren Services Company, particular, certain of the Applicants may Union Electric Company, d/b/a AmerenUE, also have requested in their respective Entergy Services, Inc., Southwestern Public applications that the commission grant DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Service Company, Commonwealth Edison blanket approval under 18 CFR Part 34 Company, Commonwealth Edison Company Federal Energy Regulatory of all future issuances of securities and of Indiana, American Electric Power Commission assumptions of liabilities by the Company and Central and South West Corporation and Entergy Services, Inc. Applicants. On March 16, 2000, the Regional Transmission Organizations; On December 20, 1999, the Commission issued an order that Notice of Meeting accepted the rate schedules for sales of Commission issued Order No. 2000 to capacity and energy at market-based March 20, 2000. advance the formation of Regional rates (Order), in the above-docketed In the matter of: RM99–2–000, ER98–1438– Transmission Organizations (RTOs). proceedings. 000, EC98–24–000, ER99–3144–000, EC99– Order No. 2000 announced the The Commission’s March 16, 2000 80–000, EL00–25–000, ER00–448–000, ER99– initiation of a regional collaborative Order granted, for those Applicants that 3318–000, EL00–39–000, EC00–27–000, process to aid in the formation of RTOs. sought such approval, their request for EC00–28–000, EC00–26–000, EL00–43–000, To initiate the collaborative process, the EL00–46–000, ER99–2779–000, TX00–2–000, Commission organized a series of blanket approval under Part 34, subject ER98–4410–000, ER99–1659–000, ER99– to the conditions found in Appendix B 1660–000, ER99–3914–000, ER99–3916–000, regional workshops. These workshops in Ordering Paragraphs (2), (3), and (5): EC99–101–000, ER99–1610–000, ER99–993– are open to all interested parties. The (2) Within 30 days of the date of this 000, ER98–2910–000, EL98–74–000, ER98– fourth workshop is scheduled for March order, any person desiring to be heard 3709–000, ER95–112–000, ER96–586–000, 29–30, 2000 in Kansas City, Missouri.
VerDate 20
During the course of the Kansas City Worth Metroplex, Dallas, Denton and Summary workshop, discussion of the above- Tarrant Counties, TX. EPA’s previous issues concerning the listed cases could arise. Any person Summary lack of a signed Memorandum of having an interest in an above-listed Understanding for the Comprehensive EPA has environmental concerns case is invited to attend the Kansas City Port Improvement Plan (CPIP), the about water quality. EPA requested workshop. There will be no Commission cumulative impacts analysis, and the no additional information regarding transcript of any of the workshops, and action alternative have been adequately optimum channel and lake morphology information discussion or disseminated addressed. EPA requested that air to ensure safe and recreational use in the workshop will not constitute part quality analyses be committed to in the compatible with water quality within of the decisional record in the above- Record of Decision for this project and the lakes. EPA also requested additional listed cases, unless formally, filed in completed prior to project information regarding the Dallas Master accordance with Commission implementation. EPA expressed Plan’s compatibility with Floodplain Regulations. concerns that until the CPIP is Management requirements established completed, impacts associated with port David P. Boergers, by Executive Order 11988. facility and infrastructure expansions Secretary. ERP No. D–NRS–A36450–00 Rating will not have been addressed. EPA [FR Doc. 00–7315 Filed 3–23–00; 8:45 am] EC2, Programmatic EIS—Emergency commented that a supplemental EIS for BILLING CODE 6717±01±M Watershed Protection Program, the Harbor Navigation Project may be Improvements and Expansion, To required at some point in the future. Preserve Life and Property Threatened ERP No. F–DOE–G60007–NM, The ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION by Disaster-Caused Erosion and Conveyance and Transfer of Certain AGENCY Flooding, US 50 States and Territories Land Tracts Administered by the US except Coastal Area. [ER±FRL±6252±5] DOE and Located at Los Alamos Summary National Laboratory, Los Alamos and Environmental Impact Statements and Santa Fe Counties, NM. Regulations; Availability of EPA EPA expressed concern that the Comments ‘‘Prioritized Watershed Planning and Summary Management’’ alternative was not EPA has no objection to the action as Availability of EPA comments selected as the proposed action. EPA proposed. prepared March 6, 2000 Through March requested several modifications to the 10, 2000 pursuant to the Environmental proposed program, including Dated: March 21, 2000. Review Process (ERP), under section requirements for cumulative impact B. Katherine Biggs, 309 of the Clean Air Act and section assessment and greater use of Associate Director, NEPA Compliance 102(2)(c) of the National Environmental bioengineering principles when Division Office of Federal Activities. Policy Act as amended. Requests for designing projects. [FR Doc. 00–7348 Filed 3–23–00; 8:45 am] copies of EPA comments can be directed Final EISs BILLING CODE 6560±50±U to the Office of Federal Activities at (202) 564–7167. ERP No. F–AFS–J65314–MT, Flathead An explanation of the ratings assigned National Forest, Swan Lake Ranger ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION to draft environmental impact District, Meadow Smith Project, AGENCY Vegetative Treatments and Other statements (EISs) was published in FR [ER-FRL±6252±4] dated April 9, 1999 (63 FR 17856). Activities to Maintain and Restore Large-Tree Old Grow Forest Draft EISs Environmental Impact Statements; Characteristics, Lake and Missoula Notice of Availability ERP No. D–AFS–L65342–00 Rating Counties, MT. EC2, Pacific Northwest Region Douglas- Responsible Agency: Office of Federal fir Tussock Moth (orgvia pseudotsugata) Summary Activities, General Information (202) Project, To Partially Control an EPA continues to express concern 564–7167 OR www.epa.gov/oeca/ofa. Anticipated Outbreak of Douglas-fir about the level of monitoring proposed Weekly receipt of Environmental Impact tussock moth, To be Implemented in to identify actual impacts from the Statements Nine National Forests in WA and OH. implementation activities. EPA also Filed March 13, 2000 Through March requested additional mitigation 17, 2000 Summary measures to reduce other impacts. Pursuant to 40 CFR 1506.9. EPA expressed concerns about the EIS ERP No. F–BLM–K67050–NV, South EIS No. 000078, Final EIS, SFW, ID, MT, lacking a clear demonstration that Pipeline Mine Project, Proposal to Grizzly Bear (Ursus arctos horribilus) defoliation by tussock moths would Extend Gold Mining Operations, Recovery Plan in the Bitterroot adversely affect the environment. EPA Implementation, Lander County, NV. Ecosystem, Implementation, also urged that the EIS apply the Endangered Species Act, Proposed protocol for addressing 303(d) waters, Summary Special Rule 10(j) Establishment of a discuss further the IPM approach used, EPA continues to express concern Nonessential Experimental and describe the indicators that would regarding air/water quality impacts and Population of Grizzly Bears in the trigger spraying. the ecological risk of pit lakes. EPA Bitterroot Area, Rocky Mountain, ERP No. D–COE–G36151–TX Rating requested that BLM address these issues Blaine, Camas, Boise, Clearwater, EC2, Programmatic EIS—Upper Trinity before the Record of Decision is signed. Custer, Elmore, Idaho, Lemhi, River Basin Feasibility Study, To ERP No. F–COE–C32035–00, New Shoshone, Due: April 24, 2000, Provide Flood Damage Reduction, York and New Jersey Harbor Navigation Contact: Dr. Christopher Servheen Environmental Restoration, Water Study, Identify, Screen and Select (406) 243–4903. Quality Improvement and Recreational Navigation Channel Improvements, NY EIS No. 000079, Draft EIS, FHW, VA, Enhancement, Trinity River, Dallas-Fort and NJ. Coalfields Expressway Location
VerDate 20
Study, Improvements from Route 23 ACTION: Notice and request for public to the Hazardous Substance Superfund. near Pound, VA to the WV State Line comment. This payment along with the $1.056 east of Slate, VA, Funding and COE million reimbursement via the de Section 404 Permit, Wise, Dickerson SUMMARY: In accordance with the minimis settlements constitutes and Buchanan, VA, Due: May 12, requirements in section 122(i)(1) of the approximately a 93% settlement of all 2000, Contact: Roberto Forseca- Comprehensive Environmental EPA’s costs at the site. Martinez (804) 775–3320. Response, Compensation and Liability In exchange for payment, EPA will Act (CERCLA), notice is hereby given of provide the settling parties with a Amended Notices a proposed past cost settlement under limited covenant not to sue for liability EIS No. 000001, Draft EIS, SFW, WA, section 122(h), concerning the Colorado under section 107(a) of CERCLA, which Tacoma Water Green River Water School of Mines Research Institute site includes liability for EPA’s past costs Supply Operations and Watershed in Golden, Colorado (Site). The and contribution protection for EPA’s Protection Habitat Conservation Plan, proposed Administrative Order on past costs and other past costs incurred Implementation, Issuance of a Consent (AOC) requires several before and including May 31, 1997. The Multiple Species Permit for Incidental Potentially Responsible Parties (PRPs), covenants and contribution protection Take, King County, WA, Due: March including Federal PRPs to pay an also extends to Colorado School of 31, 2000, Contact: Tim Romanski aggregate total of $871,000 to the United Mines (CSM), Colorado School of Mines (360) 753–5823. Published FR on 1– States Environmental Protection Agency Research Institute (CSMRI), and the 14–2000: CEQ Comment Date has (EPA) related to response actions taken State of Colorado who are also been extended from 03/14/2000 to 03/ at the Site. signatories to the agreement. The only 31/2000. DATES: Comments must be submitted by other past costs known at this time were EIS No. 000062, Final EIS, OSM, TN, April 24, 2000. incurred by the signatories to the Fall Creek Falls Petition Evaluation ADDRESSES: The proposed settlement is agreement. Document, Implementation, Designate available for public inspection at the For a period of thirty (30) days from the Land as Unsuitable for Surface EPA Superfund Record Center, 999 18th the date of this publication, the public Coal Mining Operation, Van Buren Street, 5th Floor, North Tower, Denver, may submit comments to EPA relating and Bledsoe Counties, TN , Due: May Colorado. Comments should be to this proposed past cost settlement. 03, 2000, Contact: Sam K. Bae (202) addressed to Kelcey Land, Enforcement A copy of the proposed AOC may be 208–2633. Published FR on 3–03– Specialist, (8ENF–T), U.S. obtained from Kelcey Land (8ENF–T), 2000: CEQ Comment Date has been Environmental Protection Agency, 999 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, extended from 04/03/2000 to 05/03/ 18th Street, Suite 500, Denver, Region VIII, 999 18th Street, Suite 5000, 2000. Colorado, 80202–2405, and should Colorado 80202–2405, (303) 312–6393. reference the Colorado School of Mines Additional background information EIS No. 000074, Draft EIS, AFS, CO, Research Institute Past Cost Settlement relating to the proposed cost settlement Upper Blue Stewardship Project, (EPA Docket No. CERCLA–8–2000–7). is available for review at the Superfund Implementation of Vegetation FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Records Center at the above address. Management, Travel Management, It is So Agreed. Designation of Dispersed Camping Kelcey Land, Enforcement Specialist, at Sites, White River National Forest, (303) 312–6393. Jack W. McGraw, Dillon Ranger District, Summit SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice of Acting Regional Administrator, Region VIII. County, CO, Due: May 01, 2000, section 122(h) past cost settlement: In [FR Doc. 00–7328 Filed 3–23–00; 8:45 am] Contact: Kathleen Phelps (970) 468– accordance with section 122(i)(1) of BILLING CODE 6560±50±U 5400. Published FR–3–17–00— CERCLA, notice is hereby given that the Correction to Comment Period from terms of an Administrative Order on 5–12–2000 to 5–1–2000 and Consent (AOC) has been agreed to by ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION Correction to Title. the following parties: AGENCY The PRPs include: ASARCO Inc., BP Dated: March 21, 2000. America, Inc., Cotter Corporation, [FRL±6564±4] B. Katherine Biggs, Cyprus Amax Minerals Company, El Announcement of Schedule for Associate Director, Office of Federal Paso Natural Gas Company, Elf Activities. Resource Conservation & Recovery Aquitane, Inc. on behalf of several Act (RCRA) Corrective Action [FR Doc. 00–7349 Filed 3–23–00; 8:45 am] Texasgulf companies, ExxonMobil Coal BILLING CODE 6560±50±U Guidance Documents and Request for and Minerals Company, N.L. Industries, Feedback on RCRA Cleanup Reforms Inc., Inspiration Consolidated Copper Company, Phelps Dodge Corporation, AGENCY: Environmental Protection ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION Terra Industries, Inc., and Western Agency (EPA). AGENCY Nuclear, Inc. as well as several affiliates ACTION: Notice . of these companies, all of whom are [FRL±6563±6] listed in Attachment A of the agreement. SUMMARY: The intent of this notice is to Proposed Past Cost Settlement The private PRPs paid a total of announce a schedule and invite Pursuant to the Comprehensive $480,993.48. comment on three upcoming RCRA Environmental Response, Several federal PRPs were also Cleanup Reforms draft guidance Compensation, and Liability Act identified at the site, however only the documents and invite additional (CERCLA), as Amended by the Bureau of Mines is a signatory to the feedback on the Resource Conservation Superfund Amendments and agreement. The United States paid a & Recovery Act (RCRA) Cleanup Reauthorization ActÐGolden, CO total of $390,006.52 in settlement of the Reforms announced on July 8, 1999. By claims against all federal entities. inviting additional feedback and giving AGENCY: Environmental Protection By the terms of the proposed AOC, advanced notice of when we expect Agency. these parties will together pay $871,000 these draft guidance documents to be
VerDate 20
VerDate 20
Cleanup Reforms announcement on July groundwater at RCRA facilities. It will following Websites: www.epa.gov/ 8, 1999 as a result of the Agency’s highlight the considerable flexibility in correctiveaction and www.epa.gov/ current thinking. existing policies, particularly to those epaoswer/osw/cleanup. states that have distinguished the A. Results-Based Approaches to B. Feedback on RCRA Reforms relative value and priority of their Corrective Action groundwater resources. The Handbook We continue to seek feedback from all This guidance will take the form of an will also encourage States to take a lead stakeholders on the need for additional overview and supporting documents. role in protecting their groundwater reforms to the RCRA Corrective Action The ‘‘Overview to Results-Based resources. program. Approaches to Corrective Action’’ Topic areas that will be discussed in defines results-based corrective action the guidance will include: Groundwater V. How Can I Influence EPA’s Thinking and lists some of the approaches Use Designations, Short-Term on the RCRA Corrective Action recommended to help stakeholders Protectiveness Goals, Final Remediation Program? achieve program goals. These Goals, Cleanup Levels, Point of approaches include tailored oversight, In developing these upcoming draft Compliance, Source Control, Monitored guidances and the RCRA Cleanup procedural flexibility, holistic approach, Natural Attenuation, Technical presumptive remedies, performance Reforms, we are trying to address the Impracticability, and Completing key factors that may be impeding timely standards, use of innovative Remedies. technologies, targeted data collection, and cost-effective cleanups. We invite and owner/operator initiated corrective III. Why Are These Guidance you to provide different views, or new action. The first supporting document Documents Significant? approaches we haven’t considered in focuses on implementing tailored trying to improve the pace and The draft guidance documents effectiveness of Corrective Action oversight. It provides a recommended discussed above are significant because framework for project managers and Cleanups. We welcome your views on EPA announced on October 7, 1999 (64 the draft guidances and any aspect of owner/operators to develop an oversight FR 54604) that it would not be finalizing plan tailored to site-specific conditions. the Reforms. Your feedback will be most the vast majority of the 1990 Proposed effective if you follow the suggestions B. Corrective Action Completion Subpart S regulations. EPA withdrew below: most of the proposed rule because we This document will guide the Regions determined that such regulations are not —Explain your views as clearly as and the authorized States through issues necessary to carry out the Agency’s possible and why you feel that way, that arise at the end of the corrective duties under sections 3004 (u) and (v). —Provide solid technical and cost data action process at RCRA treatment, Additionally, attempting to promulgate to support your views, storage, and disposal facilities (TSDF). a comprehensive set of RCRA —Tell us which parts you support, as Formal recognition that corrective regulations could unnecessarily disrupt well as those you disagree with, action activities are complete provides the State and Territorial programs assurance to the owner or operator that already authorized to carry out the —Provide solid technical and cost data EPA intends no further imposition of Corrective Action Program in lieu of to support your views, RCRA corrective action requirements at EPA, as well as the additional State —Tell us which parts you support, as the site unless the facility continues to programs currently undergoing review well as those you disagree with, operate as a TSDF and there is a for authorization. This decision ended subsequent release. Providing this —Provide specific examples to illustrate uncertainty related to the Subpart S your point, assurance can help communities return rulemaking for State regulators and previously used commercial and owners and operators of hazardous —Offer specific Reforms, industrial properties, such as waste management facilities. The —Refer your comments to specific ‘‘brownfields,’’ to productive use. guidance documents discussed in this sections of the Reforms material, and It is important that EPA Regions and notice will provide some further the authorized States understand the —Be sure to include the name, date, and direction on performing the cleanup, or docket number with your comments. issues related to corrective action ‘‘corrective action,’’ of contamination at completion. This guidance will provide RCRA facilities. EPA continues to seek feedback from useful information, and will encourage all stakeholders on the need for appropriate and timely action on the IV. What Is the Proposed Schedule? additional reforms to the RCRA part of regulators. A. Guidance Document Review Corrective Action Program. Based on stakeholder input and our ongoing C. Handbook of Groundwater Policies We anticipate that all the draft for RCRA Corrective Action assessment of the program, we will guidance documents will be available continue to refine the RCRA Cleanup EPA is compiling in a single for public review and comment in Reforms, add reforms as needed, and Handbook most policies concerning spring 2000. These guidance documents communicate program changes groundwater at facilities subject to are likely to become available at including those resulting from corrective action under RCRA. This different times this spring. They will be stakeholder input. EPA may need to Handbook will help address concerns available for review for a period of sixty seek clarification of electronic or written about time-consuming uncertainties and (60) days for each draft guidance feedback, or feedback received over the confusion about EPA’s expectations for document. EPA is announcing the telephone. groundwater protection and clean up. It upcoming availability of the draft will help you as regulators and members guidance documents for review and Dated: March 17, 2000. of the regulated community, as well as comment and information on how to Elizabeth A. Cotsworth, the general public, find and understand obtain them when they are available and Director, Office of Solid Waste. EPA policies on groundwater use and provide input on them to the Agency in [FR Doc. 00–7326 Filed 3–23–00; 8:45 am] the protection and clean up of this Federal Register and also on the BILLING CODE 6560±50±U
VerDate 20
EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY (EEOC) enforces the ADEA of 1967, as Commission’s functions, including COMMISSION amended, 29 U.S.C. 621 et seq., which whether the information will have prohibits discrimination against practical utility; Agency Information Collection employees and applicants for (2) Evaluate the accuracy of the Activities: Proposed Collection; employment who are age 40 or older. Commission’s estimate of the burden of Comments Request Congress amended the ADEA by the proposed collection of information, enacting the Older Workers Benefit including the validity of the AGENCY: Equal Employment Protection Act of 1990 (OWBPA), Pub. methodology and assumptions used; Opportunity Commission. L. No. 101–433, 104 Stat. 983 (1990), to (3) Enhance the quality, utility, and ACTION: Notice. clarify the prohibitions against clarity of the information to be SUMMARY: In accordance with the discrimination on the basis of age. In collected; and Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, the Title II of OWBPA, Congress addressed (4) Minimize the burden of the Commission announces that it intends waivers of rights and claims under the collection of information on those who to submit to the Office of Management ADEA, amending section 7 of the ADEA are to respond, including the use of and Budget (OMB) a request for an by adding a new subsection (f), 29 appropriate automated, electronic, extension of the expiration date without U.S.C. 626(f). The provisions of Title II mechanical, or other technological change to the existing collection of OWBPA do require employers to collection techniques or other forms of requirements under 29 CFR 1625.22, provide certain information to information technology, e.g., permitting Waivers of rights and claims under the employees (but not to EEOC) in writing. electronic submission of responses. ADEA. The Commission is seeking The regulation at 29 CFR 1625.22 Dated: March 17, 2000. public comments on the proposed reiterates those requirements. For the Commission. extension. The EEOC seeks extension without change of the information collection Ida L. Castro, DATES: Written comments on this notice requirements contained in this Chairwoman. must be submitted on or before May 23, recordkeeping regulation. [FR Doc. 00–7265 Filed 3–23–00; 8:45 am] 2000. Collection Title: Informational BILLING CODE 6570±01±P ADDRESSES: Comments should be requirements under Title II of the Older submitted to Frances M. Hart, Executive Workers Benefit Protection Act of 1990 Officer, Executive Secretariat, Equal (OWBPA), 29 CFR Part 1625. Employment Opportunity Commission, Form Number: None. Frequency of FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS 10th Floor, 1801 L Street, NW, Report: None required. COMMISSION Washington, DC 20507. As a OMB Control No. 3046–0042. convenience to commentators, the Type of Respondent: Business, state or [Report No. 2395] Executive Secretariat will accept local governments, not for profit comments transmitted by facsimile institutions. Petitions for Reconsideration of Action (‘‘FAX’’) machine. The telephone Description of the Affected Public: in Rulemaking Proceedings Any employer with 20 or more number for the FAX receiver is (202) March 16, 2000. 663–4114. (This is not a toll-free employees that seeks waiver agreements in connection with exit incentive or Petitions for Reconsideration have number.) Only comments of six or fewer been filed in the Commission’s pages will be accepted via FAX other employment termination programs (hereinafter, ‘‘Programs’’). rulemaking proceedings listed in this transmittal. This limitation is necessary Public Notice and published pursuant to to assure access to the equipment. Responses: 13,713. Reporting Hours: 41,139. 47 CFR Section 1.429(e). The full text of Receipt of FAX transmittals will not be these documents are available for acknowledged, except that the sender Number of Forms: None. Abstract: This requirement does not viewing and copying in Room CY– may request confirmation of receipt by involve record keeping. It consists of A257, 445 12th Street, S.W., calling the Executive Secretariat staff at providing adequate information in Washington, D.C. or may be purchased (202) 663–4078 (voice) or (202) 663– waiver agreements offered to a group or from the Commission’s copy contractor, 4074 (TDD). (These are not toll-free class of persons in connection with a ITS, Inc. (202) 857–3800. Oppositions to telephone numbers.) Copies of Program, to satisfy the requirements of these petitions must be filed by April comments submitted by the public will the OWBPA. 10, 2000. See Section 1.4(b)(1) of the be available for review at the Burden Statement: There is no Commission’s rules (47 CFR 1.4(b)(1)). Commission’s library, Room 6502, 1801 reporting requirement nor additional Replies to an opposition must be filed L Street, NW, Washington, DC 20507 record keeping associated with this rule. within 10 days after the time for filing between the hours of 9:30 a.m. and 5:00 The only paperwork burden involved is oppositions has expired. p.m. the inclusion of the relevant data in Subject: Amendment of Part 90 of the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: waiver agreements. The rule applies Commission’s Rules to Facilitate Future Joseph N. Cleary, Assistant Legal only to those employers who have 20 or Development of SMR Systems in The Counsel, Office of Legal Counsel, at more employees and who offer waivers 800 MHz Frequency Band (PR Docket (202) 663–4647 or TTY (202) 663–7026. to a group or class of employees in No. 93–144, RM–8117, RM–8030, RM– This notice is also available in the connection with a Program. 8029). following formats: large print, braille, Pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction Implementation of Sections 3(n) and audio tape and electronic file on Act of 1995, 44 U.S.C. Chapter 5, and 332 of the Communications Act— computer disk. Requests for this notice OMB regulation 5 CFR 1320.8(d)(1), the Regulatory Treatment of Mobile in an alternative format should be made Commission solicits public comment to Services (GN Docket No. 93–252). to the Publications Center at 1–800– enable it to: Implementation of Section 309(j) of 669–3362. (1) Evaluate whether the proposed the Communications Act—Competitive SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Equal collection of information is necessary Bidding (PP Docket No. 93–253). Employment Opportunity Commission for the proper performance of the Number of Petitions Filed: 2.
VerDate 20
Federal Communications Commission. amended to include the following areas Community Disaster Loans; 83.538, Cora Magalie Roman Salas, among those areas determined to have Brown Fund Program; 83.539, Crisis Counseling; 83.540, Disaster Legal Services Secretary. been adversely affected by the Program; 83.541, Disaster Unemployment [FR Doc. 00–7302 Filed 3–23–00; 8:45 am] catastrophe declared a major disaster by Assistance (DUA); 83.542, Fire Suppression BILLING CODE 6712±01±M the President in his declaration of Assistance; 83.543, Individual and Family February 28, 2000: Grant (IFG) Program; 83.544, Public Bourbon, Johnson, Lawrence, Oldham, and Assistance Grants; 83.545, Disaster Housing Pendleton Counties for Public Assistance Program; 83.548, Hazard Mitigation Grant FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE Program.) CORPORATION Carter County for Public Assistance (already designated for Individual Assistance) Lacy E Suiter, (The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Sunshine Act Meeting Executive Associate Director, Response and Assistance Numbers (CFDA) are to be used Recovery Directorate. Pursuant to the provisions of the for reporting and drawing funds: 83.537, ‘‘Government in the Sunshine Act’’ (5 Community Disaster Loans; 83.538, Cora [FR Doc. 00–7330 Filed 3–23–00; 8:45 am] U.S.C. 552b), notice is hereby given that Brown Fund Program; 83.539, Crisis BILLING CODE 6718±02±P at 2:00 pm on Friday, March 24, 2000, Counseling; 83.540, Disaster Legal Services Program; 83.541, Disaster Unemployment the Federal Deposit Insurance Assistance (DUA); 83.542, Fire Suppression FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM Corporation’s Board of Directors will Assistance; 83.543, Individual and Family meet in closed session, pursuant to Grant (IFG) Program; 83.544, Public Agency Information Collection sections 552b(c)(2), (c)(6), (c)(8), Assistance Grants; 83.545, Disaster Housing Activities: Announcement of Board (c)(9)(A)(ii), and (c)(9)(B), of Title 5, Program; 83.548, Hazard Mitigation Grant Approval Under Delegated Authority Program.) United States Code, to consider matters and Submission to OMB relating to the Corporation’s Robert J. Adamcik, supervisory, corporate, and personnel SUMMARY: Deputy Associate Director, Response and activities. Recovery Directorate. Background The meeting will be held in the Board [FR Doc. 00–7331 Filed 3–23–00; 8:45 am] Room on the sixth floor of the FDIC Notice is hereby given of the final Building located at 550 17th Street, NW, BILLING CODE 6718±02±P approval of proposed information Washington, DC. collection(s) by the Board of Governors Requests for further information of the Federal Reserve System (Board) FEDERAL EMERGENCY under OMB delegated authority, as per concerning the meeting may be directed MANAGEMENT AGENCY to Mr. Robert E. Feldman, Executive 5 CFR 1320.16 (OMB Regulations on Secretary of the Corporation, at (202) [FEMA±1318±DR] Controlling Paperwork Burdens on the 898–6757. Public). Board-approved collections of Virginia; Amendment No. 3 to Notice of information are incorporated into the Dated: March 21, 2000. a Major Disaster Declaration official OMB inventory of currently Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation. approved collections of information. AGENCY: Robert E. Feldman, Federal Emergency Copies of the OMB 83–Is and supporting Management Agency (FEMA). Executive Secretary. statements and approved collection of [FR Doc. 00–7394 Filed 3–21–00; 4:48 pm] ACTION: Notice. information instrument(s) are placed into OMB’s public docket files. The BILLING CODE 6714±01±M SUMMARY: This notice amends the notice of a major disaster for the Federal Reserve may not conduct or sponsor, and the respondent is not Commonwealth of Virginia, (FEMA– required to respond to, an information FEDERAL EMERGENCY 1318–DR), dated February 28, 2000, and collection that has been extended, MANAGEMENT AGENCY related determinations. revised, or implemented on or after [FEMA±1320±DR] EFFECTIVE DATE: March 20, 2000. October 1, 1995, unless it displays a FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: currently valid OMB control number. Kentucky; Amendment No. 2 to Notice Madge Dale, Response and Recovery FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: of a Major Disaster Declaration Directorate, Federal Emergency Chief, Financial Reports Section—Mary Management Agency, Washington, DC AGENCY: Federal Emergency M. West—Division of Research and Management Agency (FEMA). 20472, (202) 646–3772. Statistics, Board of Governors of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The notice Federal Reserve System, Washington, ACTION: Notice. of a major disaster for the DC 20551 (202–452–3829) OMB Desk SUMMARY: This notice amends the notice Commonwealth of Virginia is hereby Officer—Alexander T. Hunt—Office of of a major disaster for the amended to include the following areas Information and Regulatory Affairs, Commonwealth of Kentucky, (FEMA– among those areas determined to have Office of Management and Budget, New 1320–DR), dated February 28, 2000, and been adversely affected by the Executive Office Building, Room 3208, related determinations. catastrophe declared a major disaster by Washington, DC 20503 (202–395–7860). the President in his declaration of EFFECTIVE DATE: March 13, 2000. Final Approval Under OMB Delegated February 28, 2000: FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Authority of the Extension for Three Madge Dale, Response and Recovery The City of Lynchburg and the City of Years, Without Revision, of the Directorate, Federal Emergency Norton for debris removal (Category A), Following Reports emergency protective measures (Category B), Management Agency, Washington, DC and utilities (Category F) under Public 1. Report title: Interagency Notice of 20472, (202) 646–3772. Assistance. Change in Control, Interagency Notice of SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The notice (The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Change in Director or Senior Executive of a major disaster for the Assistance Numbers (CFDA) are to be used Officer, and Interagency Biographical Commonwealth of Kentucky is hereby for reporting and drawing funds: 83.537, and Financial Report.
VerDate 20
Agency form numbers: FR 2081a, FR Reporters: Foreign branches and Final Approval Under OMB Delegated 2081b, and FR 2081c. banking subsidiaries of U.S. depository Authority to Conduct, Without OMB control number: 7100–0134. institutions. Revision, the Following Report Frequency: On occasion. Annual reporting hours: 2,236 burden 1. Report title: The Quinquennial Reporters: Financial institutions and hours. Finance Company Questionnaire and certain of their officers and Estimated average hours per response: Survey. shareholders. 1.0 hour. Agency form number: FR 3033p/s. Annual reporting hours: Interagency Number of respondents: 43. Small OMB control number: 7100–0277. Notice of Change in Control—4,800 businesses are not affected. Frequency: One-time. hours; Interagency Notice of Change in Reporters: Domestic finance General description of report: This companies. Director or Senior Executive Officer— information collection is voluntary (12 150 hours; Interagency Biographical and Annual reporting hours: U.S.C.§§ 248(a)(2), 353 et seq., 461, 602, Questionnaire, 750 hours; Survey, 840 Financial Report—5,100 hours; Total— and 625). Individual respondents data 10,050 hours. hours. are confidential under section (b)(4) of Estimated average hours per response: Estimated average hours per response: the Freedom of Information Act (5 Questionnaire, 0.25 hours; Survey, 1.4 Interagency Notice of Change in U.S.C. 552(b)(4)). hours. Control—30 hours; Interagency Notice Abstract: The report collects data on Number of respondents: of Change in Director or Senior Eurodollar deposits payable to nonbank Questionnaire, 3000; Survey, 600. Small Executive Officer—2 hours; Interagency U.S. addressees from foreign branches businesses are affected. Biographical and Financial Report—4 and subsidiaries of U.S. commercial General description of report: This hours. banks and Edge and agreement information collection is voluntary (12 Number of respondents: Interagency corporations. The data are used for the U.S.C. 225a, 263, and 353–359) and is Notice of Change in Control—160; construction of the Eurodollar given confidential treatment (5 U.S.C. Interagency Notice of Change in Director component of the monetary aggregates 552(b)(4)). or Senior Executive Officer—75; and for analysis of banks’ liability Abstract: Since 1995 the Federal Interagency Biographical and Financial management practices. Reserve has conducted surveys of Report—1,275. Small businesses are Current Actions: The Federal Reserve domestic finance companies every five affected. will raise the reporting cutoff from a years on consumer and business credit General description of report: This weekly average of $350 million to $500 and on major assets and liabilities of information collection is mandatory (12 million in Eurodollar liabilities. finance companies. The first stage is a U.S.C. 1817(j) and 12 U.S.C. 1831(i)) simple questionnaire (FR 3033p) which 2. Report title: The Quarterly Report and is not given confidential treatment. is sent to all domestic finance of Assets and Liabilities of Large companies. The questionnaire asks for Abstract: In 1996 a Federal Financial Foreign Offices of U.S. Banks. Institutions Examination Council task information on each company’s total force adapted, reformatted, and retitled Agency form number: FR 2502q. receivables, areas of specialization, and the three reports, pursuant to the Riegle OMB control number: 7100–0079. other characteristics. From the universe Community Development and Frequency: Quarterly. of FR 3033p respondents, the Federal Regulatory Improvement Act of 1994. Reporters: Large foreign branches and Reserve will draw a stratified random The Federal Reserve uses the banking subsidiaries of U.S. depository sample for the survey itself (FR 3033s). biographical portions of the collections institutions. The survey will request detailed information, as of June 30, 2000, from to evaluate the competence, experience, Annual reporting hours: 13,132 hours. character, and integrity of persons both sides of the respondents’ balance proposed as organizers, senior executive Estimated average hours per response: sheet. 3.5 hours. officers, directors, or principal Final Approval Under OMB Delegated shareholders. The financial portion is Number of respondents: 938. Small businesses are not affected. Authority to Conduct Two-One Time used to evaluate the financial ability of Surveys persons proposed as organizers, senior General description of report: This executive officers, directors, or principal information collection is required (12 1. Report title: Customer Satisfaction shareholders. The reports are also used U.S.C.§§ 248(a)(2), 353 et seq., 461, 602, Survey of Federal Reserve Bulletin to allow or disapprove proposed and 625) and is given confidential Subscribers, and Customer Satisfaction acquisitions. The reporting forms allow treatment (5 U.S.C. 552(b)(4)). Survey of Publication Subscribers. applicants greater efficiency in the Abstract: The report collects gross Agency form number: FR 1371; and interagency application process assets and liability positions from FR 1372. OMB Control number: 7100–0293. including eliminating duplicative foreign branches and subsidiaries of filings. Frequency: One-time. U.S. commercial banks and Edge and Reporters: Federal Reserve Bulletin Final Approval Under OMB Delegated agreement corporations vis-a-vis subscribers; and Federal Reserve Authority of the Extension for Three individual countries. A separate publications subscribers. Years, With Minor Revisions, of the schedule collects information on Annual reporting hours: FR 1371, 100; Following Reports Eurodollar liabilities payable to certain and FR 1372, 100. U.S. addressees. Estimated average hours per response: 1. Report title: The Weekly Report of Current Actions: The Federal Reserve 0.25 hours per survey. Eurodollar Liabilities Held by Selected will add the European Central Bank to Number of respondents: 400 per U.S. Addressees at Foreign Offices of the country list. In addition, the survey. Small businesses are affected. U.S. Banks. instructions will be clarified to say that General description of report: This Agency form number: FR 2050. U.S. banks report only for subsidiaries information collection is voluntary (12 OMB control number: 7100–0068. that have a banking charter and are U.S.C 248i). The individual date are not Frequency: Weekly. engaged in banking business. considered confidential.
VerDate 20
Abstract: The Customer Satisfaction Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve acquire Independent Bank & Trust Survey of Federal Reserve Bulletin System, March 20, 2000. Company, Powder Springs, Georgia. Subscribers (FR 1371) will solicit Jennifer J. Johnson, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve comments on the content and Secretary of the Board. System, March 20, 2000. usefulness of the Federal Reserve’s [FR Doc. 00–7269 Filed 3–23–00; 8:45 am] Robert deV. Frierson, monthly Bulletin from a sample of BILLING CODE 6210±01±P Associate Secretary of the Board. subscribers. The staff is focusing on the [FR Doc. 00–7271 Filed 3–23–00; 8:45 am] Bulletin because the Board devotes substantial resources to this publication FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM BILLING CODE 6210±01±P and will use the information from this Formations of, Acquisitions by, and survey to determine whether the Board FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM should continue to publish the Bulletin Mergers of Bank Holding Companies in its current form. The Customer Notice of Proposals To Engage in Satisfaction Survey of Publication The companies listed in this notice have applied to the Board for approval, Permissible Nonbanking Activities or Subscribers (FR 1372) will solicit To Acquire Companies That Are comments on the quality of the pursuant to the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956 (12 U.S.C. 1841 et seq.) Engaged in Permissible Nonbanking customer service provided by the Activities Board’s Publications Services (BHC Act), Regulation Y (12 CFR part Department. The information will be 225), and all other applicable statutes The companies listed in this notice used to assess whether the needs of the and regulations to become a bank have given notice under section 4 of the Board’s subscribers are being met in a holding company and/or to acquire the Bank Holding Company Act (12 U.S.C. courteous and expeditious manner and assets or the ownership of, control of, or 1843) (BHC Act) and Regulation Y, (12 whether changes should be made to the the power to vote shares of a bank or CFR Part 225) to engage de novo, or to ordering and payment policies and bank holding company and all of the acquire or control voting securities or processes in order to increase efficiency banks and nonbanking companies assets of a company, including the and customer satisfaction. owned by the bank holding company, companies listed below, that engages including the companies listed below. either directly or through a subsidiary or Discontinuation of the Following The applications listed below, as well other company, in a nonbanking activity Report as other related filings required by the that is listed in § 225.28 of Regulation Y Board, are available for immediate 1. Report title: Report of Medium (12 CFR 225.28) or that the Board has inspection at the Federal Reserve Bank Term Note Issuance. determined by Order to be closely indicated. The application also will be related to banking and permissible for Agency form number: FR 2600. available for inspection at the offices of bank holding companies. Unless OMB control number: 7100–0245. the Board of Governors. Interested otherwise noted, these activities will be Effective Date: Friday, March 31, persons may express their views in conducted throughout the United States. 2000. writing on the standards enumerated in Each notice is available for inspection the BHC Act (12 U.S.C. 1842(c)). If the at the Federal Reserve Bank indicated. Frequency: Monthly, quarterly, or proposal also involves the acquisition of semi-annually. The notice also will be available for a nonbanking company, the review also inspection at the offices of the Board of Reporters: U.S. firms filing SEC shelf includes whether the acquisition of the Governors. Interested persons may registration statements for medium term nonbanking company complies with the express their views in writing on the notes. standards in section 4 of the BHC Act question whether the proposal complies Annual reporting hours: 94 burden (12 U.S.C. 1843). Unless otherwise with the standards of section 4 of the hours. noted, nonbanking activities will be BHC Act. Additional information on all Estimated average hours per response: conducted throughout the United States. bank holding companies may be 0.083 hours. Additional information on all bank obtained from the National Information holding companies may be obtained Center website at www.ffiec.gov/nic/. Number of respondents: 424. Small from the National Information Center businesses are affected. Unless otherwise noted, comments website at www.ffiec.gov/nic/. regarding the applications must be General description of report: This Unless otherwise noted, comments received at the Reserve Bank indicated information collection is voluntary (15 regarding each of these applications or the offices of the Board of Governors U.S.C. §§ 225a and 353 et seq). must be received at the Reserve Bank not later than April 7, 2000. Respondent data are not regarded as indicated or the offices of the Board of A. Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis confidential. Governors not later than April 17, 2000. (Randall C. Sumner, Vice President) 411 Abstract: The FR 2600 collects A. Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta Locust Street, St. Louis, Missouri information on the monthly volume of (Lois Berthaume, Vice President) 104 63166–2034: medium-term notes issued by Marietta Street, NW., Atlanta, Georgia 1. First Banks, Inc., Creve Coeur, corporations. 30303–2713: Missouri; to acquire certain assets and Current Actions: The Federal Reserve 1. United Community Banks, Inc., assume certain liabilities of First Capital will discontinue the FR 2600. The Blairsville, Georgia; to merge with North Group, Inc., Albuquerque, New Mexico, report has become unnecessary because Point Bancshares, Inc., Dawsonville, and thereby engage in leasing personal data are now obtained from the Georgia, and thereby indirectly acquire and real property activities, pursuant to Depository Trust Corporation, a national Dawson County Bank, Dawsonville, § 225.28(b)(3) of Regulation Y. The clearing house that collects data on Georgia. leasing activities will be conducted in a medium-term notes issued in the course 2. United Community Banks, Inc., newly formed direct wholly owned of its business of clearing and settling Blairsville, Georgia; to merge with subsidiary of Notificant, which will securities and acting as trustee for Independent Bancshares, Inc., Powder assume the selling institution’s name of holders of securities. Springs, Georgia, and thereby indirectly First Capital Group, Inc. and retain its
VerDate 20
VerDate 20
• What other types of grocery associated with claims since only one (4) the use of automated collection marketing practices—such as category reimbursement coding system is used techniques or other forms of information management—may raise antitrust and maintained. technology to minimize the information concern? What are those marketing Frequency: On occasion; collection burden. practices, and under what Affected Public: Business or other for- Type of Information Collection circumstances might they pose antitrust profit, Not-for-profit institutions, Request: Extension of a currently issues? Federal Government, and State, Local or approved collection; The Commission welcomes Tribal Government; Title of Information Collection: suggestions for other questions that Number of Respondents 47,113; Analysis of Malpractice Premium Data; Total Annual Responses: 149,609,549; Form No.: HCFA–R–143 (OMB# should be addressed as well. Total Annual Hours: 1,960,991. 0938–0575); By direction of the Commission. To obtain copies of the supporting Use: This form is used for computing statement and any related forms for the Donald S. Clark, the Medicare physician fee schedule proposed paperwork collections Secretary. Malpractice Geographic Practice Cost referenced above, access HCFA’s Web [FR Doc. 00–7268 Filed 3–23–00; 8:45 am] Index (MGPCI) and the Medicare Site address at http://www.hcfa.gov/ BILLING CODE 6750±01±M Economic Index (MEI). The data regs/prdact95.htm, or E-mail your collected will be used to update the request, including your address, phone MGPCI and the new resource-based number, OMB number, and HCFA DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND malpractice relative value units document identifier, to HUMAN SERVICES (MRVUs) component of the physician [email protected], or call the Reports fee schedule. The malpractice data are Clearance Office on (410) 786–1326. Health Care Financing Administration critical to the accuracy of the Medicare Written comments and physician fee schedule.; [Document Identifier: HCFA±1450] recommendations for the proposed Frequency: Other: every 3 years; information collections must be mailed Agency Information Collection Affected Public: State, Local or Tribal within 30 days of this notice directly to Activities: Submission for OMB Gov., Business or other for-profit, and the OMB desk officer: OMB Human Review; Comment Request Not-for-profit institutions; Resources and Housing Branch, Number of Respondents: 50; AGENCY: Health Care Financing Attention: Allison Eydt, New Executive Total Annual Responses: 50; Administration. Office Building, Room 10235, Total Annual Hours: 150. In compliance with the requirement Washington, DC 20503. To obtain copies of the supporting of section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the Dated: March 14, 2000. statement for the proposed paperwork Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, the John P. Burke III, collections referenced above, access Health Care Financing Administration Manager, HCFA Office of Information HCFA’s WEB SITE ADDRESS at http:// (HCFA), Department of Health and Services, Security and Standards Group, www.hcfa.gov/regs/prdact95.htm, or E- Human Services, is publishing the Division of HCFA Enterprise Standards. mail your request, including your following summary of proposed [FR Doc. 00–7284 Filed 3–23–00; 8:45 am] address and phone number, to collections for public comment. BILLING CODE 4120±03±M [email protected], or call the Reports Interested persons are invited to send Clearance Office on (410) 786–1326. comments regarding this burden Written comments and estimate or any other aspect of this DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND recommendations for the proposed collection of information, including any HUMAN SERVICES information collections must be mailed of the following subjects: (1) The within 30 days of this notice directly to necessity and utility of the proposed Health Care Financing Administration the OMB Desk Officer designated at the information collection for the proper [Document Identifier: HCFA±R±143] following address: OMB Human performance of the agency’s functions; Resources and Housing Branch, (2) The accuracy of the estimated Agency Information Collection Attention: Allison Eydt, New Executive burden; (3) Ways to enhance the quality, Activities: Submission for OMB Office Building, Room 10235, utility, and clarity of the information to Review; Comment Request Washington, DC 20503. be collected; and (4) The use of Dated: February 8, 2000. automated collection techniques or In compliance with the requirement John P. Burke III, other forms of information technology to of section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the minimize the information collection Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, the HCFA Reports Clearance Officer, HCFA, Office of Information Services, Security and burden. Health Care Financing Administration (HCFA), Department of Health and Standards Group, Division of HCFA Type of Information Collection Enterprise Standards. Request: Reinstatement without change Human Services, has submitted to the [FR Doc. 00–7285 Filed 3–23–00; 8:45 am] of a previously approved collection for Office of Management and Budget which approval has expired; (OMB) the following proposal for the BILLING CODE 4120±03±P Title of Information Collection: collection of information. Interested Medicare Uniform Institutional Provider persons are invited to send comments Bill and Supporting Regulations in 42 regarding the burden estimate or any DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND CFR 424.5; other aspect of this collection of URBAN DEVELOPMENT Form No.: HCFA–1450 (OMB# 0938– information, including any of the 0279); following subjects: (1) The necessity and [Docket No. FR±4565±N±09] Use: This standardized form is used utility of the proposed information Notice of Proposed Information in the Medicare/Medicaid program to collection for the proper performance of Collection; Comment Request; Utility apply for reimbursement for covered the agency’s functions; (2) the accuracy Allowance Adjustments services by all providers that accept of the estimated burden; (3) ways to Medicare/Medicaid assigned claims. It enhance the quality, utility, and clarity AGENCY: Office of the Assistant reduces cost and administrative burden of the information to be collected; and Secretary for Housing, HUD.
VerDate 20
ACTION: Notice. percent or more in the most recently Budget, Room 10235, New Executive approved utility allowances for Office Building, Washington, DC 20503. SUMMARY: The proposed information subsidized properties, the project owner collection requirement described below FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: must advise the Secretary and request Wayne Eddins, Reports Management will be submitted to the Office of new utility allowances. HUD uses this Management and Budget (OMB) for Officer, Department of Housing and information to ensure that the utility Urban Development, 451 7th Street, SW, review, as required by the Paperwork allowances are appropriate for each unit Reduction Act. The Department is Washington, DC 20410, e-mail type at the subsidized properties which [email protected]; telephone soliciting public comments on the provide utility allowances for its subject proposal. (202) 708–2374. This is not a toll-free residents. number. Copies of the proposed forms DATES: Comments Due Date: May 23, Agency form numbers, if applicable: and other available documents 2000. None. submitted to OMB may be obtained ADDRESSES: Interested persons are Estimation of the total numbers of from Mr. Eddins. invited to submit comments regarding hours needed to prepare the information SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The this proposal. Comments should refer to collection including number of Department has submitted the proposal the proposal by name and/or OMB respondents, frequency of response, and for the collection of information, as Control Number and should be sent to: hours of response: The estimated described below, to OMB for review, as Wayne Eddins, Reports Management number of respondents are 1,200, the required by the Paperwork Reduction Officer, Department of Housing and frequency of responses is 1 a year, the Act (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35). The Notice Urban Development, 451 7th Street, SW, estimated hours per response is 30 lists the following information: (1) The L’Enfant Building, Room 8202, minutes per response, and the estimated title of the information collection Washington, DC 20410, telephone (202) annual hour burden is 600. proposal; (2) the office of the agency to 708–5221 (this is not a toll-free number) Status of the proposed information collect the information; (3) the OMB for copies of the proposed forms and collection: Extension of a currently approval number, if applicable; (4) the other available information. approved collection. description of the need for the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Authority: The Paperwork Reduction Act information and its proposed use; (5) of 1995, 44 U.S.C., Chapter 35, as amended. Willie Spearmon, Multifamily Housing, the agency form number, if applicable; Office of Business Products, Department Dated: March 17, 2000. (6) what members of the public will be of Housing and Urban Development, William C. Apgar, affected by the proposal; (7) how 451 7th Street SW, Washington, DC Assistant Secretary for Housing, Federal frequently information submissions will 20410, telephone number (202) 708– Housing Commissioner. be required; (8) an estimate of the total 2866 (this is not a toll-free number). [FR Doc. 00–7262 Filed 3–23–00; 8:45 am] number of hours needed to prepare the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION : The BILLING CODE 4210±27±M information submission including Department is submitting the proposed number of respondents, frequency of information collection to OMB for response, and hours of response; (9) review, as required by the Paperwork DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND whether the proposal is new, an Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. URBAN DEVELOPMENT extension, reinstatement, or revision of Chapter 35, as amended). an information collection requirement; This Notice is soliciting comments [Docket No. FR±4561±N±14] and (10) the names and telephone from members of the public and affected numbers of an agency official familiar agencies concerning the proposed Notice of Submission of Proposed Information Collection to OMB; Study with the proposal and of the OMB Desk collection of information to: (1) Evaluate Officer for the Department. whether the proposed collection is of the Effectiveness of the Milwaukee Lead Hazard Control Ordinance This Notice also lists the following necessary for the proper performance of information: the functions of the agency, including AGENCY: Office of the Chief Information Title of Proposal: A Study of the whether the information will have Officer, HUD. Effectiveness of the Milwaukee Lead practical utility; (2) Evaluate the ACTION: Notice. Hazard Control Ordinance. accuracy of the agency’s estimate of the OMB Control Number: 2539–XXXX. burden of the proposed collection of SUMMARY: The proposed information information; (3) Enhance the quality, collection requirement described below Description of the Need for the utility, and clarity of the information to has been submitted to the Office of Information and Its Proposed Use: This be collected; and (4) Minimize the Management and Budget (OMB) for study will assess the effectiveness of a burden of the collection of information review, as required by the Paperwork city of Milwaukee ordinance requiring on those who are to respond; including Reduction Act. The Department is owners pre-1950 rental housing in two the use of appropriate automated soliciting public comments on the neighborhoods with high rates of collection techniques or other forms of subject proposal. childhood lead poisoning to conduct information technology, e.g., permitting specified low cost lead hazard control DATES: Comments Due Date: April 24, treatments. Children born into treated electronic submission of responses. 2000. This Notice also lists the following units will be followed for 2 years to information: ADDRESSES: Interested persons are assess the efficacy of the interventions Title of Proposal: Utility Allowance invited to submit comments regarding in preventing overexposure to lead. This Adjustments. this proposal. Comments must be information will be useful for OMB Control Number, if applicable: received within thirty (30) days from the determining the primary prevention 2502–0352. date of this Notice. Comments should effectiveness of these interventions and Description of the need for the refer to the proposal by name and/or for other municipalities that are information and proposed use: When OMB approval number should be sent contemplating similar legislation. approval of a utility rate change would to: Joseph F. Lackey, Jr., HUD Desk Residents of the two ‘‘treatment’’ result in a cumulative increase of 10 Officer, Office of Management and neighborhoods and two control
VerDate 20
Number of × Frequency × Hours per Burden respondents of response response = hours
New Collection ...... 312 2 0.68 425
Total Estimated Burden Hours: 425. ADDRESSES: Interested persons are the agency form number, if applicable; Status: New Collection. invited to submit comments regarding (6) what members of the public will be Authority: The Paperwork Reduction Act this proposal. Comments should refer to affected by the proposal; (7) how of 1995, 44 U.S.C. 35, as amended. the proposal by name and/or OMB frequently information submissions will Dated: March 17, 2000. approval number (2502–0415) and be required; (8) an estimate of the total should be sent to: Joseph F. Lackey, Jr., number of hours needed to prepare the Wayne Eddins, OMB Desk Officer, Office of information submission including Departmental Reports Management Officer, Office of the Chief Information Officer. Management and Budget, Room 10235, number of respondents, frequency of New Executive Office Building, response, and hours of response; (9) [FR Doc. 00–7260 Filed 3–23–00; 8:45 am] Washington, DC 20503. whether the proposal is new, an BILLING CODE 4210±01±M extension, reinstatement, or revision of FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Wayne Eddins, Reports Management an information collection requirement; DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND Officer, Q, Department of Housing and and (10) the name and telephone URBAN DEVELOPMENT Urban Development, 451 Seventh Street, number of an agency official familiar with the proposal and of the OMB Desk [Docket No. FR±4561±N±15] Southwest, Washington, DC 20410; e- mail [email protected]; Officer for the Department. This Notice also lists the following Notice of Submission of Proposed telephone (202) 708–2374. This is not a Information Collection to OMB; toll-free number. Copies of the proposed information: Multifamily Mortgage Insurance forms and other available documents Title of Proposal: Multifamily Benefits Claim submitted to OMB may be obtained Mortgagee Insurance Benefits Claims. from Mr. Eddins. OMB Approval Number: 2502–0415. AGENCY: Office of the Chief Information Form Numbers: HUD–2742, –2744–A, SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Officer, HUD. –2744–B, –2744–C, –2744–D, –2744–E. ACTION: Notice. Department has submitted the proposal for the collection of information, as Description of the Need for the SUMMARY: The proposed information described below, to OMB for review, as Information and Its Proposed Use: To collection requirement described below required by the Paperwork Reduction collect information from mortgagee has been submitted to the Office of Act (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35). The Notice claimants necessary to provide benefits Management and Budget (OMB) for lists the following information: (1) The of mortgage insurance to those review, as required by the Paperwork title of the information collection mortgagees. Reduction Act. The Department is proposal; (2) the office of the agency to Respondents: Business or Other-for- soliciting public comments on the collect the information; (3) the OMB Profit. subject proposal. approval number, if applicable; (4) the Frequency of Submission: As DATES: Comments Due Date: April 24, description of the need for the applications are submitted. 2000. information and its proposed use; (5) Reporting Burden:
Number of Frequency of Hours per respondents x responses x response = Burden hours
118 1 3.5 411
Total Estimated Burden Hours: 411. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Wildlife Service for an incidental take Status: Reinstatement, without permit pursuant to section 10(a)(1)(B) of Fish and Wildlife Service change. the Endangered Species Act, 1973, as amended. Van Daele seeks a permit for Authority: Section 3507 of the Paperwork Availability of an Environmental a period of 3 years that would authorize Reduction Act of 1995, 44 U.S.C. 35, as Assessment and Receipt of an incidental take of a bird, the threatened amended. Application for an Incidental Take coastal California gnatcatcher (Polioptila Permit for the Coastal California Dated: March 17, 2000. californica californica), associated with Gnatcatcher Associated With Wayne Eddins, single-family residential development Residential Development in the City of and occupancy of 35 acres of habitat Departmental Reports Management Officer, Fullerton, County of Orange, California within the City of Fullerton, County of Office of the Chief Information Officer. Orange, California. The permit [FR Doc. 00–7261 Filed 3–23–00; 8:45 am] AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, DOI. ACTION: Notice of availability. application includes a Habitat BILLING CODE 4210±01±M Conservation Plan and an SUMMARY: Van Daele Development Implementation Agreement, both of Corporation of Riverside, California which are available for public review (Van Daele), has applied to the Fish and and comment. We also request
VerDate 20
VerDate 20
VerDate 20
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR applicable law. Appropriation of lands 1714(f) (1994), the Secretary determines described in this order under the that the withdrawals shall be extended Bureau of Land Management general mining laws prior to the date insofar as they affect the following [CO±930±1430±ET; COC±28245] and time of restoration is unauthorized. described lands: Any such attempted appropriation, Boise Meridian Public Land Order No. 7433; Partial including attempted adverse possession under 30 U.S.C. 38 (1994), shall vest no Executive Order dated November 21, 1916, Revocation of Two Secretarial Orders; Powersite Reserve No. 565 (IDI–15630) Colorado rights against the United States. Acts required to establish a location and to T. 9 S., R. 16 E., Sec. 15, lot 8; AGENCY: Bureau of Land Management, initiate a right of possession are Interior. Sec. 16, lots 7 to 16, inclusive; governed by State law where not in Sec. 17, lots 11 to 14, inclusive; ACTION: Public Land Order. conflict with Federal law. The Bureau of Sec. 21, lot 3; Land Management will not intervene in Sec. 22, lots 5 to 12, inclusive; SUMMARY: This order partially revokes disputes between rival locators over Sec. 23, lots 10 to 19, inclusive; two Secretarial orders which withdrew possessory rights since Congress has Sec. 24, lots 10 to 15, inclusive; National Forest System lands for the provided for such determination in local Sec. 25, lots 4, 5, and 6. Bureau of Reclamation’s Colorado-Big courts. T. 9 S., R. 17 E., Thompson Project. These lands are no Sec. 19, lots 8 to 13, inclusive, and SE1⁄4SE1⁄4; longer needed for reclamation purposes. Dated: March 10, 2000. Sec. 20, lots 3 and 4; This action will open 922.26 acres to Kevin Gover, Sec. 28, lots 7 to 12, inclusive; such forms of disposition as may by law Assistant Secretary of the Interior. Sec. 29, lots 8 to 12, inclusive; Sec. 30, lots 8 to 13, inclusive; be made of National Forest System [FR Doc. 00–7292 Filed 3–23–00; 8:45 am] Sec. 33, lots 6 and 7 and NE1⁄4NE1⁄4; lands and to mining. The lands have BILLING CODE 4310±JB±P Sec. 34, lot 11, and portions of lots 12 to 17, been and will remain open to mineral inclusive; leasing. Sec. 35, portions of lots 10 to 13, inclusive, 1 1 EFFECTIVE DATE: April 24, 2000. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR and portion of SE ⁄4NW ⁄4; Sec. 36, lots 10, 11, 12, 14, and portion of lot FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Bureau of Land Management 15. Doris E. Chelius, BLM Colorado State T. 9 S., R. 18 E., [ID±933±1430±ET; IDI±15630 et al.] Office, 2850 Youngfield Street, Sec. 31, lots 4 and 5; Lakewood, Colorado 80215, 303–239– 1 2 1 4 Public Land Order No. 7437; Sec. 32, lot 5 and N ⁄ NW ⁄ ; 3706. Sec. 33, lots 1 and 2, SE1⁄4SW1⁄4, and Modification and Partial Revocation of By virtue of the authority vested in SW1⁄4SE1⁄4. Executive Orders; Idaho the Secretary of the Interior by Section T. 10 S., R. 18 E., Sec. 3, lot 9, and SW1⁄4NW1⁄4; 204 of the Federal Land Policy and AGENCY: Bureau of Land Management, Management Act of 1976, 43 U.S.C. Sec. 4, lots 1, 2, and 4. Interior. T. 10 S., R. 21 E., (1994), it is ordered as follows: ACTION: Public Land Order. Sec. 29, lots 10, 11, and 12, SW1⁄4NW1⁄4, 1. The Secretarial Orders dated March and W1⁄2SE1⁄4NW1⁄4. 7, 1935, and July 24, 1937, which SUMMARY: This order modifies 5 Executive Order dated July 2, 1910, withdrew National Forest System lands Executive orders to establish a 20-year Powersite Reserve No. 120 (IDI–15632) for the Colorado-Big Thompson term as to 8,040.07 acres of lands T. 8 S., R. 30 E., Reclamation Project, are hereby revoked withdrawn for the Bureau of Land Sec. 1, lots 4 to 7, inclusive; insofar as they affect following Management for use as Powersite Sec. 10, lots 2 to 5, inclusive, and described lands: Reserves. This order also partially W1⁄2SW1⁄4; Sec. 11, lot 5, and NW1⁄4NW1⁄4; Sixth Principal Meridian revokes 3 of the Executive orders insofar as they affect 3,443 acres and opens Sec. 12, lots 2 and 3, and SE1⁄4NW1⁄4; 1 1 Arapaho National Forest 277.30 acres to surface entry. The Sec. 15, lots 5, 6, and 7, and NW ⁄4NW ⁄4; Sec. 22, lot 4 and SE1⁄4SW1⁄4. T. 1 N., R. 75 W., remaining 3,165.70 acres have been Sec. 13, lots 5, 6, 11, and 12; conveyed out of Federal ownership. All Executive Order dated July 2, 1910, 1 1 1 1 Powersite Reserve No. 91 (IDI–15634) Sec. 14, NE ⁄4NE ⁄4, SW ⁄4NE ⁄4, and of the lands in Federal ownership have SE1⁄4NW1⁄4. been and will remain open to mining T. 45 N., R. 3 E., T. 2 N., R. 75 W., and mineral leasing. Sec. 4, lots 11, 12, 14, and island adjacent Sec. 19, lots 1 to 4, inclusive, and E1⁄2W1⁄2; thereto; Sec. 23, NE1⁄4NE1⁄4; EFFECTIVE DATE: April 24, 2000. Sec. 9, lots 1 to 6, inclusive; Sec. 31, N1⁄2SW1⁄4NE1⁄4, NE1⁄4NW1⁄4, FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sec. 10, lots 1 to 5, inclusive; W1⁄2NE1⁄4SW1⁄4, SE1⁄4NE1⁄4SW1⁄4, and Jackie Simmons, BLM Idaho State Sec. 11, lots 3 and 4; SW1⁄4NW1⁄4SE1⁄4; Office, 1387 S. Vinnell Way, Boise, Sec. 13, lots 1 to 4, inclusive, lots 9, 11, 1 1 1 1 Sec. 32, lots 3 and 6, SW1⁄4NW1⁄4, 12, and 13, S ⁄2NW ⁄4, and NW ⁄4SE ⁄4; 1 1 1 1 Idaho 83709, 208–373–3867. NE ⁄4SW ⁄4, and SW ⁄4SE ⁄4. By virtue of the authority vested in Sec. 14, lot 3 and E1⁄2NW1⁄4. The areas described aggregate 922.26 acres the Secretary of the Interior by Section T. 45 N., R. 4 E., in Grand County. 204 of the Federal Land Policy and Sec. 11, lots 3 and 4; Sec. 14, lot 3; 2. At 9 a.m. on April 24, 2000, the Management Act of 1976, 43 U.S.C. Sec. 17, lots 1 to 10, inclusive, and lands shall be opened to such forms of 1714 (1994), it is ordered as follows: SW1⁄4NE1⁄4; disposition as may by law be made of 1. The following Executive orders are Sec. 18, lot 7 and SW1⁄4NE1⁄4. National Forest System lands, including hereby modified to expire 20 years from Executive Order dated July 2, 1910, location and entry under the United the effective date of this order unless as Powersite Reserve No. 21 (IDI–15636) States mining laws, subject to valid a result of a review conducted before the T. 7 N., R. 2 E., existing rights, the provisions of existing expiration date pursuant to Section Sec. 10, lots 1 and 2; withdrawals, other segregations of 204(f) of the Federal Land Policy and Sec. 11, lots 4 and 5; record, and the requirements of Management Act of 1976, 43 U.S.C. Sec. 14, lots 1, 2, 4, and NW1⁄4SW1⁄4;
VerDate 20
Sec. 15, lots 1 to 5, inclusive; T. 7 N., R. 2 E., longer needed for these purposes and Sec. 22, NE1⁄4NE1⁄4; Sec. 30, lots 3, 4, and 5; the revocation would make 14.90 acres Sec. 23, lot 10; Sec. 31, lots 1 and 2, lots 5 to 9, inclusive, 1 1 1 1 available for exchange. These lands Sec. 32, lots 3, 4, and 8, and N ⁄2SE ⁄4; and SE ⁄4NW ⁄4. have been and will remain open to Sec. 33, lots 1 and 2. T. 8 N., R. 2 E., mineral leasing. The remaining 2.25 Executive Order dated December 19, 1910, Sec. 24, lots 1 to 7, inclusive; 1 1 acres have been conveyed out of Federal Powersite Reserve No. 165 (IDI–15650) Sec. 25, lots 1, 2, and 3, and NW ⁄4NE ⁄4; ownership and this is a record-clearing T. 2 S., R. 38 E., Sec. 26, lots 1 to 5, inclusive. Sec. 7, lots 3, 4, and 5; T. 8 N., R. 3 E., action only for this portion. Sec. 8, lots 1 and 2; Sec. 5, lots 1 and 10; EFFECTIVE DATE: March 24, 2000. Sec. 17, lot 1; Sec. 8, lots 2, 5, and 6; Sec. 17, lots 3 to 6, inclusive; FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sec. 29, lots 1, 2, and 3; Sandra Ward, BLM Montana State Sec. 33, lots 4 and 5, and NE1⁄4SE1⁄4. Sec. 18, lots 9 and 10; T. 3 S., R. 38 E., Sec. 19, lots 3, 5, 6, and NW1⁄4NE1⁄4. Office, P.O. Box 36800, Billings, Sec. 4, lots 8 to 11, inclusive; Executive Order dated December 19, 1910, Montana 59107, 406–896–5052. Sec. 9, lot 3; Powersite Reserve No. 165 (IDI–15650) By virtue of the authority vested in Sec. 10, lots 5 to 9, inclusive; T. 2 S., R. 38 E., the Secretary of the Interior by Section Sec. 11, lots 3 to 6, inclusive; Sec. 29, lot 4; 204 of the Federal Land Policy and Sec. 13, lots 5 to 9, inclusive; Sec. 33, lots 1 and 3. Management Act of 1976, 43 U.S.C. T. 4 S., R. 39 E. Sec. 14, lot 3; 1714 (1994), it is ordered as follows: Sec. 24, lots 6 and 7. Sec. 8, SW1⁄4SW1⁄4; T. 3 S., R. 39 E., Sec. 18, E1⁄2E1⁄2; 1. The Executive Order dated June 10, 1 1 Sec. 19, lots 2 and 3, SE1⁄4NW1⁄4, Sec. 19, E ⁄2NE ⁄4. 1912, which withdrew National Forest SW1⁄4NE1⁄4, NE1⁄4SW1⁄4, N1⁄2SE1⁄4, and The areas described aggregate 3,165.70 System lands for Phosphate Reserve SE1⁄4SE1⁄4; acres in Shoshone, Boise and Bingham 12—Montana No. 3, and Public Land Sec. 20, SW1⁄4SW1⁄4; Counties. Order No. 1692, which withdrew 1 1 1 1 1 Sec. 29, N ⁄2NW ⁄4, SE ⁄4NW ⁄4, and SE ⁄4; National Forest System lands for the Sec. 32, NE1⁄4 and NE1⁄4SE1⁄4; 4. At 9 a.m. on April 24, 2000, the Bureau of Land Management’s Sec. 33, N1⁄2SW1⁄4 and SE1⁄4SW1⁄4. lands described in Paragraph 2, shall be T. 4 S., R. 39 E., opened to the operation of the public Phosphate Reserve No. 12—Montana Sec. 4, W1⁄2NE1⁄4, NE1⁄4NW1⁄4, S1⁄2NW1⁄4, land laws generally, subject to valid No. 3, are hereby revoked insofar as they N1⁄2SW1⁄4, and SW1⁄4SW1⁄4; existing rights, the provisions of existing affect the following described lands: Sec. 5, S1⁄2SE1⁄4; withdrawals, other segregations of Principal Meridian, Montana Sec. 7, S1⁄2SE1⁄4; record, and the requirements of Sec. 8, N1⁄2NE1⁄4, NE1⁄4NW1⁄4, S1⁄2NW1⁄4, Beaverhead National Forest and N1⁄2SW1⁄4; applicable law. All valid applications (a) Federal lands (14.90 acres) Sec. 17, SW1⁄4NW1⁄4 and NW1⁄4SW1⁄4; received at or prior to 9 a.m. on April Sec. 20, SW1⁄4NW1⁄4, N1⁄2SW1⁄4, and 24, 2000, shall be considered as T. 1 S., R. 11 W., SE1⁄4SW1⁄4. simultaneously filed at that time. Those Sec. 3, lot 10. The areas described aggregate 8,040.07 received thereafter shall be considered (b) Non-Federal lands (2.25 acres) acres in Jerome, Twin Falls, Power, in the order of filing. T. 1 S., R. 11 W., Shoshone, Boise, and Bingham Counties. 5. The lands described in Paragragh 3 Sec. 3, a strip of land lying between Tracts The lands described above continue have been conveyed out of Federal A and B of HES 223. to be withdrawn from surface entry, but ownership. The areas described in (a) and (b) contain not mining or mineral leasing, to protect Dated: March 10, 2000. 17.15 acres in Beaverhead County. the waterpower values. 2. The Executive Order dated July 2, Kevin Gover, 2. The lands described in Paragraph 1910, which established Powersite Assistant Secretary of the Interior. 1(a) are hereby made available for Reserve No. 21 (IDI–15636), is hereby [FR Doc. 00–7320 Filed 3–23–00; 8:45 am] exchange in accordance with the revoked insofar as it affects the BILLING CODE 4310±GG±P General Exchange Act of 1922, 16 U.S.C. following described lands: 485, 486 (1994). 3. The lands described in Paragraph Boise Meridian DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 1(b) have been conveyed out of Federal T. 8 N., R. 3 E., ownership and this is a record-clearing Sec. 5, lots 7, 8, and 9; Bureau of Land Management action only. Sec. 8, lots 3, 4, 7, and 8; [MT±924±1430±ET; MTM 014987 and MTM Sec. 17, lots 1 and 2; Dated: March 10, 2000. 41561] Sec. 18, lots 5, 6, 7, and 11; Kevin Gover, Sec. 19, lots 1 and 2. Public Land Order No. 7430; Partial Assistant Secretary of the Interior. The areas described aggregate 277.30 acres Revocation of Executive Order dated [FR Doc. 00–7289 Filed 3–23–00; 8:45 am] in Boise County. June 1, 1912 and Public Land Order BILLING CODE 4310±DN±P 3. The following Executive orders are No. 1692; Montana hereby revoked insofar as they affect the following described lands: AGENCY: Bureau of Land Management, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Interior. Boise Meridian ACTION: Public land order. Bureau of Land Management Executive Order dated July 2, 1910, Powersite Reserve No. 91 (IDI–15634) SUMMARY: This order revokes an T. 45 N., R. 3 E., Executive order and a public land order [MT±924±1430±ET; MTM 40729] Sec. 5, lot 10 and NW1⁄4SW1⁄4; insofar as they affect 17.15 acres of Public Land Order No. 7432; Partial Sec. 10, lot 6; National Forest System lands Sec. 11, lots 1 and 2; Revocation of Secretarial Order Dated Sec. 13, lots 5 to 8, inclusive, lot 10, and withdrawn for the Wise River Ranger August 24, 1903; Montana SW1⁄4NE1⁄4. Station and the Bureau of Land Executive Order dated July 2, 1910, Management’s Phosphate Reserve No. AGENCY: Bureau of Land Management, Powersite Reserve No. 21 (IDI–15636) 12—Montana No. 3. The lands are no Interior.
VerDate 20
ACTION: Public Land Order. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR By virtue of the authority vested in the Secretary of the Interior by Section SUMMARY: This order revokes a Bureau of Land Management 204 of the Federal Land Policy and Secretarial order insofar as it affects [OR±958±6333±ET; GP0±0161; OR±9651] Management Act of 1976, 43 U.S.C. 382.32 acres of public lands withdrawn 1714 (1994), it is ordered as follows: for the Bureau of Reclamation’s Lower Public Land Order No. 6876; 1. The Secretarial Orders dated July 8, Yellowstone Project. The lands are no Withdrawal of National Forest System 1916 and January 24, 1917, which longer needed for reclamation purposes. Lands for the Ashland Resource established Powersite Reserve No. 536 This action will open 222.32 acres to Natural Area, the Jackson and Powersite Reserve No. 568 surface entry, subject to other Campground Extension, and the respectively, are hereby revoked in their segregations of record. The remaining Kanaka Campground; Oregon; entirety: 160 acres have been conveyed out of Correction Federal ownership and the revocation Willamette Meridian on this portion is a record-clearing AGENCY: Bureau of Land Management, Colville Indian Reservation action only. The lands in Federal Interior. ownership have been and will remain ACTION: Correction. T. 29 N., R. 26 E., open to mining and mineral leasing. Sec. 4, lots 4 and 5. SUMMARY: This action corrects Public T. 30 N., R. 26 E., EFFECTIVE DATE: April 24, 2000. Land Order No. 6876, 56 FR 46122, Sec. 26, lots 3 and 4; FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: published September 10, 1991, as FR Sec. 35, lot 1. Sandra Ward, BLM Montana State Doc. 91–21627. T. 29 N., R. 30 E., Office, P.O. Box 36800, Billings, On page 46122, third column, Sec. 1, lots 4 and 5, and lots 7 to 11, Montana 59107, 406–896–5052. paragraph 1, under T. 40 S., R. 3 W., inclusive; which reads ‘‘Sec. 19, lots 2, 3, 4, and Sec. 2, lots 6 and 7, and NE1⁄4NE1⁄4. By virtue of the authority vested in T. 30 N., R. 30 E., the Secretary of the Interior by Section 6.’’ is hereby corrected to read ‘‘Sec. 19, Sec. 10, lots 5 to 8, inclusive, NW1⁄4NE1⁄4, 204 of the Federal Land Policy and lots 1, 2, 3, 4, and 6.’’ and NE1⁄4SE1⁄4; Management Act of 1976, 43 U.S.C. Kenneth J. St. Mary, Sec. 14, SW1⁄4NW1⁄4 and W1⁄2SW1⁄4; 1714 (1994), it is ordered as follows: Acting Chief, Branch of Realty and Records Sec. 15, lots 5 to 8, inclusive; 1. The Secretarial Order dated August Services, Oregon/Washington. Sec. 22, lots 6 to 10, inclusive; 24, 1903, which withdrew public lands [FR Doc. 00–7288 Filed 3–23–00; 8:45 am] Sec. 23, W1⁄2W1⁄2; for the Bureau of Reclamation’s Lower BILLING CODE 4310±33±P Sec. 26, lots 1 to 4, inclusive, and Yellowstone Project, is hereby revoked SW1⁄4SE1⁄4; insofar as it affects the following Sec. 27, lot 5; described lands: DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Sec. 35, lots 3 to 6, inclusive. T. 31 N., R. 30 E., Principal Meridian, Montana Bureau of Land Management Sec. 31, lots 3 and 6; (a) Federal Lands (222.32 Acres) [OR±958±6333±ET; GP0±0023; OR± Sec. 32, lots 1 to 4, inclusive; T. 19 N., R. 57 E., 19617(WA), OR±22318 (WA)] Sec. 33, lots 3 and 4. 1 1 Sec. 24, W ⁄2W ⁄2. T. 28 N., R. 33 E., T. 21 N., R. 58 E., Public Land Order No. 7431; Sec. 10, lot 1, SE1⁄4SW1⁄4, and areas A and Sec. 22, lots 4 and 5. Revocation of Secretarial Orders Dated B lying in the NW1⁄4SW1⁄4; (b) Non-Federal Lands (160 Acres) July 8, 1916 and January 24, 1917; Sec. 13, lots 9 to 17, inclusive; T. 19 N., R. 57 E., Washington Sec. 14, lots 8 to 15, inclusive, and areas Sec. 24, N1⁄2NE1⁄4, SE1⁄4NE1⁄4, and A and B (formerly lot 7); 1 1 AGENCY: Bureau of Land Management, NE ⁄4NW ⁄4. Sec. 15, lots 5, 6, 8, 9, and 10. Interior. The areas described in (a) and (b) aggregate T. 28 N., R. 34 E., 382.32 acres in Richland County. ACTION: Public Land Order. Sec. 17, lots 7 to 11, inclusive; Sec. 18, lots 8, 9, 11, 12, and 13. 2. At 9 a.m. on April 24, 2000, the SUMMARY: This order revokes, in their lands referenced in paragraph 1(a) shall entirety, two Secretarial orders as they The areas described aggregate be opened to the operation of the public affect 2,404.11 acres of lands within the approximately 2,404.11 acres in Ferry and land laws generally, subject to valid Colville Indian Reservation withdrawn Okanogan Counties. existing rights, the provisions of existing for Bureau of Land Management 2. At 8:30 a.m. on March 24, 2000, the withdrawals, other segregations of Powersite Reserve Nos. 536 and 568. record, and the requirements of lands will be opened to such forms of The lands are no longer needed for the disposition as may by law be made of applicable law. All valid applications purpose for which they were received at or prior to 9:00 a.m. on April Indian Reservation lands, subject to withdrawn. This action will open the valid existing rights, the provisions of 24, 2000, shall be considered as lands to such forms of disposition as existing withdrawals, other segregations simultaneously filed at that time. Those may by law be made of Indian of record, and the requirements of received thereafter shall be considered Reservation lands. in the order of filing. applicable law. EFFECTIVE DATE: March 24, 2000. Dated: March 10, 2000. Dated: March 10, 2000. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kevin Gover, Allison O’Brien, BLM Oregon/ Kevin Gover, Assistant Secretary of the Interior. Washington State Office, PO Box 2965, Assistant Secretary of the Interior. [FR Doc. 00–7294 Filed 3–23–00; 8: 45 am] Portland, Oregon 97208–2965, 503–952– [FR Doc. 00–7291 Filed 3–23–00; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310±DN±P 6171. BILLING CODE 4310±33±P
VerDate 20
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Sec. 25, lot 3 and lot 1 including all of the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: tideland lying east of, fronting, and Janet Booth, BLM Wyoming State Office, Bureau of Land Management abutting upon; P.O. Box 1828, Cheyenne, Wyoming Sec. 26, lots 8 to 10, inclusive; 82003, 307–775–6124. The areas described aggregate [OR±958±6333±ET; GP0±0087; OR±54142] By virtue of the authority vested in approximately 1,712.74 acres in Coos the Secretary of the Interior by Section County. Public Land Order No. 7436; 204 of the Federal Land Policy and Withdrawal of Public Lands for Coos 2. The following described non- Management Act of 1976, 43 U.S.C. Bay North Spit Special Recreation Area Federal lands, if acquired by the United 1714 (1994), it is ordered as follows: and Area of Critical Environmental States, will be subject to the terms and 1. Subject to valid existing rights, the Concern; Oregon conditions of this withdrawal as following described public lands are described in paragraph 1: hereby withdrawn from settlement, sale, AGENCY: Bureau of Land Management, Willamette Meridian location, or entry under the general land Interior. laws, including the United States T. 25 S., R. 13 W., ACTION: Public land order. mining laws (30 U.S.C. Ch. 2 (1994)), Sec. 18, lots 3 and 4, and NE1⁄4SW1⁄4; but not from leasing under the mineral SUMMARY: Sec. 19, lot 4. This order withdraws leasing laws, to protect the Whiskey 1,712.74 acres of public lands from T. 25 S., R. 14 W., Sec. 24, lot 4. Mountain Bighorn Sheep Winter Range: mining for a period of 20 years for the Bureau of Land Management to protect Along with any accretion to the above Sixth Principal Meridian listed lands. The areas described aggregate the Coos Bay North Spit Special approximately 150.93 acres in Coos County. T. 40 N., R.105 W., Recreation Management Area and Area Sec. 17, NE1⁄4NE1⁄4, S1⁄2N1⁄2, NE1⁄4SW1⁄4, of Critical Environmental Concern. An 3. The withdrawal made by this order and SE1⁄4; additional 150.93 acres of non-Federal does not alter the applicability of those Sec. 18, NE1⁄4NE1⁄4; 1 1 lands, if acquired by the United States, public land laws governing the use of Sec 20, E ⁄2NE ⁄4; the lands under lease, license, or permit, Sec. 21, NW1⁄4NW1⁄4, S1⁄2NW1⁄4, N1⁄2SW1⁄4, would also be withdrawn by this order. 1 1 or governing the disposal of their and SE ⁄4SW ⁄4. The public lands have been and will T. 41 N., R. 106 W., mineral or vegetative resources other remain open to surface entry and Sec. 17, NW1⁄4SW1⁄4, S1⁄2SW1⁄4, and mineral leasing subject to other than under the mining laws. S1⁄2S1⁄2SE1⁄4; segregations of record. 4. This withdrawal will expire 20 Sec. 18, NE1⁄4NE1⁄4 (excepting patent years from the effective date of this 1 2 1 4 1 4 1 4 EFFECTIVE DATE: March 24, 2000. 906078), W ⁄ NE ⁄ , SE ⁄ NW ⁄ , order unless as a result of a review NE1⁄4SW1⁄4, and SE1⁄4; FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 1 1 1 1 conducted before the expiration date Sec. 19, lot 1, N ⁄2NE ⁄4, and NE ⁄4NW ⁄4. Michael Barnes, BLM Oregon/ pursuant to Section 204(f) of the Federal The areas described aggregate 1,430.92 Washington State Office, P.O. Box 2965, Land Policy and Management Act of acres in Fremont County. Portland, Oregon 97208–2965, 503–952– 1976, 43 U.S.C. 1714 (1994), the 6155. 2. The withdrawal made by this order Secretary determines that the does not alter the applicability of those By virtue of the authority vested in withdrawal shall be extended. the Secretary of the Interior by Section public land laws governing the use of 204 of the Federal Land Policy and Dated: March 10, 2000. lands under lease, license, or permit, or Management Act of 1976, 43 U.S.C. Kevin Gover, governing the disposal of their mineral 1714 (1994), it is ordered as follows: Assistant Secretary of the Interior. or vegetative resources other than under 1. Subject to valid existing rights and [FR Doc. 00–7293 Filed 3–23–00; 8:45 am] the mining laws. 3. This withdrawal will expire 20 other segregations of record, the BILLING CODE 4310±33±P following described public lands are years from the effective date of this hereby withdrawn from location and order unless, as a result of a review entry under the United States mining DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR conducted before the expiration date laws (30 U.S.C. Ch 2 (1994)), but not pursuant to Section 204(f) of the Federal from surface entry under the general Bureau of Land Management Land Policy and Management Act of land laws or leasing under the mineral 1976, 43 U.S.C. 1714(f) (1994), the leasing laws, to protect the Coos Bay [WY±921±1430±ET; WYW 141567] Secretary determines that the withdrawal shall be extended. North Spit Special Recreation Area and Public Land Order No. 7434; Area of Critical Environmental Concern: Withdrawal of Public Land for Whiskey Dated: March 10, 2000. Willamette Meridian Mountain Bighorn Sheep Winter Kevin Gover, Assistant Secretary of the Interior. T. 25 S., R. 13 W., Range; Wyoming 1 1 [FR Doc. 00–7290 Filed 3–23–00; 8:45 am] Sec. 4, N ⁄2NW ⁄4; AGENCY: Bureau of Land Management, Sec. 5, fractional NW1⁄4NW1⁄4; BILLING CODE 4310±22±P Sec. 6, lot 3, lots 5 to 9, inclusive, and Interior. SE1⁄4NE1⁄4; ACTION: Public Land Order. Sec. 7, lots 6 and 8, and lots 10 to 19, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR inclusive; SUMMARY: This order withdraws Sec. 8, lot 2; 1,430.92 acres of public lands from Bureau of Land Management Sec. 18, lots 7 and 8, E1⁄2NW1⁄4, fractional surface entry and mining for a period of W1⁄2NW1⁄4, and fractional NW1⁄4SW1⁄4. 20 years to protect the Whiskey [CA±940±01±5410±10±B119; CACA 41159] T. 25 S., R. 14 W., Mountain Bighorn Sheep Winter Range Sec. 12, lot 1; and capital investments in the area. The Conveyance of Mineral Interests in Sec. 13, lots 1 to 4, inclusive, and E1⁄2SE1⁄4; California; Correction Sec. 23, lot 1; lands have been and will remain open Sec. 24, lots 6 to 13, inclusive, W1⁄2NE1⁄4, to mineral leasing. AGENCY: Bureau of Land Management, and NE1⁄4SW1⁄4; EFFECTIVE DATE: March 24, 2000. Interior.
VerDate 20
ACTION: Correction. The Board will also discuss its DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR organizational and administrative SUMMARY: This notice corrects the needs. Office of Surface Mining Reclamation following Notice of Segregation: and Enforcement (1) Notice of Segregation which was The meeting will be open to the published on February 18, 2000 on page public, however, facilities and space for Final Petition Evaluation Document/ 8440 (65 FR 8440), as FR Doc. 00–3957: accommodating members of the public Environmental Impact Statement on On page 8440, in the second column, are limited, and persons will be Fall Creek Falls, Tennessee under T. 26 S., R. 37 E., which reads accommodated on a first-come-first- ‘‘Sec. 7, N1⁄2S1⁄2SE1⁄4NW1⁄4, served basis. AGENCY: Office of Surface Mining S1⁄2S1⁄2SE1⁄4NW1⁄4, N1⁄2S1⁄2SE1⁄4NW1⁄4.’’ Reclamation and Enforcement, Interior. is hereby corrected to read ‘‘Sec. 7, Assistance to Individuals With ACTION: Notice of extension. N1⁄2S1⁄2 SE1⁄4 NW1⁄4, Disabilities at the Public Meeting S1⁄2S1⁄2SE1⁄4NW1⁄4, N1⁄2N1⁄2NE1⁄4SW1⁄4.’’ SUMMARY: On March 3, 2000, the Office The meeting site is accessible to of Surface Mining Reclamation and David Mcilnay, individuals with disabilities. If you plan Enforcement (we or OSM) made Chief, Branch of Lands. to attend and will need an auxiliary aid available a final petition evaluation [FR Doc. 00–7287 Filed 3–23–00; 8:45 am] or service to participate in the meeting document/environmental impact BILLING CODE 4310±40±P (e.g., interpreting service, assistive statement (PED/EIS) for a petition to listening device, or materials in an designate certain lands in and near Fall alternate format), notify the contact Creek Falls State Park and Natural Area DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR person listed in this notice at least 2 as unsuitable for all surface coal mining operations. The land is located in Van National Park Service weeks before the scheduled meeting date. Attempts will be made to meet any Buren and Bledsoe Counties, Tennessee. Meeting of Concessions Management request(s) we receive after that date, We prepared the PED/EIS to assist the Advisory Board however, we may not be able to make Secretary of the Interior in making a the requested auxiliary aid or service decision on the petition. Governing AGENCY: National Park Service, DOI. available because of insufficient time to regulations at 40 CFR 1506.10(b)(2) ACTION: Notice of Meeting of arrange for it. require that no decision on the petition Concessions Management Advisory be made until 30 days after the PED/EIS Board. Anyone may file with the Board a is made available to the public. We are written statement concerning matters to extending the prescribed wait period by SUMMARY: In accordance with the be discussed. The Board may also 30 days. Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. permit attendees to address the Board, L. 92–463, 86 Stat. 770, 5 U.S.C. App 1, DATES: The prescribed time period is but may restrict the length of the extended to May 3, 2000; therefore, the section 10), notice is hereby given that presentations, as necessary to allow the the Concessions Management Advisory decision by the Secretary of the Interior Board to complete its agenda within the will not be made prior to May 4, 2000. Board will hold its second meeting allotted time. April 11 through April 13, 2000, in San ADDRESSES: You may obtain a copy of Francisco, California. The meeting will Interested persons may make oral/ the final PED/EIS by contacting Beverly convene at 8:30 a.m. on Tuesday, April written presentations to the Commission Brock at the address and telephone 11 at the Golden Gate Club located in during the business meeting or file number listed under FOR FURTHER Building 135, Fisher Loop at the written statements. Such requests INFORMATION CONTACT. A copy of the Presidio. The Board will adjourn at should be made to the Director, National final PED/EIS is available for inspection approximately 4:00 p.m. on Thursday, Park Service, attention: Manager, at that address, and also at the Bledsoe April 13. Concession Program Division, at least 7 and Van Buren County Clerk’s offices. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The days prior to the meeting. Further FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Advisory Board was established by Title information concerning the meeting Beverly Brock, Supervisor, Technical IV, Section 409 of the National Park may be obtained from National Park Group, Office of Surface Mining, 530 Omnibus Management Act of 1998, Service, Concession Program Division, Gay Street, S.W., Suite 500, Knoxville, November 13, 1998 (Pub. L. 105–391). 1849 C St. NW, Rm. 7313, Washington, Tennessee 37902. Telephone: (865) 545– The purpose of the Board is to advise DC 20240, telephone 202/565–1210. 4103, ext. 146. E-Mail: the Secretary and the National Park Draft minutes of the meeting will be [email protected]. Service on matters relating to SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: We have management of concessions in the available for public inspection about 8 been petitioned by Save Our National Park System. weeks after the meeting, in room 7313, Topics for discussion during this Main Interior Building, 1849 C Street, Cumberland Mountains, Tennessee meeting include: NW, Washington, DC. Citizens for Wilderness Planning, and • 49 citizens to designate the watershed Welcome; Objectives of meeting. Dated: March 17, 2000. • Overview of various business and viewshed of Fall Creek Falls State Robert Stanton, ventures and programs at the Presidio Park and Natural Area, Tennessee, as and Golden Gate NRA. Director, National Park Service. unsuitable for all types of surface coal • Review of NPS Rate Approval [FR Doc. 00–7272 Filed 3–23–00; 8:45 am] mining operations. Procedures. BILLING CODE 4310±70±P We prepared the final PED/EIS in • Discussion of Department of accordance with Section 522(d) of the Defense ‘‘Best Practices’’ Review. Surface Mining Control and • Closing remarks (including Reclamation Act of 1977 (SMCRA) and summary of accomplishments of Section 102(2)(c) of the National meeting, date of next proposed meeting, Environmental Policy Act of 1969 assignment of tasks). (NEPA). We have analyzed the
VerDate 20
VerDate 20
The proposed Decree may be The Department of Justice will accept Director. The topics to be discussed will examined at the office of the United comments relating to this consent include proposals and enhancements to States Attorney, District of Kansas, 500 decree for a period of thirty (30) days the National Crime Information Center State Avenue, Suite 360, Kansas City, from the date of this publication. (NCIC) Convicted Sexual Offender KS 66101, 913–551–6730; and the Address your comments to the Assistant Registry File, an update on the CJIS Region VII Office of the Environmental Attorney General for the Environment Security Policy, and an overview of the Protection Agency, 726 Minnesota and Natural Resources Division, use of Immigration and Naturalization Avenue, Kansas City, KS 66101, 913– Department of Justice, Washington, DC Service records in relation to the 551–7714. A copy of the proposed 20530, and send a copy to the National Instant Criminal Background Decree may also be obtained by mail Environmental Enforcement Section, Check System (NICS). Discussion will from the Consent Decree Library, P.O. U.S. Department of Justice, 301 Howard also include the status on future Box 7611, Washington, DC 20044. In Street, Suite 870, San Francisco, CA enhancements to the Integrated requesting a copy of the Consent Decree, 94105, Attn: Robert Mullaney. Your Automated Fingerprint Identification please refer to the referenced case and comments should refer to United States Systems (IAFIS), IAFIS latent enclose a check in the amount of $9.50 and Communities for a Better fingerprint processing, the National (25 cents per page reproduction costs), Environment v. Sorenson Engineering, Crime Prevention and Privacy Compact, payable to the Consent Decree Library. Inc., Civil Action No. EDCV 96–444–RT the NCIC Protection Order File, and (VAPx) (C.D. Cal.), and DOJ No. 90–11– Joel M. Gross, 2–06467. other issues related to the IAFIS, NCIC, Chief, Environmental Enforcement Section, You may examine the proposed Law Enforcement Online, NICS, and Environment and Natural Resources Division. consent decree at the office of the Uniform Crime Reporting Programs. [FR Doc. 00–7295 Filed 3–23–00; 8:45 am] United States Attorney, Central District The meeting will be open to the BILLING CODE 4410±15±M of California, Federal Building, Room public on a first-come, first-seated basis. 7516, 300 North Los Angeles Street, Los Any member of the public wishing to DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE Angeles, California 90012. You may also file a written statement concerning the obtain a copy of the consent decree by FBI’s CJIS Division programs or wishing Notice of Lodging of Consent Decree mail from the Consent Decree Library, to address this session should notify the Under the Emergency Planning and P.O. Box 7611, Washington, DC 20044. Designated Federal Employee, Mr. Don Community Right-to-Know Act Your request for a copy of the consent M. Johnson, Section Chief, Programs decree should refer to United States and Development Section (304) 625–2740, at In accordance with Departmental Communities for a Better Environment least 24 hours prior to the start of the policy, 28 CFR 50.7, notice is hereby v. Sorenson Engineering, Inc., Civil session. given that a proposed consent decree in Action No. EDCV 96–444–RT (VAPx) the case of United States and (D.C. Cal.), and DOJ No. 90–11–2– The notification should contain the Communities for a Better Environment 06467, and must include a check for requestor’s name, corporate designation, v. Sorenson Engineering, Inc., Civil $4.50 (25 cents per page reproduction and consumer affiliation or government Action No. EDCV 96–444–RT (VAPx) cost) payable to the ‘‘Consent Decree designation along with a short statement (C.D. Cal.), was lodged with the United Library.’’ describing the topic to be addressed and States District Court for the Central the time needed for the presentation. A District of California on March 2, 2000. Joel Gross, requestor will ordinarily be allowed not The proposed consent decree resolves Chief, Environmental Enforcement Section, more than 15 minutes to present a topic. claims that the United States asserted Environment and Natural Resources Division. DATES AND TIMES: against Sorenson Engineering, Inc. in a [FR Doc. 00–7296 Filed 3–23–00; 8:45 am] The Advisory Policy Board will meet in open session from 9 civil complaint in intervention filed BILLING CODE 4410±15±M concurrently with the lodging of the a.m. until 5 p.m. on June 13–14, 2000. consent decree. The complaint in ADDRESSES: The meeting will take place DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE intervention alleges that Sorenson failed at the Portland Hilton, 921 S.W. Sixth to timely submit a toxic chemical Federal Bureau of Investigation Avenue, Portland, Oregon, telephone release form for nitric acid and (503) 226–1611. phosphoric acid in each year from 1990 Meeting of the CJIS Advisory Policy through 1995, in violation of the Board FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: requirements of section 313 of the Inquiries may be addressed to Mrs. Emergency Planning and Community AGENCY: Federal Bureau of Investigation Diane M. Shaffer, Management Analyst, Right-to-know Act, 42 U.S.C. 11023. (FBI), DOJ. Advisory Groups Management Unit, The proposed consent decree requires ACTION: Meeting notice. Programs Development Section, FBI defendant to pay a civil penalty of CJIS Division, Module C3, 1000 Custer $32,500. In addition, defendant is SUMMARY: The purpose of this notice is Hollow Road, Clarksburg, West Virginia required to undertake two supplemental to announce the meeting of the Criminal 26306–0149, telephone (304) 625–2615, environmental projects to reduce Justice Information Services (CJIS) facsimile (304) 625–5090. tetrachloroethylene (perchloroethylene) Advisory Policy Board. The CJIS Dated: March 14, 2000. emissions and to eliminate hexavalent Advisory Policy Board is responsible for chromium emissions at defendant’s reviewing policy issues, uniform crime Don M. Johnson, facility in Yucaipa, California. Finally, reports, and appropriate technical and Section Chief, Programs Development defendant is required to pay $20,000 to operational issues related to the Section, Criminal Justice Information Services Communities for a Better Environment programs administered by the FBI CJIS Division, Federal Bureau of Investigation. (CBE) in payment of CBE’s attorney’s Division and thereafter, make [FR Doc. 00–7297 Filed 3–23–00; 8:45 am] fees and costs in this action. appropriate recommendations to the FBI BILLING CODE 4410±02±M
VerDate 20
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE United States to that of lawful file their applications for adjustment of permanent resident. In order to be status under the HRIFA. Immigration and Naturalization Service eligible for benefits under the HRIFA, an Under What Authority May an Alien [INS No. 2052±00] applicant must: • Submit and the Service Consider a Be a national of Haiti who was Request for Advance Parole for the Delegation of Authority To Accept and present in the United States on Purpose of Coming to the United States Adjudicate Certain Requests for December 31, 1995; • in Order To Seek Adjustment of Status Advance Parole in Connection With the Have been physically present in the Under the HRIFA? HRIFA Adjustment Program United States for a continuous period beginning not later than December 31, Service regulations at 8 CFR AGENCY: Immigration and Naturalization 1995, and ending not earlier than the 245.15(t)(2) allow an otherwise eligible Service, Justice. date the application for adjustment is applicant who is outside the United ACTION: Notice. filed (not including any absence or States to request parole authorization to absences amounting to 180 days or less come to the United States to apply for SUMMARY: This notice advises the public in the aggregate); benefits under section 902 of the that effective April 1, 2000, the • Properly file an application for HRIFA. Immigration and Naturalization Service adjustment before April 1, 2000; (Service) is delegating to the Director of What Is the Process for Seeking an • Be admissible to the United States Advance Parole Authorization? the Nebraska Service Center the under all provisions of section 212(a) of authority to accept and adjudicate An eligible individual should file the Immigration and Nationally Act requests for advance parole Form I–131, Application for Travel (Act), 8 U.S.C. 1182(a), except those authorization filed by qualifying Haitian Document, with the USINS Nebraska provisions specifically excepted by the dependents of persons who have Service Center, P.O. Box 87245, Lincoln, HRIFA; and applied for adjustment of status under NE 68501–7245. The application must • Fall within one of the five classes the Haitian Refugee Immigration be accompanied by the filing fee for of persons described in section 902(b)(1) Fairness Act of 1998 (HRIFA). The Form I–131 specified in 8 CFR of the HRIFA. Director of the Nebraska Service Center 103.7(b)(1) (currently $95) and a The five classes described in section had previously been authorized to photocopy of the complete Form I–485, 902(b)(1) of the HRIFA are: adjudicate such requests until March 31, Application to Register Permanent (1) Haitian nationals who filed for 2000, through an interim rule published Residence or Adjust Status, which the asylum before December 31, 1995; in the Federal Register on May 12, requestor will file once he or she arrives 1999, at 64 FR 25756. The delegation of (2) Haitian nationals who were in the United States. The applicant must authority provided in this public notice paroled into the United States prior to include photocopies of all the will allow the Director of the Nebraska December 31, 1995, after having been supporting documentation listed on Service Center to continue to provide identified as having a credible fear of Forms I–485 and I–485 Supplement C, this service to the public without persecution, or paroled for emergent HRIFA Supplement to Form I–485 interruption. reasons or reasons deemed strictly in Instructions. However, the applicant the public interest; should not submit the filing fee for the DATES: This notice is effective April 1, (3) Haitian national children who Form I–485, the medical report, the 2000. arrived in the United States without fingerprint card, or the local police FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: parents and have remained without clearances. Mary Alice Khachikian, Immigration parents in the United States since such Although advance parole requests by Officer, Parole Branch, Office of arrival; persons outside the United States are International Affairs, Immigration and (4) Haitian national children who normally filed with, and adjudicated by, Naturalization Service, 425 I Street NW, became orphaned subsequent to arrival the district director having jurisdiction Washington, DC 20536, telephone (202) in the United States; and over the overseas area (i.e., the district 307–6084. (5) Haitian children who were director in Mexico City, Mexico; Rome, SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: abandoned by their parents or guardians Italy; or Bangkok, Thailand), the May prior to April 1, 1998, and have 12, 1999, interim rule which What Is the Haitian Refugee remained abandoned since such implemented the HRIFA provided, at 8 Immigration Fairness Act (HRIFA)? abandonment. CFR 245.15(t), that in most cases those On October 21, 1998, the President In addition, under section 902(d) of advance parole requests submitted in signed into law a Fiscal Year 1999 the HRIFA, the Haitian national spouse, connection with the HRIFA program Omnibus Appropriations Act, Public child (i.e., under 21 years old), or would be filed with and adjudicated by, Law 105–277 (112 Stat. 2681). Division unmarried son or daughter (i.e., 21 years the Director of the Nebraska Service A, title IX of that statute, the HRIFA, old or older) of such principal Center (NSC). The interim rule contained a provision, section 902, that adjustment applicant may apply for and authorized the Director of the NSC to allows certain nationals of Haiti to be granted adjustment of status to that accept and adjudicate such requests adjust their status to that of lawful of lawful permanent resident. Although through March 31, 2000, the deadline permanent resident. On May 12, 1999, an unmarried son or daughter is for the filing of HRIFA applications by the Department of Justice (Department) required to have been physically present principal applicants. published an interim rule in the Federal in the United States since December 31, This delegation of authority was given Register at 64 FR 25756, with respects 1995, neither the spouse or child need to the Director of the NSC for two for comments, that implemented section meet any physical presence reasons. First, with the exception of 902 of the HRIFA. requirements other than to be in the applications filed by persons who are Section 902 of the HRIFA provides United States in order to apply for currently in proceedings before the that the Attorney General shall adjust adjustment of status. Furthermore, Immigration Court, all applications for the status of certain Haitian nationals unlike principal applicants, dependents adjustment of status under the HRIFA who are physically present in the have no deadline by which they must must be filed with the NSC.
VerDate 20
Accordingly, any files relating to the factors on a case-by-case basis. These Charge (or, where appropriate, the case (e.g., the file of the principal other factors include, but are not limited consular officer) is not fully satisfied applicant upon which the dependent’s to, a determination as to whether the that the requestor meets all case depends) are likely to be at the requestor’s application for adjustment of requirements for parole in order to NSC. Second, due to the NSC’s larger status is likely to be approved, whether apply for adjustment of status under the staff and greater automation, it is in a the requestor has a criminal record or HRIFA, that officer will not issue the better position to handle the volume of immigration record which warrants parole authorization to the alien, but requests for parole under this program. denial of the parole request, and will instead cancel and return it to the whether there are other negative Director of the NSC. If that officer is How Is the Advance Parole Process discretionary factors which argue fully satisfied regarding these issues, he Being Changed? against approval of the parole request. or she will issue the advance parole There is no change in the process for Furthermore, with regard to a document allowing the alien to travel to requesting or being granted advance dependent child who is approaching his the United States and be paroled into parole authorization in connection with or her 21st birthday and cannot the country for 60 days. The alien must the HRIFA applications. The only demonstrate that he or she has been apply for adjustment of status within change is that the authorization for continuously physically present in the this 60-day period. Once the application accepting and adjudicating parole United States since December 31, 1995, for adjustment of status has been filed, requests is being delegated to the not counting absences totaling 180 days the alien will be allowed to remain until Director of the NSC from April 1, 2000, or less, the Service will deny the parole the application for adjustment of status until further notice. request if it is not feasible to process the has been adjudicated. request and issue the travel document in Under What Authority Is the Service sufficient time for the requestor to travel What Will Happen to Individuals Who Taking This Action? to the United States, file a HRIFA Fail To Apply for Adjustment of Status Section 212(d)(5) of the Act adjustment application and have that During the 60-Day Parole Period? authorizes the Attorney General to application completely adjudicated If the individual paroled into the parole into the United States any alien before the requestor’s 21st birthday. United States fails to apply for applying for admission to the United adjustment of status within the 60-day States ‘‘on a case-by-case basis for Why Is the Delegation of Authority Being Applied to Applicants Under the parole period, he or she will be subject urgent humanitarian reasons or to expedited removal from the United significant public benefit.’’ In HRIFA Program and Not to Applicants Under Section 202 of the Nicaraguan States under section 235(b)(1)(A)(i) of accordance with section 103 of the Act, the Act. the Attorney General has delegated Adjustment and Central American authority for administration and Relief Act (NACARA)? When Will This Delegation of Authority enforcement of the Act, including Unlike the HRIFA, section 202 of Begin and How Long Will It Be in section 212(d)(5) of the Act, to the NACARA requires all applicants, Effect? Commissioner of the Immigration and including dependents, to have filed This delegation of authority begins Naturalization Service. See 28 CFR their applications for adjustment of April 1, 2000, and will remain in effect 0.105, 8 CFR 2.1. The Commissioner status by March 31, 2000. It is, therefore, indefinitely. If the Service should may in turn redelegate her authority to not possible for anyone to be paroled decide to terminate this delegation, a any other officer or employee of the into the United States on or after April notice to that effect will be published in Service. See 28 CFR 0.108, 8 CFR 2.1, 1, 2000, for the purpose of applying for the Federal Register. 8 CFR 103.1 adjustment of status under section 202 of NACARA. Dated: March 20, 2000. What Individuals Are Included in This Doris Meissner, Advance Parole Program? How Will the Service Detect and Deter Commissioner, Immigration and In order to participate in this advance Potential Fraudulent Requests for Naturalization Service. parole program, an individual must be Parole Authorization Under This [FR Doc. 00–7410 Filed 3–22–00; 8:45 am] Program? a national of Haiti who is the dependent BILLING CODE 4410±10±M spouse or child of a Haitian who is a Before approving the request for principal applicant for adjustment of advance parole, the Director of the NSC status under the HRIFA. In addition, a will review all Service records, and DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE Haitian national who is the dependent other records as appropriate, pertaining Parole Commission unmarried son or daughter of a Haitian to both the requestor and the principal who is a principal applicant for applicant for adjustment of status Sunshine Act Meeting adjustment of status under the HRIFA through whom the requestor’s parole may also participate in this advance request is based. The Director of the AGENCY HOLDING MEETING: Department of parole program, but only if he or she NSC will approve the parole request Justice, United States Parole was physically present in the United only after the Service has approved the Commission. principal applicant’s adjustment States on or before December 31, 1995, DATE AND TIME: 9:30 a.m., Tuesday, and has not been outside the United application and the Director of the NSC March 28, 2000. States for more than 180 days in the is satisfied that the requestor meets all PLACE: U.S. Parole Commission, 5550 aggregate since that date. criteria for parole previously discussed. Once the parole request has been Friendship Boulevard, 4th Floor, Chevy What Other Factors Will Determine approved, the documentation will be Chase, Maryland 20815. Whether the Request for Advance forwarded to the Service Officer-in- STATUS: Closed—Meeting. Parole Will Be Granted? Charge in Port-au-Prince, Haiti (or, if the MATTERS CONSIDERED: The following In accordance with the provisions of alien resides in another country, to the matter will be considered during the section 212(d)(5) of the Act previously appropriate U.S. consulate) for closed portion of the Commission’s cited, the Service will review other interview of the alien. If the Officer-in- Business Meeting:
VerDate 20
Appeals to the Commission involving DEPARTMENT OF LABOR CFR Parts 1 and 5. Accordingly, the approximately one case decided by the applicable decision, together with any National Commissioners pursuant to a Employment Standards Administration modifications issued, must be made a reference under 28 CFR 2.27. This case part of every contract for performance of Wage and Hour Division; Minimum was originally heard by an examiner the described work within the Wages for Federal and Federally panel wherein inmates of Federal geographic area indicated as required by Assisted Construction; General Wage an applicable Federal prevailing wage prisons have applied for parole or are Determination Decisions contesting revocation of parole or law and 29 CFR Part 5. The wage rates mandatory release. General wage determination decisions and fringe benefits, notice of which is of the Secretary of Labor are issued in published herein, and which are AGENCY CONTACT: Sam Robertson, Case accordance with applicable law and are contained in the Government Printing Operations, United States Parole based on the information obtained by Office (GPO) document entitled Commission, (301) 492–5962. the Department of Labor from its study ‘‘General Wage Determinations Issued Dated: March 21, 2000. of local wage conditions and data made Under the Davis-Bacon and Related available from other sources. They Acts,’’ shall be the minimum paid by Michael A. Stover, contractors and subcontractors to General Counsel, U.S. Parole Commission. specify the basic hourly wage rates and fringe benefits which are determined to laborers and mechanics. [FR Doc. 00–7407 Filed 3–22–00; 10:21 am] be prevailing for the described classes of Any person, organization, or BILLING CODE 4410±31±M laborers and mechanics employed on governmental agency having an interest construction projects of a similar in the rates determined as prevailing is character and in the localities specified encouraged to submit wage rate and DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE therein. fringe benefit information for consideration by the Department. Parole Commission The determinations in these decisions of prevailing rates and fringe benefits Further information and self- explanatory forms for the purpose of Sunshine Act Meeting have been made in accordance with 29 CFR Part 1, by authority of the Secretary submitting this data may be obtained by writing to the U.S. Department of Labor, Public Announcement Pursuant to the of Labor pursuant to the provisions of Employment Standards Administration, Government in the Sunshine Act the Davis-Bacon Act of March 3, 1931, Wage and Hour Division, Division of (Public Law 94–409) [5 U.S.C. Section as amended (46 Stat. 1494, as amended, Wage Determinations, 200 Constitution 552b] 40 U.S.C. 276a) and of other Federal statutes referred to in 29 CFR Part 1, Avenue, N.W., Room S–3014, Washington, D.C. 20210. AGENCY HOLDING MEETING: Department of Appendix, as well as such additional Justice, United States Parole statutes as may from time to time be Modifications to General Wage Commission. enacted containing provisions for the Determination Decisions payment of wages determined to be The number of decisions listed in the TIME AND DATE: 10:30 a.m., Tuesday, prevailing by the Secretary of Labor in March 28, 2000. Government Printing Office document accordance with the Davis-Bacon Act. entitled ‘‘General Wage Determinations PLACE: U.S. Parole Commission, 5550 The prevailing rates and fringe benefits Issued Under the Davis—Bacon and Friendship Boulevard, 4th Floor, Chevy determined in these decisions shall, in Related Acts’’ being modified are listed Chase, Maryland 20815. accordance with the provisions of the by Volume and State. Dates of foregoing statutes, constitute the publication in the Federal Register are STATUS: Open. minimum wages payable on Federal and in parentheses following the decisions MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED: The federally assisted construction projects being modified. following matters have been placed on to laborers and mechanics of the specified classes engaged on contract Volume I the agenda for the open Parole work of the character and in the Connecticut Commission meeting: localities described therein. CT000001 (Feb. 11, 2000) 1. Approval of minutes of previous Good cause is hereby found for not CT000003 (Feb. 11, 2000) Commission meeting. utilizing notice and public comment CT000004 (Feb. 11, 2000) Massachusetts 2. Reports from the Chairman, procedure thereon prior to the issuance MA000001 (Feb. 11, 2000) Commissioners, Legal, Chief of Staff, of these determinations as prescribed in MA000003 (Feb. 11, 2000) Case Operations, and Administrative 5 U.S.C. 553 and not providing for delay MA000005 (Feb. 11, 2000) Sections. in the effective date as prescribed in that MA000007 (Feb. 11, 2000) section, because the necessity to issue MA000012 (Feb. 11, 2000) 3. Proposed/Interim Rules for D.C. current construction industry wage MA000013 (Feb. 11, 2000) Code Offenders. determinations frequently and in large MA000017 (Feb. 11, 2000) MA000018 (Feb. 11, 2000) AGENCY CONTACT: Sam Robertson, Case volume causes procedures to be MA000019 (Feb. 11, 2000) Operations, United States Parole impractical and contrary to the public MA000020 (Feb. 11, 2000) Commission, (301) 492–5962. interest. Maine General wage determination ME000005 (Feb. 11, 2000) Dated: March 21, 2000. decisions, and modifications and ME000007 (Feb. 11, 2000) Michael A. Stover, supersedes decisions thereto, contain no ME000010 (Feb. 11, 2000) General Counsel, U.S. Parole Commission. expiration dates and are effective from ME000018 (Feb. 11, 2000) their date of notice in the Federal ME000022 (Feb. 11, 2000) [FR Doc. 00–7408 Filed 3–22–00; 10:22 am] ME000037 (Feb. 11, 2000) BILLING CODE 4410±31±M Register, or on the date written notice New Jersey is received by the agency, whichever is NJ000003 (Feb. 11, 2000) earlier. These decisions are to be used NJ000005 (Feb. 11, 2000) in accordance with the provisions of 29 New York
VerDate 20
NY000003 (Feb. 11, 2000) Volume V THE NATIONAL FOUNDATION ON THE NY000005 (Feb. 11, 2000) Nebraska ARTS AND THE HUMANITIES NY000007 (Feb. 11, 2000) NE000001 (Feb. 11, 2000) NY000008 (Feb. 11, 2000) NE000002 (Feb. 11, 2000) Meetings of Humanities Panel NY000009 (Feb. 11, 2000) NE000003 (Feb. 11, 2000) NY000010 (Feb. 11, 2000) AGENCY: The National Endowment for NY000012 (Feb. 11, 2000) NE000019 (Feb. 11, 2000) the Humanities. NY000013 (Feb. 11, 2000) Volume VI ACTION: Notice of meetings. NY000014 (Feb. 11, 2000) NY000015 (Feb. 11, 2000) North Dakota ND000001 (Feb. 11, 2000) SUMMARY: Pursuant to the provisions of NY000016 (Feb. 11, 2000) the Federal Advisory Committee Act NY000017 (Feb. 11, 2000) ND000003 (Feb. 11, 2000) NY000018 (Feb. 11, 2000) ND000004 (Feb. 11, 2000) (Public Law 92–463, as amended), NY000019 (Feb. 11, 2000) ND000054 (Feb. 11, 2000) notice is hereby given that the following NY000025 (Feb. 11, 2000) meetings of the Humanities Panel will Volume VII NY000026 (Feb. 11, 2000) be held at the Old Post Office, 1100 NY000031 (Feb. 11, 2000) None. Pennsylvania Avenue, NW, Washington, NY000032 (Feb. 11, 2000) DC 20506. General Wage Determination NY000033 (Feb. 11, 2000) FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Publication NY000036 (Feb. 11, 2000) Laura S. Nelson, Advisory Committee NY000037 (Feb. 11, 2000) Management Officer, National NY000039 (Feb. 11, 2000) General wage determinations issued NY000041 (Feb. 11, 2000) under the Davis-Bacon and related Acts, Endowment for the Humanities, NY000043 (Feb. 11, 2000) including those noted above, may be Washington, DC 20506; telephone (202) NY000044 (Feb. 11, 2000) found in the Government Printing Office 606–8322. Hearing-impaired individuals NY000045 (Feb. 11, 2000) (GPO) document entitled ‘‘General Wage are advised that information on this NY000051 (Feb. 11, 2000) Determinations Issued Under the Davis- matter may be obtained by contacting NY000055 (Feb. 11, 2000) Bacon and Related Acts.’’ This the Endowment’s TDD terminal on (202) NY000066 (Feb. 11, 2000) 606–8282. NY000078 (Feb. 11, 2000) publication is available at each of the 50 Regional Government Depository SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Volume II Libraries and many of the 1,400 proposed meetings are for the purpose Pennsylvania Government Depository Libraries across of panel review, discussion, evaluation PA000005 (Feb. 11, 2000) the country. and recommendation on applications PA000006 (Feb. 11, 2000) for financial assistance under the PA000026 (Feb. 11, 2000) The general wage determinations National Foundation on the Arts and the issued under the Davis-Bacon and Volume III Humanities Act of 1965, as amended, related Acts are available electronically including discussion of information Georgia by subscription to the FedWorld given in confidence to the agency by the GA000022 (Feb. 11, 2000) Bulletin Board System of the National grant applicants. Because the proposed Kentucky Technical Information Service (NTIS) of KY000002 (Feb. 11, 2000) meetings will consider information that KY000004 (Feb. 11, 2000) the U.S. Department of Commerce at 1– is likely to disclose trade secrets and KY000027 (Feb. 11, 2000) 800–363–2068 commercial or financial information KY000028 (Feb. 11, 2000) Hard-copy subscriptions may be obtained from a person and privileged KY000029 (Feb. 11, 2000) purchased from: Superintendent of or confidential and/or information of a Volume IV Documents, U.S. Government Printing personal nature the disclosure of which Office, Washington, D.C. 20402, (202) would constitute a clearly unwarranted Illinois invasion of personal privacy, pursuant IL000001 (Feb. 11, 2000) 512–1800. to authority granted me by the IL000008 (Feb. 11, 2000) When ordering hard-copy IL000009 (Feb. 11, 2000) Chairman’s Delegation of Authority to IL000011 (Feb. 11, 2000) subscription(s), be sure to specify the Close Advisory Committee meetings, IL000013 (Feb. 11, 2000) State(s) of interest, since subscriptions dated July 19, 1993, I have determined Michigan may be ordered for any or all of the that these meetings will be closed to the MI000002 (Feb. 11, 2000) seven separate volumes, arranged by public pursuant to subsections (c)(4), MI000004 (Feb. 11, 2000) State. Subscriptions include an annual and (6) of section 552b of Title 5, United MI000005 (Feb. 11, 2000) edition (issued in January or February) States Code. MI000007 (Feb. 11, 2000) which includes all current general wage 1. Date: April 3, 2000. MI000047 (Feb. 11, 2000) MI000062 (Feb. 11, 2000) determinations for the States covered by Time: 9 a.m. to 5:30 p.m. MI000064 (Feb. 11, 2000) each volume. Throughout the remainder Room: 415. MI000077 (Feb. 11, 2000) of the year, regular weekly updates are Program: This meeting will review MI000081 (Feb. 11, 2000) distributed to subscribers. applications for Humanities Projects in MI000082 (Feb. 11, 2000) Media, submitted to the Division of Dated: Signed at Washington, D.C. this MI000083 (Feb. 11, 2000) 15th Day of March 2000. Public Programs at the February 1, 2000 MI000084 (Feb. 11, 2000) deadline. MI000088 (Feb. 11, 2000) Carl J. Poleskey, 2. Date: April 3, 2000. Minnesota Chief, Branch of Construction Wage Time: 9 a.m. to 5:30 p.m. MN000007 (Feb. 11, 2000) Determinations. Room: 426. Ohio [FR Doc. 00–7058 Filed 3–23–00; 8:45 am] OH000002 (Feb. 11, 2000) Program: This meeting will review OH000028 (Feb. 11, 2000) BILLING CODE 4510±27±M applications for Humanities Projects in OH000029 (Feb. 11, 2000) Museums and Historical Organizations, OH000034 (Feb. 11, 2000) submitted to the Division of Public
VerDate 20
Programs at the February 1, 2000 submitted to the Division of Education It is estimated that approximately 176 deadline. at the March 1, 2000 deadline. initial profiles and 129 updated profiles 3. Date: April 7, 2000. are filed with the Commission annually. Laura S. Nelson, Time: 9 a.m. to 5:30 p.m. The Commission estimates that each Advisory Committee Management Officer. Room: 415. profile contains on average 1.25 [FR Doc. 00–7298 Filed 3–23–00; 8:45 am] Program: This meeting will review portfolios, resulting in 220 portfolios applications for Humanities Projects in BILLING CODE 7536±01±M filed annually on initial profiles and 161 Media, submitted to the Division of portfolios filed annually on updated Public Programs at the February 1, 2000 profiles. The number of burden hours deadline. for preparing and filing an initial profile SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE per portfolio is 25. The number of 4. Date: April 7, 2000. COMMISSION Time: 9 a.m. to 5:30 p.m. burden hours for preparing and filing an updated profile per portfolio is 10. The Room: 426. Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request total burden hours for preparing and Program: This meeting will review filing initial and updated profiles under applications for Special Projects, Upon Written Request, Copies Available Rule 498 is 7,110, representing a submitted to the Division of Public From: Securities and Exchange decrease of 6,640 hours from the prior Programs at the February 1, 2000 Commission, Office of Filings and estimate of 13,750. The reduction in deadline. Information Services, Washington, DC burden hours is attributable to the lower 5. Date: April 10, 2000. 20549. number of profiles actually prepared Time: 9 a.m. to 5:30 p.m. and filed as compared to the previous Room: 426. Extension: Rule 498, File No. 270–435, OMB Control estimates. Program: This meeting will review No. 3235–0488; The collection of information under applications for Humanities Projects in Rule 30a–1, File No. 270–210, OMB Rule 498 is voluntary. The information Museums and Historical Organizations, Control No. 3235–0219. provided by Rule 498 is not kept submitted to the Division of Public Notice is hereby given that, pursuant confidential. Programs at the February 1, 2000 to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 deadline. Rule 30a–1 Under the Investment (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), the Securities Company Act of 1940, Annual Reports 6. Date: April 14, 2000. and Exchange Commission Time: 9 a.m. to 5:30 p.m. (‘‘Commission’’) has submitted to the Rule 30a–1 [17 CFR 270.30a–1] Room: 415. Office of Management and Budget requires that investment companies Program: This meeting will review requests for extension on the previously registered under the Investment applications for Humanities Projects in approved collections of information Company Act file annual and periodic Libraries and Archives, submitted to the discussed below. reports with the Commission and send Division of Public Programs at the to the Commission copies of their February 1, 2000 deadline. Rule 498 Under the Securities Act of reports to shareholders. These 7. Date: April 25, 2000. 1933, Profiles for Certain Open-End requirements are designed to ensure that Management Investment Companies Time: 9 a.m. to 5 p.m. the Commission has enough information Room: 315. Rule 498 (17 CFR 230.498) permits in its files to effectively monitor the operations of each company and to Program: This meeting will review open-end management investment provide investors with the kind of applications for Summer Seminars and companies (or a series of an investment current information that is necessary to Institutes for School Teachers, company organized as a series company, detect problems in the operations of the submitted to the Division of Education which offers one or more series of company.1 at the March 1, 2000 deadline. shares representing interests in separate There is no burden associated with 8. Date: April 26, 2000. investment portfolios) (‘‘funds’’) to provide investors with a ‘‘profile’’ that complying with Rule 30a–1. The Time: 9 a.m. to 5 p.m. respondent’s reporting burden and cost Room: 315. contains a summary of key information about a fund, including the fund’s burden under Rule 30a–1 is associated Program: This meeting will review investment objectives, strategies, risks with Form N–SAR. Those burdens and applications for Summer Seminars and and performance, and fees in a costs are discussed in the submission Institutes for College and University standardized format. The profile for Form N–SAR. Teachers, submitted to the Division of provides investors the option of buying The collection of information under Education at the March 1, 2000 fund shares based on the information in Rule 30a–1 is mandatory. The deadline. the profile or reviewing the fund’s information provided by Rule 30a–1 is 9. Date: April 27, 2000. prospectus before making an investment not kept confidential. Time: 9 a.m. to 5 p.m. decision. Investors purchasing shares The estimates of average burden hours Room: 315. based on a profile receive the fund’s are made solely for the purposes of the Program: This meeting will review prospectus prior to or with confirmation Paperwork Reduction Act and are not applications for Summer Seminars and of their investment in the fund. derived from a comprehensive or even Institutes for School Teachers, Consistent with the filing requirement representative survey or study of the submitted to the Division of Education of a fund’s prospectus, a profile must be cost of Commission rules and forms. at the March 1, 2000 deadline. filed with the Commission thirty days The Commission may not conduct or 10. Date: April 28, 2000. before first use. Such a filing allows the sponsor, and a person is not required to Time: 9 a.m. to 5 p.m. Commission to review the profile for respond to, a collection of information Room: 315. compliance with Rule 498. Compliance 1 Annual and periodic reports to the Commission Program: This meeting will review with the rule’s standardized format become part of its public files and, therefore, are applications for Summer Seminars and assists investors in evaluating and available for use by prospective investors and Institutes for School Teachers, comparing funds. shareholders.
VerDate 20
VerDate 20
VerDate 20
VerDate 20
Issued on: March 10, 2000. factor (RCAF) and cost index filed by available through TDD services (202) Karen E. Skelton, the Association of American Railroads. 565–1695.] Chief Counsel, Federal Highway The second quarter 2000 RCAF This action will not significantly Administration. (Unadjusted) is 1.050. The second affect either the quality of the human [FR Doc. 00–7223 Filed 3–23–00; 8:45 am] quarter 2000 RCAF (Adjusted) is 0.593. environment or energy conservation. BILLING CODE 4910±22±P The second quarter 2000 RCAF–5 is 0.577. Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 605(b), we conclude that our action will not have DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION EFFECTIVE DATE: April 1, 2000. a significant economic impact on a FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: H. substantial number of small entities Surface Transportation Board Jeff Warren, (202) 565–1533. TDD for within the meaning of the Regulatory [STB Ex Parte No. 290 (Sub No. 5) (2000± the hearing impaired: (202) 565–1695. Flexibility Act. 2)] SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Decided: March 20, 2000. Additional information is contained in Quarterly Rail Cost Adjustment Factor By the Board, Chairman Morgan, Vice the Board’s decision. To purchase a Chairman Burkes, and Commissioner AGENCY: Surface Transportation Board. copy of the full decision, write to, call, Clyburn. or pick up in person from: DAY TO ACTION: Approval of rail cost adjustment Vernon A. Williams, factor. DAY OFFICE SOLUTIONS, Suite 210, 1925 K Street, NW, Washington, DC Secretary. SUMMARY: The Board has approved the 20423–0001, telephone (202) 289–4357. [FR Doc. 00–7329 Filed 3–23–00; 8:45 am] second quarter 2000 rail cost adjustment [Assistance for the hearing impaired is BILLING CODE 4915±00±P
VerDate 20
Corrections Federal Register Vol. 65, No. 58
Friday, March 24, 2000
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER 2000, the agency ’s name is corrected to Friday, March 10, 2000, make the contains editorial corrections of previously read as set forth above. following correction: published Presidential, Rule, Proposed Rule, and Notice documents. These corrections are [FR Doc. C0–6202 Filed 3–23–00; 8:45 am] On page 13069, in the third column, prepared by the Office of the Federal BILLING CODE 1505±01±D the date line is added to read as set forth Register. Agency prepared corrections are above. issued as signed documents and appear in [FR Doc. C0–5916 Filed 3–23–00; 8:45 am] the appropriate document categories SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE elsewhere in the issue. COMMISSION BILLING CODE 1505±01±D 17 CFR Part 270 SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE [Release Nos. 33±7728A, IC±23958A, IA± NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION COMMISSION 1815A; File No. S7±25±95] RIN 3235±AG27 [Release No. 35±27149] [Docket Nos. 50±295 and 50±304 Personal Investment Activities of Filings Under the Public Utility Holding Investment Company Personnel Commonwealth Edison Company Zion Company Act of 1935, as Amended, Nuclear Power Station, Units 1 and 2; Correction (``Act'') Notice of Consideration of Approval of Transfer of Facility Operating Licenses In rule document 00–5914 beginning Correction and Conforming Amendments and on page 12943 in the issue of Friday, March 10, 2000, make the following Opportunity for a Hearing In notice document 00–6077 correction: beginning on page 13349 in the issue of Correction On page 12934, in the second column, Monday, March 13, 2000, make the above the signature, ‘‘Dated: March 6, following corrections: In notice document 00–5743 200’’ should read ‘‘Dated: March 6, beginning on page 12586 in the issue of 2000’’. 1. On page 13349, in the third Thursday, March 9, 2000, make the column, the agency’s name is corrected [FR Doc. C0–5914 Filed 3–23–00; 8:45 am] to read as set forth above. following correction: BILLING CODE 1505±01±D On page 12587, in the first column, in 2. On the same page, in the same the 8th line, ‘‘April 29, 2000’’ should column, in the sixth line from the read ‘‘March 29, 2000’’. SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE bottom, ‘‘March 8, 2000’’ should read COMMISSION ‘‘March 28, 2000’’. [FR Doc. C0–5743 Filed 3–23–00; 8:45 am] [Release No. 34±42494; File No. SR± NASD± [FR Doc. C0–6077 Filed 3–23–00; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 1505±01±D 00±06] BILLING CODE 1505±01±D Self-Regulatory Organizations; Notice SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness COMMISSION of Proposed Rule Change by the National Association of Securities [Extension: Rule 17a±6; SEC File No. 270± Dealers, Inc. Relating to the Delay of 433; OMB Control No. 3235±0489] the Implementation Date of Changes to Riskless Principal Trade Reporting Request Under Review by Office of Rules Management and Budget March 3, 2000. Correction Correction In notice document 00–6202 on page In notice document 00–5916, 13799 in the issue of Tuesday March 14, beginning on page 13069, in the issue of
VerDate 20
Part II
Department of State Office of Protocol; Gifts to Federal Employees From Foreign Government Sources Reported to Employing Agencies in Calendar Year 1999; Notice
VerDate 20
DEPARTMENT OF STATE statements which, as required by law, Publication of this listing in the Federal employees filed with their Federal Register is required by Section [Public Notice 3250] employing agencies during calendar 7342(f) of Title 5, Unites States Code, as year 1999 concerning gifts received from added by Section 515(a)(1) of the Office of Protocol; Gifts to Federal foreign government sources. The Foreign Relations Authorization Act, Employees From Foreign Government compilation includes reports of both Fiscal Year 1978 (Public Law 95–105, Sources Reported to Employing tangible gifts and gifts of travel or travel August 17, 1977, 91 Stat. 865). Agencies In Calendar Year 1999 expenses of more than minimal value, Dated: March 10, 2000. The Department of State submits the as defined by statute. Bonnie Cohen, following comprehensive listing of the Under Secretary for Management.
REPORT OF TANGIBLE GIFTS
Gift, date of acceptance on behalf Name and title of person accepting of the U.S. Government, esti- Identity of foreign donor and gov- Circumstances justifying accept- the gift on behalf of the U.S. Gov- mated value, and current disposi- ernment ance ernment tion or location
Executive Office of The President
President ...... 40″ x 29″ gilt framed oil painting His Excellency Petru Lucinschi, Non-acceptance would cause em- of an autumn landscape that President of the Republic of barrassment to donor and U.S. depicts a shepherd and goats. Moldova. Government. RecdÐOctober 20, 1998. Est. ValueÐ$1500. Archives For- eign. President ...... Six bottles of sake. RecdÐNo- His Excellency, Keizo Obuchi, Non-acceptance would cause em- vember 20, 1998. Est. ValueÐ The Prime Minister of Japan barrassment to donor and U.S. $72. Accepted by Another Gov- and Mrs. Obuchi. Government. ernment Agency. Two bonsai trees. One is a 250- year-old Ezo Spruce, $9000. The other is an 80-year-old Tri- dent Maple, $5500. RecdÐNo- vember 20, 1998. Est. ValueÐ $14500. Accepted by Another Government Agency. President ...... 49″ tall wood chair with a black Sr. Victor Cervera Pacheco, Gov- Non-acceptance would cause em- leather seat and carved back ernor of Yucatan Mexico. barrassment to donor and U.S. splat that depicts the Mexican Government. and American flags, an eagle, a snake, and two hands, and reads ``USA and Mexico.'' RecdÐJanuary 15, 1999. Est. ValueÐ$1000. Archives For- eign. President ...... (1) Rosary with white glass beads His Holiness John Paul II ...... Non-acceptance would cause em- and silver-tone crucifix, $15. (2) barrassment to donor and U.S. Three limited edition Vatican Government. coins: bronze, silver, and 22 kt. gold. Each is 44 mm diameter and is decorated with an image of the Pope and Latin text, $1000. RecdÐJanuary 26, 1999. Est. ValueÐ$1015. Ar- chives Foreign. President ...... (1) Paperback. ``The Routes of Al- His Majesty Juan Carlos I, King of Non-acceptance would cause em- Andalus,'' by various authors, Spain. barrassment to donor and U.S. $15. (2) Three hardcover Government. books. ``The Fires of Excel- lence,'' by Miles Danby, ``The Alhambra in Detail,'' by Aurelio Cid Acedo, and ``American Ori- entalists,'' by Gerald Ackerman, $45. (3) 38″ x 30″ gilt framed and matted series of four etch- ings, two depict landscapes and two depict buildings in Spain, $600. RecdÐFebruary 3, 1999. Est. ValueÐ$660. Archives Foreign.
VerDate 20
REPORT OF TANGIBLE GIFTSÐContinued
Gift, date of acceptance on behalf Name and title of person accepting of the U.S. Government, esti- Identity of foreign donor and gov- Circumstances justifying accept- the gift on behalf of the U.S. Gov- mated value, and current disposi- ernment ance ernment tion or location
President ...... 31″ x 26″ silver-tone framed and His Excellency Jacques Chirac, Non-acceptance would cause em- double matted antique map President of the French Repub- barrassment to donor and U.S. circa 1669 of the United States, lic. Government. Canada, and Greenland; sight size 24″ x 18″. RecdÐFebruary 19, 1999. Est. ValueÐ$1200. Archives Foreign. President ...... 4″ x 6″ ornate reticulated silver His Excellency Massimo D'Alema Non-acceptance would cause em- tray. RecdÐMarch 5, 1999. and Mrs. D'Alema, President of barrassment to donor and U.S. Est. ValueÐ$1400. Archives the Council of Ministers of the Government. Foreign. Italian Republic. President ...... (1) 13″ x 22″ ceramic wall hang- His Excellency Armando Calderon Non-acceptance would cause em- ing that depicts a boy peeking Sol, President of the Republic barrassment to donor and U.S. through a cactus, $185. (2) Pa- of El Salvador. Government. perback. ``Ceramica,'' by Cesar Sermeno, $5. RecdÐMarch 9, 1999. Est. ValueÐ$190. Ar- chives Foreign. (1) Bottle of Foucher white wine. (2) Bottle of Cousine-Macul ca- bernet sauvignon. (3) Bottle of Finlandia vodka. (4) Bottle of Johnnie Walker Black Label scotch. (5) Bottle of Corodniu champagne. RecdÐMarch 9, 1999. Est. ValueÐ$120. Ac- cepted by Another Government Agency. President ...... (1) 9″ bronze sculpture that de- His Excellency Alvaro Arzu Non-acceptance would cause em- picts hands reaching upward, Irigoyen, President of the Re- barrassment to donor and U.S. on a 5″ square black wooden public of Guatemala. Government. base, $500. (2) Two 11″ x 14″ x 6″ inlaid wooden boxes that contain stationery and a black pen, personalized for the Presi- dent and First lady, $800. (3) Two cases of refill stationery, $400. RecdÐMarch 10, 1999. Est. ValueÐ$1700. Archives Foreign. President ...... (1) 23″ x 16″ paper scroll hon- The Honorable Dr. Vilma R. de Non-acceptance would cause em- oring the President's visit to Castellanos, Mayor of barrassment to donor and U.S. Honduras, $25. (2) 7″ long sil- Tegucigalpa, Tegucigalpa, Hon- Government. ver key, held in a 14″ x 10″ x duras. 4″ wooden box with blue velvet lining, $400. RecdÐMarch 11, 1999. Est. ValueÐ$425. Ar- chives Foreign. President ...... 18″ x 15″ black wood framed and His Excellency Bertie Ahern, Non-acceptance would cause em- matted watercolor painting of a Prime Minister of Ireland. barrassment to donor and U.S. white domed building, a foun- Government. tain, and trees. RecdÐMarch 17, 1999. Est. ValueÐ $1200. Archives Foreign. Dublin crystal oval dish with etch- ing that reads ``Presented to Bill Clinton, President of the United States on the Occassion of St. Patrick's Day, 1999, by the Taoesich Bertie Ahern''; ap- proximately 14″ long x 16″ tall x 18″ wide. RecdÐMarch 17, 1999. Est. ValueÐ$1200. Ar- chives Foreign.
VerDate 20
REPORT OF TANGIBLE GIFTSÐContinued
Gift, date of acceptance on behalf Name and title of person accepting of the U.S. Government, esti- Identity of foreign donor and gov- Circumstances justifying accept- the gift on behalf of the U.S. Gov- mated value, and current disposi- ernment ance ernment tion or location
President ...... 20″ x 13″ mother-of-pearl and ab- Mr. Yasser Arafat, Chairman, Ex- Non-acceptance would cause em- alone oval shadow box Nativity ecutive Committee of the Pal- barrassment to donor and U.S. scene with a horseshoe-shaped estine Liberation Organization. Government. crown on top. Inside the crown is an angel and a man. RecdÐ March 23, 1999. Est. ValueÐ $750. Archives Foreign. President ...... 5″ square x 3″ tall Christian Dior His Excellency Jacques Chirac, Non-acceptance would cause em- men's burlwood jewelry box President of the French Repub- barrassment to donor and U.S. with removable top drawer lined lic. Government. with suede, and lid with small gilt handle. RecdÐApril 23, 1999. Est. ValueÐ$250. Ar- chives Foreign. President ...... (1) 6″ x 7″ bronze statute of three His Excellency Leonid Kuchma, Non-acceptance would cause em- men and one woman on a ship, President of Ukrane. barrassment to donor and U.S. on a marble base, $750. (2) 15″ Government. x 5″ diameter green vase hand- painted with purple and blue stemmed irises, $250. RecdÐ April 24, 1999. Est. ValueÐ $1000. Archives Foreign. President ...... 5″ x 2″ silver box with lid rimmed His Excellency Nursultan Non-acceptance would cause em- with 18 kt. gold border and the Nazarbayev, President of the barrassment to donor and U.S. seal of Kazakhstan engraved Republic of Kazakhstan. Government. on top. RecdÐApril 14, 1999. Est. valueÐ$2000. Archives Foreign. President ...... 8″ tall 14 kt. gold and silver tree His Excellency Eduard Non-acceptance would cause em- with green enamel leaves and Shevardnadze, President of barrassment to donor and U.S. grapes, on a 3″ x 6″ marble Georgia. Government. stand. RecdÐApril 24, 1999. Est. ValueÐ$2500. Archives Foreign. President ...... 5 liter bottle of liquor, vintage His Excellency Viktor Orban, The Non-acceptance would cause em- 1963. RecdÐMay 3, 1999. Est. Prime Minister of the Republic barrassment to donor and U.S. ValueÐ$50. Accepted by An- of Hungary and Mrs. Orban. Government. other Government Agency. President ...... Gilt framed pastel and gold wash His Excellency Keizo Obuchi, The Non-acceptance would cause em- painting of Mount Fuji at sunset Prime Minister of Japan and barrassment to donor and U.S. with a pine forest in the fore- Mrs. Obuchi. Government. ground, under glass; sight size 16″ x 20″; signed in calligraphy. RecdÐMay 3, 1999 Est. ValueÐ$2500. Archives For- eign. President ...... Three bottles of 1995 Szepsy His Excellency Arpad Goncz, The Non-acceptance would cause em- wine. RecdÐJune 8, 1999. Est. President of the Republic of barrassment to donor and U.S. ValueÐ$90. Accepted by An- Hungary and Mrs. Goncz. Government. other Government Agency. President ...... Handcrafted 32 piece lead crystal His Excellency Dr. Janez Non-acceptance would cause em- chess set. Board is 21″ square Drnovsek, Prime Minister of the barrassment to donor and U.S. with black marble base and Republic of Slovenia. Government. crystal top. Each playing piece is 2±3″ tall, one side has a white marble base, the other has a black marble base. RecdÐJune 22, 1999. Est. ValueÐ$1400. Archives For- eign. President ...... 13″ x 27″ wood carving of a bird His Excellency Ljubco Non-acceptance would cause em- and two bunches of grapes, Georgievski, The Prime Minister barrassment to donor and U.S. with a 2.5″ wooden border. of the Former Yugoslav Repub- Government. RecdÐJune 24, 1999. Est. lic of Macedonia and Mrs. ValueÐ$500. Archives Foreign. Georgievska.
VerDate 20
REPORT OF TANGIBLE GIFTSÐContinued
Gift, date of acceptance on behalf Name and title of person accepting of the U.S. Government, esti- Identity of foreign donor and gov- Circumstances justifying accept- the gift on behalf of the U.S. Gov- mated value, and current disposi- ernment ance ernment tion or location
President ...... 65″ x 78″ earth-tone wool tapestry His Excellency Mohamed Hosny Non-acceptance would cause em- wall hanging reproduction that Mubarak, President of the Arab barrassment to donor and U.S. depicts a city street filled with Republic Egypt. Government. people. RecdÐJuly 1, 1999. Est. ValueÐ$2500. Archives Foreign. President ...... Leather-bound antique book with His Excellency Ehud Barak, The Non-acceptance would cause em- gilt edging. ``The Recovery of Prime Minister of Israel and barrassment to donor and U.S. Jerusalem,'' by Captain Charles Mrs. Barak. Government. Wilson and Captain Warren; original edition published 1871. RecdÐJuly 16, 1999. Est. ValueÐ$700. Archives Foreign. President ...... 8″ diameter carved gold chased His Excellency Sergei Stepashin, Non-acceptance would cause em- metal and vermeil tray with tree Chairman of the Government of barrassment to donor and U.S. matching 4″ tall pedestal cordial the Russian Federation. Government. glasses. RecdÐJuly 27, 1999. Est. ValueÐ$300. Archives Foreign. President ...... Antique leather-bound books. (1) His Majesty Mohamed VI, King of Non-acceptance would cause em- Six volume set of ``The World Morocco. barrassment to donor and U.S. Crisis,'' by Winston Churchill, Government. first edition, $2400. (2) ``His- toric, Military, and Naval Anec- dotes,'' by Edward Orme; illus- trated with hand-colored litho- graphs, first edition, $3000. (3) ``Sonnets,'' by the Italian poet Petrarch, hand-illuminated edi- tion, $5000. (4) ``Com- mentaries,'' by Caesar, edited by Clark in a large rebacked folio with maps, plans, and plates, $4000. RecdÐSep- tember 1, 1999. Est. ValueÐ $14400. Archives Foreign. 8″ x 11″ green leather portfolio embossed with the seal of Mo- rocco. RecdÐSeptember 1, 1999. Est. ValueÐ$30. Ar- chives Foreign. President ...... 59″ x 67″ sage, beige, brown, and His Excellency Sir Michael Non-acceptance would cause em- maroon colored rug titled Hardie-Boys, G.C.M.G., Gov- barrassment to donor and U.S. ``Whaka Hura''; limited edition. ernor General of New Zealand. Government. RecdÐSeptember 13, 1999. Est. ValueÐ$2824. Archives Foreign. President ...... 9″ diameter bronze incense burn- His Excellency Phan Van Khai, Non-acceptance would cause em- er with animal head ring han- Prime Minister of the Socialist barrassment to donor and U.S. dles. Bowl and legs have inlaid Republic of Vietnam. Government. lacquer, shell, and mother-of- pearl traditional motifs and fig- ures. Matching lid has open ventilation slots, inlaid folk in- struments motif, and is capped with a ``fu dog'' finial. Burner stands on a tripodial base with plaque that reads ``With the compliments from H.E. Mr. Phan Van Khai, Prime Minister, Socialist Republic of Vietnam.'' RecdÐSeptember 13, 1999. Est. ValueÐ$500. Archives Foreign.
VerDate 20
REPORT OF TANGIBLE GIFTSÐContinued
Gift, date of acceptance on behalf Name and title of person accepting of the U.S. Government, esti- Identity of foreign donor and gov- Circumstances justifying accept- the gift on behalf of the U.S. Gov- mated value, and current disposi- ernment ance ernment tion or location
President ...... (1) 8″ x 17″ etched and sand The Right Honorable Jenny Ship- Non-acceptance would cause em- blasted blue crystal canoe, ley, P.C., The Prime Minister of barrassment to donor and U.S. $125. (2) Two woven pouches New Zealand and Mr. Shipley. Government. that contain a greenstone from the Ngai Tahu tribe and a Kauri tree seed, a symbolic tree in New Zealand, $30. (3) 18″ x 18″ x 10″ black wooden box with wool lining and a remov- able lid with an applied leaf de- sign, $45. RecdÐSeptember 13, 1999. Est. ValueÐ$200. Ar- chives Foreign. President ...... 24″ x 20″ gilt wood framed and The Right Honorable Jean Non-acceptance would cause em- matted impressionist style win- Chretien, P.C., M.P., Prime barrassment to donor and U.S. ter landscape oil painting titled Minister of Canada. Government. ``Vienvra le Temps,'' that de- picts a hiking man sitting under a tree next to a campfire; paint- ed and signed by Serge Brunoni; sight size 12″ x 16″. RecdÐSeptember 30, 1999. Est. ValueÐ$800. Archives Foreign. President ...... 11″ tall x 9″ long x 3″ wide solid The Honorable Lucien Bouchard, Non-acceptance would cause em- bronze sculpture of a woodland Prime Minister of the Province barrassment to donor and U.S. caribou; signed by artist of Quebec. Government. Huguette Joneas. RecdÐOcto- ber 9, 1999. Est. ValueÐ $1200. Archives Foreign. President ...... 14″ cut crystal Valaska Bela vase His Excellency Eduard Kukan, Non-acceptance would cause em- with a snowflake motif and saw- Minister of Foreign Affairs of barrassment to donor and U.S. tooth border. RecdÐOctober 9, the Slovak Republic. Government. 1999. Est. ValueÐ$550. Ar- chives Foreign. President ...... Hardcover book. ``The Mosaics of Their Majesties King Abdullah II Non-acceptance would cause em- Jordan,'' by Michele Piccirillo. and Queen Rania al Abdullah, barrassment to donor and U.S. RecdÐOctober 12, 1999. Est. Jordan. Government. ValueÐ$65. Archives Foreign. President ...... 9″ x 10″ long silver model of a His Excellency Kjell Magne Non-acceptance would cause em- single-sailed Norwegian Viking Bondevik, Prime Minister of barrassment to donor and U.S. boat, which sits on a 6″ x 7.5″ Norway. Government. wooden base with silver plaque. RecdÐOctober 15, 1999. Est. ValueÐ$700. Archives Foreign. President ...... Gilt framed shadow box that con- Her Excellency Mireya Moscoso, Non-acceptance would cause em- tains a gold-tone reproduction President of the Republic of barrassment to donor and U.S. of a Panamanian Huaca. Panama. Government. RecdÐOctober 19, 1999. Est. ValueÐ$200. Archives Foreign. President ...... 10.5″ tall x 10″ wide silver eagle His Excellency Olusegun Non-acceptance would cause em- with vermeil gold beak and tal- Obasanjo, The President of the barrassment to donor and U.S. ons, that sits on a wooden base Federal Republic of Nigeria and Government. with plaque. RecdÐOctober 28, Mrs. Obasanjo. 1999. Est. ValueÐ$2800. Ar- chives Foreign. President ...... (1) Three hardcover books. ``Nor- Their Majesties, The King and Non-acceptance would cause em- way,'' ``The Other Side of Blue,'' Queen of Norway. barrassment to donor and U.S. and ``Living in Norway,'' $60. (2) Government. 8″ x 10″ framed photograph of King Harald and Queen Sonja, $20. RecdÐNovember 1, 1999. Est. ValueÐ$80. Archives For- eign.
VerDate 20
REPORT OF TANGIBLE GIFTSÐContinued
Gift, date of acceptance on behalf Name and title of person accepting of the U.S. Government, esti- Identity of foreign donor and gov- Circumstances justifying accept- the gift on behalf of the U.S. Gov- mated value, and current disposi- ernment ance ernment tion or location
18″ tall bronze abstract sculpture of a man and woman standing together, titled ``Unity,'' signed by artist Kjersti, W., that sits on a 8″ x 5.5″ black marble base. RecdÐNovember 1, 1999. Est. ValueÐ$3000. Archives For- eign. President ...... 15″ x 19″ mother-of-pearl and ab- Mr. Yasser Arafat, Chairman, Non-acceptance would cause em- alone shadow box Nativity Committee of the Palestine Lib- barrassment to donor and U.S. scene. RecdÐNovember 1, eration Organization. Government. 1999. Est. ValueÐ$1000. Ar- chives Foreign. President ...... 16″ x 14″ x 8″ 18 kt. gold mantle His Royal Highness Prince Ban- Non-acceptance would cause em- clock with Arabic numerals, with dar bin Sultan, Ambassador of barrassment to donor and U.S. a sterling silver Arabian horse Saudi Arabia. Government. with traditional Bahraini dress saddle that stands on a mala- chite base. RecdÐNovember 3, 1999. Est. ValueÐ$12000. Ar- chives Foreign. President ...... (1) Hardcover book. ``Istanbul,'' The Honorable Erol Cakir, Gov- Non-acceptance would cause em- $50. (2) 12″ silver coffee pot ernor of Istanbul, The Republic barrassment to donor and U.S. that sits on a 6″ diameter base, of Turkey. Government. with inscription on base that reads ``As a memory of visiting Istanbul: Earl Cakir,'' $2500. RecdÐNovember 17, 1999. Est. ValueÐ$2550. Archives Foreign. President ...... 15″ x 9″ ornately carved gold and The Honorable Dimitris L. Non-acceptance would cause em- silver religious icon in the Avramopoulos, The Mayor of barrassment to donor and U.S. shape of an altar with a picture Athens and Mrs. Avramopoulos, Government. of the Virgin Mary of Soumela The Hellenic Republic. in the center; mounted on an 18″ x 12″ velvet-covered board. RecdÐNovember 22, 1999. Est. ValueÐ$800. Archives Foreign. President ...... (1) 14″ tall x 14″ wide x 6″ deep The Honorable Yordon Sokolov, Non-acceptance would cause em- grey/green carved marble President, National Assembly, barrassment to donor and U.S. eagle, $1000. (2) 2.5″ diameter Republic of Bulgaria. Government. silver medallion that depicts a religious man with a beard, with writing around the rim, $50. RecdÐNovember 22, 1999. Est. ValueÐ$1050. Archives Foreign. (1) Videotape. ``Panorama,'' $15. (2) Hardcover book. ``120 Years National Assembly 1879±1999,'' by the National Assembly in Sofia, $25. RecdÐNovember 22, 1999. Est. ValueÐ$40. Ar- chives Foreign.. President ...... 28″ x 23″ gilt and peach framed His Excellency Petar Stoyanov, Non-acceptance would cause em- abstract oil painting that depicts The President of the Republic barrassment to donor and U.S. a blue cup and a peach block in of Bulgaria and Mrs. Stoyanova. Government. the lower corner on a navy background; sight size 19″ x 24″. RecdÐNovember 22, 1999. Est. ValueÐ$300. Ar- chives Foreign.
VerDate 20
REPORT OF TANGIBLE GIFTSÐContinued
Gift, date of acceptance on behalf Name and title of person accepting of the U.S. Government, esti- Identity of foreign donor and gov- Circumstances justifying accept- the gift on behalf of the U.S. Gov- mated value, and current disposi- ernment ance ernment tion or location
President ...... (1) 31″ x 43″ oil painting on can- His Excellency Leonid Kuchma, Non-acceptance would cause em- vas titled ``The Well,'' in a 49.5″ President of Ukraine. barrassment to donor and U.S. x 38″ gilt frame. Piece depicts a Government. stone well in a barren land- scape of muted grey, blue, and green tones, $3500. (2) Silver medallion engraved with the image of a Ukrainian palace, $50. (3) 3″ x 1″ gold-plated sculpture in the shape of a wand and a crown, all of which sit on a green marble base, $40. (4) 8″ diameter green glass vase with blue, grey, red, and yellow circles and swirls, $250. RecdÐDecember 8, 1999. Est. ValueÐ$3840. Ar- chives Foreign. (1) Bottle of Hetman vodka (2) Bottle of Ukrainian liquor. RecdÐDecember 8, 1999. Est. ValueÐ$65. Accepted by An- other Government Agency.. President ...... (1) Three ceramic coffee can- His Majesty Sultan Haji Hassanal Non-acceptance would cause em- isters, with gold-tone clasps, Bolkiah Mu' Izzaddin barrassment to donor and U.S. $60. (2) Small navy blue nylon Waddaulah, Sultan and Yang Government. backpack, $25. (3) Green apron Di-Pertuan of Brunei with gold vertical stripes, $30. Darussalam. (4) Green pot holder with gold vertical stripes, $15. (5) Navy blue plastic tote bag with gold stars, $20. (6) Light brown ``Mil- lennium Bear'' teddy bear, $50. (7) 18″ x 27″ braided wicker basket, $60. (8) 14″ oatmeal and brown Harrods teddy bear with a maroon fleece hat and scarf, $75. (9) 10″ brass and glass coffee pot, $60. (10) Sil- ver corkscrew, $35. (11) Two 7″ silver candlesticks, $60. (12) 9″ crystal decanter with gold trim, $100. (13) Set of four crystal brandy glasses with gold trim, $200. (14) Silver gray ladle, $25. (15) 9″ silver platter, $50. (16) 8″ silver gravy boat, $40. (17) 8″ cream colored cake stand with a green and purple grape and leaf pattern, $75. RecdÐDecember 16, 1999. Est. ValueÐ$980. Archives Foreign. Assorted wine, champagne, can- dles, and food products, all from Harrods. RecdÐDecem- ber 16, 1999. Est. ValueÐ $1200. Accepted by Another Government Agency.. President ...... Set of 14 kt. gold cuff links and tie His Excellency Martti Ahtisaari, Non-acceptance would cause em- clip that bear the seal of Fin- President of Finland. barrassment to donor and U.S. land. RecdÐDecember 17, Government. 1999. Est. ValueÐ$575. Ar- chives Foreign.
VerDate 20
REPORT OF TANGIBLE GIFTSÐContinued
Gift, date of acceptance on behalf Name and title of person accepting of the U.S. Government, esti- Identity of foreign donor and gov- Circumstances justifying accept- the gift on behalf of the U.S. Gov- mated value, and current disposi- ernment ance ernment tion or location
President ...... Three 29″ diameter circular leath- His Excellency Jibril Muhammad Non-acceptance would cause em- er mats and one 11.5′ x 10′ Aminu, Ambassador of the Fed- barrassment to donor and U.S. leather floor covering. All items eral Republic of Nigeria. Government. are primarily beige with green stripes and a red and white flo- ral and heart pattern. The three round mats are embroidered to read ``Bill Clinton.'' RecdÐDe- cember 18, 1999. Est. ValueÐ $5000. Archives Foreign. President ...... 10″ x 8″ gold and silver sculpture His Excellency Nursultan Non-acceptance would cause em- with a circular flat top lined with Nazarbayev, President of the barrassment to donor and U.S. small animals and a carved ob- Republic of Kazakhstan. Government. ject in the middle, on a blue- green marble/granite base. RecdÐDecember 20, 1999. Est. ValueÐ$1000. Archives Foreign. (1) Two 18 kt. gold rings attached ...... to a pendant and cuff bracelet by two thin gold chains. All pieces are embedded with tur- quoise stones, $1800. (2) 12″ x 10″ green marble two-piece sculpture. The sphere has a metal ring that reads ``Coopera- tive Threat Reduction,'' which sits in a concave spot on the marble base, $150. (3) Set of 18 kt. gold rectangular cuff links with an intricately carved design on each, $225. RecdÐDecem- ber 20, 1999. Est. ValueÐ $2175. Archives Foreign. President ...... (1) Case of eight bottles of olive His Excellency Zine El-Abidine Non-acceptance would cause oil. (2) Two 10lb. bags of dates. Ben Ali, The President of the embarrasment to donor and RecdÐDecember 29, 1999. Republic of Tunisia and Mrs. U.S. Government. Est. ValueÐ$200. Accepted by Ben Ali. Another Government Agency. 20″diameter x 15″ tall yellow and ...... purple leather ottman storage box. Ottoman is hollow with lid. Inside the ottoman are two 14″diameter x 5″ tall purple and yellow leather trays. RecdÐDe- cember 29, 1999. Est. ValueÐ $350. Archives Foreign. President and First Lady ...... (1) Silver brooch with clusters of Their Imperial Majesties The Em- Non-acceptance would cause em- pearls in the shape of a daisy, peror and Empress of Japan. barrassment to donor and U.S. $185. (2) 2″ x 8″ x 10″ black Government. lacquer box with gold wheat desing on the lid, $250. RecdÐ June 22, 1994. Est. ValueÐ $435. Archives Foreign.
VerDate 20
REPORT OF TANGIBLE GIFTSÐContinued
Gift, date of acceptance on behalf Name and title of person accepting of the U.S. Government, esti- Identity of foreign donor and gov- Circumstances justifying accept- the gift on behalf of the U.S. Gov- mated value, and current disposi- ernment ance ernment tion or location
President and First Lady ...... (1) 15″ tall porcelain figure of a Mr. Joe Harrington Mayor of Lim- Non-acceptance would cause em- woman dancer with long brown erick Ireland. barrassment to donor and U.S. hair and a white hardened Government. mesh dress standing on a rock surrounded by puffins, $350. (2) 9″ x 7″ gold-tone framed poem titled ``Dance In The Wind'' $25. (3) 6″ x 4″ white and blue por- celain stand that reads ``Dance In The Wind, Limited Edition No. 1, Presented to Hillary Clin- ton by the City of Limerick, Ire- land, 5th of September 1998,'' $50. RecdÐSeptember 8, 1998. Est. ValueÐ$425. Ar- chives Foreign. President and First Lady ...... For the President: 10″ tall off- The Honorable Licenciado Xavier Non-acceptance would cause em- white carved bone that depicts Abreu Sierra, Presidente Munic- barrassment to donor and U.S. a warrior wearing a jaguar ipal de Merida, Merida, Yucatan Government. headdress; a lion's head pro- Mexico. trudes from the top of the bone; sitting on a 3″ diameter wooden base, $200. For the First Lady: 1″ x 2″ gold filigree cross pend- ant, $250. RecdÐFebruary 14, 1999. Est. ValueÐ$450. Ar- chives Foreign. President and First Lady...... For the President: Two volume His Excellency Ernesto Zedillo Non-acceptance would cause em- and antique book set. ``The His- Ponce de Leon, President of barrassment to donor and U.S. tory of the Conquest of Mexico the United Mexican States. Government. By the Spaniards,'' by Don An- tonio de Solis, $400. For the First Lady: (1) Book. ``Rebuzus de la Collection,'' by Robert Everts, $50. (2) Traditional Mexican shawl, $150. RecdÐ February 15, 1999. Est. ValueÐ$600. Archives Foreign. President and First Lady ...... For the President: 15″ x 20″ light His Excellency Flt. Lt. Jerry John Non-acceptance would cause em- yellow/brown traditional Ashanti Rawlings, (Ret.), The President barrassment to donor and U.S. stool with various shaped carv- of the Republic of Ghana and Government. ings, $500. For the First Lady: Mrs. Rawlings. (1) Three 11″ x 13″ gilt framed and matted shadow boxes con- taining multicolored cotton tradi- tional Ghanaian cloths, $375. (2) 23″ long yellow traditional Ghanaian beaded a necklace with blue, white, and red stripes, and two 1″ gold tube accents, with a matching brace- let, $100. (3) 18″ long 18 kt. gold link necklace with a 1″ pure gold nugget pendant, and a pair of matching 2″ dangling pierced earrings with .5″ pure gold nuggets at the ends, $1400. RecdÐFebruary 23, 1999. Est. ValueÐ$2375. Ar- chives Foreign. President and First Lady ...... For the President: 20″ x 13″ x 11″ His Excellency Arnoldo Aleman, Non-acceptance would cause em- wood lacquered humidor with The President of the Republic barrassment to donor and U.S. two drawers, $650. For the First of Nicaragua and Mrs. Aleman. Government. Lady: 1″ x 2″ x 14 kt. gold fili- gree leaf-shaped brooch, $300. RecdÐMarch 10, 1999. Est. ValueÐ$950. Archives Foreign.
VerDate 20
REPORT OF TANGIBLE GIFTSÐContinued
Gift, date of acceptance on behalf Name and title of person accepting of the U.S. Government, esti- Identity of foreign donor and gov- Circumstances justifying accept- the gift on behalf of the U.S. Gov- mated value, and current disposi- ernment ance ernment tion or location
President and First Lady ...... For the President: 23″ x 15″ black His Excellency Aleksander Non-acceptance would cause em- framed and matted pen sketch Kwasniewski, The President of barrassment to donor and U.S. of a Warsaw city square; the Republic of Poland and Government. signed by the artist Solom Mrs. Kwasniewski. Krosimy, $300. For the First Lady: 90″ x 16″ blue silk table runner with rust, pink, green, tan, and blue floral motif, gold backing, and silver fringe on both ends, $165. RecdÐApril 23, 1999. Est. ValueÐ$465. Ar- chives Foreign. President and First Lady ...... (1) Hardcover book. ``Together His Excellency Heydar Aliyev, Non-acceptance would cause em- Towards the New Century: Offi- President of the Republic of barrassment to donor and U.S. cial Visit of Heydar Aliyev to the Azerbaijan. Government. United States of America,'' $40. (2) Paperback. ``NATO and Azerbaijan,'' $10. (3) Silver and vermeil wine decanter ewer set with six cups and a platter. 13″ tall decanter has long spout and handle, with blue, white and green floral enamel motif. 3.5″ tall cups have engraved silver floral motif and sit on a gold stem. 16″ x 12″ platter has white, blue, and green floral enamel work on each scalloped end and a silver medallion in the center of the platter sur- rounded by a gold engraved background, $2500. (4) Silver and vermeil tea set with six set- tings and a black and white enamel floral motif; that in- cludes 8.5″ tall teapot with gold spout, handle, and attached lid; 3″ diameter gold saucers; 1.5″ tall x 2.5″ diameter teacups; 3.5″ long spoons; 13″ diameter platter with silver rim, gold trimmed circle of black and white enamel work at the cen- ter, $3000. RecdÐApril 24, 1999. Est. ValueÐ$5550. Ar- chives Foreign. President and First Lady ...... For the First Lady: 4″ x 7″ round The Right Honorable Jean Non-acceptance would cause em- crystal bowl with geometric and Chretien, P.C., M.P., The Prime barrassment to donor and U.S. vine motif, $350. For the Presi- Minister of Canada and Mrs. Government. dent: 30″ x 34″ brown framed Chretien. and double matted 22″ x 26″ print of a crane in red and black, titled ``Radiant Loon''; signed by the artist Kenojuak; numbered 15/50, $1000. RecdÐApril 24, 1999. Est. ValueÐ$1350. Archives For- eign.
VerDate 20
REPORT OF TANGIBLE GIFTSÐContinued
Gift, date of acceptance on behalf Name and title of person accepting of the U.S. Government, esti- Identity of foreign donor and gov- Circumstances justifying accept- the gift on behalf of the U.S. Gov- mated value, and current disposi- ernment ance ernment tion or location
President and First Lady ...... For the First Lady: (1) 13″ x 9″ His Excellency Suleyman Demirel, Non-acceptance would cause em- round silver vessel with a floral The President of the Republic barrassment to donor and U.S. and bird relief. Vessel has a of Turkey and Mrs. Demirel. Government. hinged lid with a gold spiral leaf finial, $1200. (2) 48″ x 96″ rust, orange, blue, and tan Vakko silk scarf with a geometric and floral motif, $150. (3) Two silver frames with a rope border, a name plate of donor, and the Turkish crest, each including photographs inscribed by the donor, $600. For the President: Large hardcover book ``Istanbul Capital of Empires,'' by Ertug, $200. RecdÐApril 24, 1999. Est. ValueÐ$2150. Archives Foreign. President and First Lady ...... (1) Six place settings, including a His Excellency Islam Karimov, Non-acceptance would cause em- four piece silver flatware set President of the Republic of barrassment to donor and U.S. with a symbol that depicts an Uzbekistan. Government. eagle at the bottom of each piece, $3300. (2) 13″ brass Chillim pipe that has turquoise beads in a floral motif, $300. (3) 19″ long wooden flute with mother-of-pearl inlay floral de- sign, $175. RecdÐApril 24, 1999. Est. ValueÐ$3775. Ar- chives Foreign. President and First Lady ...... For the President: 9″ diameter His Excellency Petar Stoyanov, Non-acceptance would cause em- bronze plate with silver overlay The President of the Republic barrassment to donor and U.S. and crest in the center and an of Bulgaria and Mrs. Stoyanova. Government. etched signature, $300. For the First Lady: 3″ x 3″ silver model of a domed church, $250. RecdÐApril 24, 1999. Est. ValueÐ$550. Archives Foreign. President and First Lady ...... 43″ x 30″ gilt framed pencil sketch His Excellency Vaclav Havel, Non-acceptance would cause em- of butterflies, pink roses, or- President of the Czech Repub- barrassment to donor and U.S. chids, and seven face profiles lic. Government. with a 5″ x 3″ square cut out in the center of the piece with sketches of five additional pro- files. RecdÐApril 28, 1999. Est. ValueÐ$750. Archives Foreign. President and First Lady ...... (1) 4′ x 8′ red hand-woven wool Their Majesties King Abdullah II Non-acceptance would cause em- rug with green, black, blue, and and Queen Rania al Abdullah, barrassment to donor and U.S. yellow vertical stripes, $800. (2) Jordan. Government. 4′ x 3′ black wood framed paint- ing titled ``Spring/Winter,'' that is divided into two halves, one half has blue paint splatters and a blue horizontal stripe, other half has yellow paint splatters and a yellow horizontal stripe, $1200. (3) 72″ x 28″ rust and mustard colored silk shawl with a gold braided border and nine embroidered flowers with stems standing vertically from the base, $400. RecdÐMay 18, 1999. Est. ValueÐ$2400. Ar- chives Foreign.
VerDate 20
REPORT OF TANGIBLE GIFTSÐContinued
Gift, date of acceptance on behalf Name and title of person accepting of the U.S. Government, esti- Identity of foreign donor and gov- Circumstances justifying accept- the gift on behalf of the U.S. Gov- mated value, and current disposi- ernment ance ernment tion or location
President and First Lady ...... For the First Lady: 16″ long Gil- The Honorable Pierre Muller, Non-acceptance would cause em- bert Albert black leather neck- Mayor of Geneva, Switzerland. barrassment to donor and U.S. lace with silver pendant that de- Government. picts three conch shells with a pink pearl in the center, $450. For the President: 10″ dark wood Gilbert Albert letter open- er with two silver conch shells and one small pink pearl on the end, $300. RecdÐJune 16, 1999. Est. ValueÐ$750. Ar- chives Foreign. President and First Lady ...... For the President: 9″ square His Excellency Jacques Chirac, Non-acceptance would cause em- wooden Hermes picture frame President of the French Repub- barrassment to donor and U.S. with burgundy leather hinge lic. Government. that opens to display two 4.5″ square pictures, $200. For the First Lady: 18 kt. gold Claude Lalanne floral brooch depicting a dogwood blossom, $750. RecdÐJune 17, 1999. Est. ValueÐ$950. Archives Foreign. President and First Lady ...... For the President: Silver-plated His Excellency Lionel Jospin, The Non-acceptance would cause em- Waterman ``Night and Day'' Prime Minister of the French barrassment to donor and U.S. fountain pen that has silver and Republic and Mrs. Jospin. Government. black horizontal stripes and black tips, $345. For the First Lady: 9.5″ tall x 4″ diameter co- balt blue porcelain vase with gilt fleur-de-lis accents and gilt rim, $300. RecdÐJune 17, 1999. Est. ValueÐ$645. Archives Foreign. President and First Lady ...... 10″ tall white cloisonne vase with His Excellency Kim Dae-jung, The Non-acceptance would cause em- gold trim and adorned with President of the Republic of barrassment to donor and U.S. green, blue, and pink flowers, Korea and Mrs. Kim. Government. that sits on a silver base. RecdÐJuly 3, 1999. Est. ValueÐ$300. Archives Foreign. President and First Lady ...... (1) 11″ tall black hand-woven His Excellency Andres Pastrana, Non-acceptance would cause em- handbag with a pink, yellow, The President of the Republic barrassment to donor and U.S. and green floral motif with of Colombia and Mrs. Pastrana. Government. drawstring closure and a woven shoulder strap, $50. (2) 100″ x 95″ ornate white hand-woven hammock with braided fringe and a peacock motif on the edges, $450. RecdÐSeptember 21, 1999. Est. ValueÐ$500. Ar- chives Foreign. President and First Lady ...... (1) 15″ x 22″ mother-of-pearl and Mr. Yasser Arafat, Chairman, Ex- Non-acceptance would cause em- abalone shadow box Nativity ecutive Committee of the Pal- barrassment to donor and U.S. scene that reads ``Bethlehem estine Liberation Organization. Government. 2000″ across the front, $1000. (2) 16″ 18kt. gold hourglass link necklace with hexagonal dia- mond pendant with a blue sap- phire in lower center, $5000. RecdÐSeptember 23, 1999. Est. ValueÐ$6000. Archives Foreign. President and First Lady ...... 23″ tall ceramic vase in blue, Their Majesties King Abdullah II Non-acceptance would cause em- green, white, and gold pattern and Queen Rania al Abdullah, barrassment to donor and U.S. with gold around the rim and Jordan. Government. base. RecdÐOctober 12, 1999. Est. ValueÐ$300. Archives Foreign.
VerDate 20
REPORT OF TANGIBLE GIFTSÐContinued
Gift, date of acceptance on behalf Name and title of person accepting of the U.S. Government, esti- Identity of foreign donor and gov- Circumstances justifying accept- the gift on behalf of the U.S. Gov- mated value, and current disposi- ernment ance ernment tion or location
46″ x 29″ tile mosaic depicting the Church of St. Stephen on a beige background with yellow, rust, black, and brown. RecdÐ October 12, 1999. Est. ValueÐ $3500. Archives Foreign. President and First Lady ...... For the President: 53″ x 41″ gilt His Excellency Olusegun Non-acceptance would cause em- wood framed and matted dot Obasanjo, The President of the barrassment to donor and U.S. painting of the President wear- Federal Republic of Nigeria and Government. ing a black suit and a red and Mrs. Obasanjo. blue striped tie with a red and yellow background; sight size 36″ x 25″, $100. For the First Lady: Two traditional Nigerian silk outfits, each includes a mesh silk shirt and three wraps. One wrap measures 88″ x 50″, one measures 44″ x 27″, and the other measures 21″ x 74″. The first outfit is beige with gold and blue weaving, blue vertical stripes, and gold diagonal stripes with gold fringe, $360. The second outfit is silk with gold and brown weaving, pink and gold flowers, brown, gold, and red horizontal stripes and gold fringe, $310. RecdÐOcto- ber 28, 1999. Est. ValueÐ $770. Archives Foreign. President and First Lady ...... (1) Two 42″ x 91″ and 42″ x 150″ His Excellency Abdurrahman Non-acceptance would cause em- black, rust, and cream silk Wahid, The President of the barrassment to donor and U.S. sarees with an exotic print, Republic of Indonesia and Mrs. Government. $300. (2) 24″ square wood Wahid. framed 3-dimensional wood carving that depicts a female Hindu Goddess playing a sitar in a forest setting, $1000. (3) 11″ diameter orange alabaster bowl with silver banding on the outside rim that sits on a wood- en base, $600. RecdÐNovem- ber 12, 1999. Est. ValueÐ $1900. Archives Foreign. President and First Lady ...... For the First Lady: 12″ x 9″ silver His Excellency Suleyman Demirel, Non-acceptance would oval hanging mirror with silver The President of the Republic causeembarrassment to donor chain, scalloped edges and of Turkey and Mrs. Demirel. and U.S. Government. raised heart motif on the back, $700. For the President: White album of photographs com- memorating the President and First Lady's State Visit to An- kara, Turkey, $50. RecdÐNo- vember 15, 1999. Est. ValueÐ $750. Archives Foreign.
VerDate 20
REPORT OF TANGIBLE GIFTSÐContinued
Gift, date of acceptance on behalf Name and title of person accepting of the U.S. Government, esti- Identity of foreign donor and gov- Circumstances justifying accept- the gift on behalf of the U.S. Gov- mated value, and current disposi- ernment ance ernment tion or location
President and First Lady ...... (1) 18 kt. gold brooch with grape His All Holiness Bartholomew Non-acceptance would cause em- leaf motif that reads ``2000,'' Archbishop of Constantinople, barrassment to donor and U.S. $450. (2) Three butterfly pins, New Rome and Ecumenical Pa- Government. one large silver, one medium triarch. gold, and one small silver, $250. (3) Paperback. ``Tsitouras: Discover the Tsitouras Collection 1999,'' $15. (4) Pair of 18″ tall ornately en- graved silver candlesticks on a tripodial base with clawed feet, $8000. RecdÐNovember 17, 1999. Est. ValueÐ$8715. Ar- chives Foreign. 21″ x 15″ unframed religious paper with four gold leaf squares of Jesus at various stages in his life and Turkish writings in the background. RecdÐNovember 17, 1999. Est. ValueÐ$800. Archives Foreign. Two paperbacks. ``Conversations With Ecumenical Patriarch Bar- tholomew I,'' by Oliver Clement, and ``The Orthodox Church and the Environment,'' by Athena Schina. RecdÐNovember 17, 1999. Est. ValueÐ$35. Ar- chives Foreign. President and First Lady ...... For the President: (1) Paperback. Her Excellency Elisavet Papazoi, Non-acceptance would cause em- ``Coins and Numismatics,'' pub- Minister of Culture of the Hel- barrassment to donor and U.S. lished by the Hellenic Ministry lenic Republic. Government. of Culture and the Numismatic Museum, $25. (2) Three lami- nated pamphlets. ``Archaic Horsemen of the Acropolis,'' $5. (3) Large hardcover book about ancient artifacts, written in Greek, $75. For the First Lady: Hardcover book. ``Greek Jewellery[sic]: 6,000 Years of Tradition,'' published by The Ar- chaeological Receipts Fund, $50. RecdÐNovember 19, 1999. Est. ValueÐ$155. Ar- chives Foreign. For the President: (1) Four an- cient silver Greek coins, $200. (2) 7″ tall composition replica bust of a young boy titled ``The Head of Eros,'' on a 3″ square wooden base, $50. (3) Paper- back. ``The Monuments of the Acropolis,'' by Maria Brouskari, $20. For the First Lady: Gold- plated eight-petaled rosette brooch, $65. RecdÐNovember 19, 1999. Est. ValueÐ$335. Ar- chives Foreign.
VerDate 20
REPORT OF TANGIBLE GIFTSÐContinued
Gift, date of acceptance on behalf Name and title of person accepting of the U.S. Government, esti- Identity of foreign donor and gov- Circumstances justifying accept- the gift on behalf of the U.S. Gov- mated value, and current disposi- ernment ance ernment tion or location
President and First Lady ...... For the First Lady: 8″ x 6″ silver His Excellency Constantine Non-acceptance would cause em- Hellenistic Water-Jug pitcher Simitis, The Prime Minister of barrassment to donor and U.S. with scrolled handle and spout the Hellenic Republic and Mrs. Government. that resembles a leather sac, Simitis. $1200. For the President and First Lady: (1) Hardcover book. ``The Olympic Games in An- cient Greece,'' edited by Nicolaos Yalouris, $40. (2) 24″ x 11″ x 1″ off-white ceramic re- production of an ancient relief that depicts two youths playing hockey with four onlookers, $175. RecdÐNovember 20, 1999. Est. ValueÐ$1415. Ar- chives Foreign. First Family ...... For the First Family: (1) 66″ x 65″ His Excellency Zhu Rongji, The Non-acceptance would cause em- cherry wood framed and matted Premier of the State Council of barrassment to donor and U.S. color sketch of the First Family the People's Republic of China Government. at the Great Wall of China, and Madame Lao. $4000. (2) Hardcover book. ``The Life and Works of Wang Yingchun and Yang Lizhou,'' $30. For the First Lady: Four silk shirts, one short sleeve with green and white stripes, two short sleeve with tan and white stripes, and one tan long sleeve, $160. RecdÐApril 8, 1999. Est. ValueÐ$4190. Ar- chives Foreign. First Family...... For the President: Paperback. His Excellency Keizo Obuchi, The Non-acceptance would cause em- ``The Exhibition of Hohrin Prime Minister of Japan and barrassment to donor and U.S. Fukuoji,'' $100. For the First Mrs. Obuchi. Government. Lady: (1) 12″ x 9″ black lacquer letter box with gold and pink flowers painted on lid, $600. (2) 76″ x 16″ silk shawl, half black, half white, with a silk rose and leaf on each end, $200. (3) 21″ x 18″ silver blue framed and matted Japanese poem written in charcoal, made by Mrs. Obuchi, $500. For Chelsea Clinton: 5″ x 4″ brass Mikimoto frame inlaid with lapis and two cultured pearls, $300. RecdÐ May 3, 1999. Est. ValueÐ $1700. Archives Foreign. First Family ...... (1) 25″ x 18″ framed impression His Excellency Gerhard Schroe- Non-acceptance would cause em- of 200 nails on white flat paper, der, The Chancellor of the Fed- barrassment to donor and U.S. enclosed in a 33″ x 27″ eral Republic of Germany and Government. plexiglass case; signed by artist Mrs Schroeder. Ueker, $2500. (2) Large hardcover book. ``Ueker,'' in- scribed by artist, $30. (3) Two 80″ x 30″ black cashmere Jil Sander scarves, $1000. RecdÐ June 16, 1999. Est. ValueÐ $3530. Archives Foreign.
VerDate 20
REPORT OF TANGIBLE GIFTSÐContinued
Gift, date of acceptance on behalf Name and title of person accepting of the U.S. Government, esti- Identity of foreign donor and gov- Circumstances justifying accept- the gift on behalf of the U.S. Gov- mated value, and current disposi- ernment ance ernment tion or location
First Family ...... For the President and First Lady: The Honorable Viktorija Potocnik, Non-acceptance would cause em- Set of 12 handblown clear crys- Mayor of Ljubljana Slovenia. barrassment to donor and U.S. tal wine glasses by Oskar Government. Kogoj, each with unique colored stem design. Three 6″ tall, six 8″ tall, and three 10″ tall. Five of the glasses have a flared cone base, $600. For the Presi- dent: Hardcover book. ``Ljubljana: A Pictorial Chronicle of a Capital City,'' by Marko Habic, $40. For the First Lady: (1) Hardcover book. ``Nature Design,'' written and inscribed by Oskar Kogoj, $40. (2) Hardcover book. ``Ljubljana: City of Culture,'' by Bojana Leskovar, $20. For Chelsea Clinton: Hardcover book. RecdÐJune 21, 1999. Est. ValueÐ$740. Archives Foreign. First Family ...... For the President: (1) 14″ x 10″ His Excellency Milan Kucan, The Non-acceptance would cause em- reproduction of the first Slove- President of the Republic of barrassment to donor and U.S. nian Bible, circa 1584, with Solvenia and Mrs. Kucan. Government. brown leather cover. The Bible is stored in a 15″ x 12″ en- graved wooden box, $250. For the First Lady: 16″ x 42″ cream colored intricately woven doily table runner with scalloped edges, $100. For the President and First Lady: Two brown leather photo albums com- memorating the President and First Lady's trip to Slovenia, June 1999, $150. For Chelsea Clinton: (1) Hardcover book. ``Slovenske Krajine,'' by Dusan Ogrin; inscribed by Ana and Spela Kucan, $30. (2) Paper- back, ``Krajine/Landscapes,'' written and inscribed by Ana Kucan, $20. (3) Small silver dove pendant on a silver chain, $50. RecdÐJune 22, 1999. Est. ValueÐ$600. Archives Foreign. First Family ...... For the President: (1) Black and His Excellency Nawaz Sharif, Non-acceptance would cause em- green wool and viscose base- Prime Minister of the Islamic barrassment to donor and U.S. ball cap that reads ``Ireland,'' Republic of Pakistan. Government. $20. (2) Grey, blue, and black wool fisherman's sweater, $85. (3) Pair of 18 kt. gold Cartier cuff links in the shape of a car's head with emerald eyes and onyx nose, $1500. For the First Lady: Pair of Saks Fifth Avenue 18kt. white gold loop earrings encircled with gold and dia- monds, $4000. For Chelsea Clinton: 18kt. gold Tiffany & Co. charm bracelet with five charms depicting starfish and hearts, $1200. ReedÐJuly 5, 1999. Est. ValueÐ$6805. Archives Foreign.
VerDate 20
REPORT OF TANGIBLE GIFTSÐContinued
Gift, date of acceptance on behalf Name and title of person accepting of the U.S. Government, esti- Identity of foreign donor and gov- Circumstances justifying accept- the gift on behalf of the U.S. Gov- mated value, and current disposi- ernment ance ernment tion or location
First Family ...... For Chelsea Clinton: (1) 16″ sliver His Excellency Bulent Ecevit, Non-acceptance would cause em- red carnelian beaded necklace Prime Minister of the Republic barrassment to donor and U.S. with eight carved seals and a of Turkey. Government. flat oval red stone pendant, $400. (2) 70″ square purple, blue, and fuchsia silk scarf with a white circular pattern, $100. (3) 7″ purple satin purse with purple fringe and metal se- quins, $30. For the First Lady: (1) 54″ x 16″ hand printed gold, orange, blue, turquoise, and black silk scarf, $60. (2) 3″ sil- ver brooch with a 1″ lapis stone and a small red coral stone, $200. (3) 16″ carved silver serving tray with handles; at- tached to tray by a ribbon are 10 embroidered napkins, $550. For the President: (1) 9″ diame- ter scalloped silver serving bowl and lid with carved silver flower finial, $450. (2) 4″ tall scalloped silver creamer with handle and matching 6″ diameter drip plate, $450. (3) 54″ x 60″ red, blue, green, gold, black, and orange handwoven Anatolian wool rug with braided fringe, $2000. (4) Two large hardcover copies of the book ``Anatolian Carpet,'' $50. (5) Leather-bound book. ``Architecture of the Ottoman Empire,'' $375. (6) Paperback. ``Turkish Handwoven Carpets,'' $50. RecdÐSeptember 28, 1999. Est. ValueÐ$4715. Ar- chives Foreign.
VerDate 20
REPORT OF TANGIBLE GIFTSÐContinued
Gift, date of acceptance on behalf Name and title of person accepting of the U.S. Government, esti- Identity of foreign donor and gov- Circumstances justifying accept- the gift on behalf of the U.S. Gov- mated value, and current disposi- ernment ance ernment tion or location
First Family ...... For Chelsea Clinton: Silver five His Excellency Suleyman Demirel, Non-acceptance would cause em- piece mirror/hairbrush set with The President of the Republic barrassment to donor and U.S. raised floral pattern. Set in- of Turkey and Mrs. Demirel. Government. cludes a 9.5″ handheld mirror, a 7″ comb, a 9″ oval brush with handle, a 7″ oval lint brush, and a 3″ powder box with lid, $1200. For the First Lady: Large silk-covered book. ``Silks for the Sultans,'' by Ahmet Ertug, $150. For the President: (1) Large fabric-covered book. ``In Pursuit of Excellence,'' by Ahmet Ertug, $125. (2) Set of seven commemorative Turkish coins, one 25 lira gold, and six 3,000,000 lira silver. All read ``75 C 1923±1998,'' $300. (3) Turkish State Award. Award consists of (a) White enamel and gold trimmed starburst me- dallion that hangs from a white eagle and olive branches, at- tached to a red and white striped ribbon. (b) Black leather and velvet portfolio that con- tains a certificate signed by President Demirel, $500. RecdÐNovember 15, 1999. Est. ValueÐ$2275. Archives Foreign. First Family ...... 5.5″ long antique silver floral-motif His Excellency Bulent Ecevit, Non-acceptance would cause em- handheld mirror, with six small Prime Minister of the Republic barrassment to donor and U.S. lapis stones embedded on the of Turkey. Government. front and one larger lapis stone embedded on the back, $200 (2) 16″ x 5″ x 9.5″ light green wooden box with gilt square ac- cents on the top, each square painted with moon and berry designs; lined with tan velvet, $75. RecdÐNovember 15, 1999. Est. ValueÐ$275. Ar- chives Foreign. (1) 10″ square silk handkerchief His Excellency Bulent Ecevit, Non-acceptance would cause em- trimmed with blue handstitched Prime Minister of the Republic barrassment to donor and U.S. lace, $50. (2) Handmade 10″ of Turkey. Government. long fork and spoon set made of black horn, inlaid with two stripes of bone and silver on the handles and dots on the tips, $40. (3) 67″ x 17″ handwoven white silk shawl with gold thread floral pattern and white silk fringe on each end, $175. RecdÐNovember 15, 1999. Est. ValueÐ$265. Ar- chives Foreign.
VerDate 20
REPORT OF TANGIBLE GIFTSÐContinued
Gift, date of acceptance on behalf Name and title of person accepting of the U.S. Government, esti- Identity of foreign donor and gov- Circumstances justifying accept- the gift on behalf of the U.S. Gov- mated value, and current disposi- ernment ance ernment tion or location
First Family ...... (1) 40″ x 40″ hand-embroidered The Honorable Kemal Non-acceptance would cause em- linen tablecloth with an embroi- Nehrozoglu, Governor of the barrassment to donor and U.S. dered floral design in each of Province Izmir. Government. the corners and a 1″ gold col- ored lace doiley trimming the edges, $175. (2) Three hardcover copies of ``Ataturk's Izmir Days,'' complied by Izmir Valiligi, $150. (3) 42″ x 70″ dark multi-colored burlap kilim with fringed ends, displaying a Turk- ish design of different abstract shapes, $450. For Chelsea Clinton: 9″ x 9″ black velvet handmade Turkish drawstring handbag with a 3″ diameter gold and silver embroidered emblem and a thin rope shoul- der strap, $50. RecdÐNovem- ber 16, 1999. Est. ValueÐ $825. Archives Foreign. First Family ...... For the First Lady: 18kt. gold ban- His Excellency Constantinos Non-acceptance would cause em- gle bracelet with a lion head on Stephanopoulos, President of barrassment to donor and U.S. each end, $1200. For Chelsea the Hellenic Republic. Government. Clinton: 7″ silver necklace with a 1″ round sodalite pendant, $225. For the President: (1) 9″ diameter x 1.5″ deep silver bowl engraved with a signature and the seal of Greece, $1000. (2) Two. 4.5″ tall hand-ham- mered silver cups with raised olive branch relieve under the rim. Each cup is 5″ in diameter and sits on a pedestal base, $3,000. RecdÐNovember 19, 1999. Est. ValueÐ$5425; Ar- chives Foreign. First Lady ...... 26″ x 26″ gilt framed and white His Excellency Dr. Julio Maria Non-acceptance would cause em- matted oil portrait of a man Sanguinetti, President of the barrassment to donor and U.S. wearing a maroon and brown Oriental Republic of Uruguay. Government. coat, by Carmelo de Arzadun. RecdÐOctober 4, 1998. Est. ValueÐ$3000. Archives For- eign. First Lady ...... (1) Two 4″ tall six-sided pots, $40. His Excellency Jacques Chirac, Non-acceptance would cause em- (2) Two 2″ tall six-sided cache President of the French Repub- barrassment to donor and U.S. pots, $20. (3) 5″ tall x 10″ di- lic. Government. ameter red metal bowl with gold trim, $20. (4) 8″ tall x 13″ di- ameter wooden box covered with blue and multicolored cot- ton fabric, $10. RecdÐFebruary 19, 1999. Est. ValueÐ$90. Ar- chives Foreign. First Lady ...... 73″ x 18″ grey silk and rayon His Excellency Bertie Ahern, Non-acceptance would cause em- scarf with a striped and floral Prime Minister of Ireland. barrassment to donor and U.S. pattern. RecdÐMarch 17, 1999. Government. Est. ValueÐ$245. Archives Foreign. First Lady ...... 2″ x 3″ 18 kt. gold florentine scar- General Selmy Selim, President Non-acceptance would cause em- ab pendant with blue inlay ac- of Supreme Council, Egypt. barrassment to donor and U.S. cents. RecdÐMarch 24, 1999. Government. Est. ValueÐ$1200. Archives Foreign.
VerDate 20
REPORT OF TANGIBLE GIFTSÐContinued
Gift, date of acceptance on behalf Name and title of person accepting of the U.S. Government, esti- Identity of foreign donor and gov- Circumstances justifying accept- the gift on behalf of the U.S. Gov- mated value, and current disposi- ernment ance ernment tion or location
25″ tall cream Egyptian alabaster vase inlaid with turquoise, lapis, and limestone banding. RecdÐ March 24, 1999. Est. ValueÐ $1200. Archives Foreign. First Lady ...... 39″ diameter mosaic that depicts The Honorable Muhammid El Non-acceptance would cause em- a man wearing a fruit and leaf Hashim Guedria, Governor of barrassment to donor and U.S. crown, with a 7″ wide border Mahidia, The Republic of Tuni- Government. that depicts fruit and leaves. sia. RecdÐMarch 26, 1999. Est. ValueÐ$2500. Archives For- eign. First Lady ...... 26″ coral graduated bead neck- Mrs. Leila Ben Ali, Office of the Non-acceptance would cause em- lace with a 7″ matching bracelet President of the Republic of Tu- barrassment to donor and U.S. and 2″ tear-drop clip-on nisia. Government. earrings. RecdÐMarch 31, 1999. Est. ValueÐ$1500. Ar- chives Foreign. First Lady ...... 48″ square red and white silk Her- His Excellency Jacques Chirac, Non-acceptance would cause em- mes scarf, permanently creased President of the French Repub- barrassment to donor and U.S. accordion style. RecdÐApril 23, lic. Government. 1999. Est. ValueÐ$175. Ar- chives Foreign. First Lady ...... 25″ x 32″ gilt floral framed and His Excellency Eduard Non-acceptance would cause em- matted cotton pastel drawing Shevardnadze, President of barrassment to donor and U.S. that is predominantly pink, Georgia. Government. white, blue, yellow, and black and depicts a woman walking away from a man; titled ``Street Scene in Rome'', by Zurab NizRaradze. RecdÐApril 24, 1999. Est. ValueÐ$400. Ar- chives Foreign. First Lady ...... 12″ x 8″ white Herend porcelain His Excellency Viktor Orban, The Non-acceptance would cause em- serving bowl bordered in mint Prime Minister of the Republic barrassment to donor and U.S. green and gold with yellow and of Hungary and Mrs. Orban. Government. green flowers and butterfly motif. RecdÐMay 3, 1999. Est. ValueÐ$450. Archives Foreign. First Lady ...... (1) 80″ x 20″ orange silk shawl His Excellency Abdul Kareem Non-acceptance would cause em- with red and gold embroidered Kabariti, The Chief of the Royal barrassment to donor and U.S. paisley design and orange Court and Mrs. Kabariti, Government. tassles on both ends, $400, (2) Amman, Jordan. 54″ long purple silk dress with purple and gold embroidered flowers and multicolored appli- que on the sleeves, neck, and sides, $600. RecdÐMay 18, 1999. Est. ValueÐ$1000. Ar- chives Foreign. First Lady ...... (1) 12″ x 7″ white Herend por- His Excellency Arpad Goncz, The Non-acceptance would cause em- celain urn with gilt trim, pink President of the Republic of barrassment to donor and U.S. and green flowers and butterfly Hungary and Mrs. Goncz. Government. motif, and matching lid with yel- low rose finial, $1400. (2) 22″ x 11″ green velour table runner with gold trim and a 5″ diameter needle-pointed rose in the cen- ter, $100. RecdÐJune 8, 1999. Est. ValueÐ$1500. Archives Foreign.
VerDate 20
REPORT OF TANGIBLE GIFTSÐContinued
Gift, date of acceptance on behalf Name and title of person accepting of the U.S. Government, esti- Identity of foreign donor and gov- Circumstances justifying accept- the gift on behalf of the U.S. Gov- mated value, and current disposi- ernment ance ernment tion or location
First Lady ...... (1) 26″ x 9″ x 9″ carved red Mrs. Marguerite Kerekou, First Non-acceptance would cause em- wooden statue depicting a Lady of Benin. barrassment to donor and U.S. woman carrying a baby in her Government. arms and a bowl of fruit on her head, $475. (2) 20″ silver bead- ed necklace with amber stones, $40. (3) 25″ necklace with rust color seed beads, $65. (3) 9″ ir- regularly shaped box covered in pink leather, $10. (4) 6′ square cotton/linen blend blanket with white stitching, $75. RecdÐ June 11, 1999. Est. ValueÐ $665. Archives Foreign. First Lady ...... 34″ tall silver-plated samovar with Maitre Mohamed Debbagh, Presi- Non-acceptance would cause em- black wood finial lid, two wood dent of the Municipal Council barrassment to donor and U.S. side handles, and floral relief. Fez, Morocco. Government. RecdÐJune 23, 1999. Est. ValueÐ$1300. Archives For- eign. First Lady ...... (1) 30″ ornate gold and silver The Honorable Leoluca Orlando, Non-acceptance would cause em- vermeil belt with an ornate Mayor of Palermo, Italy. barrassment to donor and U.S. buckle depicting St. George Government. and the Dragon, $1200. (2) 10″ tall silver pitcher with large spout, pedestal base, and curled handle, $1200. RecdÐ June 23, 1999. Est. ValueÐ $2400. Archives Foreign. First Lady ...... 2″ silver brooch with an oval His Excellency Ljubco Non-acceptance would cause em- mother-of-pearl center. RecdÐ Georgievski, The Prime Minister barrassment to donor and U.S. June 24, 1999. Est. ValueÐ of the Former Yugoslav Repub- Government. $135. Archives Foreign. lic of Macedonia and Mrs. Georgievska. First Lady ...... Two 14″ x 12″ 18 kt. gold and His Majesty Mohamed VI, King of Non-acceptance would cause em- platinum picture frames with fili- Morocco. barrassment to donor and U.S. gree motif and set with ame- Government. thyst, topaz, garnet, jade, and acquamarine stones. Each hold an 8″ x 10″ photograph. One photograph is of the First Lady and the former King of Mo- rocco. The other is of the former King of Morocco, the First Lady, and Chelsea Clinton walking. Both are inscribed by the former King. RecdÐSep- tember 7, 1999. Est. ValueÐ $15000. Archives Foreign. First Lady ...... 21″ Benin gilt bronze head of a Mrs. Stella Obasanjo, First Lady Non-acceptance would cause em- woman with rings around her of the Federal Republic of Nige- barrassment to donor and U.S. neck, on a 4″ green stand. ria. Government. RecdÐSeptember 16, 1999. Est. ValueÐ$1000. Archives Foreign. First Lady ...... (1) 19.5″ silver square link neck- His Excellency Bronislaw Non-acceptance would cause em- lace with yellow amber stones. Geremek, Minister of Foreign barrassment to donor and U.S. (2) 3¤4″ silver square shaped Affairs of the Republic of Po- Government. earrings with yellow amber land. stones. (3) 8″ silver square link bracelet with yellow amber stones. RecdÐOctober 6, 1999. Est. ValueÐ$350. Ar- chives Foreign.
VerDate 20
REPORT OF TANGIBLE GIFTSÐContinued
Gift, date of acceptance on behalf Name and title of person accepting of the U.S. Government, esti- Identity of foreign donor and gov- Circumstances justifying accept- the gift on behalf of the U.S. Gov- mated value, and current disposi- ernment ance ernment tion or location
First Lady ...... (1) 5″ bronze statue of a man on His Excellency Aleksander Non-acceptance would cause em- a 1.5″ black marble stand, by Kwasniewski, President of the barrassment to donor and U.S. Zofia Wolslka, $3000. (2) Silver Republic of Poland. Government. medallion depicting the profile of Fryderyk Chopin and his sig- nature, $35. (3) Compact disc. ``Chopin Year 1999,'' $15. (4) Hardcover book. ``Spotkania z Chopinem,'' by Edward Hartwig, $45. RecdÐOctober 6, 1999. Est. ValueÐ$3095. Archives Foreign. First Lady ...... (1) Hardcover book. ``Slovensko v His Excellency Rudolf Schuster, Non-acceptance would cause em- Obrazoch,'' by Remedium, $50. The President of the Slovak barrassment to donor and U.S. (2) Hardcover book. ``Slovakia,'' Republic and Mrs. Schusterova. Government. compiled by Eugen Lazistan, $25. (3) Silver medallion that depicts a castle and reads ``Prezidentsky Palac v Bratislve,'' $35. (4) 3″ antique pottery oil lamp, $75. (5) 4″ an- tique pottery jug, $100. (6) 3″ antique pottery oil lamp, $75. Items 4±6 are contained on an 11″ x 6″ wooden stand with a gold-tone plaque that reads ``Roman Period 63 B.C.E. 330 C.E'' with a plastic lid. (7) 24″ x 24″ handwoven cream colored fiber wall hanging with floral de- sign in a gold-tone wooden loom, $150. (8) 27″ x 20″ brightly colored oil painting on canvas that depicts a farm scene with people working, $350. (9) Blue glass tea set with hand-painted pink, yellow, and blue flowers and 24 kt. gold accents. Set includes a teapot, cream pitcher, sugar dish, six teacups, and six sau- cers, $600. RecdÐOctober 6, 1999. Est. ValueÐ$1460. Ar- chives Foreign. First Lady ...... 4″ blue, gold, white, orange, and His Excellency Olafur Ragnar Non-acceptance would cause em- yellow kelandic glass figure on Grimsson, President of the Re- barrassment to donor and U.S. a 3″ clear glass stand that public of Iceland. Government. reads ``Forseti Islands.'' RecdÐ October 8, 1999. Est. ValueÐ $300. Archives Foreign. First Lady ...... 10″ cut crystal table Valaska Bela His Excellency Eduard Kukan, Non-acceptance would cause em- basket with a snowflake motif. Minister of Foreign Affairs of barrassment to donor and U.S. RecdÐOctober 9, 1999. Est. the Slovak Republic. Government. ValueÐ$300. Archives Foreign. First Lady ...... Black onyx bead necklace with a Her Excellency Mireya Moscoso, Non-acceptance would cause em- pendant of four 14 kt. gold President of the Republic of barrassment to donor and U.S. frogs and a pair of matching Panama. Government. earrings. RecdÐOctober 19, 1999. Est. ValueÐ$1200. Ar- chives Foreign.
VerDate 20
REPORT OF TANGIBLE GIFTSÐContinued
Gift, date of acceptance on behalf Name and title of person accepting of the U.S. Government, esti- Identity of foreign donor and gov- Circumstances justifying accept- the gift on behalf of the U.S. Gov- mated value, and current disposi- ernment ance ernment tion or location
First Lady ...... Two ornate brass lamps, 58″ in His Majesty Mohamed VI, King of Non-acceptance would cause em- height and 27″ in diameter. Morocco. barrassment to donor and U.S. Lamps have rectangular glass Government. panels with hinge doors that open and have eight sockets in- side, on a brass stand. Lamps are an arabesque, traditional Middle Eastern pattern. RecdÐ October 26, 1999. Est. ValueÐ $6000. Archives Foreign. First Lady ...... (1) 18 kt. white gold and diamond Their Majesties King Abdullah II Non-acceptance would cause em- 16″ necklace with center pend- and Queen Rania al Abdullah, barrassment to donor and U.S. ant of seven diamonds, $8500. Jordan. Government. (2) Pair of open-work 18 kt. white gold and diamond clip-on earrings, $1200. RecdÐNo- vember 17, 1999. Est. ValueÐ $9700. Archives Foreign. (1) 13″ x 13″ x 2″ beige ceramic dish with four trees etched in the center in a darker beige tone, $150. (2) 16″ x 12″ red leather book of photographs commemorating the First Lady's visit to Jordan, $225. (3) 76″ x 48″ cream colored woven rug with three brown, green, and gold trees and cream colored fringe at each end, $675. RecdÐNovember 17, 1999. Est. ValueÐ$1050. Archives Foreign. First Lady ...... 80″ x 36″ blue, red, green, black, The Honorable Ertugrul Non-acceptance would cause em- and white patterned handwoven Dokuzoglu, Governor of the barrassment to donor and U.S. Turkish rug with cream colored Province of Antalya, Turkey. Government. fringe. RecdÐNovember 18, 1999. Est. ValueÐ$600. Ar- chives Foreign. 40″ x 17″ cream colored silk table runner with blue, pink, gold, and green floral embroidery on the ends and silver sequins along the edges. RecdÐNo- vember 18, 1999. Est. ValueÐ $75. Archives Foreign. First Lady ...... 10′′ white, blue, and gold-tone The Honorable Bekir Kumbul, Non-acceptance would cause em- porcelain urn with silver over- Mayor of Antalya, Turkey. barrassment to donor and U.S. lay, hearts, and jewelled insets. Government. RecdÐNovember 18, 1999. Est. ValueÐ$850. Archives Foreign.
VerDate 20
REPORT OF TANGIBLE GIFTSÐContinued
Gift, date of acceptance on behalf Name and title of person accepting of the U.S. Government, esti- Identity of foreign donor and gov- Circumstances justifying accept- the gift on behalf of the U.S. Gov- mated value, and current disposi- ernment ance ernment tion or location
First Lady ...... Six Coroc Studio purses. (1) 7″ x His Excellency Abdelsam Jaidi, Non-acceptance would cause em- 13″ purple alligator pattern vel- Consul General of the Kingdom barrassment to donor and U.S. vet handbag with two purple of Morocco. Government. leather handles, $125. (2) 10″ x 12″ black leather shoulder bag with three divided compart- ments and two shoulder straps, $300. (3) 8″ x 14″ metallic grey leather purse with two shoulder straps and snap closure, $225. (4) 11″ x 12″ metallic blue handbag with two clear plastic handles, $250. (5) 12″ x 14″ soft brown alligator pattern leather drawstring shoulder bag, with one strap and silver accents, $200. (6) 6″ x 10″ red alligator pattern velvet handbag, with a front spin clasp and matching adjustable strap, $150. RecdÐNovember 24, 1999. Est. ValueÐ$1250. Ar- chives Foreign. First Lady and Chelsea ...... For the First Lady: (1) Paperback. Mrs. Suzanne Mubarak, Ittihadiya Non-acceptance would cause em- ``Silent Images: Women in Palace, Egypt. barrassment to donor and U.S. Pharaonic Egypt,'' by Zahi Government. Hawass, $10. (2) 49″ x 39″ multicolored wool rug that de- picts an Egyptian market with four men trading pottery, $350. For Chelsea Clinton: 2″ x .5″ silver brooch that depicts a pueblo style house and wheel, set with turquoise and ame- thyst, $150. RecdÐMarch 23, 1999. Est. ValueÐ$510. Ar- chives Foreign.
VerDate 20
REPORT OF TANGIBLE GIFTSÐContinued
Gift, date of acceptance on behalf Name and title of person accepting of the U.S. Government, esti- Identity of foreign donor and gov- Circumstances justifying accept- the gift on behalf of the U.S. Gov- mated value, and current disposi- ernment ance ernment tion or location
First Lady and Chelsea...... For the First Lady: Set of blue Her Excellency Faiza Kefi, Min- Non-acceptance would cause em- glass containers with silver fili- ister of Environment and Land barrassment to donor and U.S. gree accents. (1) 5″ x 8″ round Development of the Republic of Government. chalice with silver filigree base, Tunisia. $100. (2) 8″ round container with silver filigree top, $100. (3) 13″ x 7″ vase with silver filigree top, $150. (4) 13″ x 4″ oil lamp with silver filigree, $125. (5) 13″ x 3″ decorative oil lamp with sil- ver filigree handle, $125. (6) 3″ x 2″ amphora-shaped black, blue, and yellow glass vessel, $25. (7) 5″ x 4″ silver plaque that reads ``Presented to Mrs. Hillary Clinton By The Town Hall of Ariana Tunisia,'' $75. (8) Black carved rose on a silver stem with silver leaves, $150. (9) 22″ x 60″ orange scarf with foil stitching, $50. For Chelsea Clinton: Set of blue glass items with silver filigree accents. (1) 7″ x 2″ pair of slippers with sil- ver fish motif on the toe, heal, and strap, $200. (2) Four blue and black painted pottery beads, each smaller than an inch, $40. (3) 4″ x 5″ silver plaque that reads ``Presented to Ms. Chelsea Clinton By The Town Hall of Ariana Tunisia,'' $75. (4) 5″ x 3″ cylinder con- tainer with silver top, $100. RecdÐMarch 25, 1999. Est. ValueÐ$1315. Archives For- eign. First Lady and Chelsea ...... For the First Lady: Two black ce- His Excellency Zine El-Abidine Non-acceptance would cause em- ramic bottles with swirl wirework Ben Ali, The President of the barrassment to donor and U.S. motif silver finials, and silver Republic of Tunisia and Mrs. Government. pedestal base. One is wide and Ben Ali. 9″ tall, the other is thin and 17″ tall, $800. For Chelsea Clinton: 13″ x 9″ silver filigree two-sided oval dressing mirror on two col- umn supports with covered jar on base, mounted on four feet, $650. RecdÐMarch 28, 1999. Est. ValueÐ$1450. Archives Foreign. First Lady and Chelsea ...... For the First Lady: (1) 12″ x 6″ x The Honorable Moulay Mustapha Non-acceptance would cause em- 5″ wood lockable jewelry box Ait Mauma, Governor of barrassment to donor and U.S. with raised hinged lid, $200. (2) Errachidia, Morocco. Government. 26″ irregular amber bead neck- lace. Salmon colored stone beads on metal loops separate some beads, $100. For Chel- sea Clinton: (1) 10″ x 6″ x 4″ wooden jewelry box, $100. (2) 28″ link necklace of round me- dallions connected by silver rings with red and blue bead accents, $100. RecdÐMarch 31, 1999. Est. ValueÐ$500. Ar- chives Foreign.
VerDate 20
REPORT OF TANGIBLE GIFTSÐContinued
Gift, date of acceptance on behalf Name and title of person accepting of the U.S. Government, esti- Identity of foreign donor and gov- Circumstances justifying accept- the gift on behalf of the U.S. Gov- mated value, and current disposi- ernment ance ernment tion or location
First Lady and Chelsea...... (1) Gold-tone leather purse with His Majesty Hassan II, King of Non-acceptance would cause em- two strap handles, $200. (2) Morocco. barrassment to donor and U.S. Dark green silk caftan with Government. green embroidery on the sleeves and collar, $300. (3) Black velvet caftan with gold- tone braiding at collar and shoulders, $300. (4) Two velvet capes, one blue/grey and one light blue, each with a hood lined with a gold-tone braid trim and tassels, $600. (5) Blue, green, yellow, and gold-tone silk caftan with gold-tone, blue, and green brocade down the center and matching sheer silk liner, $400. (6) Red and gold- tone polka-dot silk caftan with gold-tone and red brocade braid down the center and matching sheer silk liner, $350. (7) Two gold-tone brocade belts, $150. RecdÐApril 1, 1999. Est. ValueÐ$2300. Ar- chives Foreign.
VerDate 20
REPORT OF TANGIBLE GIFTSÐContinued
Gift, date of acceptance on behalf Name and title of person accepting of the U.S. Government, esti- Identity of foreign donor and gov- Circumstances justifying accept- the gift on behalf of the U.S. Gov- mated value, and current disposi- ernment ance ernment tion or location
(1) Three layered green organza and silk caftans with gold-tone embroidery, $350. (2) Silver- tone leather purse, $150. (3) 18 kt. gold overlay, silver, and green enamel horn-shaped evening purse with gold chain. Lid is set with 64 diamonds, and below the lid are seven garnets. Inside lid is a mirror surrounded by four more gar- nets, $20000. (4) Two 60″ x 60″ velvet blankets. One is red with gold-tone and red fringe. The other is blue with blue and gold-tone fringe tassels, and braid, $500. (5) Maroon velvet hooded cape with a gold-tone braid trim and tassels, $300. (6) Blue silk polka-dot caftan with blue, black, and gold-tone cen- ter brocade braid, $500. (7) Green and white floral silk caf- tan with green white, and gold- tone center brocade, $500. (8) Grey, silver-tone, and black dia- mond patterned silk caftan with gold-tone and silver-tone center brocade, $350. (9) Green sheer silk with a gold-tone, purple, white, and yellow floral design, with white, green and gold-tone braid accents, $350. (10) Sky blue silk satin caftan with white floral motif with blue, white and gold-tone center brocade, $350. Items 6±10 each have matching silk liners. (11) Blue and silver- tone silk caftan with silver-tone sequins and a blue, grey and gold-tone center brocade, $300. (12) Blue, white, and black silk caftan with silver-tone bars and blue, grey, and gold-tone bro- cade accents, $350. (13) Two brown leather suitcases, $700. (14) Four gold-tone brocade belts, $300. RecdÐApril 1, 1999. Est. ValueÐ$25000. Ar- chives Foreign. First Lady and Chelsea ...... (1) Large fabric-covered book. His Excellency Abderrahmane Non-acceptance would cause em- ``The Splendour of Islamic Cal- Youssoufi, Prime Minister of barrassment to donor and U.S. ligraphy,'' by Abdelkebir Khatibi, Morocco. Government. $60. (2) Large hardcover book. ``The Hassan II Mosque,'' Mo- hammed-Allal Sinaceur, $60. (3) 11″ x 4″ x 7″ burlwood jew- elry box with locking lid and two sectional interior, $250. (4) 6″ tall x 4.5″ diameter amber ves- sel with pointed lid. Both parts are decorated with silver accent overlays, $300. RecdÐApril 1, 1999. Est. ValueÐ$670. Ar- chives Foreign.
VerDate 20
REPORT OF TANGIBLE GIFTSÐContinued
Gift, date of acceptance on behalf Name and title of person accepting of the U.S. Government, esti- Identity of foreign donor and gov- Circumstances justifying accept- the gift on behalf of the U.S. Gov- mated value, and current disposi- ernment ance ernment tion or location
First Lady and Chelsea ...... For the First Lady: Gold brooch in His Excellency Ehud Barak, The Non-acceptance would cause em- the shape of four tulips, $250. Prime Minister of Israel and barrassment to donor and U.S. For Chelsea Clinton: 4″ swan- Mrs. Barak. Government. like turquoise stone paper- weight that is also a letter opener, $50. RecdÐJuly 16, 1999. Est. ValueÐ$300. Ar- chives Foreign. First Lady and Chelsea ...... For Chelsea Clinton: 15.5″ blue Mrs. Nava Barak, Israel ...... Non-acceptance would cause em- topaz beaded necklace with a barrassment to donor and U.S. 22kt. gold double floral clasp, Government. $450. For the First Lady: (1) 16″ cut carnelian beaded triple strand necklace with a 22kt. gold clasp, $450. (2) .5″ 22 kt. gold and cabochon carnelian circular earrings, $300. RecdÐ November 9, 1999. Est. ValueÐ$1200. Archives For- eign. First Lady and Chelsea ...... For Chelsea Clinton: Steel Sector Their Majesties King Abdullah II Non-acceptance would cause em- watch with a black face and a and Queen Rania al Abdullah, barrassment to donor and U.S. gold-tone crown on the face, Jordan. Government. $150. For the First Lady: 7″ sil- ver and gold camel with a silver and gold military figure riding the camel that sits on a 1.5″ marble stand, $4500. RecdÐ November 17, 1999. Est. ValueÐ$4650. Archives For- eign. First Lady and Chelsea ...... For the First Lady: (1) 2″ 18 kt. The Honorable Istemihan Talay, Non-acceptance would cause em- gold brooch in the shape of a The Minister of Culture, Repub- barrassment to donor and U.S. half man, half bird, $400. (2) lic of Turkey and Mrs. Talay. Government. 34″ x 34″ blue, white, yellow, and red Vakko silk scarf with a floral and striped pattern, $65. For Chelsea Clinton: (1) 16″ sil- ver link necklace with a flower pendant, $175. (2) 25″ x 25″ blue, green, yellow, and white Vakko silk scarf with an astro- logical sign pattern, $50. RecdÐNovember 18, 1999. Est. ValueÐ$690. Archives Foreign. President and Chelsea ...... For the President (1) Black cot- The Right Honorable Jenny Ship- Non-acceptance would cause em- ton/poly rugby jersey that reads ley, P.C., The Prime Minister of barrassment to donor and U.S. ``New Zealand All Blacks,'' $50. New Zealand and Mr. Shipley. Government. (2) 18″ tapered black and char- treuse art-glass vase, $140. For Chelsea Clinton: (1) Four com- pact discs. ``Te Papa Suite'' performed and recorded by Gareth Farr and the New Zea- land Symphony Orchestra, ``Stellar,'' by Tom Bailey and Stellar, ``The Best of Crowded House,'' by Crowded House, and ``The Mutton Birds,'' by the Mutton Birds, $60. (2) Small black cotton/poly rugby jersey that reads ``New Zealand all Blacks,'' $50. RecdÐSep- tember 13, 1999. Est. ValueÐ $300. Archives Foreign.
VerDate 20
REPORT OF TANGIBLE GIFTSÐContinued
Gift, date of acceptance on behalf Name and title of person accepting of the U.S. Government, esti- Identity of foreign donor and gov- Circumstances justifying accept- the gift on behalf of the U.S. Gov- mated value, and current disposi- ernment ance ernment tion or location
Chelsea ...... Black brushed fabric cape with Mrs. Leila Ben Ali, Office of the Non-acceptance would cause em- hood that has silver embroi- President of the Republic of Tu- barrassment to donor and U.S. dery. RecdÐMarch 27, 1999. nisia. Government. Est. ValueÐ$300. Archives Foreign. Chelsea ...... 7″ long x .5″ wide yellow and Their Majesties King Abdullah II Non-acceptance would cause em- white gold and diamond brace- and Queen Rania al Abdullah, barrassment to donor and U.S. let. RecdÐNovember 17, 1999. Jordan. Government. Est. ValueÐ$2500. Archives Foreign. Chelsea ...... (1) Gold-tone scarf ring in the The Honorable Bekir Kumbul, Non-acceptance would cause em- shape of a flower with a pearl in Mayor of Antalya, Turkey. barrassment to donor and U.S. the center, $10. (2) 60″ x 23″ Government. orange, yellow, red, blue, and tan Vakko silk scarf with Arabic motif, $90. RecdÐNovember 18, 1999. Est. ValueÐ$100. Ar- chives Foreign. Carlos E. Pascual, Director, NSC Three gold coins: 200 som, 20 His Excellency Abdulazziz Non-acceptance would cause em- Russia/Ukraine/Eurasian Affairs. som, and 1 som in a green vel- Kamilov, Minister of Foreign Af- barrassment to donor and U.S. vet box. RecdÐMarch 17, fairs of the Republic of Government. 1999. Est. ValueÐ$1000. Gen- Uzbekistan. eral Services Administration. Samuel Berger, Assistant to the 6″ diameter silver dish with gold His Excellency George Non-acceptance would cause em- President for National Security plated medallion in the center. Papandreou, Minister of For- barrassment to donor and U.S. Affairs. RecdÐMay 27, 1999. Est. eign Affairs of the Hellenic Re- Government. ValueÐ$350. General Services public. Administration. Samuel Berger, Assistant to the Silver crossed filigree desk set His Excellency Yusuf bin Alawi Non-acceptance would cause em- President for National Security that includes a sword letter Bin Abdullah, The Minister Re- barrassment to donor and U.S. Affairs. opener, a dagger and a small sponsible for Foreign Affairs of Government. brass camel, on an oval wood the Sultanate of Oman. base. RecdÐJune 15, 1999. Est. ValueÐ$500. General Services Administration. Samuel Berger, Assistant to the 8″ x 8″ silver compote with The Honorable A. Non-acceptance would cause em- President for National Security vermeil lining and six dolphin Tsohatzopoulos, Minister of Na- barrassment to donor and U.S. Affairs. fish on the scalloped rim and tional Defense, Hellenic Repub- Government. three on the pedestal base. lic. RecdÐSeptember 23, 1999. Est. ValueÐ$950. General Services Administration. Samuel Berger, Assistant to the (1) Three 29″ diameter leather The Honorable Aliyu Non-acceptance would cause em- President for National Security embroidered pillow covers, Mohammadd, Nigerian National barrassment to donor and U.S. Affairs. $300 each. (2) 100″ diameter Security Advisor. Government. leather embroidered rug to match the pillow covers, $2100. RecdÐOctober 26, 1999. Est. ValueÐ$3000. General Serv- ices Administration. Sean P. Maloney, Assistant to the 6″ round silver dish with gold plat- His Excellency Constantinos Non-acceptance would cause em- President and Staff Secretary. ed sterling medallion. RecdÐ Stephanopoulos, President of barrassment to donor and U.S. December 1, 1999. Est. the Hellenic Republic. Government. ValueÐ$350. General Services Administration. James. B. Steinberg, Deputy As- 6″ round silver dish with gold plat- His Excellency Constantinos Non-acceptance would cause em- sistant to the President for Na- ed sterling medallion. RecdÐ Stephanopoulos, President of barrassment to donor and U.S. tional Security Affairs. December 3, 1999. Est. the Hellenic Republic. Government. ValueÐ$350. General Services Administration. Jennifer Palmieri, Special Assistant 6″ round silver dish with gold plat- His Excellency Constantinos Non-acceptance would cause em- to the Chief of Staff. ed sterling medallion. RecdÐ Stephanopoulos, President of barrassment to donor and U.S. December 10, 1999. Est. the Hellenic Republic. Government. ValueÐ$350. General Services Administration.
VerDate 20
REPORT OF TANGIBLE GIFTSÐContinued
Gift, date of acceptance on behalf Name and title of person accepting of the U.S. Government, esti- Identity of foreign donor and gov- Circumstances justifying accept- the gift on behalf of the U.S. Gov- mated value, and current disposi- ernment ance ernment tion or location
Agency for International Development
Anderson, J. Brady ...... Three gold coins in a brown leath- President Milo Djukanovic of the Gift was from a high level foreign er case. RecdÐNovember 23, Republic of Montenegro. dignitary and was accepted to 1999. Est. ValueÐ$540.00. In further government. the Administration awaiting dis- position.
Air Force
Gamble, Patrick (General)ÐCom- Two Koji pottery dragons. RecdÐ General Chen, Chaeo-Min, Tai- Non-acceptance would have mander, Pacific Air Forces, November 18, 1999. Est. wan Air Force. caused embarrassment to Hickam Air Force Base, Hawaii. ValueÐ$590.00 (aggregately). donor and United States Gov- Retained for official display at ernment. Headquarters Pacific Air Forces, Hickam Air Force Base. Ryan, Jane Mrs.Ðwife of Chief of 18-karat gold Kartouche. RecdÐ Air Marshal Ahmed Shafik, Egyp- Non-acceptance would have Staff, USAF, Washington, DC. June 21, 1999. Est. ValueÐ tian Air Force. caused embarrassment to $200.00. Retained for official donor and United States Gov- display at Air House (official ernment. residence of Chief of Staff, USAF). Ryan, Michael (General)ÐChief of Sterling Silver Chilean matte cup. General Fernando Rojas, Chief of Non-acceptance would have Staff, USAF, Washington, DC. RecdÐNovember 2, 1998. Est. Staff Chilean Air Force. caused embarrassment to the ValueÐ$325.00. Retained for donor and U.S. Government. official display at Air House (of- ficial residence of Chief of Staff, USAF). Ryan, Michael (General)ÐChief of Marble aircraft statue. RecdÐNo- General Fernando Rojas, Chief of Non-acceptance would have Staff, USAF, Washington, DC. vember 2, 1998. Est. ValueÐ Staff, Chilean Air Force. caused embarrassment to $100.00. Retained for official donor and United States Gov- display at Air House (official ernment. residence of Chief of Staff, USAF). Taylor, Francis X. (Brigadier Gen- Watercolor print. RecdÐJune 22, Superintendent General Yum Joe Non-acceptance would have eral)ÐCommander, Head- 1998. Est. ValueÐ$1,500.00. Lee, Attache, Embassy of the caused embarrassment to the quarters Air Force, Office of On official display at Head- Republic of Korea, Washington, donor and the United States Special. quarters Air Force Office of DC. Government. Special Investigations, Bolling Air Force Base, DC. Taylor, Francis X. (Brigadier Gen- Watercolor print. RecdÐJune 22, Superintendent General Yum Joe, Non-acceptance would have eral)ÐCommander, Head- 1998. Est. ValueÐ$1,500.00. Attache, Embassy of the Re- caused embarrassment to the quarters Air Force, Office of On official display at Head- public of Korea, Washington, donor and the United States Special. quarters Air Force Office of DC. Government. Special Investigations, Bolling Air Force Base, DC. Weston, Craig P. (Brigadier Gen- Tissot gold-tone wristwatch Col. Sultan Bin Farhan Al-Milhin, Non-acceptance would have eral)ÐAir Force Program Execu- modelÐ#T49.5.481.32. RecdÐ Royal Saudi Air Force Peace caused embarrassment to the tive Officer, Command and Con- February 14, 1999. Est. Shield Project Officer. donor and the United States trol,. ValueÐ$275.00. Turned in to Government. GSA, October 6, 1999.
Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve Sys
Greenspan, AlanÐChairman ...... Pen and ink print, ``Fragment III'' Hakuo Yanagisawa, Chairman of To have refused would have by Noriko Yanagisawa. RecdÐ the Japanese Financial Recon- caused offense or embarrass- Sept. 7, 1999. Est. ValueÐ struction Committee. ment. $500.00. Retained for display.
Central Intelligence Agency
An Agency Employee...... 750 (18K) yellow gold circular 5 U.S.C. 7343(f)(4) ...... Non-acceptance would have braided necklace and matching caused embarrassment to bracelet, modern. (2 oz) donor and U.S. Government. RecdÐJune 10, 1999. Est. ValueÐ$500.00. To be retained for official display.
VerDate 20
REPORT OF TANGIBLE GIFTSÐContinued
Gift, date of acceptance on behalf Name and title of person accepting of the U.S. Government, esti- Identity of foreign donor and gov- Circumstances justifying accept- the gift on behalf of the U.S. Gov- mated value, and current disposi- ernment ance ernment tion or location
Gordon, John A.ÐDeputy Director Embossed silver mounted gilt 5 U.S.C. 7342(f)(4) ...... Non-acceptance would have of Central Intelligence. tooled black leatherette sta- caused embarrassment to tionary stand, modern, rectan- donor and U.S. Governments. gular form with hinged writing leaf opening to view a remov- able folio cover, beneath two hinged boxes centering a letter rack, each mounted with em- bossed floral silver panels. 22 x 181¤2 inches. RecdÐNovember 18, 1999. Est. ValueÐ$300.00. To be retained for official dis- play. Gordon, John A.ÐDeputy Director Geometric piece and applied blue 5 U.S.C. 7342(f)(4) ...... Non-acceptance would have of Central Intelligence. and beige leather round rug caused embarrassment to and three round pillows, mod- donor and U.S. Government. ern with muslin backing, worked in a radiating geometric pattern with stylized flowers in white, red, green and blue on alter- nating beige and blue grounds. (approx. 10 feet) RecdÐNo- vember 11, 1999. Est. ValueÐ $500.00 To be retained for offi- cial display. Gordon, John A.ÐDeputy Director Geometric pieced and applied 5 U.S.C. 7342(f)(4) ...... Non-acceptance would have of Central Intelligence. beige and lavender leather caused embarrassment to round rug and three round pil- donor and U.S. Government. lows, modern, en suite with number 99±072. (approx. 10 feet) RecdÐNovember 10, 1999. Est. ValueÐ$500.00. To be retained for official display. Tenet, George J.ÐDirector of Cen- Mother-of-pearl Bible box, mod- 5 U.S.C. 7342(f)(4) ...... Non-acceptance would have tral Intelligence. ern, with a hinged top set with caused embarrassment to nativity scene, enclosing Holy donor and U.S. Government. Bible, Old and New Testament, published Collins' Clear Type Press, London and New York, with mother-of-pearl binding. 31¤4 x 93¤4 inches. RecdÐOcto- ber 29, 1999. Est. ValueÐ $300.00. To be retained for offi- cial display. Tenet, George J.ÐDirector of Cen- Cut glass tall vase, modern, 5 U.S.C. 7342(f)(4) ...... Non-acceptance would have tral Intelligence. mounted on walnut plinth, in- caused embarrassment to scribed on lip 34cm Vaza donor and U.S. Government. Anfoka 1987. 133¤4 inches. RecdÐOctober 1, 1999. Est. ValueÐ$300.00. To be retained for official display. Tenet, George J.ÐDirector of Cen- Brass mounted chagrin com- 5 U.S.C. 7342(f)(4) ...... Non-acceptance would have tral Intelligence. memorative dagger and parade caused embarrassment to hat, modern, from the Third donor and U.S. Government. Lancers, 1815±1831. RecdÐ September 27, 1999. Est. ValueÐ$300.00. To be retained for official display. Tenet, George J.ÐDirector of Cen- 24 Karat textured gold `loop and 5 U.S.C. 7342(f)(4) ...... Non-acceptance would have tral Intelligence. star' necklace, modern, marked caused embarrassment to 9999. RecdÐDecember 2, donor and U.S. Government. 1999. Est. ValueÐ$300.00. To be retained for official display.
VerDate 20
REPORT OF TANGIBLE GIFTSÐContinued
Gift, date of acceptance on behalf Name and title of person accepting of the U.S. Government, esti- Identity of foreign donor and gov- Circumstances justifying accept- the gift on behalf of the U.S. Gov- mated value, and current disposi- ernment ance ernment tion or location
Tenet, George J.ÐDirector of Cen- Silver gilt group of a horned ani- 5 U.S.C. 7342(f)(4) ...... Non-acceptance would have tral Intelligence. mal beneath a palm tree, mod- caused embarrassment to ern. 7 inches. RecdÐNovember donor and U.S. Government. 1, 1999. Est. ValueÐ$300.00. To be retained for official dis- play. Tenet, George J.ÐDirector of Cen- Mother-of-pearl Diorama of Nativ- 5 U.S.C. 7342(f)(4) ...... Non-acceptance would have tral Intelligence. ity and The Last Supper, mod- caused embarrassment to ern. Each with applied plaque donor and U.S. Government. (17 x 23 x 21¤2 inches). RecdÐ October 26, 1999. Est. ValueÐ $500.00. To be retained for offi- cial display. Tenet, George J.ÐDirector of Cen- Commemorative six-piece coin 5 U.S.C. 7342(f)(4) ...... Non-acceptance would have tral Intelligence. set, 1993, consisting of: 3 gold caused embarrassment to coins and 3 silver coins, each donor and U.S. Government. with double-headed eagle and dates 1943±1993. RecdÐOcto- ber 1, 1999. Est. ValueÐ $300.00. To be retained for offi- cial display. Tenet, George J.ÐDirector of Cen- Marquetry ebonized wood hex- 5 U.S.C. 7342(f)(4) ...... Non-acceptance would have tral Intelligence. agonal folding trestle-base caused embarrassment to table, modern, with scenes of donor and U.S. Government. early civilization. RecdÐOcto- ber 28, 1999. Est. ValueÐ $300.00. To be retained for offi- cial display. Tenet, George J.ÐDirector of Cen- Engraved silver coffee pot, mod- 5 U.S.C. 7342(f)(4) ...... Non-acceptance would have tral Intelligence. ern, of typical form 141¤2 inches. caused embarrassment to RecdÐNovember 2, 1999. Est. donor and U.S. Government. ValueÐ$500.00. To be retained for official display. Tenet, George J.ÐDirector of Cen- Herend six-piece desk set, Roth- 5 U.S.C. 7342(f)(4) ...... Non-acceptance would have tral Intelligence. schild Bird pattern #RO, mod- caused embarrassment to ern, consisting of: oblong tray, donor and U.S. Government. cup and undertray, footed small cup, seal and a covered box. RecdÐSeptember 28, 1999. Est. ValueÐ$500.00. To be re- tained for official display. Tenet, George J.ÐDirector of Cen- Daum amber pat-de-verre glass 5 U.S.C. 7342(f)(4) ...... Non-acceptance would have tral Intelligence. figure of a standing woman, caused embarrassment to modern, inscribed Daum/ donor and U.S. Government. France. 10 inches. RecdÐMay 19, 1999. Est. ValueÐ$500.00. To be retained for official dis- play. Tenet, George J.ÐDirector of Cen- Contemporary silver and speci- 5 U.S.C. 7342(f)(4) ...... Non-acceptance would have tral Intelligence. men amethyst and rock crystal caused embarrassment to bust of a Horse, modeled by donor and U.S. Government. Laido, modern, mounted on mottled black marble oval base. 17 inches. RecdÐOctober 29, 1999. Est. ValueÐ$750.00. To be retained for official display.
Commerce
Daley, William M.ÐSecretary of Mother of Pearl replica of ``The Mr. Yasser Arafat, Chairman, Pal- Non-acceptance would have Commerce. Manger Scene/Bethlehem estinian Liberation Organization. caused embarrassment to 2000''. RecdÐOctober 11, donor and United States Gov- 1999. Est. ValueÐ$800.00. ernment. Commerce for disposition. Daley, William M.ÐSecretary of 14″ x 16″ Framed Multicolored H.E. Osama Faqih, Minister of Non-acceptance would have Commerce. Mosaic Painting. RecdÐOcto- Commerce of Saudi Arabia/Ri- caused embarrassment to ber 15, 1999. Est. ValueÐ yadh. donor and United States Gov- $275.00. Department of Com- ernment. merce for disposition.
VerDate 20
REPORT OF TANGIBLE GIFTSÐContinued
Gift, date of acceptance on behalf Name and title of person accepting of the U.S. Government, esti- Identity of foreign donor and gov- Circumstances justifying accept- the gift on behalf of the U.S. Gov- mated value, and current disposi- ernment ance ernment tion or location
Daley, William M.ÐSecretary of 8″ x 12″ Metal Sculptured Horse H.H. Sultan Bin Zayed Al Nahyan, Non-acceptance would have Commerce. mounted on stone with quartz Deputy Prime Minister of the caused embarrassment to formations. RecdÐOctober 17, United Arab Emirates, Abu donor and United States Gov- 1999. Est. ValueÐ$800.00. De- Dhabi. ernment. partment of Commerce for dis- position.
Defense
Cohen, Mrs.ÐSpouse of Secretary Pearl Necklace Double Strand. Essa Bin Salman Al Khalifa, The Non-acceptance would have of Defense (William Cohen). RecdÐMarch 4, 1998. Est. Amir of the State of Bahrain. caused embarrassment to ValueÐ$2,600.00. Reported to donor and U.S. Government. GSA on October 8, 1999. Cohen, Mrs.ÐSpouse of Secretary Lady's Rolex. RecdÐMarch 4, Essa Bin Salman Al Khalifa, The Non-acceptance would have of Defense (William Cohen). 1998. Est. ValueÐ$4,700.00. Amir of the State of Bahrain. caused embarrassment to Reported to GSA on October donor and U.S. Government. 14, 1999. Cohen, Mrs.ÐSpouse of Secretary Pearl Bracelet Double Strand in a Essa Bin Salman Al Khalifa, The Non-acceptance would have of Defense (William Cohen). Gold Band. RecdÐMarch 4, Amir of the State of Bahrain. caused embarrassment to 1998. Est. ValueÐ$720.00. Re- donor and U.S. Government. ported to GSA on October 14, 1999. Cohen, Mrs.ÐSpouse of Secretary Hand made Gold Bracelet with Field Marshal Hussein Tantawy, Non-acceptance would have of Defense (William Cohen). enameled Beetle. RecdÐMarch Minister of Defense (Egypt). caused embarrassment to 4, 1998. Est. ValueÐ$970.00. donor and U.S. Government. Reported to GSAÐOctober 8, 1999. Cohen, Mrs.ÐSpouse of Secretary Gold Egyptian Bracelet. RecdÐ Essa Bin Salman Al Khalifa, The Non-acceptance would have of Defense (William Cohen). December 24, 1998. Est. Amir of the State of Bahrain. caused embarrassment to ValueÐ$600.00. Retained for donor and U.S. Government. Official Display. Cohen, William S.ÐSecretary of Head cast metal, on white marble Unknown ...... Non-acceptance would have Defense. block. RecdÐJanuary 8, 1999. caused embarrassment to Est. ValueÐ$1,200.00. Re- donor and U.S. Government. turned for Official Display. Cohen, William S.ÐSecretary of Man's Wristwatch, Rolex. RecdÐ Unknown ...... Non-acceptance would have Defense. January 8, 1999. Est. ValueÐ caused embarrassment to $2,120.00. Retained for Official donor and U.S. Government. Display. Cohen, William S.ÐSecretary of Hand made Silk Carpet (Floral Field Marshal Hussein Tantawy, Non-acceptance would have Defense. Design). RecdÐMarch 8, 1998. Minister of Defense (Egypt). caused embarrassment to Est. ValueÐ$650.00. Reported donor and U.S. Government. to GSA on October 8, 1999. Cohen, William S.ÐSecretary of Lady's Wristwatch Rolex. RecdÐ Unknown ...... Non-acceptance would have Defense. January 8, 1999. Est. ValueÐ caused embarrassment to $1,680.00. Retained for Official donor and U.S. Government. Display. Cohen, William S.ÐSecretary of Handmade Silk Carpet (Floral De- Field Marshal Hussein Tantawy, Non-acceptance would have Defense. sign). RecdÐMarch 8, 1998. Minister of Defense (Egypt). caused embarrassment to Est. ValueÐ$700.00. Reported donor and U.S. Government. to GSA on October 8, 1999. Cohen, William S.ÐSecretary of Wristwatch Rolex. RecdÐUn- Unknown ...... Non-acceptance would have Defense. known. Est. ValueÐ$5,220.00. caused embarrassment to Retained for Official Display. donor and U.S. Government. Cohen, William S.ÐSecretary of Jewelry/Writing Set. RecdÐJanu- Unknown ...... Non-acceptance would have Defense. ary 8, 1999. Est. ValueÐ caused embarrassment to $4,895.00. Retained for Official donor and U.S. Government. Display. Kramer, Franklin D.ÐASD for ISA Gold Cherub Key Chain. RecdÐ Field Marshal Hussein Tantawy, Non-acceptance would have May 17, 1999. Est. ValueÐ Minister of Defense (Egypt). caused embarrassment to $290.00 Reported to GSA on donor and U.S. Government. October 8, 1999. Kramer, Franklin D.ÐASD for ISA Three Blue Leather Mats and Gen. Abdulsalami A. Abubakar, Non-acceptance would have 23x27 small throw rug. RecdÐ Head of State of the Republic caused embarrassment to May 18, 1999. Est. ValueÐ of Nigeria. donor and U.S. Government. $280.00. Retained for Official Display.
VerDate 20
REPORT OF TANGIBLE GIFTSÐContinued
Gift, date of acceptance on behalf Name and title of person accepting of the U.S. Government, esti- Identity of foreign donor and gov- Circumstances justifying accept- the gift on behalf of the U.S. Gov- mated value, and current disposi- ernment ance ernment tion or location
Kramer, Franklin D.ÐASD for ISA Beige Rug (53x37). RecdÐMarch Field Marshal Hussein Tantawy, Non-acceptance would have 13, 1999. Est. ValueÐ$600.00. Minister of Defense (Egypt). caused embarrassment to Reported to GSA on October 8, donor and U.S. Government. 1999. Kramer, Franklin D.ÐASD for ISA Silver Lamp. RecdÐMarch 13, Lt. Gen. Magdy Hatata, Chief of Non-acceptance would have 1999. Est. ValueÐ$480.00. Re- Staff, Egyptian Armed Forces. caused embarrassment to ported to GSA on October 8, donor and U.S. Government. 1999. Kramer, Mrs.ÐSpouse of ASD for 20″ Gold Kartouche Necklace. Field Marshal Hussein Tantawy, Non-acceptance would have ISA. RecdÐMay 17, 1999. Est. Minister of Defense (Egypt). caused embarrassment to ValueÐ$365.00. Reported to donor and U.S. Government. GSA on October 8, 1999. Kramer, Mrs.ÐSpouse of ASD for Egyptian Bracelet. RecdÐMarch Wife of Field Marshal Hussein Non-acceptance would have ISA. 13, 1999. Est. ValueÐ$830.00. Tantawy, Minister of Defense caused embarrassment to Reported to GSA on October (Egypt). donor and U.S. Government. 14, 1999. Ralston, Joseph W.ÐGeneral, Chalice with decorative stones. General Lieutenant David Non-acceptance would have USAF Vice Chairman of the RecdÐDecember 10, 1998. Tevzadze, Minister of Defense, caused embarrassment to Joint Chiefs of Staff. Est. ValueÐ$400.00. Reported Republic of Georgia. donor and U.S. Government. to GSA on October 12, 1999. Romanowski, Alina, ASD of De- Two Gold Bracelets. RecdÐDe- H.E. Shaykh Salim al-Sabah Al- Non-acceptance would have fense Near Eastern and South cember 3, 1998. Est. ValueÐ Salim Al Sahah, Minister of De- caused embarrassment to Asian Affairs, ISA. $1,960.00. Reported to GSA on fense. donor and U.S. Government. October 12, 1999. Sattler, John F.ÐBrigadier General Dunhill Watch. RecdÐMay 11, Lt. General Ali, Chief of Defense, Non-acceptance would have 1999. Est. ValueÐ$345.00. Re- Kuwait. caused embarrassment to ported to GSA on October 14, donor and U.S. Government. 1999. Shelton, Henry H.ÐGeneral, Joint Suit of Armor. RecdÐMarch 11, LTG Henryk Szumski ...... Non-acceptance would have of Chiefs of Staff. 1999. Est. ValueÐ$280.00. Re- caused embarrassment to tained for Official Display. donor and U.S. Government. Shelton, Mrs.ÐSpouse of General Concord ladies watch. RecdÐ General and Mrs. Al-Attayah, Non-acceptance would have Henry H. Shelton, Chairman of March 11, 1999. Est. ValueÐ Chief of Staff, Qatar Armed caused embarrassment to the Joints Chiefs of Staff. $950.00. Reported to GSA on Forces. donor and U.S. Government. October 6, 1999. Smith, Frederick C.ÐPASD for Globe. RecdÐSeptember 2, Sheikh Salman, Under Secretary Non-acceptance would have ISA. 1998. Est. ValueÐ$3500.00. of Defense Policy, Bahrain caused embarrassment to Reported to GSA on October MOD. donor and U.S. Government. 12, 1999. Tyrer, BobÐChief of Staff ...... Eterna Men's watch in a wood Essa Bin Salman al Khalifa, Amir Non-acceptance would have presentation box. RecdÐMarch of Bahrain. caused embarrassment to 4, 1998. Est. ValueÐ$2870.00. donor and U.S. Government. Reported to GSA on October 14, 1999. Unruh, BrianÐNear Eastern and Man's watchÐChristian Dior Ser# Col. Mohammed al-Sobaie, Mili- Non-acceptance would have South Asian Affairs. D71±100 AJ5787. RecdÐDe- tary Liaison Officer, Embassy of caused embarrassment to cember 23, 1998. Est. ValueÐ Kuwait. donor and U.S. Government. $380.00. Reported to GSA on October 14, 1999.
Justice
Carter, J.C.ÐAssistant Director In Gold Coin. RecdÐApril 1999. Est. Saudi Arabia Mabahith...... Courtesy gift received during Charge, Washington Field Office. ValueÐ$272.00. On display in meeting. Washington Field Office.
Marine Corps
Schneider, H. Jr. (Major)ÐU.S. Candino Swiss Watch. RecdÐ Col Ahem Al-Al-YatamaÐKuwait Non-acceptance would have Central Command. September 29, 1999. Est. caused embarrassment to ValueÐ$462.00. Forwarded to donor & U.S. Government. GSA for disposition. Zinni, A.C. (General)ÐCINC, U.S. Egyptian Prayer Rug. RecdÐNo- Lt. Gen. HattataÐChief of Staff Non-acceptance would have Central Command. vember 1999. Est. ValueÐ (Egypt). caused embarrassment to $2500.00. Individual purchased. donor & U.S. Government.
VerDate 20
REPORT OF TANGIBLE GIFTSÐContinued
Gift, date of acceptance on behalf Name and title of person accepting of the U.S. Government, esti- Identity of foreign donor and gov- Circumstances justifying accept- the gift on behalf of the U.S. Gov- mated value, and current disposi- ernment ance ernment tion or location
Zinni, A.C. (General)ÐCINC, U.S. Sig Saul P228 9mm Combat Pis- Sheikh Isa bin Sulman Al- Non-acceptance would have Central Command. tol. RecdÐDecember 15, 1998. KhalifaÐAmir of Bahrain. caused embarrassment to Est. ValueÐ$1098.00. Indi- donor & U.S. Government. vidual purchased.
Navy
Cheney, Stephen A. (Bgen)ÐMa- Man's Eterna 18K Gold Watch. Sheikh Isa bin Sulman Al- Non-acceptance would have rine Corps IG. RecdÐFebruary 17, 1999. Est. KhalifaÐAmir of Bahrain. caused embarrassment to ValueÐ$7,500.00. Forwarded donor & U.S. Government. to GSA on July 16, 1999 for disposition. Danzig, RichardÐSecretary of the Woman's Rolex 18K Watch. Sheikh Isa bin Sulman Al- Non-acceptance would have Navy. RecdÐFebruary 17, 1999. Est. KhalifaÐAmir of Bahrain. caused embarrassment to ValueÐ$9000.00. Forwarded to donor & U.S. Government. GSA on July 16, 1999 for dis- position. Danzig, RichardÐSecretary of the Tiffany & Co. Brass Alarm Clock Sheikh Saud NasserÐKuwait Non-acceptance would have Navy. and Tiffany & Co. Sterling Sil- Minister of Oil. caused embarrassment to ver Gold Pen (given as one donor & U.S. Government. gift). RecdÐFebruary 15, 1999. Est. ValueÐ$700.00 & $250.00. Forwarded to GSA on July 16, 1999 for disposition. Danzig, RichardÐSecretary of the Man's Rolex 18K Watch. RecdÐ Sheikh Isa bin Sulman Al- Non-acceptance would have Navy. February 17, 1999. Est. KhalifaÐAmir of Bahrain. caused embarrassment to ValueÐ$14,000.00. Forwarded donor & U.S. Government. to GSA on July 16, 1999 for disposition. Danzig, RichardÐSecretary of the Two-strand Pearl Necklace. Sheikh Isa bin Sulman Al- Non-acceptance would have Navy. RecdÐFebruary 17, 1999. Est. KhalifaÐAmir of Bahrain. caused embarrassment to ValueÐ$9000.00. Forwarded to donor and U.S. Government. GSA on July 16, 1999 for dis- position. Stavridis, James (Captain)ÐExec- Man's Eterna 18K Gold Watch. Sheikh Isa bin Sulman Al- Non-acceptance would have utive Assistant & Naval I/Aide to RecdÐFebruary 17, 1999. Est. KhalifaÐAmir of Bahrain. caused embarrassment to the Secretary of the Navy. ValueÐ$7,500.00. Forwarded donor and U.S. Government. to GSA on July 16, 1999 for disposition. Work, Robert (Colonel)ÐMilitary Man's Eterna 18K Gold Watch. Sheikh Isa bin Sulman Al- Non-acceptance would have Assistant & Marine Aide to the RecdÐFebruary 17, 1999. Est. KhalifaÐAmir of Bahrain. caused embarrassment to Secretary of the Navy. ValueÐ$7,500.00. Forwarded donor and U.S. Government. to GSA on July 16, 1999 for disposition.
Office of the Vice President
Mrs. Gore ...... Black silk evening bag with crystal Keizo Obuchi, Prime Minister of Non-acceptance would have beading decoration. RecdÐ Japan and Mrs. Obuchi. caused embarrassment to June 6, 1999. Est. ValueÐ donor and U.S. Government. $350.00. Archives. Mrs. Gore...... African masks in black frame. Mrs. Marguerite Midjo Keredou, c/ Non-acceptance would have RecdÐJune 6, 1999. Est. o Embassy of the Republic of caused embarrassment to ValueÐ$400.00. Archives. Benin. donor and U.S. Government. Mrs. Gore ...... Broach in 20±22 kt. Gold, design Mr. and Mrs. Vardis and Mariana Non-acceptance would have of the Cycladic period. RecdÐ Vardinoyannis, Athens. caused embarrassment to March 17, 1999. Est. ValueÐ donor and U.S. Government. $500.00. Archives. OVP Staff ...... Blue leather box with gold trimÐ Nursultan Nazabayez, President Non-acceptance would have inside is a silver box with a of the Republic of Kazakhstan. caused embarrassment to seal. RecdÐMay 3, 1999. Est. donor and U.S. Government. ValueÐ$2500.00. Archives. Vice President ...... 1. Statuette of Ukrainian figure. 2. Leonid Kuchma, President of Non-acceptance would have Miniature gold mace. 3. 1999 Ukraine. caused embarrassment to commemorative silver coin. 4. donor and U.S. Government. Glass Vase. RecdÐDecember 8, 1999. Est. ValueÐ$ over $250.00, awaiting appraisal. Of- fice of the Vice President.
VerDate 20
REPORT OF TANGIBLE GIFTSÐContinued
Gift, date of acceptance on behalf Name and title of person accepting of the U.S. Government, esti- Identity of foreign donor and gov- Circumstances justifying accept- the gift on behalf of the U.S. Gov- mated value, and current disposi- ernment ance ernment tion or location
Vice President...... Sculpture of calf by inuk artist. Prime Minister Jean Chretien, Non-acceptance would have RecdÐMay 3, 1999. Est. Prime Minister of Canada. caused embarrassment to ValueÐ$1000.00. Archives. donor and U.S. Government. Vice President ...... Baseball autographed by Sammy Roberto B. Saladin Selin, Ambas- Non-acceptance would have Sosa. RecdÐDecember 12, sador of the Dominican Repub- caused embarrassment to 1999. Est. ValueÐ$ over lic, Washington, DC. donor and U.S. Government. $250.00 awaiting appraisal. Of- fice of the Vice President. Vice President and Mrs. Gore ...... Jewelry: gold pin for Mrs. Gore Mireya Moscoso, President of Re- Non-acceptance would have (reproduction of pre-Columbian public of Panama. caused embarrassment to artifact excavated in Panama), donor and U.S. Government. gold cufflinks for VP. RecdÐ October 19, 1999. Est. ValueÐ $650.00. Archives. Vice President and Mrs. Gore ...... Small carriage clock; Koran-sha Keizo Obuchi, Prime Minister of Non-acceptance would have white porcelain vase. RecdÐ Japan. caused embarrassment to June 6, 1999. Est. ValueÐ donor and U.S. Government. $350.00. Archives. Vice President and Mrs. Gore ...... Porcelain Jar. RecdÐDecember Yuriy Viktorovich Ushakov, Am- Non-acceptance would have 12, 1999. Est. ValueÐ$ over bassador Extraordinary and caused embarrassment to $250.00, awaiting appraisal. Of- Plenipotentiary of the Russian donor and U.S. Government. fice of the Vice President. Federation, Washington, DC.
Senate
Durbin, Richard JÐU.S. Senator ... Commemorative historical sword. Buzek, JerzyÐPrime Minister of Non-acceptance would have RecdÐApril 21, 1999. Est. Poland. caused embarrassment to ValueÐ$260.00. Displayed in donor and U.S. Government. Senate Office, SR 364. Shelby, Richard C. and Annette Gems Painting. RecdÐSep- Maj. Gen. Ye Myint of Myanmar .. Non-acceptance would have Nevin ShelbyÐU.S. Senator and tember 1, 1999. Est. ValueÐ caused embarrassment to Wife. $150.00. Deposited with Sec- donor and U.S. Government. retary of Senate. Shelby, Richard C. and Annette Nine-Gems Ring. RecdÐAugust Lt. Gen. And Mrs. Khin Myunt of Non-acceptance would have Nevin ShelbyÐU.S. Senator and 31, 1999. Est. ValueÐ$300.00. Myanmar. caused embarrassment to Wife. Deposited with Secretary of donor and the U.S. Senate. Shelby, Richard C. and Annette Silver Tea Set. RecdÐAugust 23, President B.J. Habibie of Indo- Non-acceptance would have Nevin ShelbyÐU.S. Senator and 1999. Est. ValueÐ$3,500.00. nesia. caused embarrassment to Wife. Deposited with Secretary of donor and the U.S. . Senate. Sisco, GaryÐSecretary of Senate Waterman Pen. RecdÐMay 8, Harold Romer, Deputy Secretary Non-acceptance would have 1999. Est. ValueÐ$300.00. De- General of the European Par- caused embarrassment to posited with Secretary of Sen- liament. donor and the U.S. ate.
State
Albright, Madeleine K.ÐSecretary Silver Brooch with stones. RecdÐ President WeizmanÐIsrael...... Non-acceptance would have of State. December 22, 1999. Est. caused embarrassment to ValueÐ$350.00. Office of Pro- donor & U.S. Government. tocol for Disposition. Albright, Madeleine K.ÐSecretary Gold bracelet and necklace. Chairman Yasser Arafat (PLO) .... Non-acceptance would have of State. RecdÐDecember 8, 1999. Est. caused embarrassment to ValueÐ$500.00. Office of Pro- donor & U.S. Government. tocol for Disposition. Albright, Madeleine K.ÐSecretary Gold Bracelet. RecdÐ1998. Est. Suha Arafat, First Lady (PLO) ...... Non-acceptance would have of State. ValueÐ$800.00 Office of Pro- caused embarrassment to tocol for disposition. donor & U.S. Government. Albright, Madeleine K.ÐSecretary Gold Chain. RecdÐSeptember Sheikh Hasina, Prime Minister Non-acceptance would have of State. 20, 1999. Est. ValueÐ$400.00. (Banglesh). caused embarrassment to Office of Protocol for disposition. donor & U.S. Government. Albright, MadeleineÐSecretary of Gold Necklace with diamonds. Chairman Yasser Arafat (PLO) .... Non-acceptance would have State. RecdÐOctober 22, 1999. Est. caused embarrassment to ValueÐ$1500.00. Office of Pro- donor & U.S. Government. tocol for disposition.
VerDate 20
REPORT OF TANGIBLE GIFTSÐContinued
Gift, date of acceptance on behalf Name and title of person accepting of the U.S. Government, esti- Identity of foreign donor and gov- Circumstances justifying accept- the gift on behalf of the U.S. Gov- mated value, and current disposi- ernment ance ernment tion or location
Albright, MadeleineÐSecretary of 6″ Round Silver Box w/lid. RecdÐ Lamberto Dini, Foreign Minister Non-acceptance would have State. May 26, 1999. Est. ValueÐ (Italy). caused embarrassment to $500.00. Office of Protocol for donor & U.S. Government. disposition. Ambassador WifeÐLagos ...... One double strand pearl necklace Lagos Government...... Non-acceptance would have and matching earrings. RecdÐ caused embarrassment to July 1999. Est. ValueÐ donor & U.S. Government. $325.00. Delivered to GSA on Sept. 7, 1999. Bartels, CamilaÐPublic Affairs ...... Eterna watch. RecdÐNovember Government of Bahrain ...... Non-acceptance would have 1997. Est. ValueÐ$2,550.00 caused embarrassment to Delivered to GSA on Sep- donor & U.S. Government. tember 7, 1999. Brill, KennethÐAmbassador...... Painting (Animal Abstractions). Foreign GovernmentÐNicosia..... Non-acceptance would have RecdÐJuly 1, 1999. Est. caused embarrassment to ValueÐ$460.00. Retained at donor & U.S. Government. Embassy for Official Display. Brill, KennethÐAmbassador...... Painting (Ghost Island). RecdÐ Foreign GovernmentÐNicosia..... Non-acceptance would have July 1, 1999. Est. ValueÐ caused embarrassment to $550.00. Retained at the Em- donor & U.S. Government. bassy for Official Display. Bujac, GregÐDiplomatic Security Eterna Watch. RecdÐNovember Government of Bahrain ...... Non-acceptance would have 1997. Est. ValueÐ$2,550.00. caused embarrassment to Delivered to GSA on Sep- donor & U.S. Government. tember 7, 1999. BurneiÐAdmin Consul ...... Revue, Thommen Watch. RecdÐ Burundian Royal Family Member Non-acceptance would have December 23, 1997. Est. caused embarrassment to ValueÐ$1,500.00. Office of donor & U.S. Government. Protocol for Disposition. BurneiÐAmbassador ...... Baume & Mercier Watch. RecdÐ Burundian Royal Family Member Non-acceptance would have December 23, 1997. Est. caused embarrassment to ValueÐ$3,500.00. Office of donor & U.S. Government. Protocol for Disposition. BurneiÐCharge ...... Tag Heuer Watch. RecdÐDecem- Burundian Royal Family Member Non-acceptance would have ber 23, 1997. Est. ValueÐ caused embarrassment to $1500.00. Office of Protocol for donor & U.S. Government. Disposition. Burns, NickÐAmbassador ...... Black Leather bound Coin Collec- Wife of Ministry of Defense official Non-acceptance would have tion (``one Century of Greek caused embarrassment to Coins; 1880±1995''. RecdÐ donor & U.S. Government. April 19, 1999. Est. ValueÐ $1,677.00. Retained at the Em- bassy for Official Display. Burns, WilliamÐAmbassador ...... Motorola Cellular Telephone GSM Greek Official at the Thessaloniki Non-acceptance would have package with accessories. Trade Fair. cause embarrassment to donor RecdÐUnknown Est. ValueÐ & U.S. Government. $536.00. Retain at the Em- bassy for Official Use. Cook, Frances D.ÐMother of Am- Set of traditional Omani Tribal Ghassan Al Khalili ...... Non-acceptance would caused bassador for Muscat. Jewelry including necklace, embarrassment to donor & U.S. ring, bracelet and earring. Government. RecdÐLate 1996. Est. ValueÐ $700.00. Office of Protocol for disposition. Cook, Frances D.ÐMother of Am- Two traditional Gold Omani Almutasim Bin Hamoud Al Non-acceptance would have bassador for Muscrat. Bracelets. RecdÐDecember Busaidi, Minister of State and cause embarrassment to donor 26, 1997. Est. ValueÐ$600.00. Governor of Muscat. & U.S. Government. Office of Protocol for disposition. Dubai Consulate Political Officer ... Gold Bracelet. RecdÐOctober Leading Member of Dubai Busi- Gift was present as a mark of 1999. Est. ValueÐ$274.00. De- ness Community. courtesy. To refuse would have livered to GSA on Sept. 7, 1999. been counter to U.S. interests. Duncan, CharlesÐWhite House Li- Eterna watch. RecdÐNovember Government of Bahrain ...... Non-acceptance would have aison Office. 1997. Est. ValueÐ$2,550.00. caused embarrassment to Delivered to GSA on Sep- donor & U.S. Government. tember 7, 1999. Fowler, WycheÐAmbassador ...... Harry Winston Timepiece (Watch). Saudi Crown Abdullah bin Abdul Non-acceptance would have RecdÐSeptember 1998. Est. Aziz Al Saud. caused embarrassment to ValueÐ$10,666.00. Delivered donor & U.S. Government. to GSA on Sept. 7, 1999.
VerDate 20
REPORT OF TANGIBLE GIFTSÐContinued
Gift, date of acceptance on behalf Name and title of person accepting of the U.S. Government, esti- Identity of foreign donor and gov- Circumstances justifying accept- the gift on behalf of the U.S. Gov- mated value, and current disposi- ernment ance ernment tion or location
George, SuzanneÐOffice of Sec- Eterna watch. RecdÐNovember Government of Buhrain ...... Non-acceptance would have retary. 1997. Est. ValueÐ$2,550.00. caused embarrassment to Delivered to GSA on Sep- donor & U.S. Government. tember 7, 1999. Hale, DavidÐOffice of Secretary ... Eterna watch. RecdÐNovember Government of Bahrain ...... Non-acceptance would have 1997. Est. ValueÐ$2,550.00. caused embarrassment to Delivered to GSA on Sep- donor & U.S. Government. tember 7, 1999. Hartnett, LarryÐDiplomatic Secu- Eterna, watch. RecdÐNovember Government of Bahrain ...... Non-acceptance would have rity. 1997. Est. ValueÐ$2,550.00. caused embarrassment to Delivered to GSA on Sep- donor & U.S. Government. tember 7, 1999. Haycraft, TomÐDiplomatic Secu- Eterna, watch. RecdÐNovember Government of Bahrain ...... Non-acceptance would have rity. 1997. Est. ValueÐ$2,550.00. caused embarrassment to Delivered to GSA on Sep- donor & U.S. Government. tember 7, 1999. Helal, GemalÐInterpreter ...... Eterna, watch. RecdÐNovember Government of Bahrain ...... Non-acceptance would have 1997. Est. ValueÐ$2,550.00. caused embarrassment to Delivered to GSA on Sep- donor & U.S. Government. tember 7, 1999. Hicks, DeloresÐLine Assistant ...... Eterna, watch. RecdÐNovember Government of Bahrain ...... Non-acceptance would have 1997. Est. ValueÐ$2,550.00. caused embarrassment to Delivered to GSA on Sep- donor & U.S. Government. tember 7, 1999. Hipp, MarkÐDiplomatic Security ... Eterna, watch. RecdÐNovember Government of Bahrain ...... Non-acceptance would have 1997. Est. ValueÐ$2,550.00. caused embarrassment to Delivered to GSA on Sep- donor & U.S. Government. tember 7, 1999. Hurly, JohnÐDiplomatic Security .. Eterna, watch. RecdÐNovember Government of Bahrain ...... Non-acceptance would have 1997. Est. ValueÐ$2,550.00. caused embarrassment to Delivered to GSA on Sep- donor & U.S. Government. tember 7, 1999. Inderfurth, Karl F.ÐAssistant Se- Eterna, watch. RecdÐNovember Government of Bahrain ...... Non-acceptance would have curity. 1997. Est. ValueÐ$2,550.00. caused embarrassment to Delivered to GSA on Sep- donor & U.S. Government. tember 7, 1999. Inderfurth, Karl F.ÐAsst. Sec. For Lalique Crystal Clock. RecdÐMay The Hinduja Group ...... Non-acceptance would have South Asian Affairs. 11, 1999. Est. ValueÐ$260.00. caused embarrassment to Delivered to GSA on Sept. 7, donor & U.S. Government. 1999. Inderfurth, Karl F.ÐAsst. Sec. For Sterling Silver dessert service (4 Mr. Islom, President of Uzbekistan Non-acceptance would have South Asian Affairs. piece place settings for six). caused embarrassment to RecdÐApril 26, 1999.Est. donor & U.S. Government. ValueÐ$2,130.00. Delivered to GSA on September 7, 1999. Indyk, MartinÐAssistant Secretary Eterna, watch. RecdÐNovember Government of Bahrain ...... Non-acceptance would have 1997. Est. ValueÐ$2,550.00. caused embarrassment to Delivered to GSA on Sep- donor & U.S. Government. tember 7, 1999. Indyk, MartinÐAssistant Secretary Versay Men's watch. RecdÐOcto- General Samih Battikhi, Chief of Non-acceptance would have ber 7, 1999. Est. ValueÐ Jordanian Intelligence. caused embarrassment to $500.00. Office of Protocol for donor & U.S. Government. Disposition. Indyk, Martin S. and wifeÐAsst. Two Swiss Watches. RecdÐOcto- Abu Mazen, Secretary General, Non-acceptance would have Sec. for Near East Affairs. ber 1999. Est. ValueÐ$260.00/ PLO Executive Committee. caused embarrassment to $260.00. Office of Protocol for donor & U.S. Government. disposition. Koumans, MarkÐLine Officer ...... Eterna, watch. RecdÐNovember Government of Bahrain ...... Non-acceptance would have 1997. Est. ValueÐ$2,550.00. caused embarrassment to Delivered to GSA on Sep- donor & U.S. Government. tember 7, 1999. Krajeski, ThomasÐConsul General Mont Blanc Pen. RecdÐOctober Leading Member of Dubai Busi- Gift was presented as a mark of 1999. Est. ValueÐ$800.00. De- ness Community. courtesy. To refuse would have livered to GSA on Sept. 7, 1999. been counter to US interests. Krajeski, ThomasÐConsul General Tissot Chronograph. RecdÐOcto- Leading Member of Dubai Cham- Gift was presented as a mark of ber 1999. Est. ValueÐ ber of Commerce. courtesy. To refuse would have $1,200.00. Delivered to GSA on been counter to US interests. Sept. 7, 1999.
VerDate 20
REPORT OF TANGIBLE GIFTSÐContinued
Gift, date of acceptance on behalf Name and title of person accepting of the U.S. Government, esti- Identity of foreign donor and gov- Circumstances justifying accept- the gift on behalf of the U.S. Gov- mated value, and current disposi- ernment ance ernment tion or location
Lakhdhir, KamalaÐLine Officer ..... Eterna, watch. RecdÐNovember Government of Bahrain ...... Non-acceptance would have 1997. Est. ValueÐ$2,550.00. caused embarrassment to Delivered to GSA on Sep- donor & U.S. Government. tember 7, 1999. Lineberry, Laura ElizabethÐSec- Eterna, watch. RecdÐNovember Government of Bahrain ...... Non-acceptance would have retary. 1997. Est. ValueÐ$2,550.00. caused embarrassment to Delivered to GSA on Sep- donor & U.S. Government. tember 7, 1999. Lucas, HillaryÐGift Officer...... Oyster Perpetual Date Watch. The Amir of Bahrain ...... Non-acceptance would have RecdÐJune 8, 1998. Est. caused embarrassment to ValueÐ$11,700.00. Office of donor & U.S. Government. Protocol for disposition to GSA. Luck, AlÐDiplomatic Security ...... Eterna watch. RecdÐNovember Government of Bahrain ...... Non-acceptance would have 1997. Est. ValueÐ$2,550.00. caused embarrassment to Delivered to GSA on Sep- donor & U.S. Government. tember 7, 1999. Maybus, Raymond E. JrÐAmbas- 4.5 x 2″ Solid Silver Calendar, Ahmed Zaki Yamani of Dallah Non-acceptance would have sador. dipped in gold. RecdÐJanuary Real Estate and Tourism Com- caused embarrassment to 9, 1998. Est. ValueÐ$960.00. panyÐJeddah. donor & U.S. Government. Office of Protocol for disposition. Miller, AaronÐSMEC...... Eterna, watch. RecdÐNovember Government of Bahrain ...... Non-acceptance would have 1997. Est. ValueÐ$2,550.00. caused embarrassment to Delivered to GSA on Sep- donor & U.S. Government. tember 7, 1999. Moore, AlexÐDiplomatic Security Eterna watch. RecdÐNovember Government of Bahrain ...... Non-acceptance would have 1997. Est. ValueÐ$2,550.00. caused embarrassment to Delivered to GSA on Sep- donor & U.S. Government. tember 7, 1999. Morningstar, RichardÐAmbas- 4x6 rug. RecdÐFebruary 19, President Saparmurat Niyazov ..... Non-acceptance would have sador. 1999. Est. ValueÐ$250± caused embarrassment to 500.00. Retained at Embassy donor & U.S. Government. for Official Display. Morningstar, RichardÐAmbas- 4x6 rug. RecdÐApril 26, 1999. President Heydar Aliyev, Azer- Non-acceptance would have sador. Est. ValueÐ$250±500.00. Re- baijan. caused embarrassment to tained for Official Display. donor & U.S. Government. Morningstar, RichardÐAmbas- 4x6 rug. RecdÐMay 19, 1999. President Saparmurat Niyazov, Non-acceptance would have sador. Est. ValueÐ$250±500.00. Re- Turkmenistan. caused embarrassment to tained at the Embassy for Offi- donor & U.S. Government. cial Display. Mussomeli, Joseph A.ÐDeputy Gold Omega Men's watch with Amir, Shaikh Isa Bin Salman Al- Non-acceptance would have Chief of Mission. one pair of gold cufflinks and Khalifa, Bahrain. caused embarrassment to gold Omega Lady's watch with donor & U.S. Government. diamonds, Two-strand Bahraini pearl necklace. RecdÐSep- tember 23, 1998. Est. ValueÐ $5700.00, $5,700.00, $7,960.00 ($19,360.00). Delivered to GSA on Sept. 7, 1999. Ogle, KarenÐForeign Service Offi- Diamond and White Gold Ring. Princess Shamsa al-Saud, Non-acceptance would have cer. RecdÐJune 22, 1999. Est. Jeddah. caused embarrassment to ValueÐ$1850.00. Delivered to donor & U.S. Government. GSA on Sept. 7, 1999. Petrihos, PeterÐDeputy Executive Eterna watch. RecdÐNovember Government of Bahrain ...... Non-acceptance would have Director. 1997. Est ValueÐ$2,550.00. caused embarrassment to Delivered to GSA on Sep- donor & U.S. Government. tember 7, 1999. Ransom, DavidÐAmbassador (Re- Ebel Watch and $13,217.00 cash. Amir of Bahrain ...... Non-acceptance would have tired). RecdÐFebruary 1999. Est. caused embarrassment to ValueÐAbove $260.00. Office donor & U.S. Government. of Protocol for disposition, money forwarded to appropriate agency. Ransom, DavidÐAmbassador (Re- Rolex Watch and $26,490.00 Amir of Bahrain ...... Non-acceptance would have tired). cash. RecdÐJuly 1998. Est. caused embarrassment to ValueÐAbove $260.00. Office donor & U.S. Government. of Protocol for disposition, money forwarded to appropriate agency.
VerDate 20
REPORT OF TANGIBLE GIFTSÐContinued
Gift, date of acceptance on behalf Name and title of person accepting of the U.S. Government, esti- Identity of foreign donor and gov- Circumstances justifying accept- the gift on behalf of the U.S. Gov- mated value, and current disposi- ernment ance ernment tion or location
Ransom, DavidÐAmbassador (Re- Rolex Watch and $25,000.00 Amir of Bahrain ...... Non-acceptance would have tired). cash. RecdÐJune 1998. Est. caused embarrassment to ValueÐAbove $260.00. Office donor & U.S. Government. of Protocol for disposition, money forwarded to appropriate agency. Ransom, DavidÐAmbassador (Re- Rolex Watch and $52,966.88 Amir of Bahrain ...... Non-acceptance would have tired). cash. RecdÐNovember 97. caused embarrassment to Est. ValueÐAbove $260.00. Of- donor & U.S. Government. fice of Protocol for disposition, Money forwarded to appropriate agency. Ransom, MarjorieÐForeign Serv- Gold Bracelet with pearls. RecdÐ Foreign Minister of Bahrain ...... Non-acceptance would have ice Officer. October 1999. Est. ValueÐ caused embarrassment to Above $260.00. Office of Pro- donor & U.S. Government. tocol for disposition. Reside, JulieÐPublic Affairs ...... Eterna watch. RecdÐNovember Government of Bahrain ...... Non-acceptance would have 1997. Est. ValueÐ$2,550.00. caused embarrassment to Delivered to GSA on Sep- donor & U.S. Government. tember 7, 1999. RiyadhÐConsular Section at Em- Longines Timepiece, Roamer of H.R.H. Prince Turki Al-Faisal bin Non-acceptance would have bassy Saudi Arabia. Switzerland watch with metal Abdul Aziz al Saud, Director of caused embarrassment to band (2), Roamer of Switzer- Intelligence. donor & U.S. Government. land with leather band. RecdÐ January 31, 1999. Est. ValueÐ $322.66, 133.33, 133.33, 120.00 = $709.32. Office of Protocol for Disposition. Roy, J. StapletonÐAmbassador .... A boxed piece of Silk Batik Fab- President Habibie, Indonesia ...... Non-acceptance would have ric. RecdÐUnknown. Est. caused embarrassment to ValueÐ$600.00. Retained at donor & U.S. Government. the Embassy for Official Display. Roy, J. StapletonÐAmbassador .... A Boxed Silver and Pewter Tea President Habibie, Indonesia ...... Non-acceptance would have Service. RecdÐUnknown. Est. caused embarrassment to ValueÐ$1250.00. Retained at donor & U.S. Government. the Embassy for Official Use. Rubin, James P.ÐAssistant Sec- Pocket watch with the country's Unknown ...... Non-acceptance would have retary and Spokesman. seal and tradition cap. RecdÐ caused embarrassment to the 08/17/99. Est. ValueÐ$275.00. donor and the United States Office of Protocol for Disposi- Government. tion. Rubin, James P.ÐSpokesperson .. Eterna watch. RecdÐNovember Government of Bahrain ...... Non-acceptance would have 1997. Est. ValueÐ$2,550.00. caused embarrassment to Delivered to GSA on Sep- donor & U.S. Government. tember 7, 1999. Shinnick, RichardÐDeputy Execu- Eterna watch. RecdÐNovember Government of Bahrain ...... Non-acceptance would have tive Director. 1997. Est. ValueÐ$2,550.00. caused embarrassment to Delivered to GSA on Sep- donor & U.S. Government. tember 7, 1999. Shocas, ElaineÐChief of Staff ...... Eterna watch. RecdÐNovember Government of Bahrain ...... Non-acceptance would have 1997. Est. ValueÐ$2,550.00. caused embarrassment to Delivered to GSA on Sep- donor & U.S. Government. tember 7, 1999. Stocking, TomÐDiplomatic Secu- Eterna watch. RecdÐNovember Government of Bahrain ...... Non-acceptance would have rity. 1997. Est. ValueÐ$2,550.00. caused embarrassment to Delivered to GSA on Sep- donor & U.S. Government. tember 7, 1999. Sweeney, LynnÐComputer Spe- Eterna watch. RecdÐNovember Government of Bahrain ...... Non-acceptance would have cialist. 1997. Est. ValueÐ$2,550.00. caused embarrassment to Delivered to GSA on Sep- donor & U.S. Government. tember 7, 1999. Tucker, NicholeÐSecretary...... Eterna watch. RecdÐNovember Government of Bahrain ...... Non-acceptance would have 1997. Est. ValueÐ$2,550.00. caused embarrassment to Delivered to GSA on Sep- donor & U.S. Government. tember 7, 1999.
VerDate 20
REPORT OF TANGIBLE GIFTSÐContinued
Gift, date of acceptance on behalf Name and title of person accepting of the U.S. Government, esti- Identity of foreign donor and gov- Circumstances justifying accept- the gift on behalf of the U.S. Gov- mated value, and current disposi- ernment ance ernment tion or location
USUN ...... Two Carpets: 139″ x 102″ plus Visiting Delegation of Afghanistan Non-acceptance would have fringe, wool on cotton, red field caused embarrassment to with many octagon and cross donor & U.S. Government. medallions, multiple borders, Pakistani Bokhara. RecdÐApril 1998. Est. ValueÐ$1500.00 each. Delivered to GSA on Sept. 7, 1999. USUN ...... Three (3) wool pile hand knotted Visiting Delegation of Afghanistan Non-acceptance would have carpets. RecdÐApril 1998. Est. caused embarrassment to ValueÐ$300.00 ea. ($900.00). donor & U.S. Government. Retained at the Embassy for Official Use. USUN ...... Two Carpets: 154″ x 230″ and Visiting Delegation from Afghani- Non-acceptance would have 148″ x 226″ plus fringe, wool on stan. caused embarrassment to cotton, red field with many oc- donor & U.S. Government. tagonal and cross medallions, multiple borders, Pakistani Bokhara. RecdÐApril 1998. Est. ValueÐ$2250.00 each. Delivered to GSA on Sept. 7, 1999. Welch, David C.ÐAmbassador ..... 4.5 x 2″ Solid Silver Calendar Ahmed Zaki Yamani of Dallah Non-acceptance would have dipped in gold. RecdÐJanuary Real Estate and Tourism Co.Ð caused embarrassment to 9, 1998. Est. ValueÐ$960.00. Jeddah. donor & U.S. Government. Office of Protocol for Disposi- tion. Wills, Laura B.ÐAssist. Chief of Raymond Weil Geneve Watch. Crown Prince Sultan bin Abdul Non-acceptance would have Protocol, Visits. RecdÐNovember 5, 1999. Est. Aziz, Saudi Arabia. caused embarrassment to ValueÐ$500.00. In the Office donor & U.S. Government. of Protocol for Disposition. Woodward, WilliamÐSpeechwriter Eterna watch. RecdÐNovember Government of Bahrain ...... Non-acceptance would have 1997. Est. ValueÐ$2,550.00. caused embarrassment to Delivered to GSA on Sep- donor & U.S. Government. tember 7, 1999. Young, JohnnyÐAmbassador ...... Pair of men's cufflinks in white Amir Shaikh Isa Bin Salman Al- Non-acceptance would have gold with onyx and diamonds, Khalifa, Bahrain. caused embarrassment to pair of women's earrings and donor & U.S. Government. one ring with two-toned gold with diamonds. RecdÐJuly 13, 1998. Est. ValueÐ$3,580.00, $3,980.00 ($26,920.00). Deliv- ered to GSA on Sept. 7, 1999. Young, JohnnyÐAmbassador ...... Men's Piaget wristwatch in white Amir, Shaikh Isa bin Salman Al- Non-acceptance would have gold with date function and Khalifa, Bahrain. caused embarrassment to women's Piaget wristwatch in donor & U.S. Government. white gold with diamond chips. RecdÐFebruary 22, 1999. Est. ValueÐ$12,000.00 & $11,400.00 ($23, 400.00) Office of Protocol for Disposition. Young, JohnnyÐAmbassador ...... Men's Piaget wristwatch in white Amir, Shaikh Isa bin Salman Al- Non-acceptance would have gold with date function and Khalifa, Bahrain. caused embarrassment to women's Piaget wristwatch in donor & U.S. Government. white gold with diamond chips. RecdÐFebruary 22, 1999. Est. Value $12,000 and $11,400.00 ($23,400.00). Delivered to GSA on Sept 7, 1999.
VerDate 20
REPORT OF TRAVEL OR EXPENSES OF TRAVELÐ1999
Name and title Brief description Identity of foreign donor Circumstances
National Council on Disability
Blank, KathleenÐProgram Spe- RecdÐJuly 18, 1999. Est. Airports Council International, To present paper and guest cialist. ValueÐ$4,170.00. Expended Richmond, B.C., Canada. speak at conference. for airfare, hotel, meals and conference registration for speaking engagement in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.
U.S. General Accounting Office
Epstein, DavidÐGAO Evaluator .... RecdÐNovember 19±24, 1999. Barbados Tourist Board, Bar- To become a specialist in the field Est. ValueÐ$800.00. Expended bados. of travel/tourism for Barbados for airfare, hotel and meals. as related to Mr. Epstein's own- ership of a travel agency.
United States House of Representatives
Hilliard, EarlÐMember of Con- RecdÐApril 2, 1999. Est. ValueÐ Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan ..... Authorized by 5 U.S.C. gress. $not submitted. Air transpor- 7342(c)(1)(B)(ii). tation from Amman to Petra, Jordan and back. Burr, RichardÐMember of Con- RecdÐAugust 11±14, 1999. Est. Norway ...... Authorized by 5 U.S.C. gress. ValueÐ$not submitted. Air 7342(c)(1)(B)(ii). transport, rail travel, boat tour, meals and lodging for Member and spouse in Oslo and Ber- gen, Norway. Campbell, TomÐMember of Con- RecdÐNov. 24±25, 1999. Est. Burma ...... Authorized by 5 U.S.C. gress. ValueÐ$not submitted. Air 7342(c)(1)(B)(ii). transportation between Ran- goon, Keng Tung, and Tachileik, Burma. Cardin, BenjaminÐMember of RecdÐMay 28±30, 1999. Est. United Kingdom of Great Britain .. Authorized by 5 U.S.C. Congress. ValueÐ$not submitted. Meals, 7342(c)(1)(B)(ii). lodging and ground transpor- tation for Member and spouse in Belfast, Northern Ireland. Carson, JuliaÐMember of Con- RecdÐMay 28±30, 1999. Est. United Kingdom of Great Britain .. Authorized by 5 U.S.C. gress. ValueÐ$not submitted. Meals, 7342(c)(1)(B)(ii). lodging and ground transpor- tation in Belfast, Northern Ire- land. Gilman, BenjaminÐMember of RecdÐApril 2, 1999. Est. ValueÐ Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan ..... Authorized by 5 U.S.C. Congress. $not submitted. Air transpor- 7342(c)(1)(B)(ii). tation from Amman to Petra, Jordan and back. Van Wicklin, Robert W.ÐRep. RecdÐMay 28±29, 1999. Est. United Kingdom of Great Britain .. Authorized by 5 U.S.C. Houghton. ValueÐ$not submitted. Meals 7342(c)(1)(B)(ii). and ground transportation in Belfast, Northern Ireland. Greenwood, James C.ÐMember RecdÐMay 28±30, 1999. Est. United Kingdom of Great Britain .. Authorized by 5 U.S.C. of Congress. ValueÐ$not submitted. Food, 7342(c)(1)(B)(ii). lodging and ground transpor- tation for Member and spouse in Belfast, Northern Ireland. Hobson, DavidÐMember of Con- RecdÐAugust 11±14, 1999. Est. Norway ...... Authorized by 5 U.S.C. gress. ValueÐ$not submitted. Trans- 7342(c)(1)(B)(ii). portation from Stockholm to Oslo and return, and in-country lodging, meals, and transpor- tation for Member and spouse among Myrdal, Flom, Gudvangen and Bergen, Nor- way. Houghton, Amory Jr.ÐMember of RecdÐMay 28±30, 1999. Est. United Kingdom of Great Britain .. Authorized by 5 U.S.C. Congress. ValueÐ$not submitted. Meals, 7342(c)(1)(B)(ii). lodging and ground transpor- tation for Member and spouse in Belfast, Northern Ireland.
VerDate 20
REPORT OF TRAVEL OR EXPENSES OF TRAVELÐ1999ÐContinued
Name and title Brief description Identity of foreign donor Circumstances
Johnson, Eddie BerniceÐmember RecdÐMay 28±30, 1999. Est. United Kingdom of Great Britain .. Authorized by 5 U.S.C. of Congress. ValueÐ$not submitted. Meals, 7342(c)(1)(B)(ii). lodging and ground transpor- tation for Member and spouse in Belfast, Northern Ireland. Ford, James Dr.ÐHouse Chaplin .. RecdÐApril 2, 1999. Est. ValueÐ Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan ..... Authorized by 5 U.S.C. $not submitted. Air transpor- 7342(c)(1)(B)(ii). tation from Amman to Petra, Jordan and back. Filner, BobÐMember of Congress RecdÐApril 2, 1999. Est. ValueÐ Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan ..... Authorized by 5 U.S.C. $not submitted. Air transpor- 7342(c)(1)(B)(ii). tation from Amman to Petra, Jordan and back. Roberts, KimberlyÐInternational RecdÐApril 2, 1999. Est. ValueÐ Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan ..... Authorized by 5 U.S.C. Relations Comm. $not submitted. Air transpor- 7342(c)(1)(B)(ii). tation from Amman to Petra, Jordan and back. McNulty, Michael R.ÐMember of RecdÐMay 28±30, 1999. Est. United Kingdom of Great Britain .. Authorized by 5 U.S.C. Congress. ValueÐ$not submitted. Meals, 7342(c)(1)(B)(ii). lodging and ground transpor- tation in Belfast, Northern Ire- land. Olson, Susan L.ÐRep. Bereuter ... RecdÐAugust 24±September 2, Republic of Turkey...... Authorized by 5 U.S.C. 1999. Est. ValueÐ$not sub- 7342(c)(1)(B)(ii). mitted. Lodging in Istanbul, Antalyla and Ankara, Turkey. Munson, LesterÐInternational Re- RecdÐApril 2, 1999. Est. ValueÐ Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan ..... Authorized by 5 U.S.C. lations Comm. $not submitted. Air transpor- 7342(c)(1)(B)(ii). tation from Amman to Petra, Jordan and back. Conzelman, James K.ÐRep. RecdÐAugust 11±14, 1999. Est. Norway ...... Authorized by 5 U.S.C. Oxley. ValueÐ$not submitted. Trans- 7342(c)(1)(B)(ii). portation from Stockholm to Oslo and return, and in-country lodging, meals, and transpor- tation for Member and spouse among Myrdal, Flom, Gudvangen and Bergen, Nor- way. Clack, MarkÐInternational Rela- RecdÐApril 2, 1999 Est. ValueÐ Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan ..... Authorized by 5 U.S.C. tions Comm. $not submitted. Air transpor- 7342(c)(1)(B)(ii). tation from Amman to Petra, Jordan and back. Bodlander, DeborahÐInternational RecdÐApril 2, 1999. Est. ValueÐ Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan ..... Authorized by 5 U.S.C. Relations Comm. $not submitted. Air transpor- 7342(c)(1)(B)(ii). tation from Amman to Petra, Jordan and back. Bloomer, Nancy ShubaÐInter- RecdÐApril 2, 1999. Est. ValueÐ ...... Authorized by 5 U.S.C. national Relations Comm. $not submitted. Air transpor- 7342(c)(1)(B)(ii). tation from Amman to Petra, Jordan and back. Wolf, FrankÐMember of Congress RecdÐAugust 29, 1999. Est. World Food Programme (UN) ...... Authorized by 5 U.S.C. ValueÐ$not submitted. Airline 7342(c)(1)(B)(ii). flight from Rome to Pristina and helicopter flight over Pristina, Gjacova and Prizren for Mem- ber and spouse. Sanders, BernardÐMember of RecdÐApril 2, 1999. Est. ValueÐ Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan ..... Authorized by 5 U.S.C. Congress. $not submitted. Air transpor- 7342(c)(1)(B)(ii). tation from Amman to Petra, Jordan and back. Oxley, MichaelÐMember of con- RecdÐAugust 11±14, 1999. Est. Norway ...... Authorized by 5 U.S.C. gress. ValueÐ$not submitted. Trans- 7342(c)(1)(B)(ii). portation from Stockholm to Oslo and return, and in-country lodging, meals and transpor- tation for Member and spouse among Myrdal, Flom, Gudvangen and Bergen, Nor- way.
VerDate 20
REPORT OF TRAVEL OR EXPENSES OF TRAVELÐ1999ÐContinued
Name and title Brief description Identity of foreign donor Circumstances
Flanders, David AlanÐRep. RecdÐAugust 24±26, 1999. Est. Japan ...... Authorized by 5 U.S.C. Thompson. ValueÐ$not submitted. Lunch- 7342(c)(1)(B)(ii). eon and dinner in Japan.
United States Senate
Walsh, SallyÐDirector, Inter- RecdÐAugust 13±15, 1999. Est. Government of Cuba ...... Non-acceptance would cause parliamentary Services. ValueÐ$not submitted. Trans- host government embarrass- portation within Cuba to official ment. meetings via two sedans and one minivan. Dorgan, Byron L.ÐU.S. Senator ... RecdÐAugust 13±15, 1999. Est. Government of Cuba ...... Non-acceptance would cause ValueÐ$not submitted. Official host government embarrass- meetings via two sedans and ment. one minivan. Daschle, TomÐU.S. Senator ...... RecdÐAugust 13±15, 1999. Est. Government of Cuba ...... Non-acceptance would cause ValueÐ$not submitted. Official host government embarrass- meetings via two sedans and ment. one minivan. Bob, DanielÐSpecial Assistant to RecdÐJanuary 11±15, 1999. Est. Government of Peru ...... Non-acceptance would cause Senator Roth. ValueÐ$not submitted. Meals host government embarrass- and transportation within Peru. ment. Daschle, LindaÐSpouse of Sen- RecdÐAugust 13±15, 1999. Est. Government of Cuba ...... Non-acceptance would cause ator. ValueÐ$not submitted. Official host government embarrass- meetings via two sedans and ment. one minivan. Dorgan, KimÐSpouse of Senator RecdÐAugust 13±15, 1999. Est. Government of Cuba ...... Non-acceptance would cause ValueÐ$not submitted. Official host government embarrass- meetings via two sedans and ment. one minivan. Roberts, PatÐU.S. Senator ...... RecdÐAugust 12±14, 1999. Est. Government of Norway ...... Official travel to participate in offi- ValueÐ$not submitted. Trans- cial meetings. portation, lodging and meals within Norway during an official visit. Roberts, FrankieÐSpouse of Sen- RecdÐAugust 12±14, 1999. Est. Government of Norway ...... Official travel to participate in offi- ator. ValueÐ$not submitted. Trans- cial meetings. portation, lodging and meals within Norway during an official visit. Twining, Daniel C.ÐLegislative RecdÐApril 7±8, 1999. Est. Government of Belgium ...... No commercial travel available. Correspondent to Senator ValueÐ$not submitted. Round- McCain. trip transportation between Brussels, Belgium and Tirana, Albania aboard Belgian military aircraft to attend official meet- ings. Twining, Daniel C.ÐLegislative RecdÐMay 12, 1999. Est. Government of Belgium ...... No commercial travel available. Correspondent to Senator ValueÐ$not submitted. Trans- McCain. portation from Brussels, Bel- gium to Skopje, Macedonia aboard Belgian military aircraft to attend official meetings. Waldren, HowardÐLegislative As- RecdÐAugust 13±15, 1999. Est. Government of Cuba ...... Non-acceptance would cause sistant to Senator Dorgan. ValueÐ$not submitted. Trans- host government embarrass- portation within Cuba to official ment. meetings via two sedans and one minivan. Van Dum, BradleyÐLegislative As- RecdÐAugust 13±15, 1999. Est. Government of Cuba ...... Non-acceptance would cause sistant for Defense for Senator ValueÐ$not submitted. Trans- host government embarrass- Daschle. portation within Cuba to official ment. meetings via two sedans and one minivan.
[FR Doc. 00–6858 Filed 3–23–00; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4710±20±M
VerDate 20
Part III
Department of Justice Antitrust Division
United States v. Cargill, Incorporated; Public Comment and Plaintiff’s Response; Notice
VerDate 20
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE 1. Monopoly Analysis will continue to operate as independent 2. Monopsony Analysis businesses after Cargill’s acquisition of Antitrust Division C. Overview Of The Department’s Analysis its grain trading business. Of Competitive Issues In This [Civil No. 98±CV±1875 (GK)] Transaction C. The Complaint 1. Background On July 8, 1999, the United States United States v. Cargill, Incorporated; 2. Analysis Of Cargill As A Seller Of Public Comment and Plaintiff's Standard-Grade Grain Products Department of Justice (the Department) Response 3. Analysis Of Cargill As A Seller Of filed a Complaint with this Court Specialty Products alleging that Cargill’s acquisition of Pursuant to the Antitrust Procedures 4. Analysis Of Cargill As A Buyer Of Grain Continental’s Commodity Marketing and Penalties Act, 15 U.S.C. 16(b)–(h), 5. Analysis Of Cargill As An Operator Of Group would substantially lessen the United States of America hereby River Elevators Designated By CBOT For competition for grain purchasing publishes below the comments received Settlement Of Futures Contracts services in nine relevant markets, in on the proposed Final Judgment in 6. Summary Of The Department’s violation of Section 7 of the Clayton Act United States v. Cargill, Incorporated Competitive Analysis (15 U.S.C. 18). In those markets, Cargill V. The Department’s Responses To Specific and Continental Grain Company, Civil Comments would have gained the power to No. 98–CV–1875 (GK), filed in the A. Remedy artificially depress the prices paid to United States District Court for the B. Market Definition U.S. farmers and other suppliers for District of Columbia, together with the C. Cargill’s Power Over Price their grain and oilseed crops—including Untied States’ response to the D. Futures Markets corn, soybeans, and wheat (collectively comments. E. Specialty Markets referred to as ‘‘grain’’). Copies of the comments and response F. Nebraska Grain Markets The Complaint also alleged that the are available for inspection in Room 215 G. Concentration In Other Agriculture transaction would have resulted in of the U.S. Department of Justice, Markets Cargill and one other grain company H. Ban On All Agribusiness Mergers Antitrust Division, 325 Seventh Street, I. Vertical Integration controlling approximately eighty NW, Washington, DC 20530 (telephone: J. Non-Economic Concerns percent of capacity at the Chicago and 202/514–2481) and at the office of the K. Administration And Legislative Actions Illinois River elevators that are Clerk of the United States District Court L. The OCM Comments authorized by Chicago Board of Trade for the District of Columbia, 333 M. A Hearing Is Unnecessary In This Case (CBOT) to accept delivery for the Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington, N. The 60-Day Comment Period Should settlement of corn and soybeans futures DC 20001. Copies of these materials may Not Be Extended contracts.1 That concentration would be obtained upon request and payment Conclusion have increased the risk of manipulation of a copying fee. United States Response to Public of futures prices. Comments Finally, the Complaint alleged that a Constance K. Robinson, non-compete provision of the Cargill/ Director of Operations, Antitrust Division. Pursuant to the Antitrust Procedures Continental agreement was a division of and Penalties Act, 15 U.S.C. 16(b) markets in violation of Section 1 of the UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR (‘‘AAPA’’), plaintiff, the UNITED THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA Sherman Act, 15 U.S.C. 1. Because the STATES OF AMERICA, acting under Cargill/Continental acquisition In the matter of: United States of America, the direction of the Attorney General, agreement prohibited Continental from Plaintiff, v. Cargill, Incorporated, and hereby files comments received from re-entering the grain distribution Continental Grain Company, Defendants, members of the public concerning the Civil Action No. 99–1875 (GK). business for five years, the Complaint proposed Final Judgment in this civil charged that it gave Cargill more time UNITED STATES RESPONSE TO PUBLIC antitrust suit and the Response of the than would be reasonably necessary to COMMENTS United States to those comments. gain the loyalty of former Continental Communications with respect to this I. Factual Background suppliers and customers, and therefore, document should be addressed to: Roger W. the agreement constituted an unlawful Fones, Chief; Donna N. Kooperstein, A. The Parties to the Transaction division of markets. Assistant Chief; Robert L. McGeorge, Michael P. Harmonis, Attorneys; Transportation, Cargill, Incorporated (‘‘Cargill’’) and D. The Proposed Settlement Energy & Agriculture Section, Antitrust Continental Grain Company Division, U.S. Department of Justice, 325 (‘‘Continental’’) are grain traders. They The Department, Cargill, and Seventh Street, NW, Washington, DC 20530, employ grain distribution networks— Continental filed a joint stipulation for (202) 307–6361. primarily composed of country entry of a proposed Final Judgment February 11, 2000. elevators, rail terminals, river elevators, settling this action on July 8, 1999. In Table of Contents and port elevators—to buy grain from each of the nine markets where the farmers and other suppliers, store it, and Department has determined that the I. Factual Background consolidation of competing Cargill and A. The Parties To The Transaction move it to their domestic and foreign B. The Proposed Acquisition customers. In addition, both firms are Continental grain elevators would give C. The Complaint engaged in related businesses such as grain companies the power to artificially D. The Proposed Settlement grain processing and cattle feeding. depress the price of grain that they pay E. Compliance With Antitrust Procedures farmers and other suppliers, the Final And Penalties Act B. The Proposed Acquisition Judgment requires the divesture of II. Legal Standard Governing The Court’s On October 9, 1998, Cargill entered either the Cargill grain elevator or the Public Interest Determination into an agreement with Continental to Continental grain elevator serving that III. Summary Of Public Comments IV. The Department’s Analysis Of The acquire its gain trading business (conducted by Continental’s Commodity 1 For corn futures contracts, CBOT-authorized Transaction delivery points are located in Chicago and on the A. The Relevant Merger Law Marketing Group). Cargill is not Illinois River as far south as Peoria; for soybean B. Framework For The Department’s acquiring Continental’s processing or contracts, these facilities are in Chicago and along Competitive Analysis finance divisions, which Continental the entire length of the Illinois River.
VerDate 20
VerDate 20
VerDate 20
A. The Relevant Merger Law B. Framework for the Department’s given region, that region is defined as Section 7 of the Clayton Act, 15 Competitive Analysis the relevant geographic market. Id. at U.S.C. 18, prohibits mergers and As the case law suggests, the core 1.21. If, on the other hand, the evidence acquisitions whose effect may be issue in competition analysis is whether shows that a sufficient number of substantially to lessen competition ‘‘in the proposed transaction likely would customers would switch to products or any line of commerce * * * in any create or enhance market power or services provided at locations outside section of the country.’’ The purpose of facilitate its exercise. This investigation the region to make such a price increase Section 7 is to prevent acquisitions or focused on both monopoly and unprofitable, those locations are also mergers before they create harm. ‘‘ ‘The monopsony issues (that is, whether included in the geographic market. Id. intent here * * * [is] to cope with Cargill would likely gain market power This process continues until a group of monopolistic tendencies in their through its acquisition of Continental’s locations is identified for which a small incipiency and well before they have grain trading business in its roles as a but significant and nontransitory price attained such effects as would justify a seller or as a buyer of grain). increase would be profitable. Id. Sherman Act proceeding.’ ’’ Brown Shoe Co. v. United States, 370 U.S. 294, 318 1. Monopoly Analysis Once the relevant product and n. 32 (1962) (quoting S. Rep. No. 81– The Horizontal Merger Guidelines, geographic markets are defined, 1775 at 4–5). which outlines the Department’s Department staff must evaluate the The antitrust laws apply to the enforcement policy for horizontal competitive impact of the proposed exercise of market power over sellers acquisitions and mergers subject to acquisition. A merger is likely to be (monopsony power), just as they do to Section 7 of the Clayton Act, define problematic if the merged firms are two the exercise of market power over market power in monopoly situations as of a relatively small number of sellers in buyers (monopoly power).4 See the ability of a seller profitably to the market. Under these circumstances, Mandeville Island Farms v. American maintain prices above competitive the merged firm may gain unilateral Crystal Sugar Co. 334 U.S. 219, 235–44 levels (or to reduce quality or service power to raise prices, or the existence of (1948) (a case arising under Sections 1 below competitive levels) for a only a few other firms in the market and 2 of the Sherman Act). Section 7, in significant period of time. Horizontal may facilitate tacit collusion. particular, applies to monopsony power Merger Guidelines at § 0.1. An gained via acquisitions or mergers. See acquisition can facilitate the exercise of 2. Monopsony Analysis United States v. Rice Growers Ass’n of market power by increasing the As a general proposition, the analysis California, 1986 WL 12562 (E.D. Cal. likelihood of coordinated interaction 1986) (acquisition by one miller of of competitive issues in monopsony among competing firms or by creating a cases is the mirror image of the more another found to lessen competition in market structure in which firms find it purchase of California paddy rice); common analysis of competitive issues profitable to unilaterally raise prices or in monopoly cases.5 For example, United States v. Pennzoil Company, 252 reduce output. See id. at § 2. instead of determining whether the F. Supp. 962, 981–985 (W.D. Pa. 1965), To determine whether the proposed merging firms are two of a small number (merger found to lessen competition in acquisition would create, enhance or purchase of Penn Grade crude oil). facilitate the exercise of market power, of sellers in the relevant product and To predict whether an acquisition Department staff first had to define the geographic market, and whether the may substantially lessen competition or markets within Cargill and Continental merged firm would gain sufficient tend to create a monopoly, the compete. Under the Horizontal Merger market power to raise prices to reviewing court must determine: (a) The Guidelines, a market is defined as a set consumers, monopsony analysis focuses ‘‘line of commerce’’ or product market of products or services within a on whether the merging firms are two of in which to assess the transaction, (b) geographic area such that a hypothetical a small number of buyers in the relevant the ‘‘section of the country’’ or monopolist could profitably impose a product and geographic market, and geographic market in which to assess ‘‘small but significant and whether the merged firm would gain the transaction, and (c) the acquisition’s nontransitory’’ price increase or sufficient market power to depress probable effect on competition in the decrease. Id. at § 1.0. prices paid to its suppliers. Likewise, product and geographic markets. The If the evidence shows that a instead of determining whether the probable effect often can be assessed by hypothetical monopolist of any given buyers could defeat an attempt by a determining the level of concentration product or service profitably could monopolist to increase prices by a small based on the market shares of the parties impose such a price increase, that but significant and non-transitory to the proposed transaction and their product or service is defined as the amount by switching to alternative competitors in the product and relevant product market. Id. at 1.11. If, geographic markets. See United States v. products or alternative suppliers, the on the other hand, the evidence shows issue in a monopsony investigation is Philadelphia National Bank, 374 U.S. that a sufficient number of customers 321, 362–63 (1963). whether the sellers could defeat an would substitute other products or attempt by a monopsonist to depress services to make such a price increase 4 prices by producing other products or As noted in the U.S. Department of Justice/ unprofitable, those products or services Federal Trade Commission’s Horizontal Merger by selling their products to more distant are also included in the product market. Guidelines § 0.1 (issued 1992, revised 1997): ‘‘The buyers. unifying theme of the Guidelines is that mergers Id. This process continues until a group should not be permitted to create or enhance market of products or services is identified for power or to facilitate its exercise. Market power to which a small but significant and 5 As noted in Section 0.1 of the Horizontal a seller is the ability profitably to maintain prices Guidelines: ‘‘The exercise of market power by above competitive levels for a significant period of nontransitory price increase would be buyers (‘power’) has adverse effects comparable to time * * * Market power also encompasses the profitable. Id. those associated with the exercise of market power ability of a single buyer (a ‘monopsonist’), a Similarly, if the evidence shows that coordinating group of buyers, or a single buyer, not by sellers. In order to assess potential monopsony a monopsonist, to depress the price paid for a a hypothetical monopolist of the concerns, the Agency will apply an analytical product to a level that is below the competitive relevant product or service could framework analogous to the framework of these price * * *’’ impose such a price increase in any Guidelines.’’
VerDate 20
C. Overview of the Department’s and fourth aspects of the Cargill and two of a relatively small number of Analysis of Competitive Issues in This Continental grain businesses. sellers of less widely-traded Transaction commodities and that the consolidation 2. Analysis of Cargill as a Seller of of these business might give Cargill 1. Background Standard-Grade Grain Products market power as a seller of these Cargill and Continental are Cargill and Continental compete in a products. Niche grain products include international grain traders, and so the national (or international) market in super commodities (crops with specific Department’s investigation their roles as sellers of standard characteristics, such as high oil content encompassed grain markets throughout agricultural commodities. Although corn), special commodities (crops that the world. In the course of this they are big grain companies in absolute are not widely traded, such as white investigation, conducted by a team of terms, they have relatively small shares corn), and organic crops. approximately twenty lawyers, of the output markets in which they Our investigation determined, paralegals, and economists, the compete. One way to assess however, that there are no niche Department’s staff: reviewed over 400 concentration among grain traders is product market sin which Cargill and boxes of documents furnished by Cargill grain storage capacity.6 By this measure Continental are two of a relatively small and Continental pursuant to our second of concentration, collectively they had number of competitors. Consequently, request discovery procedures; deposed less than eight percent of total U.S. off- we concluded that the transaction will Cargill and Continental executives; farm grain storage capacity—before the not create opportunities for Cargill to reviewed relevant legal and economic divestitures required by the Final gain sufficient market power to raise the literature; consulted with officials of the Judgment.7 prices on any of the niche products that Department of Agriculture, the Food processors, cattle feeders, and it sells. Commodity Futures Trading other buyers of agricultural 4. Analysis of Cargill as a Buyer of Grain Commission, and state attorney general commodities rely upon competition offices; and interviewed over one among a fairly large number of big grain Although Cargill and Continental hundred farmers, farm organization companies with nationwide grain compete for the sale of grain in national officials, agricultural economists, grain distribution networks and nearby and international markets, our company executives, and other regional grain companies to ensure investigation revealed that they compete for the purchase of grain in relatively individuals with knowledge of the competitive prices. Commodity prices small local or regional markets. industry and competitive conditions. tend to be fairly consistent in grain Shipping grain by truck is relatively The Department’s staff found that companies’ output markets throughout costly and time-consuming. Farmers, grain typically moves from farms to the country when adjusted for therefore, tend to truck their grain country elevators, from which it moves transportation costs. With these within limited geographic areas competitive conditions, it was not to river elevators and rail terminals, and surrounding their farms—usually to surprising that the officials from cereal then to domestic purchasers or to port buyers who operate nearby country companies, bakers, and other buyers of elevators for export to the rest of the elevators or to buyers who operate river, wheat, corn, and soybeans whom we world. We found that Cargill and rail or port elevators if their farms are interviewed consistently indicated that Continental often compete with each fairly close to those facilities. Operators they thought the transaction would not other at various stages of their grain of river elevators and rail terminals may give Cargill the power to raise prices for distribution networks as they buy, store, transport grain farther distances to standard commodities. distribute, and sell agricultural buyers who operate port elevators and commodities. Accordingly, the In summary, our investigation domestic processing plants—reflecting investigation encompassed all aspects of determined that the relevant geographic the relatively low cost of transporting their worldwide grain businesses in market for grain companies’ sale of grain bulk commodities long distances by rail order to identify any portions of their is at least as broad as the national or barge as compared with truck respective grain distribution networks market. With a combined Cargill/ transportation. The draw area of one where they compete with each other. Continental share of less than eight grain company’s country, river, rail or In our investigation, we focused on percent of that market, it is highly port elevator overlaps the ‘‘draw area’’ the use of these grain distribution unlikely that this transaction could of a competing elevator if their facilities networks to facilitate four different create or enhance market power for are close enough to each other so that aspects of the grain business: sellers of these commodities to any the costs of shipping grain to the two 1. Selling standard grades of grain appreciable degree. elevators are not significantly different. (Primarily, corn, wheat and soybeans); 3. Analysis of Cargill as a Seller of During the course of our investigation, 2. Selling less widely-traded grain Speciality Products the Department reviewed every local or products (super commodities, special regional market in which Continental commodities, and other niche products); Although we concluded that this competed with Cargill for the purchase 3. Buying grain; and transaction would not give Cargill or of grain before the transaction. 4. Providing elevator services at other grain companies market power as Department staff began this process by delivery facilities that are designated by a seller of standard grade grain identifying every geographic market in the CBOT for the settlement of corn and products, we considered the possibility which Cargill and Continental operate that Cargill and Continental might be soybean futures contracts. facilities with overlapping draw areas.8 As to the first two categories, the We then determined how many grain 6 Market share data is difficult to obtain and not investigation indicated that the entirely reliable in this industry. One limitation of companies other than Cargill and transaction would not create market this measure of concentration is the ‘‘double power in the sale of these products; and counting’’ problem that occurs when a firm handles 8 At this stage of the process, we eliminated only very few of the public comments dealt the same bushel of grain several times—for the Continental elevators that are located so far example, when it buys wheat at a country elevator, away from the nearest Cargill elevator that it is with these aspects of the grain business. transfers it to its rail terminal and subsequently its inconceivable that the Continental elevator and Most of the comments concerned the flour mill, and sells it to a baker. nearest Cargill elevator might be drawing an Department’s conclusions on the third 7 See section V(B) of this Response. appreciable amount of grain from the same farmers.
VerDate 20
Continental operated grain elevators in created or enhanced the ability of grain each of those markets and conducted Continental Facilities Acquirer companies to exercise monopsony detailed and specific analyses of all of Lockport, IL river el- Louis Dreyfus Cor- powers in those geographic markets. the approximately three dozen local or evator. poration. Cargill’s acquisition of Continental’s regional markets that are served by less Caruthersville, MO Louis Dreyfus Cor- CBOT-authorized delivery points would than twelve grain company elevators. river elevator. poration. have resulted in undue concentration of Salina, KN rail eleva- Declined to renew The analysis for each of these tor. its lease. these facilities and increased geographic markets included interviews Troy, OH rail eleva- Mennel Milling opportunities for manipulations of of farmers, officials of farm tor. Company CBOT futures markets. And, the non- organizations, independent elevator Beaumont, TX port Louis Dreyfus Cor- compete provision of the Cargill/ operators, and other people with elevator. poration. Continental agreement would have knowledge of these local and regional Stockton, CA port el- Penny Newman harmed competition by unduly markets, determinations of local or evator. Grain Co. restricting Continental’s right to re-enter regional grain transportation costs, and Birds Point, MO Terminated minority 9 the grain trading business in the future. other relevant information about river elevator . interest. Cargill Facilities Acquirer The Department has concluded that competitive conditions in these markets. East Dubuque, IL Consolidated Grain the restructuring of the transaction as We concluded that sufficient numbers river elevator. & Barge. required by the proposed Final of competitive grain buyers would Morris, IL river ele- Louis Dreyfus Cor- Judgment resolves these competitive remain after the consolidation of the vator. poration. concerns. The divestitures required by Cargill and Continental elevators in Seattle, WA port ele- Louis Dreyfus Cor- the Final Judgment should preserve the vator. poration. most of those local or regional markets competitive conditions that existed 9 The proposed Final judgment does not to make it highly unlikely that grain before the acquisition and ensure that companies could gain the power to require a divestiture of the Birds Points fa- cility since Continental terminated its mi- farmers in the affected markets will depress the prices they pay for grain. nority interest in that facility before the exe- continue to have effective alternatives to In nine local or regional markets, cution of that settlement agreement. Cargill when selling their crops. The however, farmers located within the 5. Analysis of Cargill as an Operator of entry of new operators of CBOT- overlapping Cargill/Continental draw authorized delivery stations should areas depend on competition among River Elevators Designated by CBOT for Settlement of Futures Contracts prevent manipulation of CBOT corn and Cargill, Continental, and only a few soybean futures markets. And, the other grain companies to obtain a Our investigation indicated that the requirement that the non-compete competitive price for their grain. acquisition would give Cargill and one provision of the Cargill/Continental Cargill’s acquisition of Continental’s other firm approximately 80% of the agreement remain in force for no more elevators in these markets, therefore, authorized delivery capacity for than three years should ensure that could create sufficient market power to settlement of CBOT corn and soybeans Cargill does not preclude continental’s enable the few grain companies futures contracts. In the light of these re-entry into the grain distribution competing in those markets to depress market shares and other market business for longer than is required to grain prices. information, we determined that give Cargill a fair opportunity to gain Sections VI and VII of the Complaint Cargill’s acquisition of Continental the loyalty of former Continental refer to these overlapping Cargill/ would make it easier for Cargill suppliers and customers. Continental draw areas as ‘‘captive draw unilaterally, or in coordination with the areas.’’ This term identifies highly few remaining firms in the corn and V. The Department’s Responses to concentrated markets in which Cargill soybean futures markets, to manipulate Specific Comments and Continental are two of a relatively corn and soybean futures contracts in small number of grain buyers and in violation of section 7 of the Clayton Act. We now turn to the comments that which the transaction is likely to create The divestitures of Continental’s raise questions about our analysis or or enhance monopsony market power Lockport river elevator and Cargill’s that suggest relief different or for: operators of port elevators in the Morris river elevator are needed to supplemental to that contained in the Pacific Northwest port range; operators prevent the loss of competitors that proposed Final Judgment. Copies of this of port elevators in the central California otherwise would have occurred as a Response without appendix are being port range; operators of port elevators in result of consolidation among operators mailed to all who filed comments. the Texas Gulf port range; operators of of delivery facilities authorized for the A. Remedy river elevators along the Illinois and settlement of CBOT corn and soybean Mississippi rivers; and operators of rail futures contracts. Further divestitures Several commentators questioned terminals in the vicinities of Salina, required by the Final Judgment to whether the acquirers of the divested Kansas and Troy, Ohio. remedy these concerns include facilities would be competitive.10 The In order to prevent the loss of Continental’s Chicago port elevator and proposed Final Judgment sets forth competition for the purchase of grain one-third of the capacity of Cargill’s procedures designed to ensure that the that would result from Continental’s river elevator at Havana, Illinois. firms that acquire the divested facilities exit from these markets, the Department will vigorously compete to buy grain insisted that Cargill divest either its 6. Summary of the Department’s from farmers in their geographic elevator or Continental’s elevator in the Competitive Analysis markets. markets to a new entrant who would In summary, the Department found Pursuant to the proposed Final operate the facility as a grain elevator that Cargill’s acquisition of Judgment, Cargill and Continental and compete for the purchase of grain Continental’s Commodity Grain provided widespread notice of the from farmers in the facility’s draw area. Marketing Group, as originally availability of the facilities that they Cargill and Continental have divested, structured, would violate the antitrust were required to divest in newspapers or are in the process of divesting, the laws. Cargill’s acquisition of grain following facilities: elevators in nine local or regional 10 Minnesota Attorney General Mike Hatch, South markets in which there are relatively Dakota Attorney General Mark Barnett, National small numbers of elevators operated by Farmers Union, and Western Organization of other grain companies would have Resource Councils.
VerDate 20
VerDate 20
VerDate 20
VerDate 20
‘‘non-economic concerns.’’ While she Therefore, Attorney General Madrid can actually injure competition, and the does not say so directly, Attorney be sure that whenever the opportunities Department is not aware of any General Heitkamp may be suggesting present themselves—in legislation, plausible theories. that the antitrust laws be used to administrative proceedings or 2. DOJ Failed To Consider the preserve family farms. elsewhere—the Department will Our prosecution of this matter Continuing Potential for continue to promote competition in Anticompetitive Behavior in the Post- protects the interests of all farmers, large agriculture markets. and small. The proposed Final Merger Market Judgment is designed to eliminate the L. The OCM Comments OCM is concerned that the proposed risk that Cargill’s acquisition of OCS’s comments indicate that it is Final Judgment may not preserve Continental will lessen competition dissatisfied with the action taken by the competition in the relevant markets. We anywhere in the United States. Department of Justice. Apparently, OCM address this concern in the CIS at pages Department staff first identified all thinks the complaint and proposed 9–17 and in section V(A) of this markets in which Cargill and Final Judgment are too modest to deal memorandum. Continental are competitors, and then, with Cargill’s dominance, as perceived 3. DOJ Failed To Show That the in every one of these markets, assessed by OCM, in numerous agriculture Divested Remnants of Continental Will the extent to which the acquisition markets throughout the world. OCM’s Be a Competitive Force Absent a Large raises concerns about a loss of comments thus ‘‘reach beyond the Network of Elevators That Buy Grain competition that would cause complaint, to evaluate claims that the competitive problems. Ultimately, we government did not make and to inquire OCM questions whether the divested identified nine relevant markets in as to why they were not made.’’ See grain elevators will be operated by which farmers were likely to be United States v. Microsoft Corp., 56 F.3d effective competitors if the acquirers do adversely affected by the creation of at 1459. By doing so, OCM invites the not operate a large-scale network of monopsony market power that would court improperly to intrude on the facilities. This comment also goes to the enable Cargill and other grain government’s prosecutorial role. See id. issue of relief, which we address in companies to depress grain prices. On the merits, many of OCM’s section V(A) of this memorandum. Through divestitures, the proposed comments in opposition to the In addition to the points discussed in Final Judgment resolves those concerns. Department’s analysis are answered by that section, we note that operators of In addition, the Final Judgment protects the CIS itself, the rationale of which river elevators and rail terminals who against the exercise of market power to OCM has not addressed. Rather than do not have extensive distribution manipulate corn and soybean futures repeat the CIS here, we briefly deal with networks in their facilities’ draw areas prices and limits a non-compete clause OCM’s principal objections with do not have to buy their grain from that otherwise would have prevented appropriate references to relevant Cargill or other national grain Continental from re-entering the grain explanations in the CIS or elsewhere in companies—they can buy from farmers distribution business. this Response.25 and local or regional operators of As far as our investigation was able to country elevators in those markets. determine, there are no other potential 1. DOJ Failed To Consider the Wider Likewise, operators of port elevators adverse competitive effects likely to Concentration in Agricultural Markets who do not have extensive inland arise from the acquisition. The proposed Beyond Grain Buying distribution networks can buy grain Final Judgment therefore protects sellers In addition to its grain trading from independent operators of river of grain throughout the United States operations, Cargill has significant elevators and grain terminals in their from the price depressing effects that presence in beef packing, cattle feedlots, facilities’ draw areas. On the basis of otherwise could have been caused by pork packing, broiler and turkey these facts and other information that the acquisition. This outcome is production, animal feed plants, flour we learned about the acquirers and beneficial to farmers of every size, and corn milling, soybean crushing, and competitive conditions in the markets including small family farmers. ethanol production. OCM believes that where the divested facilities are located, we concluded that all of the acquirers of K. Administrative and Legislative Cargill transfers resources between these the divested facilities are likely to be Actions markets according to prevailing economic conditions.26 In OCM’s view, viable and effective competitors as a New Mexico Attorney General Madrid these transfers are bound to increase result of the elevators that they are has no opposition to the proposed Final after the transaction and, in some acquiring. Judgment. Rather, her comment urges manner, enhance Cargill’s power 4. DOJ Failed To Consider the Impact on the Department to advocate regardless of its economic performance. administrative and legislative actions Potential Entry Into Grain Buying The appropriate question for antitrust Markets that will invigorate competition in purposes, however, is whether, by agriculture markets. transferring its own assets across OCM suggests that Continental should The Antitrust Division of the industry lines as it sees fit in response be held together because it is one of the Department of Justice testifies before to changing economic conditions, few firms that has the potential to Congress on antitrust matters and Cargill’s ability artificially to depress challenge Cargill in markets that Cargill prepares written reports stating the prices will increase. OCM does not now dominates, citing United States v. views of the Department on pending or explain how such transfers could Penn-Olin Chemical Co., 378 U.S. 158 proposed legislation pertaining to (1964), for that proposition. The antitrust. Division attorneys also 25 In a separate filing, Nebraska Attorney General teachings of Penn-Olin do not apply to participate in administrative Don Stenburg shares OCM’s concerns as they are set the facts in this case. proceedings that require consideration out in points 4, 5, 6, 8, and 9 of this section. In Penn-Olin, the Supreme Court of the antitrust laws or competition 26 OCM refers to these transfers of resources considered the legality of a joint venture between markets as ‘‘cross-subsidization,’’ and policies. In these situations, the claims that they make diversified firms ‘‘even more between two chemical companies to Division often is the government’s capable of * * * anti-competitive behavior.‘‘ OCM build a sodium chlorate plant. Although principal advocate of competition. at 2–3. the joint venture would have added a
VerDate 20
VerDate 20
APPA. See OCM comment at 13. For for the purpose of eliciting additional facts consider in negotiating and consenting that reason, OCM is concerned that the should it do so.29 to the proposed Final Judgment. Nor do interests of midwestern farmers may not The expeditious procedures to they explain why more time would be be fully considered in this federal determine the public interest that desirable to assist the Court in making circuit. Congress envisioned are not possible the public interest determination that is There is no reason to believe that the without reliance upon the Department’s required by the APPA. Under the District Court for the District of good faith execution of its prosecutorial circumstances, an extension of the 60- Columbia cannot make the public discretion. Evidentiary hearings, day public comment period is interest determination that is required therefore, should be used only in unnecessary and inappropriate in this by law in this case. extreme cases. See United States v G. action. Heileman Brewing Co., 563 F. Supp. M. A Hearing Is Unnecessary in This Conclusion Case 642, 652 (D. Del. 1983) (‘‘This preference for the comment procedure The Competitive Impact Statement Nebraska Attorney General Stenberg over more burdensome forms of third- and this Response to comments urges the Court to appoint a special party participation * * * is clearly demonstrate that the proposed Final master ‘‘to hear evidence and to make a shown by the legislative history of the Judgment serves the public interest. recommendation to the court as to the APPA.’’). Accordingly, after publication of this efficacy’’ of the proposed Final In the instant case, an evidentiary Response in the Federal Register Judgment prior to its entry. See Brief of hearing would be inordinately time pursuant to 15 U.S.C. 16(b), the United the Attorney General of Nebraska as consuming and would not in any way States will move this Court to enter the Amicus Curiae at 13–14. The APPA further the Court’s understanding of Final Judgment. provides that the Court must make a facts relevant to the determination it Dated this 11th day February, 2000. determination that entry of the proposed must make. There has been no claim of Respectfully submitted, consent judgment is in the public bad faith or malfeasance on the part of Robert L. McGeorge, interest before entering that judgment. the United States in settling this case. D.C. Bar No. 91900. The statute provides that in making See AMPI, 394 F. Supp. at 41, and cases such a public interest determination, the cited. Nor has Attorney General Michael P. Harmonis, Court ‘‘may’’, inter alia, appoint a Stenberg explained why he has not been U.S. Department of Justice, Antitrust Division, special master, conduct proceedings able to fully apprise the Court of his 325 7th Street, NW, Suite 500, Washington, involving the taking of testimony and concerns in the comments he has D.C. 20530, (202) 307–6361. documentary evidence, and ‘‘take such already filed with respect to the other action in the public interest as the proposed Final Judgment. See Heileman Certificate of Service court may deem appropriate.’’ 15 U.S.C. Brewing Co., 563 F. Supp. at 653. I hereby certify that I am an attorney 16(f)(5). The statute does not require the The Court need only consider the for the United States in this action, and Court to hold hearings, but directs the proposed Final Judgment as explained have caused true and correct copies of court to take such action as it deems by the CIS, the comments thereon, and the foregoing UNITED STATES appropriate. this Response thereto. Such RESPONSE TO PUBLIC COMMENTS to As noted in section II of this consideration will amply demonstrate be served by first-class mail or by more memorandum, Congress, in passing the that the proposed Final Judgment expeditious means on counsel for the APPA, intended that consent decrees satisfies the public interest standard of defendants, Marc G. Schildkraut, Esq., remain a viable antitrust enforcement the APPA as interpreted by the courts. Howrey & Simon, 1299 Pennsylvania option. They could not remain viable if N. The 60-Day Comment Period Should Ave., NW, Washington DC, Paul T. it were necessary for a reviewing court Not Be Extended Dennis, Esq., Swidler Berlin Shereff to conduct a trial for a de novo Friedman, LLP, 3000 K Street, NW, determination of factual issues relevant Several commentators request that the Suite 300 Washington, DC and Jack to the adequacy of a proposed decree. time period for filing public comments Quinn, Esq., Arnold & Porter, 555 12th The legislative history is clear that the be extended.30 There is no need for such Street, NW, Washington, DC, on this court need not conduct the equivalent of extension. 11th day of February, 2000. a trial on the merits, or even conduct a The 60-day public comment period specified in 15 U.S.C. 16(b) commenced hearing or take evidence, S.Rep. No. Michael P. Harmonis. 298–93 at 6 (1973): on August 12, 1999 and terminated on October 12, 1999; but we have United States Response to Public The Committee recognizes that the court considered and responded to every Comments—Appendix must have broad discretion to accommodate comment that we received before or a balancing of interests. On the one hand, the Communications with respect to this after the deadline. Those who request court must obtain the necessary information document should be addressed to: to make its determination that the proposed more time for the filing of comments do consent decree is in the public interest. On not suggest the existence of relevant Roger W. Fones, Chief, Donna N. the other hand, it must preserve the consent facts that the Department has failed to Kooperstein, Assistant Chief; Robert L. decree as a viable settlement option. It is not McGeorge, Michael P. Harmonis, Attorneys; Transportation, Energy & the intent of the Committee to compel a 29 This passage is quoted in United States v. Agriculture Section, Antitrust Division, hearing or trial on the public interest issue. Associated Milk Producers, Inc., 394 F. Supp. 29, U.S. Department of Justice, 325 Seventh It is anticipated that the trial judge will 45 (W.D. Mo. 1975), aff’d, 534 F.2d 113 (8th Cir. Street, NW, Washington, DC 20530, (202) adduce the necessary information through 1976), cert. denied sub non. National Farmers Org., 307–6361. the least complicated and least time- Inc. v. United States, 429 U.S. 940 (1976) (hereafter ‘‘AMPI’’). consuming means possible. Where the public 30 Public Comments interest can be meaningfully evaluated Animal Welfare Institute, NFO Kansas, OCM, Insabelle Barth, Mary Casserand, Steve Dewell, The comments from members of the simply on the basis of briefs and oral Grant and Mabel Dobbs, Barbara Hook, Jay Godley, arguments, this is the approach that should Todd Lewis, Glenn Oshiro, N. Ramsey, Ellen public that follow in this Appendix be utilized. Only where it is imperative that Stebbins, Giles Stockton, Dr. Frankie M. Summers, were filed during the sixty-day period the court should resort to calling witnesses Dennis and Janice Urie. specified in 15 U.S.C. 16(b),
VerDate 20
VerDate 20
Jefferson City, MO, September 16, 1999. and Barge (C.G.B.), another competitor in the worldwide business. The proposed merger Mr. Roger W. Fones, Esq., market, would also be far from optimal. needs to be viewed not simply on a region Chief, Transportation, Energy and Before Cargill and Continental announced by region basis, but upon overall national Agriculture Section, Antitrust Division, this global transaction, farmers in southeast grain marketing implications. United States Department of Justice, 325 Missouri had four competing buyers to sell The fundamental evils of excessive Seventh Street, NW, Suite 500, their product to. We urge the Department of economic concentration are well known and Washington, DC 20530. Justice to exercise its discretion, when have been well known for more than 100 approving proffered buyers, to make sure years. In a highly concentrated industry, it is Re: Comments on Proposed Consent Decree they have four separate and distinct buyers easy to keep track of the prices a handful of and Divestiture Settlement, Cargill, Inc.’s after this divestiture, as well. competitors are paying to acquire grain and Acquisition of Continental Grain While my analysis has focused exclusively to sell it. It is in the interest of the handful Company. on the Missouri facilities, I also have of competitors to uniformly offer low prices Dear Mr. Fones: As Missouri Attorney concerns about the impact of this merger on to buy and high prices to sell to consumers. General, I wrote directly to Joel Klein, the market generally. I share the concern of This is true whether or not there is an Assistant Attorney General in charge of the many Missouri farmers that the current anti- explicit contract or conspiracy in restraint of Antitrust Division, in mid-May, 1999, trust laws and resources may not adequately trade. Moreover, it is easier and more regarding the above-referenced acquisition. I protect them from attempts to manipulate the tempting to form contracts or conspiracies to had also instructed my assistant, Trey Hanna, market place. I urge the Justice Department restraint of trade in a highly concentrated to assist your office in assessing the to scrutinize this acquisition closely in light industry. anticompetitive impact this merger would of the growing consolidation in agriculture. In a May 7, 1999 letter concerning the have on grain farmers in southeast Missouri. Thank you for giving these comments due Cargill/Continental merger to the U.S. As expressed on earlier occasions, I am consideration. If we can answer any Department of Justice, Minnesota Attorney concerned about this acquisition. questions or provide other assistance, don’t General Mike Hatch noted some basic market I was quite glad to see that the Department hesitate to contact us through my assistant, share information that is of great importance. of Justice secured (1) Cargill’s agreement that Trey Hanna, at (816) 889–5000. He pointed out that Cargill and Continental are the two largest grain exporters in the it would not seek to acquire any ownership Sincerely, United States. Cargill is the nation’s largest interest in the river elevator at Birds’ Point, Jeremiah W. (Jay) Nixon. Missouri, which Continental had previously grain exporter and Continental is the second held, and (2) Continental’s agreement to first Don Stenberg, Attorney General, largest. General Hatch goes on the explain divest its river terminal at Cottonwood Point, State of Nebraska, that in fiscal year 1998, the market shares for Missouri, (near Caruthersville) before Office of the Attorney General, the four largest national grain exporters conveying most of its other grain assets to Lincoln, Nebraska 68509–8920, September 7, (including Cargill and Continental) range Cargill. Allow me to again express our 1999. from 46.6% for wheat to 64.9% for soybeans thanks. Mr. Roger W. Fones, and 80.9% for corn. Cargill itself estimates But we are still concerned; it remains to be Chief, Transportation, Energy and that it and Continental together control about seen whether the new owner of that Agriculture Section, Antitrust Division, 35% of the U.S. grain exports. Continental and Cargill are both already Cottonwood Point facility will be acceptable. United States Department of Justice, 325 such large enterprises that it is very doubtful We have analyzed competitive conditions Seventh Street, N.W., Suite 500, that this merger will produce any economies in southeast Missouri’s grain business and Washington, DC 20530. of scale that would increase profits. Rather, farmers’ ability to secure a fair price for their Re: United States of America v. Cargill, Inc increased profits will come from the product. We have analyzed the ‘‘Competitive and Continental Grain Company. increased market power to pay producers less Impact Statement’’ (C.I.S.) filed by the Dear Mr. Fones: Pursuant to the Antitrust and charge consumers more by virtue of Department of Justice on July 23, 1999 and Procedures and Penalties Act, I am writing in vastly increased economic power. subsequently published in the Federal my official position as the Attorney General The purpose of the anti-trust statutes is to Register. Pursuant to the Antitrust of the State of Nebraska to object to the preserve the free markets so that our free Procedures and Penalties Act, 15 U.S.C. § 16 proposed final judgment in this case. In my enterprise system can produce the fairest (b)–(h), I now wish to formally comment on opinion, the approval of the consent decree prices for both producers and consumers. the proposed consent decree which, if is not in the public interest and is not The anti-trust statutes should be brought to approved by the court, will become a final consistent with the public policy underlying bear in this case for that very reason. judgment and will set competitive conditions federal antitrust statutes. As General Hatch correctly noted in his in southeast Missouri for many years to The proposed consent decree requires the May 7 letter, these issues are national in come. divestiture of certain grain elevators in scope and adequate resolution cannot come As the Department of Justice explained in specified locations, but otherwise approves from the state or local level. If the U.S. that C.I.S., the core purpose of requiring the merger of two of our nation’s largest grain Department of Justice cannot be persuaded to Continental to first divest the Cottonwood trading companies. vigorously oppose a merger of this Point facility is to ‘‘preserve existing The increasing concentration in magnitude, it is difficult to imagine any competition’’ and ‘‘maintain the level of agricultural marketing and processing will merger in the area of agri-business which competition [in southeast Missouri] that mean lower prices for farmers and higher would be opposed by the Department. existed pre-acquisition.’’ (C.I.S., at p. 9). As prices for consumers. Indeed, it was farmers’ Those of us from agricultural states under- also recited therein, the Department of Justice protests against the formation of large stand the negative impact of excessive has the sole discretion to approve or agricultural marketing and processing trusts economic concentrations in agriculture on disapprove the manner in which the in the late 1800’s that led to the creation of our farmers and ranchers. Persons from non- defendants propose to implement the our antitrust laws. agricultural states should carefully consider divestiture of this facility (C.I.S., at p. 12), We are now seeing the same types of the substantial increases in consumer food and whom they propose to divest it to (C.I.S., concentrations of economic power in the prices that loom on the horizon if further at p. 11). agricultural processing and marketing economic concentration occurs in our Farmers in southeast Missouri hear rumors industries that existed over 100 years ago agricultural sector. that Continental may propose to divest the until they were broken up by the passage and Yours truly, Cottonwood Point facility to Bunge, the enforcement of federal antitrust laws. At a second largest competing purchaser of grain minimum, a line must now be drawn to Don Stenber. in the area (after Cargill). That would reduce prevent further anti-competitive economic In the matter of The United States District the number of competing buyers of grain concentration in agriculture. Court for the District of Columbia; United from four to three, being nearly as bad for The fundamental flaw in the U.S. Justice States of America, Plaintiff, vs. Cargill, competition in southeast Missouri as a sale Department’s analysis that it fails to Incorporated, and Continental Grain to Cargill, which you sued to prevent. recognize that grain handling and grain Company, Defendants; Case No. Likewise, a divestiture to Consolidated Grain merchandising is a nationwide and 1:99CV01875 (GK) Judge; Gladys Kessler.
VerDate 20
Filed October 22, 1999. Memorandum of Points and Authorities special interest in the subject matter of in Support of Motion by the Attorney this suit. Motion by the Attorney General of General of Nebraska To File Brief as II Nebraska To File Brief as Amicus Amicus Curiae Curiae The court should exercise its discretion Don Stenberg, #14023, Comes Now Don Stenberg, the so as to allow the Attorney General of Attorney General of Nebraska. Attorney General of the State of Nebraska to file a brief in this case as Nebraska, and moves this Court for Dale A. Comer, #15365, amicus curiae. leave to file the brief attached hereto as Assistant Attorney General, 2115 State Capitol, Lincoln, NE 68509–8920, Tel: (402) The amicus curiae brief which the Exhibit A as amicus curiae in the above- 471–2682. Attorney General of Nebraska proposes referenced action. The Attorney General to submit to this court contains a of Nebraska has a special interest in the Introduction detailed discussion and analysis of the subject matter of this lawsuit because of This case involves an action under the proposed Final Judgment in this case his duties and responsibilities to enforce Tunney Act, and in particular 15 U.S.C. under the applicable antitrust laws, and the antitrust laws, and because the 16(e), in which the parties seek this therefore, will hopefully provide this merger proposed herein will have a court’s approval of a proposed final court with a helpful analysis of the law. significant impact upon the State of consent judgment involving a corporate More importantly, the Attorney General Nebraska. merger between Cargill, Inc. and of Nebraska has a special interest in the Continental Grain Company. The subject matter of this lawsuit, in two Don Stenberg, #14023, Attorney General of the State of respects. Attorney General of Nebraska. Nebraska has now filed a Motion For First, the Attorney General of Leave To File A Brief As Amicus Curiae Dale A. Comer, #15365, Nebraska is the primary state official in in this proceeding. This Memorandum Assistant Attorney General, 2115 State Nebraska charged with the duty of of Points and Authorities is submitted to Capitol, Lincoln, NE 68509–8920, Tel: (402) enforcing the state’s antitrust laws. See, the court in support of that Motion. 471–2682. e.g., Neb. Rev. Stat. §§ 59–1601 through Certificate of Service Argument 59–1623 (1998) (the Nebraska Consumer I Protection Act which, among other The undersigned hereby certifies that things, authorizes the Attorney General a copy of the foregoing Motion By The The decision as to whether to allow to bring an action seeking to enjoin a Attorney General Of Nebraska To File participation by amicus curiae in this corporate acquisition which would Brief As Amicus Curiae with case is left to the discretion of this court. ‘‘substantially lessen competition or attachments has been served upon the In general, the decision as to whether tend to create a monopoly in any line parties herein by mailing each of those to allow a non-party to participate in a of commerce); Neb. Rev. Stat. §§ 59–801 parties a true and correct copy of the case as amicus curiae is solely within through 59–831) (1998) (authorizing same, via first-class United States Mail, the broad discretion of the court. criminal sanctions for antitrust violations in Nebraska); and Neb. Rev. postage prepaid, addressed to the Ellsworth Associates, Inc. v. United Stat. §§ 84–212 (1994) (authorizing the parties’ counsel of record as follows: States, 917 F.Supp. 841 (D.D.C. 1996). Such discretion also applies within the Attorney General to sue a parens patriae Robert L. McGeorge, Esq. specific context of the Tunney Act. on behalf of citizens of the state to Attorney, U.S. Department of Justice, 325 United States v. Associated Milk recover damages sustained by those Seventh Street, NW, Suite 500, Washington, Producers, 394 F.Supp. 29 (W.D.Mo. citizens as a result of violations of the DC 20530. 1975). The aid of amicus curiae is state or federal antitrust laws). The Marc G. Schildkraut, Esq., appropriate at the trial level where they Nebraska Attorney General also has can provide helpful analysis of the law. specific enforcement authority under Howrey & Simon, 1299 Pennsylvania Avenue, the federal antitrust laws. See, e.g., NW, Washington, DC 20004. Waste Management of Pennsylvania v. City of York, 162 F.R.D. 34 (M.D.Pa. Section 4 of the Clayton Act, 15 U.S.C. Paul T. Denis, Esq., 1995). Amicus curiae are also 15 (1998) (authorizing states to sue for Swidler, Berlin Shereff Friedman, LLP, 3000 appropriate when they have a special proprietary damages inflicted upon K Street, NW, Suite 300, Washington, DC interest in the subject matter of the suit. them); Title III of the Hart-Scott-Rodino 20007–5116. Strasser v. Doorley, 432 F.2d 567 (1st Antitrust Improvements Act of 1976, 15 Jack Quinn, Esq., Cir. 1970). As a result, the decision as U.S.C. 15c (1998) (authorizing state Arnold & Porter, 555 Twelfth Street, NW, to whether to allow participation by attorneys general to sue for damages as Washington, DC 20004. amicus curiae in this case is left to the parens patriae on behalf of natural On this 21st day of October, 1999. discretion of this court, and such persons); Section 16 of the Clayton Act, participation is warranted if the amicus 15 U.S.C. § 26 (1998); California v. Dale A. Comer, participants can provide a helpful American Stores Co., 495 U.S. 271 Assistant Attorney General. analysis of the law or if they have a (1990) (upholding state’s right pursuant
VerDate 20
VerDate 20
VerDate 20
If the presence of ‘‘power buyers’’ in Department of Justice, grain buying in E. The proposed final consent judgment a particular market helps to make a the post-merger markets in the captive fails to take into account the effects of proposed merger more acceptable, it draw areas at issue will still remain removal of Continental as potential necessarily follows that the lack of such heavily concentrated and susceptive to competitor to Cargill. ‘‘power buyers’’ makes a merger less collusive and cooperative activity In United States v. Penn-Olin acceptable, because powerful sellers in among the remaining grain buyers. As a Chemical Co., 378 U.S. 158, 173–4 a given market can use their market result, the proposed final consent (1964), the United States Supreme Court power to exploit small and disorganized judgment will not effectively foreclose stated: buyers. For example, in United States v. the possibility that antitrust violations Tote, Inc., 768 F.Supp. 1064 (D. Del. [t]he existence of an aggressive, well will occur in the future in the captive equipped and well financed corporation 1991), the court rejected the power draw areas. For that reason, it is engaged in the same or related lines of buyer defense because there were a large deficient. commerce waiting anxiously to enter into an number of small buyers in the market at oligopolistic market would be a substantial issue. For that reason, among others, the C. The proposed final consent judgment incentive to competition which cannot be court held the merger in question to be fails to take into account the impact of underestimated. anticompetitive. See also F.T.C. v. global sales or grain buying in the In the present case, Continental Cardinal Health, Inc., 12 F.Supp.2d 34 United States. currently possesses the grain (D.D.C. 1998). distribution network and other The reasoning underlying the power A great deal of the grain purchased by resources to potentially challenge buyer defense should also be applied Continental and Cargill is sold overseas Cargill in the grain buying business. equally in evaluating the competitive where purchases are based upon factors With Continental taken out of that effects of a merger in an oligopsony such as geographic area, historic business as a result of the merger situation. In other words, the preference or long-term contracts. Those proposed herein, Cargill will face much anticompetitive effects of a merger factors often reduce the need for less pressure to pay competitive prices and compete in grain buying markets. involving a small number of possible competition in buying American grain. buyers should be evaluated, in part, by This is particularly true given the However, the proposed final consent measuring the number and power of the difficulty of entry into the market by judgment fails to take those global sellers for those buyers. If the sellers are new firms. numerous, disorganized and small, then market factors into account in determining what is necessary to F. The final consent judgment fails to they will be unable to respond to the take into account other statutes which anticompetitive exercise of market maintain competitive grain buying in the United States. Congress intended should be considered power by small group of powerful in making determinations regarding buyers. That is precisely the situation in D. Under the proposed final consent agricultural markets. the present case where a small group of judgment, there is no assurance that the A primary rule of statutory buyers in the grain buying and portions of Continental’s operations marketing industry are able to exert construction is that when a court which are divested can or will remain anticompetitive power over numerous, interprets multiple statutes dealing with a competitive force in the markets in disorganized and small farmers selling a related object or subject, those statutes grain. That situation will be exacerbated question. are in pari materia and should be construed together. Common Cause v. by the merger proposed under the final The government notes, in its consent judgment in this case, and for Federal Election Commission, 842 F.2d Complaint, that ‘‘[g]rain traders such as 436 (D.C. Cir. 1988); Linquist v. Bowen, that reason, the final judgment is not in Cargill and Continental operate the public interest. 813 F.2d 884 (8th Cir. 1987). Essentially, extensive grain distribution networks, if a number of separate statutes relate to B. The proposed final consent judgment which facilitate the movement of grain the same thing, they are in pari materia, does not take into account the potential from farms to domestic consumers of and all ought to be taken into for continuing anticompetitive behavior these commodities and to foreign consideration in construing any one of in the post-merger market. markets.’’ Government Complaint at 3. them. United States v. Freeman, 44 U.S. In its Complaint, the government Given this need for ‘‘extensive grain 556 (1845). In the area of agricultural argues that very few firms buy grain distribution networks.’’ it is unclear as markets, Congress has passed a number within particular draw areas. to how the remnants of Continental of statutes in addition to the provisions Government Complaint, p.4. The divested as a result of the final consent of the Sherman Act and the Clayton Act government then contends that in those judgment will compete effectively in the which are in pari materia with those ‘‘captive draw areas, [a merged] Cargill markets where they are located, since antitrust statutes because they reflect would be in a position unilaterally, or they may not be part of such a congressional concerns about economic in coordinated interaction with the few distribution network with its concentration and the disproportionate remaining competitors, to depress prices competitive flexibility and access to bargaining power of farmers. All of paid to producers and other suppliers information about grain flows. In those statutes should have been because transportation costs would addition, the acknowledged need for considered in fashioning the proposed preclude them from selling to ‘‘extensive grain distribution networks’’ final consent judgment in this case. purchasers outside the captive draw in these markets will make it highly Because they were not, that final areas in sufficient quantities to prevent unlikely that new firms will enter these consent judgment is deficient. the price decrease.’’ Government First of all, the Department of Justice markets and provide additional Complaint, p.4. To remedy this problem failed to consider the implications of the in the context of the proposed merger, competition. Indeed, the Department of Packers and Stockyards Act of 1921, 7 the government simply proposes Justice concedes in its Complaint that U.S.C. 181 et seq. (the ‘‘PSA’’), in divestitures in a few of the captive draw new entry into the grain buying developing the final consent judgment. areas. However, even with the business is unlikely. Government The PSA was passed after the Sherman, divestitures proposed by the Complaint at 6. Clayton and Federal Trade Commission
VerDate 20
Acts, and was designed to go beyond the witnessed by the divestitures required those parties a true and correct copy of broad language of those statutes. Wilson in the proposed final consent judgment the same, via first-class United States & Co. v. Benson, 286 F.2d 891 (7th Cir. and the other allegations in the Mail, postage prepaid, addressed to the 1961). Among other things, the PSA was Complaint. Yet, the papers prepared by parties’ counsel of record as follows: directed at the lack of competition the government do not set out any between agricultural buyers and the reasons for approving the proposed Robert L. McGeorge, Esq., attendant possible depression of merger after the divestitures such as Attorney, U.S. Department of Justice, 325 producers’ prices. Swift & Co. v. United post-merger efficiencies which will Seventh Street, NW, Suite 500, Washington, States, 393 F. 2d 247 (7th Cir. 1968). In result from the action. Absent any DC 20530. the present case, one of the economic benefits resulting from the Marc G. Schildkraut, Esq., government’s concerns with the merger in this case, it is difficult to Howrey & Simon, 1299 Pennsylvania Avenue, proposed merger is that prices paid to understand how this merger can be in NW, Washington, DC 20004. farmers could be depressed in a post- the public interest in light of the other Paul T. Denis, Esq., merger market. Government Complaint potential anticompetitive problems set Swidler, Berlin Shereff Friedman, LLP, 3000 at 6. The PSA supports the notion that out above. K Street, NW, Suite 300, Washington, DC particular attention should be directed 20007–5116. III to mergers which implicate marketing Jack Quinn, Esq., for farmers. If necessary, this court should appoint Arnold & Porter, 555 Twelfth Street, NW, Another statute with implications for a special master to assist in determining Washington, DC 20004. the merger under consideration which if the proposed final consent judgment On this 21st day of October, 1999. was not considered by the government in this case is in the public interest Dale A. Comer, is the Capper-Volstead Act, 7 U.S.C. For all the various reasons set out Assistant Attorney General. 291–2. That statute specifically above, the Attorney General of Nebraska exempted agricultural cooperatives from Attorney General of New Mexico contends that the proposed final the antitrust laws because Congress consent judgment in this case is not in 6301 Indian School Rd., NE., Suite 400, intended to treat farmer cooperatives the public interest as required by 15 Albuquerque, New Mexico 87110; (505) 841– differently from typical corporations U.S.C. 16(e). However, should this court 8098, FAX: (505) 841–8095 and to give farmers the opportunity to not determine that such a finding is October 12, 1999. build their bargaining power relative to appropriate at the present time, the FACSIMILE NUMBER (202) 307–2784 corporate buyers. Fairdale Farms, Inc. v. Roger W. Fones, Yankee Milk, Inc., 635 F.2d 1037 (2nd Attorney General of Nebraska urges the court to appoint a special master in this Chief, Transportation, Energy & Agriculture Cir. 1980). This was done deliberately to Section, Antitrust Division, United States enable farmers to organize and work case as contemplated by 15 U.S.C. 16(f) Department of Justice, 325 Seventh together so as to obtain and exercise to hear evidence and to make a Street, NW., Suite 500, Washington, DC marketing power. Kinnet Dairies, Inc. v. recommendation to the court as to the 20530. Dairymen, Inc., 512 F.Supp. 608 (M.D. efficacy of the proposed final consent Re: United States v. Cargill, Incorporated and GA. 1981). Any merger which works judgment. The appointment of a special Continental Grain Company, Case against those principles to increase the master in this case is based upon the Number 1:99CV0187 (GK) power of buyers at the expense of complex nature of the agricultural Dear Mr. Fones: I want to take this farmers should therefore be subject to markets at issue and the various statutes opportunity to express my concerns for small special, heightened scrutiny. discussed above which interact upon farmers and ranchers and the serious threats Finally, the proposed final consent the application of the antitrust laws in I believe they face from the ever-increasing judgment fails to consider the this context. rate of consolidation in agricultural implications of the Agricultural Fair industries, of which the pending Cargill- Conclusion Continental Grain Company transaction is Practices Act of 1967, 7 U.S.C. 2301– For the reasons discussed above, the but one example. 2306 (the ‘‘AFPA’’). That Act was Not only is consolidation occurring on a intended to prevent corporations from Attorney General of Nebraska, as amicus curiae, urges the court to reject the horizontal level—that is between direct interfering in the formation of collective competitors—but large, economically marketing organizations involving proposed final consent judgment in this powerful companies are becoming more farmers. The overriding purpose of the case as not in the public interest. vertically integrated. Increasingly, these legislation was the protection of Alternatively, the Attorney General of vertically integrated companies are able to farmers’ rights to organize Nebraska urges the court to appoint a exercise significant power over the food cooperatively. Butz v. Lawson Milk Co., special master in this case who can chain, all the way from production to the packaged product. This can have serious 386 F.Supp. 227 (N.D. OH. 1974). Again, assist the court in analyzing the particular agricultural markets at issue. adverse effects on our economy and the AFPA’s recognition of the potential for important role performed by small farmers abusive practices by agricultural Dated this 21st day of October, 1999. and ranchers throughout our nation. As processors shows congressional concern Don Stenberg, #14023 Minnesota Attorney General Hatch pointed with the potential market power of Attorney General of Nebraska. out in his May 7, 1999 letter concerning this agricultural buyers which should have Dale A. Comer, #15365 matter to United States Assistant Attorney been reflected to a greater degree in the Assistant Attorney General, 2115 State General Klein, and consistent with the final consent judgment which is now Capitol, Lincoln, NE 68509–8920, Tel: (402) comments submitted to you by Attorney before this court. 471–2682. General Don Stenberg of Nebraska dated September 7, 1999, reliable studies indicate G. The final consent judgment fails to Certificate of Service that the gap between rising food retail prices and falling prices to farmers and ranchers has set out any benefits or efficiencies of the The undersigned hereby certifies that proposed merger. been growing for some time. This widening a copy of the foregoing Brief Of The gap is the result, at least in part, of growing The Department of Justice obviously Attorney General Of Nebraska As economic power of vertically integrated has concerns about the anticompetitive Amicus Curiae has been served upon agribusinesses and increasingly concentrated effects of the merger in this case as the parties herein by mailing each of markets and suggests that these markets may
VerDate 20
VerDate 20
VerDate 20
This makes no sense to those of us who unfair prices paid to them, but rural you think would have gone on in the hands agree with the Department’s own finding in communities are experiencing negative of a large corporation? What benefit does its ‘‘Complaint’’. economic impacts as corporate agribusiness increased concentration have on our This purchase, if approved in its present giants continue to consolidate and control American agriculture? form, will further accelerate the vertical more and more of our food system. Many I don’t know just exactly how long these integration of the agricultural sector with dire small towns in the state depend on farming mergers will take to impact our local farmers. consequences for family farm agriculture, income to support their local I do not that when Farmland Industries and rural America and the consumers of our food infrastructures—schools, banks, churches Cenex Harvest States consolidated their supply. and small businesses. The trend toward petroleum operations into Country Energy We urge the Department of Justice to vertical and horizontal integration is L.L.C. that we took an enormous hit on withdraw its ‘‘Final Judgement’’; reaffirm the threatening the economic viability of these product pricing and had to go to the outside. adverse impact of the Cargill purchase upon communities. I hated to do that, but our farmers need the economic and social structure of rural Cargill has utterly failed to addressed the competition in the market place. What America and to stand by its original above-mentioned concerns generated by impact did this joint venture for most ‘‘Complaint’’. excessive vertical and horizontal integration cooperatives that had not sought out other Very truly yours, in the industry. We urge you to reject the supplies? They were forced to pay a higher proposed consent decree. Marilyn Murphy, price for this consolidation. I’m am against Sincerely, these mergers if they do not benefit our Social Concerns Facilitator/Rural Life producers. I just believe that we need to Contact. Suzanne R. McIntosh, Esq., protect our farmers by making sure that Program Director. Clean Water Action Alliance competition continues to be strong. Just thought I would share my opinion with you. Mr. Roger W. Fones, Farmland Co-Op Inc., A Pro Farmers Choice Thank you, Chief, Transportation, Energy & Agriculture P.O. Box 276, Brush, Colorado 80723; Section, Antitrust Division, United States Telephone 1–970–842–5059, Fax 1–970–842– Glenn A. Babcock, Department of Justice, 325 Seventh 5667 General Manager. Street, N.W., Suite 500, Washington, D.C. October 8, 1999. 20530. Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy Re: United States of America v. Cargill, Inc. Roger W. Fones, and Continental Grain Company Chief, Transportation, Energy & Agriculture 2105 First Avenue South, Minneapolis, MN Section, Antitrust Division, United States 55404–2505 Dear Mr. Fones: I am writing on behalf of Department of Justice, 325 Seventh October 7, 1999. our organization to object to the proposed Street, N.W., Suite 500, Washington, DC Mr. Roger W. Fones, final judgment in this case. The approval of 20530. the consent decree is not in the public Chief, Transportation, Energy & Agriculture interest and is not consistent with the public Dear Mr. Fones: It is my belief that the Section, Antitrust Division, United States policy underlying federal antitrust laws. Our merger of Cargill and Continental Grain has Department of Justice, 325 Seventh organization has over 40,000 members state- to be stopped. Our farmers have realized for Street N.W., Suite 500, Washington, D.C. wide. We are concerned with the growing a long time that without market competition, 20530. concentration in agriculture and the resulting they suffer from pricing that is below what Re: United States of America v. Cargill, Inc. economic impact on family farmers and can be achieved through active competition. and Continental Grain Company environmental degradation of our rural This lack of competition threatens the future communities. Antitrust laws have long of our agricultural system. It may be all right Dear Mr. Fones: I am writing to express recognized that concentration in agricultural for the large corporations and regional IATP’s opposition to Cargill’s proposed industries is harmful to farmers. These entities, but I have to look out for my acquisition of Continental Grain Company, protections have not been enforced to individual farmers. I do not think you take an acquisition which would unify the second prevent extensive concentration in the consolidation seriously. When you look a and third largest grain traders in North meatpacking and other agricultural industries consolidation I believe you have to look at all America, which export 40 percent of which are now being controlled by a small their activities including strategic alliances, American agricultural commodities. number of agribusiness giants. and joint ventures. A full-blown combination Competition in agricultural markets is Both the DOJ/FTC and NAAG Guidelines of assets is not telling the whole story. rapidly declining in the face of mergers and raise serious questions and grave concerns Concentration of large companies is one of acquisitions and a plethora of new corporate regarding the economic effect of the proposed the reasons for lower prices even though it relationships including joint ventures, Cargill-Continental merger. The grain may be only one of many. I do not see how strategic alliances or partnerships, industry is already heavily concentrated, you can say that some of these merging interlocking directorates and partial leaving farmers who sell their grain to companies preserve competition. If you truly ownership. In its analysis, the Department of exporters vulnerable and with very limited believe this I would like to be able to explain Justice failed to recognize the wider options. Both Cargill and Continental are that to my farmers. You as a representative concentration in agriculture markets beyond among the top four corn and soybean our political system need to step up to the grain buying to include handling, processing exporters nationwide. Cargill estimates that plate and address this growing concern of and merchandising both domestically and together they will control 35% of U.S. grain rapid consolidation. We need to be more pro globally. exports. This type of extensive control in the active in our communities and in our state The principle result of this concentration market share by Cargill and Continental by even court actions to curtail market would be a significant increase in the extends beyond grain processing to animal concentration. imbalance of power favoring agribusiness at feed and meat-packing. If the economic I represent a local cooperative association the expense of the farmer. This growing power of these mega-firms is not controlled, of approximately 1000 producers. In imbalance would exacerbate the trend toward a few large corporations will control the conversations with the top 165 growers, I can lower prices for farmers and likely result in marketplace and our food supply which is say that they know the results and have been higher prices for consumers. harmful to both farmers and consumers. impacted from no competition to placed While the proposed consent decree The federal antitrust laws are important to competition in the grain market in our requires divestiture of some grain elevators in allow every business entity—no matter how community. In 1997 we had only one local certain locations, it does not, in our opinion, small—the freedom to compete. The rapid entity purchasing grain. In 1998 after a meet the spirit and the letter of federal anti- rate of concentration in the agricultural partnership with us that opened a trust law. We must use our anti-trust laws to sector is threatening the ability of the small competitive elevator, the price offered to our preserve our free market system and ensure farmer to compete effectively in the growners increased $0.5 a bushel and the competition that produces fair prices for both marketplace. Not only are farmers suffering competitor was forced to pay for protein. producers and consumers. because of the lack of access to markets and Without this action, how many dollars do Thank you for your attention in this matter.
VerDate 20
Sincerely, according to the economic conditions that are Re: United States of America v. Cargill, Inc. prevailing at a given time. and Continental Grain Company Niel Ritchie, The ability to transfer assets will allow Dear Mr. Fones: Pursuant to the Antitrust Policy Analyst. Cargill to maintain its dominant status in all Procedures and Penalties Act, I am writing to Dated: November 10, 1999. of these markets irrespective of its object to the proposed final judgment in this Judge Gladys Kessler, competitive prowess, Unlike farmers, who case. The approval of the consent decree is U.S. District Court, for the District of are forced into bankruptcy after a few bad not in the public interest and is not Columbia, 333 Constitution Ave. N.W., seasons, Cargill will maintain its dominant consistent with the public policy underlying Washington, D.C. 20001. status over time regardless of economic federal antitrust statutes. performance over the short-term. With The proposed consent decree requires Re: United States of America v. Cargill, Inc. Continental’s assets. Cargill will become an and Continental Grain Company divestiture of certain grain elevators in even more powerful and ‘‘sophisticated’’ specified locations, but otherwise approves Dear Judge Kessler: Presently before you firm, even more capable of strategic, the merger of the second and third largest awaiting your approval is a ‘‘Final Judgment’’ cooperative, and anti-competitive behavior. grain traders in North America, which export filed by the U.S. Department of Justice As the Kansas Cattlemen’s Association 40 percent of American agricultural relative to the purchase of the grain Chairman I, Michael L. Schultz am acting on commodities. This continued concentration merchandising division of Continental Grain behalf of our members to state that we are of commodity exporters violates the spirit Co. by the Cargill Corp. opposed in the continual mergers and and the letter of the federal antitrust laws. Legal precedent, according to the acquisitions that are becoming common place The increasing concentration in Department of Justice, requires that ‘‘[t]he in our society. These mergers do have agricultural marketing and processing will balancing of competing social and political detrimental effects on our communities by mean continued low prices for farmers and interests affected by a proposed antitrust taking the wealth out of the community and higher prices for consumers. It was this very consent decree must be left, in the first destroying competition and family life, type of concentration, which lead to the instance, to the discretion of the Attorney which is what built this country. creation and passage of the first federal General.—The court’s role in protecting the We have seen the effects of the antitrust laws. public interest is one of insuring that the consolidation in the cattle industry and its The primary flaw in the U.S. Justice government has not breached its duty to the negative effects on our industry and Department’s analysis is that it failed to public in consenting to the decree. The court communities. It is mentally conditioning that recognize the wider concentration in is required to determine not whether a has taken over, along with great amounts of agriculture markets beyond grain buying to particular decree is the one that will best money from the corporations to pressure the include grain handling and merchandizing serve society, but whether the settlement is political and legal systems to allow these both a nationwide and worldwide business. within the reaches of the public interest.’’ mergers to continue. We are not sure where The proposed merger between Cargill and In its July 8, 1999 ‘‘Final Judgment’’ I it will end, possibly when we have 1 Continental fails to explain what benefits believe in fact that the Department of Justice company in the U.S.A., Russia and China will be produced. The economies of scale of has ‘‘breached its duty to the public in then will we have enough consolidation in these two corporations merging will not lead consenting to the decree’’ and that its ‘‘Final our society. to increased profits. Rather, the increased Judgment’’ is not ‘‘within the reaches of the We ask that you enforce the anti-trust laws profits will come on the backs of the farmers public interest.’’ to ensure competition in the market, once receiving a lower price for their grain and Clearly, as the Department of Justice’s own competition is reduced the corporations will consumers paying higher prices for their ‘‘Complaint’’ states the Cargill purchase not pass the savings or profits back to the products, the very consequence antitrust would ‘‘substantially lessen competition for producers or consumers of which they claim. statutes seek to prevent. purchases of corn, soybeans, and wheat in A great example for doing the reverse is the Catholic Social Teaching states a firm each of the relevant geographic markets, breakup of Ma-Bell. It produced more belief in the principle that the economy enabling it unilaterally to depress the prices competition in the telecommunication exists for the people, not the people for the paid to farmers. The proposed transaction industry and now we have competition, great economy; In this merger there is a threat to will also make it more likely that the few phone rates, cellular service, etc. This is what that principle and therefore I urge you to remaining grain trading companies that drives creativity and healthy communities. In reject the proposed consent decree. purchase corn, soybeans, and wheat in these Kansas a population of less than 3300 serves Sincerely, markets will engage in anticompetitive over 80% of the communities. We do need coordination to depress farm prices.’’ your support to end the death of our Thomas (Toby) Pearson, Using the Department of Justice’s own communities, competition will ensure that Director of Social Concerns, Minnesota figures and criteria we see in its ‘‘Complaint’’ small communities survive. Catholic Conference. that even before this announced purchase the In the name of economic and social justice U.S. grain trade was already dominated, if and the preservation of the family farm Missouri Farm Bureau Federation not monopolized, by Cargill and nothing in system of agriculture in the United States I P.O. Box 658, 701 South Country Club Drive, the Department of Justice’s ‘‘Final Judgment’’ urge you to recommend that the Department Jefferson City, MO 65102 / (573) 893–1400 addresses itself to that important issue. of Justice withdraw its ‘‘Final Judgment,’’ Likewise, the Department of Justice must study in far greater detail this ill-advised sale July 13, 1999. consider more that the grain buying and carefully consider the grave anti-trust Mr. Roger Fones, operations of Cargill. The acquisition of issues that it presents and the dire Chief, Transportation, Energy and Continental’s seventy elevators will enhance consequences to both producers and Agriculture Section, Antitrust Division, the economic power of Cargill as a general consumers of our food supply. US Department of Justice, 327 7th Street, NW, Suite 500, Washington, DC 20530. matter. such a result concerns farmers Michael L. Schultz, because Cargill’s assets and economic power Chairman, Kansas Cattlemen’s Association. Dear Mr. Fones: We appreciate the Justice can be deployed across a range of agricultural Department’s scrutiny of the proposed sale of sectors. Minnesota Catholic Conference Continental Grain Company’s Commodity For example, Cargill stands out as a top- Marketing Group to Cargill, Incorporated and four firm in beef packing, cattle feedlots 475 University Avenue W., St. Paul, believe the stipulations included in the (where Continental is the largest), pork Minnesota 55103–1996) Phone (651) 227– consent decree are warranted. The packing, broiler production, turkey 8777, Fax (651) 227–2675 preservation of competition at the local level production, animal feed plants, grain elevator September 23, 1999. is of the utmost importance; agricultural capacity, flour milling, dry corn milling, wet Mr. Roger W. Fones, producers can ill afford consolidation that corn milling, soybean crushing, and ethanol Chief, Transportation, Energy & Agriculture further depresses commodity prices. While production. Such a dominant position across Section, Antitrust Division, 325 Seventh the Justice Department complaint states the many agricultural markets will allow Cargill Street N.W., Suite 500, Washington, D.C. proposed Cargill/Continental sale would to transfer resources between sectors 20530. have adversely affected competition in some
VerDate 20
VerDate 20
Thank You! In addition to failing the public interest According to the Department of Justice, the test, we believe the proposed enforcement court is required to determine, not whether Greg Stephens, mechanisms are not enforceable and are this judgment to allow the Cargill/ Kansas NFO National Director, 842 S. 10th, therefore, insufficient. The stipulation Continental sale best serves society, but Salina, KS 67401. requires a number of divestitures in order to whether it falls within the range of maintain competition. Yet, what happens if acceptability or is ‘‘within the reaches of National Farmers Union another buyer cannot be found. And, if a public interest.’’ 400 Virginia Avenue, S.W., Suite 710, buyer is found, what buyer will be able to The Cargill purchase of Continental Grain Washington, D.C. 20024, Phone (202) 554– effectively compete with the newly enlarged facilities will increase Cargill’s buying power 1600 Cargill? Once Continental Grain has been and price control; it will decrease the swallowed by Cargill, the damage is done. October 7, 1999. markets available to farmers and cause We cannot come back at a later date and have farmers to have to transport grain farther, Mr. Roger W. Fones, any assurance of being able to replace the especially if some terminals are closed to Chief, Transportation, Energy & Agriculture loss of this competitor. increase corporate profits; it will position Section, Antitrust Division, U.S. The proposed stipulation also completely Cargill to dominate specialty or ‘‘niche’’ Department of Justice, 325 Seventh fails to address the roles Cargill and markets because of the acquisition of Street, N.W., Suite 500, Washington, D.C. Continental play as the largest and third continental’s storage facilities (markets that 20530. largest grain exporters. Lack of competition farmers are currently using to try to find Re: United States of America v. Cargill, Inc. in the export market has a direct impact on profitability in already heavily Cargill- and Continental Grain Company U.S. grain producers for two reasons: 1) dominated markets). Dear Mr. Fones: On behalf of the 300,000 exports make up an important part of our I believe that every person has a right to farm and ranch families of the National market and, 2) the domestic market is the gifts of creations, especially to the Farmers Union, I write to express our strong influenced by the world price. While the necessities of life. Respect for the dignity of opposition to the acquisition of Continental complaint alleges the merger will lessen the human person also requires that each Grain company by Cargill, Inc. competition, and estimates that collectively person has the right to free enterprise, the We agree with the allegation in the Cargill and Continental control right to undertake the work that is their complaint that alleges the merger would approximately 40 percent of all U.S. grain calling and the right to fair compensation for substantially lessen competition for grain exports, the stipulation does nothing to that work. This right is compromised when purchasing service to farmers and other address that problem. too much control is concentrated to increase suppliers in many areas in the United States. In addition, the only alternative to the the power and wealth of a few. Food, as well We also agree that the merger would increase proposed final judgment, discussed in the as the facilities for production and concentration in the delivery point for consent decree, is that of going to trial and distribution, should not be concentrated to settlement of Chicago Board of Trade obtaining a court decision similar to the the benefit of a few. contracts. And, we agree that the covenant proposed stipulation. The consent decree Therefore I urge that you not allow the sale not to compete is an unreasonable violation fails to consider the alternative of of Continental to Cargill. Thank you very of trade. disallowing the acquisition. much. The proposed stipulation attempts to While we appreciate that the Justice Sincerely, address these concerns by requiring a Department required a number of number of divestitures. Yet, even these concessions from the merging parties, the Sister Kathleen Grace, divestitures are insufficient to avoid the harm bottom line is that there is just no way to Pastoral Minister. that will inevitably occur to market allow this merger without causing competition if there is a merger between irreversible damage to market competition. O.C.M.—Organization for Competitive Cargill—the second largest grain trader in Therefore, we respectfully request that the Markets North America and the largest grain exporter, proposed consent decree be rejected. 301 South 13th Street, Suite 401, Lincoln, and Continental—until recently the third Sincerely, Nebraska 68508, (402) 434–2938 largest grain trader and the third largest grain October 1, 1999. exporter. Leland Swenson, Bob McGeorge, If the two firms were less dominant, the President. U.S. Department of Justice, Antitrust proposed divestitures may have been Division, 3257th St. NW, Room 506, sufficient to insure post-merger competition Office of Hispanic Ministry, St. Joseph Washington, D.C. 20530. within the grain market. However, when the Catholic Church tops firms are allowed to merge, there is no Dear Bob: This letter seeks confirmation 320 Mulberry, Waterloo, IA 50703, 319–234– that your office has received our objections way to recoup the loss to market 6744 competitiveness. to the Cargill-Continental consent decree. In the countryside, Continental is known September 30, 1999. Please advise. for being an aggressive grain buyer. Elevator Judge Gladys Kessler, Given the great interest in this merger, operators report Continental will usually beat U.S. District Court for the District of OCM has also requested that the Department any other offer by $.02 per bushel, if given Columbia, 333 Constitution Ave. N.W., of Justice seek an extension of the comment the chance. And while $.02 is Washington, D.C. 20001. period, as allowed in the Tunney Act. Since inconsequential, it turns into millions of Dear Judge Kessler: The Department of many groups and individuals will need to be dollars when multiplied by the volume of Justice’s investigation and subsequent formal advised of a potential extension, OCM is grain that farmers and ranchers sold to ‘‘Complaint’’ revealed that the nation’s interested in knowing whether DOJ will seek Continental last year. largest private corporation, Cargill, is such an extension. Cargill’s extensive submission of attempting to overwhelmingly control the Thank you for your help in this matter. information in public documents reveals that U.S. grain trade. Legal documents show that Sincerely, Cargill is already operating in the areas Cargill’s purchase would ‘‘substantially Jon K. Lauck where Continental operates. The clear reason lessen competition for purchases of corn, for this merger is the elimination of soybeans, and wheat in each of the relevant O.C.M.—Organization for Competitive competition. There is nothing about this geographic markets, enabling it unilaterally Markets merger that will increase competition to to depress the prices paid to farmers. The either farmers or ranchers or other members proposed transaction will also make it more 301 South 13th Street, Suite 401, Lincoln, of the general public. Therefore, both the likely that the few remaining grain trading Nebraska 68508, (402) 434–2938 Department of Justice and the Court should companies that purchase corn. soybeans and September 20, 1999. find that the proposed stipulation that allows wheat in these markets will engage in anti- Mr. Roger W. Fones, the merger is not and cannot be in the public competitive coordination to depress farm Chief, Transportation, Energy & Agriculture interest. prices.’’ Section, Antitrust Division, United States
VerDate 20
Department of Justice, 325 Seventh merger given the growing concentration in The DOJ argues in its complaint that Street NW, Suite 500, Washington, DC the banking market.2 It was the growing within particular draw areas very few firms 20530. power of agribusiness firms that triggered buy grain. It argues that if Continental’s Re: United States of America v. Cargill, Inc. concerns among farmers and inspired the operations were absorbed ‘‘Cargill would be and Continental Grain Company passage of the Sherman Act. And it was in a position unilaterally, or in coordinated continuing concentration in agricultural Dear Mr. Fones: I am writing to you to interaction with the few remaining markets, particularly through merger, that explain OCM’s opposition to Cargill’s competitors, to depress prices paid to prompted passage of additional antitrust acquisition of Continental Grain Company, producers and other suppliers because statutes such as the Clayton Act. The an acquisition which would unify the second transportation costs would preclude them importance of the antitrust laws to farmers is from selling to purchasers outside the captive and third largest grain traders in North explained by the difficulties inherent in America, which export 40 percent of draw areas in sufficient quantities to prevent farmers bargaining with large and powerful the price decrease.’’ 4 Divestitures in a few of American agricultural commodities. agribusiness buyers. Legislators and courts Specifically, OCM objects to the analysis these markets as proposed by the DOJ does have fully recognized these concerns in not address this problem. Even with the used by the Department of Justice (‘‘DOJ’’) statutes and in cases, respectively, but the when reviewing the acquisition. DOB’s divestitures, grain buying would remain DOJ’s merger analysis failed to weigh these heavily concentrated and susceptible to analysis: (1) failed to consider the wider considerations. I have explained this collusive and cooperative activity. concentration in agricultural markets beyond background in a law reviews article entitled (3) DOJ failed to show that the divested grain buying; (2) failed to consider the ‘‘Toward an Agrarian Antitrust,’’ 75 North remnants of Continental will be a continuing potential for anticompetitive Dakota Law Review (August/September 1999) competitive force absent a large network of behavior in the post-merger market; (3) failed which I have included for your review. elevators which buy grain: to show that the divested remnants of The DOJ must consider more that the grain Furthermore, it is unclear how the divested Continental will be a competitive force buying operations of Cargill. The acquisition components of Continental will remain an absent a large network of elevators which buy of Continental’s seventy elevators will grain; (4) DOJ failed to consider the impact enhance the economic power of Cargill as a effective competitor with Cargill absent the on potential entry into grain buying markets; general matter. Such a result concerns former entity’s large-scale elevator capacity. (5) failed to consider the nature of the grain farmers because Cargill’s assets and The few facilities that will not be acquired selling market; (6) failed to consider the economic power can be deployed across a by Cargill hardly constitute a legitimate economic disorganization of farmers which range of agricultural sectors. For example, competitive threat. As the DOJ emphasized in can be exploited by powerful buyers; (7) Cargill stands out as a top-four firm in beef its complaint, grain buying involves a large- 5 failed to consider information disparities in packing, cattle feedlots (where Continental is scale network of facilities. The few agricultural markets; (8) failed to explain the the largest and where it plans to invest the remaining Continental facilities, stripped of benefits of the merger; (9) failed to consider one-half billion dollars paid by Cargill for its their internal networks which provide them a range of statutes that Congress intended elevator chain), port packing, broiler with competitive flexibility and information courts to consider when making decisions production, turkey production, animal feed about grain flows, will be powerless in about agricultural markets; (10) and failed to plants, grain elevator capacity, flour milling, comparison with Cargill, with its $51 billion consider that the consent decree risks leaving dry corn milling, wet corn milling, soybean in annual revenues and 81,000 employees in farmers without an effective outlet for legal crushing, and ethanol production. Such a 60 different countries. Continental’s decision redress. By failing to consider the dominant position across many agricultural to sell off its grain buying operation may also aforementioned factors, the DOJ failed to markets will allow Cargill to transfer indicate that it no longer considers grain recognize how the Cargill-Continental merger resources between sectors according to the buying a priority. In short, there is no posed ‘‘a significant threat of injury from an economic conditions that are prevailing at a assurance that the remaining facilities will 1 impending violation of the antitrust laws.’’ given time. This cross-subsidization will even compete in the markets that concerned (1) DOJ failed to consider the wider allow Cargill to maintain its dominant status the DOJ. Given the need for a network of concentration in agricultural markets beyond in all of these markets irrespective of its elevators to compete in the grain buying grain buying. competitive prowess. Unlike farmers, who business, it is also highly unlikely that any In recent years, agricultural processing are forced into bankruptcy after a few bad new firms will enter the market to challenge markets have become highly concentrated. seasons, Cargill will maintain its dominant Cargill. The DOJ openly concedes in its From a top-five concentration ratio of 24 status over time regardless of economic complaint that it is ‘‘unlikely that Cargill’s percent in the early 1980s, for example, the performance over the short-term. With exercise of market power will be prevented beef-packing sector’s five-firm concentration Continental’s assets, Cargill will become an by new entry, by farmers and other suppliers ratio has grown to 85 percent. Similar even more powerful and ‘‘sophisticated’’ transporting their products to more distant statistics apply to several other sectors of the firm, even more capable of strategic, markets, or by any other countervailing agricultural processing economy. I have cooperative, and anti-competitive behavior.3 competitive force.’’ 6 enclosed a copy of a report authorized by Allowing the merger of Cargill and (4) DOJ failed to consider the impact on Professor William Heffernan of the Continental makes further agribusiness potential entry into grain buying markets: University of Missouri that explains the consolidation likely. Allowing such a large- Stripping Continental Grain of its internal extent of the concentration problem. scale merger abets the recently-announced network of elevators poses additional threats The DOJ’s analysis did not consider the merger of Smithfield Foods, the nation’s to competition. Given the difficulty of entry wider context of consolidation in the largest pork packers, with Murphy Farms, the into the grain buying business, as conceded agricultural system and instead focused on nation’s largest pork producer. The by DOJ, it is additionally important to hold the grain buying activities of Cargill and Smithfield-Murphy Farms merger sets the together a firm that could potentially Continental. Growing concentration in stage for another Cargill-Continental merger, challenge Cargill in the many markets in agricultural markets should have been this time involving Cargill’s large-scale pork which it holds a dominant position. As the considered by the DOJ given the continuing packing operation and Continental’s pork Supreme Court has noted, ‘‘[t]he existence of consolidation of agribusiness firms. In United producing operation, further continuing the an aggressive, well equipped and well States v. Philadelphia National Bank, for cycle of agribusiness consolidation. financed corporation engaged in the same or example, in which enforcement officials (2) DOJ failed to consider the continuing stopped the merger of the second- and third- potential for anticompetitive behavior in the 4 Complaint, U.S. v. Cargill, Inc. and Continental largest banks in Philadelphia, the court noted post-merger market: Grain Company, July 8, 1999, at 4 (italic added). the particular importance of stopping the 5 Id. at 3 (noting that ‘‘Grain traders such as 2 United States v. Philadelphia National Bank, Cargill and Continental operate extensive grain 1 Zenith Radio Corp. v. Hazeltime Research Inc., 374 U.S. 321, 367 (1963). distribution networks, which facilitate the 395 U.S. 100, 130 (1969). Section 16 of the Clayton 3 For judicial recognition of the power of movement of grain from farms to domestic Act allows individuals to sue for injunctive relief sophisticated firms see Michael S. Jacobs, The New consumers of these commodities and to foreign ‘‘against threatened loss or damage by a violation Sophistication in Antitrust, 79, Minn. L. Rev. 1 markets’’). of the antitrust laws.’’ 15 U.S.C. § 26 (1988). (1994). 6 Id. at 6.
VerDate 20
VerDate 20
VerDate 20
1921.54 The purposes and provisions of the described the legislation as ‘‘extending farmer cooperatives from the antitrust laws statute require consideration when enforcing farther than any previous law in the Congress sought to help ‘‘farmers to compete the Sherman, Clayton, and Federal Trade regulation of private business.’’ 63 Borrowing with large corporations.’’ 72 According to Commission Acts. P&SA passed after these heavily from the language of other antitrust some commentators, the legislation was broader statutes became law and was laws, again confirming the specifically designed to ‘‘counterveil the specifically directed toward a problem that interconnectedness of the antitrust legal monopsony power then held by the corporate seemed to persist despite the existence of regime, the legislation prohibits ‘‘any purchasers.’’ 73 The Supreme Court agreed previous legislation. The Congressional unfair’’ 64 practices or ‘‘any undue or that ‘‘individual farmers should be given, intent to promote the combined unreasonable preference or advantage’’ to through agricultural cooperatives acting as consideration and construction of the certain sellers. 65 The language of the PP&SA entities, the same unified competitive antitrust statutes is evidenced by the shared makes clear that particularly close scrutiny advantage—and responsibility—available to enforcement provisions of the P&SA.55 should be given to the marketing problems of businessmen acting through corporations as Some courts have specifically held that the farmers. entities.’’ 74 Without fear of antitrust statute is designed to go beyond the broad The DOJ also failed to consider the Capper- prosecution, farmers were to unify into language of the Sherman, Clayton, and Volstead Act.66 Among farmers in the late farmer cooperatives that could employ their Federal Trade Commission Acts, thereby 19th century, a favored method of responding bargaining power to negotiate with large food recognizing the importance of construing the to the economic concentration of buyers was manufacturers for better prices for their statutes together.56 While refusing to the marketing cooperative. Formal products.75 purchase a farmer’s livestock might be government efforts to aid farmer cooperatives The jurisprudence interpreting the Capper- acceptable under the Sherman or Federal came with the passage of the Clayton Act in Volstead Act recognizes farmer Trade Commission Acts, for example, it 1914.67 In order to eliminate legal obstacles disorganization and the power of large-scale would not be acceptable under the broad that might slow the growth of market power buyers. The court in Kinnet Dairies, Inc. v. protective purposes of the P&SA.57 In making among farmers through cooperatives, the Dairymen, Inc., for example, noted that such decisions, courts have recognized the legislation specifically exempted non-stock ‘‘farmers needed congressional help’’ since problem of buyer power that farmers face 58 agricultural cooperatives from the antitrust they ‘‘had always been pricetakers, standing and which Congress attempted to address in laws.68 The inclusion of the farmer relatively helpless before those who would the P&SA.59 Furthermore, given the remedial cooperative provision within an antitrust purchase their products.’’ 76 In order to nature of the statute, it should be interpreted statute offers further evidence of the overcome the monopoly problem common to liberally to carry out its broad mandate and importance Congress placed on considering agricultural markets, Congress ‘‘deliberately purposes.60 When combined with the already the economic disorganization of farmers set about to enable farmers to organize and broad language of the statute, enforcement when applying the antitrust laws. Doubts band together in order to acquire and agencies are given wide regulatory powers about the effectiveness of the Clayton Act exercise marketing power.’’ 77 If farmers can over the meatpacking industry,61 especially exemption triggered legislative efforts to draft muster enough bargaining power a ‘‘bilateral as it relates to injuries inflicted upon a stronger statute.69 The result was the monopoly’’ between seller and buyer will farmers.62 One contemporary commentator Capper-Volstead Act of 1922, which result, conferring on farmers a fair price for 78 broadened the exemption from the antitrust their products. The mirror image of 54 7 U.S.C. § 181 et seq. laws beyond non-stock cooperatives.70 55 The PS&A even allowed for divided With the passage of Capper-Volstead, hopes of helping ‘‘cooperatives to finance business enforcement between the Secretary of Agriculture Congress demonstrated its intention to treat operations of sufficient magnitude to compete with and the FTC. The FTC was to enforce the ‘‘retail farmer cooperatives differently from the corporations’’); Kathryn J. Sedo, The Application of sales’’ provision of the statute but the Secretary the Securities Law to Cooperatives: A Call for Equal could assume responsibility if the FTC was not typical corporate form and to give farmers the Treatment for Non-agricultural Cooperatives, 46 already proceeding with a similar investigation. opportunity to build their bargaining power Drake L. Rev. 259, 272 (1997) (noting the farmer § 406(d). Per se illegality standards in the Clayton relative to corporate buyers.71 By exempting cooperative exemption from the securities laws, and FTC Acts carry over to P&SA. Re ITT indicating the Congressional view that cooperatives Continental Baking Co. (1985) 44 Ag Dec 748. monopoly of the packers, enabling them unduly were favored organizations). 56 Wilson & Co. v. Benson, 286 F.2d 891 (7th Cir. and arbitrarily to lower prices to the shipper who 72 Sunkist Growers, Inc. v. Winckler & Smith 1961). sells’’). Citrus Products Co., 284 F.2d 1, 8 (9th Cir. 1960). 57 Swift & Co. v. U.S., 393 F.2d 247, 255 (7th Cir. 63 Current Legislation, The Packing Industry and 73 David L. Baumer, Robert T. Masson, and Robin 1968). the Packing Act, 22 Colum L. Rev. 68, 70 (1922) Abrahamson Masson, Curdling the Competition: An 58 Id., at 250–52 (finding that buyers of lambs (quoting Senate Agricultural Comm., Rep. No. 77, Economic and Legal Analysis of the Antitrust agreed not to pay over a certain price and that 67th Cong., 1st Sess. 2 (1921)). Exemptions for Agriculture, 31 Vill. L. Rev., 183, buyers agreed not to bid against one another for 64 7 U.S.C. § 202(a) (italics added). 185 (1986) (‘‘Congressional passage of the agricultural antitrust exemption encouraged the lambs; the firm which bought the lambs then sold 65 Id. at § 202(b) (italics added). them to another buyer which had agreed not to bid formation of agricultural cooperatives intended to 66 7 U.S.C. §§ 291–2. on the lambs). counterveil the monopsony power then held by the 67 59 Id., at 254 (‘‘The lack competition between 15 U.S.C. §§ 12–27 (1983). corporate purchasers’’). 68 buyers, with the attendant possible depression of Id., at § 17. 74 Maryland & Va. Milk Producers Ass’n v. United producers’ prices, was one of the evils at which the 69 Wendy Moser, Selective Issues Facing States, 362 U.S. 458, 466 (1960). Packers and Stockyards Act was directed’’) (citing Cooperatives: Can the Customer continue to be the 75 Note, Trust Busting Down on the Farm: Meat Packer Legislation hearings before the House Company? 31 S.D.L.Rev. 394, 395 (explaining that Narrowing the Scope of Antitrust Exemptions for Committee on Agriculture, 66th Cong., 2d Sess., pp. Capper-Volstead was passed to ‘‘clarify the Clayton Agricultural Cooperatives, 61 VA L. Rev. 341, 364 22, 229, 250, 303, 1047, 2284 (1920)). Act exemption provided to farmers’’). (1975) (‘‘Capper-Volstead’s authorization of 60 Bruhn’s Freezer Meats of Chicago, Inc. v. U.S. 70 7 U.S.C. §§ 291–92. collective processing and marketing was an attempt Department of Agriculture, 438 F.2d 1332, 1336 71 Fairdale Farms, 635 F.2d at 1043 (noting that to counter the bargaining power of oligopsonist (8th Cir. 1971) (citations omitted); Glover Livestock ‘‘agricultural cooperatives were ‘a favorite child of buyers, but the bargaining power gap is as wide Commission Company, Inc. v. Hardin, 454 F.2d Congressional policy’ ’’) (quoting treatise); David today as it was fifty years ago’’). 109, 111 (8th Cir. 1972) (describing the legislation Million, The Sherman Act and the Balance of 76 512 F.Supp. 608, 630 (M.D. GA. 1981); as remedial and requiring liberal construction to Power, 61 S. Cal. L. Rev. 1219, 1281 (1988) (‘‘The Northern Cal. Supermarkets, Inc. v. Central Cal. carry out its purpose of (‘‘prevent[ing] economic exemption of labor and agricultural combinations Lettuce Producers Cooperative., 413 F.Supp. 984, harm to producers and consumers at the expense from the Sherman Act’s proscriptions further 988 (N.D. Cal. 1976) (noting that ‘‘Congress of middlemen’’) (citing Bruhn’s). demonstrates that a deep concern about social perceived farmers as being at the mercy of sharp 61 Id., at 1339 (‘‘The Act was framed in language balance lay beneath statements of solicitude for dealers in the sale of their produce and, therefore, designed to permit the fullest controls of packers those harmed by the trusts. Several senators made it possible for them to form cooperatives to and stockyards which the Constitution permits, and advocated exemption on the ground that such help themselves’’). its coverage was to encompass the complete chain combinations were necessary to counterbalance the 77 Kinnet Dairies, 512 F.Supp. at 630. The court of commerce and give the Secretary of Agriculture economic power of massed capital.’’); Michael D. specifically mentions the promotion of complete regulatory power over packers and all Love, Antitrust Law—Fairdale Farms, Inc. v. ‘‘countervailing power’’ as a function of farmer activities connected therewith’’). Yankee Milk, Inc.:—The Right of Agricultural cooperatives. Id., at 614. 62 Stafford v. Wallace, 258 U.S. 495, 514–15 Cooperatives to Possess Monopoly Power, 7 78 National Broiler Marketing Assn. v. U.S., 436 (1922) (holding that the ‘‘chief evil feared is the J.Corp.L. 339, 341 (1982) (explaining Congressional U.S. 816, 842 (1978) (J. White dissenting) (‘‘The
VerDate 20
VerDate 20
VerDate 20
Sept. 29, 1999. to drive greater distances with our own farm and understand why this merger is being Roger W. Fones, trucks to reach a terminal. challenged in the agriculture sector. Since Chief, Transportation, Energy and Formerly, Montana was the only state that this is harvest in the Midwest, it would also Agriculture Section, Anti-Trust Division was dominated by one rail carrier. Now we be of some assistance if the deadline for in U.S. Dept. of Justice, 325 Seventh see that, because of mergers, other states, comment would be extended another sixty Street, NW, Ste 500, Washington, D.C. other industries, have lost the edge that days to December 12, 1999. 20530. competition in transportation gives them. Yours in Ag, Dear Sir: Regarding merger of Continental Those who have watched the developments and Cargill Grain Co. are not surprised that, no matter what Frances Heinrichs, Deep concerns of the shrinking but reassurances are given by the company that Women Involved in Farm Economics (WIFE). is benefitting by the takeover, the dire necessary family farmers. Tab 4 Excessive mergers are forming monopolies. predictions by those opposing the transaction In the agriculture sector it is putting more have proven accurate. Greta Anderson, Iowa City, IA stress on your food producers (grain & So now we are again among those who are September 19, 1999. livestock). predicting that the Cargill acquisition of Judge Gladys Kessler, Cargill may have already thought they have Continental’s grain operations will be U.S. District Court, for the District of the merger sewed up the merger as grain sold beneficial only to Cargill. Columbia, 333 Constitution Ave. N.W., to the Continental Grain Co. was paid for Competition is vital to not only our grain Washington, D.C. 20001. with a Cargill check? producers, but to the farmers of the world. The takeover of Continental’s operations is Re: United States of America v. Cargill, Inc. I urge you to stop this mad rush of mergers and Continental Grain Company with everything. Seven corporations will rule going to dramatically affect not only those producers who are directly served by the Dear Judge Kessler: the world. It is fast becoming international. Cargill/Continental terminals, but by all Presently before you awaiting your Is this what our pioneer fore-fathers producers of grains in the U.S. approval is a ‘‘Final Judgment’’ filed by the wanted? The Antitrust Division is our only hope, so U.S. Department of Justice relative to the Thank you for your time and thought. we ask that you exercise your authority purchase of the grain merchandising division Dyed in the wool American farm wife. before the amount of power exerted by one of Continental Grain Co. by the Cargill Corp. Senior Citizen, company becomes too great, and producers Legal precedent, according to the Dorothy McKay. lose one more battle to keep competition Department of Justice, requires that ‘‘[t]he working for them. balancing of competing social and political Elmwood, NE 68349 Sincerely, interests affected by a proposed antitrust Mr. Roger Fones, consent decree must be left, in the first U.S. Dept. of Justice, Antitrust Division, 325 Mary W. Nielsen, instance, to the discretion of the Attorney Seventh St. N.W. Suite 500, Washington, Montana Transportation, WIFE. General. The court’s role in protecting the D.C. public interest is one of insuring that the September 27, 1999. Dear Mr. Fones: I am a family farmer in government has not breached its duty to the eastern Nebraska. I am extremely concerned Mr. Roger W. Fones public in consenting to the decree. The court about the merger of Cargill and Continental Chief, Transportation, Energy & Agriculture is required to determine not whether a Section, Antitrust Division, US grain companies. The merger of these two particular decree is the one that will best Department of Justice, 325 Seventh St. giant grain companies would lessen the serve society. but whether the settlement is SW Suite 500, Washington, DC 20530. competition in grains, locally, nationally and within the reaches of the public interest.’’ globally. I urge you to consider the impact Re: Cargill & Continental Grain Company In its July 8, 1999 ‘‘Final Judgment’’ I this would have on us and act to stop the Merger believe in fact that the Department of Justice merger. This merger (proposed) needs Dear Mr. Fones: It is my understanding that has ‘‘breached its duty to the public in immediate action by the antitrust division the final judgment concerning the above consenting to the decree’’ and that its Final and the U.S. Justice Department. The matter will be determined in the middle of Judgment is not ‘‘within the reaches of the antitrust laws are in place and need to be October. public interest.’’ enforced! I want to urge you to consider this matter As the Department of Justice’s own very carefully and urge your affiliates to rule ‘‘Complaint’’ states, the Cargill purchase Thank You. against this merger. Cargill’s purchase of would ‘‘substantially lessen competition for Norma Hall. Continental Grain would unify the second purchases of corn, soybeans, and wheat in each of the relevant geographic markets, Plentywood, MT and third largest grain traders in Nebraska, enabling it unilaterally to depress the prices Mr. Roger W. Fones, making it possible for Cargill to control the export market much more than it does at the paid to farmers. The proposed transaction Chief, Transportation, Energy and present time. will also make it more likely that the few Agriculture Section, Antitrust Division, We do not need bigger companies with remaining grain trading companies that U.S. Dept. of Justice, 325 7th St. NW, more control over our markets. We have a purchase corn, soybeans, and wheat in these Suite 500, Washington, D.C. 20530. Cargill elevator within 15 miles of our markets will engage in anticompetitive Dear Mr. Fones, Having served as farming operating. They have so many coordination to depress farm prices.’’ Transportation officer for WIFE for many different plans for each agriculture producer Using the Department of Justice’s own years, and seen just what ‘mergers’/ that it is unbelievable. They have determined figures and criteria we see in its ‘‘Complaint’’ ‘takeovers’/ acquisitions, etc. do to rural that our grain should be .5% dryer when that even before this announced purchase the America in the field of rail transportation, I brought into the elevator making more money U.S. grain trade was already dominated, if write to ask that the U.S. Department of for the elevator and less for the producer. It not monopolized, by Cargill and nothing in Justice re-open its investigation of the may not seem like a large amount but when the Department of Justice’s ‘‘Final Judgment’’ Cargill’s acquisition of Continental Grain you are paying the drying bill, it definitely addresses itself to that important issue. operations. adds up. They also have a plan if you buy Likewise, the Department of Justice must As farmers, we are already experiencing everything from them—fertilizer, seed corn, consider more that the grain buying the loss of competition in rural America. chemicals, insecticide and deliver all your operations of Cargill. The acquisition of Producers who own one company’s grain to them—they will do this for you and Continental’s seventy elevators will enhance machinery find that they may have to drive that for you. They definitely want control— the economic power of Cargill as a general 100–150 miles to acquire some repairs for its. both of the farmer and the market. matter. Such a result concerns farmers Or wait until it can be mailed to them from The farming industry is in very serious because Cargill’s assets and economic power some central point thousands of miles away. trouble with today’s markets so low and our can be deployed across a range of agricultural Those of us who have no alternative to cost of production going up. sectors. shipping by rail have found not only that we We hope that in reading this letter that you For example, Cargill stands out as a top- now are ‘served’ by one carrier, but we have will investigate the merger more thoroughly four firm in beef packing, cattle feedlots, pork
VerDate 20
VerDate 20
VerDate 20
VerDate 20
VerDate 20
VerDate 20
VerDate 20
VerDate 20
Section, Antitrust Division, United States he came into power and look what happened. would certainly be detrimental to small and Department of Justice, 325 Seventh Please stop this merger, let the farmers be medium sized farms that are less able to hang Street, N.W., Suite 500, Washington, DC heard throughout the land, help them to find on to their grain until markets improve. Even 20530. solutions don’t put the nails in the coffin of if one believes that bigger farms are always Dear Mr. Fones: I have been following with rural America. These people are your better, there is considerable danger in great interest the Cargill-Continental merger. neighbors, your friends, your community, allowing such large corporations to merge I work in an office with many policy analysts remember it is people you are dealing with when there is already very limited and they understand in a more technical way here not just numbers. competition. Add to this the fact that we are what is going on. I do the administrative Thank you. dealing with food, and the danger of work and have never really been interested Sincerely, monopolizing the market becomes even more in technical jargon except to file it. But I am Kathy Hiltsley. grave. very interested in the lives of people. No For all of these reasons, I strongly urge you longer should people’s lives be caught up in Tulsa, OK 74133 and your department to disallow this merger the technical jargon but it is time to seriously 10 October 1999. between Cargill and Continental. Thank you take a look at the holocaust happening within Mr. Roger W. Fones, for your consideration. the rural communities of our nation. It is a Chief, Transportation, Energy and Sincerely, slow demise of the family farmer and if you Agriculture Section, Anti-Trust Division, Rev. Jeff Horejsi. ask the farmer they are slowly losing hope for U.S. Department of Justice, 325 7th a culture that made this country great. Street, NW, Suite 500, Washington, DC Roger W. Fones I also worked at Cargill many years ago, I 20530. Chief, Transportation, Energy and am aware of the hug offices, the money that FAX: 202/307–2784 Agriculture Section, Antitrust Division, they have accrued on a personal level is U.S. Dept. of Justice, 325 7th Street NW, Dear Mr. Fones: I am writing this to request incredible and that money was made off the #500, Washington, DC 20530. that you conduct further investigation of the very product that our family farms produced Please stop the Cargill-Continental Grain for you and I to eat. It is a product that we Cargill-Continental Grain sale and that you extend the comment deadline for another Sale because it will hurt the small farmers in use everyday of our lives in some way or my area and the U.S. It will also eventually other and the farmers worked hard everyday sixty days. Are you aware of what the creation of a raise food prices. Please extend the comment of their lives to bring it to us. They were not period for 60 days. looking for ways to make more money to larger monopoly will do, not only to grain satisfy their stockholders, they did not have farmers in this country, but also to all Reena Kazmann. an insatiable need for more things. What they consumers? October 07, 1999. did was take their land, put the seed into the Monopolies always create higher prices for Roger W. Fones, ground tend to the crops, harvest it and then the consuming public. They create even Chief, of Transportation, Energy & turned around and sold it to people like lower prices for those who must sell their Agriculture Section, Antitrust, Division, Cargill and Continental. I was always amazed commodities to the monopolies. Grain prices 325 Seventh St. NW, Suite 500, when I worked at Cargill the amounts of are already below break-even. Washington, DC 20530. product that were shipped from ordinary Farmers are going broke in our state at an farmers and the amounts of money they made alarming rate. Across the U.S., farm income Dear Sir: I am writing to concerning the on trading and selling it. I didn’t understand is down by 70%. Depressed prices are Cargill-Continental merger. I wanted to let at that time nor was I very interested but ruining not only farmers but all small-town you know that the market for our grain on the today as I watch and listen to farmers story businesses. I urge you to conduct a more farm is already highly concentrated. The my heart is breaking for those people you are thorough investigation into the Cargill/ Cargill-Continental Merger would spell doom not listening to. Continental Sale before submitting a final for the independent farms we have left on the I don’t want to be a part of our country’s judgment on this. prairie. Small farmers are struggling the way holocaust when it comes to our farmers. I do Please give my request your serious it is. Please consider this before you vote. know that by letter in the Cargill Continental consideration. Sincerely, merger happen you are saying to the farmers Sincerely, you are not very important but money is and Barbara Hook. Robin Kleven. the bottom line is money not people. How can I say that? Because it is the message I’m Madison, MN 56256 Corporate Agribusiness Research Project hearing loud and clear from you. Whitney October 7, 1999. P.O. Box 2201, Everett, Washington 98203– McMillan, Cargill McMillan, and the other Mr. Roger W. Fones 0201 McMillan’s have more money that I or most U.S. Dept. of Justice, 325 Seventh St. NW, of our farmers will ever dream of. Who do Suite 500, Washington, DC 20530. October 8, 1999. you think they made that money from? How Dear Mr. Fones: I am writing to you Roger W. Fones much is enough? And do we have to lose a because of my concern abut the proposed Chief, Transportation, Energy & Agriculture whole culture so they will make enough to merger between two grain handling giants. I Section, Antitrust Division, U.S. satisfy their insatiable need for more money? am a pastor of a Catholic parish of about 600 Department of Justice, 325 Seventh Look at who they say they are competing people in western Minnesota. Our economy Street N.W., Suite 500, Washington, DC with how many companies is it really? Some in Madison is very much tied to agriculture. 20530. of the competition comes from within. My When farm commodities are depressed, it Dear Mr. Fones: In accordance with the husband is in the wallcoverings business does not simply mean hard times. Businesses ‘‘Antitrust Procedures and Penalties Act’’ competition is there all the time for him but fold and do not reopen. More and more of (APPA) of the U.S. Code I am enclosing a he doesn’t go out and buy all the business out our population flees to other towns and recent issue of The Agribusiness Examiner,’’ so he can make more money. We are satisfied areas. Of course there are other contributing a weekly e-mail newsletter which I edit and with the money we make, we work hard for factors, but there is no denying that an publish devoted to monitoring corporate it but it allow us to live with integrity. unhealthy agricultural sector spells rapid agribusiness from a public interest You can listen to all the technical jargon, decline for our town and region. perspective. you can look at all the numbers but in the Ten years ago, it was well known that 90% I am sending this copy to you as my way end we are talking about people’s lives here. of the world’s grain exports were done of making a ‘‘public comment’’ regarding the Our farmers need us to stand with them. through just five corporations. Cargill and Justice Department’s ‘‘Final Judgment’’ They need the very government that they Contentntal are two of the five. There is regarding the sale of Continental Grain’s have helped support through hard work and already too much concentration in this area grain merchandising division to Cargill. I will toil to stop and listen very closely to do the of agriculture. This merger would mean even look forward to the Department’s comments right thing that will make the most money. less competition in the marketplace. It would in the Federal Register regarding the various Hitler was working on economic health when be great for the few corporations left, but it issues raised in this issue of my newsletter.
VerDate 20
I should also note that this newsletter is agriculture, merely as additional logs on that Legal precedent, according to the DofJ, distributed on a weekly basis to nearly 850 fire that is intended to smoke them out of the requires that ‘‘[t]he balancing of competing people through the U.S. and the rest of the business of farming. social and political interests affected by a world, including many family farmers, farm Meanwhile, the crucial issue that is today proposed antitrust consent decree must be organizations and public interest food deeply distressing family farmers to the point left, in the first instance, to the discretion of advocates. of near hopelessness is the rapid corporate the Attorney General. The court’s role in Thank you for your time and consideration concentration within agriculture as protecting the public interest is one of of the enclosed. exemplified by the recent announced insuring that the government has not Sincerely, purchases by Cargill of Continental Grain’s breached its duty to the public in consenting merchandising business and Smithfield to the decree. A.V. Krebs, Foods buying up of Murphy Family Farms ‘‘The court is required to determine not Director. and Tyson Food’s Pork Group. whether a particular decree is the one that While Dan ‘‘Of the Grain Trade, By the will best serve society, but whether the Subject: The Agribusiness Examiner #50 Grain Trade and For the Grain Trade’’ settlement is ‘within the reaches of the public Date: Fri. 08 Oct 1999 01:15:46–0700 Glickman may be ‘‘very pleased that the interest.’ [A] proposed decree must be From: ‘‘Albert V. Krebs’’ Department of Justice has taken * * * steps approved even if it falls short of the remedy ([email protected]) to protect American farmers from the the court the would impose on its own, as To: [email protected] potential adverse effects’’ of the Cargill/ long as it falls within the range of SPECIAL EDITION Continental sale by its recent ‘‘Final acceptability or is ‘within the reaches of the Judgment’’ and divestiture order, farmers public interest.’.’’ The Agribusiness Examiner from Stockton, California to Hampton Roads, Letters specifically demonstrating and/or Monitoring Corporate Agribusiness From a Virginia see the consolidation of two of the documenting the impact of Cargill’s Public Interest Perspective world’s largest grain traders as nothing but monopoly of the grain trade and how the Issue #50 October 8, 1999 more economic and social adversity for them Continental purchase will affect that and their families. situation on one’s own family farm operation A.V. Krebs, Editor/Publisher. Thus, in an attempt to force the or upon the rural community in which one Urgent Appeal: Effort to Block Cargill/ Department of Justice anti-trust division to lives will be most valuable. Copies of such Continental Sale—Public Comment Deadline conduct a more thorough investigation of the letters should also be sent to the letter at Hand Cargill/Continental sale, efforts are currently writer’s state attorney general’s office urging underway to forestall the Department from that office at the same time to utilize their October 12, 1999 remains the deadline for submitting its ‘‘Final Judgment’’ for the good offices in not only calling upon the U.S. public comment on the U.S. Department of approval to presiding U.S. District Court Department of Justice to revisit its Justice’s Anti-Trust Division’s ‘‘Final Judge Gladys Kessler. This ‘‘Special Issue’’ of ‘‘investigation’’ of the Cargill/Continental Judgment’’ relative to the sale by Continental The Agribusiness Examiner is part of that sale, but requesting that the deadline for Grain of its grain merchandising division to effort. comment be extended another sixty days to Cargill, the world’s largest grain trader. For once, not simply acting as a mere After characterizing what it publicly called December 12. mouthpiece for corporate agribusiness, but an almost year long ‘‘investigation’’ of the Whether or not Judge Kessler concludes actually serving as ‘‘a voice for American sale the Department of Justice (DofJ) in fact that the consent decree is ‘‘within the reaches Agriculture,’’ American Farm Bureau filed a formal ‘‘Complaint’’ with the U.S. of public interest’’ the corporate President Dean Kleckner, has rightfully District Court for the District of Columbia. audaciousness of Cargill in attempting to observed that ‘‘the time has come for the However, the DofJ totally neutralized its summarily own this nation’s grain trade with Justice Department to have someone with ‘‘Complaint’’ by filing it on the same day its purchase of Continental’s grain assets is agricultural expertise to oversee such (July 8, 1999) and at the same time that it breathtaking. One need only look at the facts concentration issues. Agriculture is a unique furtively filed a consented ‘‘Final Judgment,’’ brought to light in the DofJ’s own industry. It requires someone with the agreed to by all parties. While the DofJ’s ‘‘Complaint’’ to see such covertness. ‘‘Final Judgment’’ now awaits the approval of experience and background to ensure anti- trust laws are not being violated and that OCM’S Fred Stokes: ‘‘A Dark Day for presiding U.S. District Court Judge Gladys Agriculture’’ Kessler, the public comment period regarding opportunities for all farmers are protected’’ the Department’s decision remains open until The hour is late, the deadline for public ‘‘If the Cargill merger goes through, it is a October 12. comment on the Cargill/Continental ‘‘Final dark day for agriculture,’’ is the way Fred In their ‘‘Complaint’’ the DofJ formally Judgment’’ is Tuesday, October 12. Stokes, a Mississippi cattlemen and recently charged that Cargill’s purchase would No matter what one’s degree of elected President of the Organization for ‘‘substantially lessen competition for involvement in various and related public Competitive Markets (OCM) describes the purchases of corn, soybeans, and wheat in interest issues might be or what political or Cargill/Continental sale. ‘‘The loss of each of the relevant geographic markets, ideological persuasion one might be if they Continental Grain as a competitor while enabling it unilaterally to depress the prices care about who grows their food, who creating a more powerful Cargill will drive paid to farmers. The proposed transaction produces and manufacturers it, its farmers’ share of the retail dollar even lower. will also make it more likely that the few availability, its safety, its cost and the future Continental Grain will then plow the new remaining grain trading companies that of family farming agriculture the effort to money into further consolidating the purchase corn, soybeans, and wheat in these block this sale is one that deserves their livestock industry.’’ markets will engage in anticompetitive immediate and highest priority. Alone among farm organizations who have coordination to depress farm prices.’’ The ‘‘Antitrust Procedures and Penalties denounced the Department of Justice’s ‘‘Final Act’’ (APPA) of the U.S. Code provides that Judgment’’ decree the Organization for Commentary any person may submit to the United States Competitive Markets is a non-profit, non- Liberals and progressives and those written comments regarding the proposed partisan organization of farmers, ranchers, individuals and organizations that seemingly ‘‘Final Judgment.’’ Any person who wishes to academics and attorneys which provides care so deeply about the plight of the nation’s comment should do so by October 12. The information to the public about the family farmers may pride themselves on comments and the response of the United importance of true competition in the being on the cutting edge of today’s economic States will be filed with the Court and agricultural marketplace. and social issues such as genetic engineering published in the Federal Register. Keith Mudd, a Missouri farmer and OCM and the upcoming World Trade Organization Written comments should be submitted to: board member, adds, ‘‘Farmers used to have meeting in Seattle, Washington. Roger W. Fones, Chief, Transportation, several choices of elevators to market their At the moment, however, agrarian Energy & Agriculture Section, Antitrust grain. Mergers have reduced the number of populists and thousands of family farmers Division, United States Department of buyers to two in many geographic areas. If throughout the U.S. see such issues, as Justice, 325 Seventh Street, NW, Suite 500, the Cargill merger goes through, many important as they may be for the future of Washington, DC 20530. farmers will have only one buyer. I fail to
VerDate 20
VerDate 20
VerDate 20
VerDate 20
Harvest States Co-op, now in the process of elevator pursuant to a right of first refusal, grain market. ‘‘My concern is deliveries on merging with Farmland Industries, to form Cargill shall not subsequently acquire any the Illinois River,’’ Love said. ‘‘Now, you’ll United Country Brands, the nation’s largest other interest in that facility (including a basically have two big companies, and if agricultural cooperative. (See Issue #25) joint venture interest) without the written they’re both bullish, you won’t have any Slightly over 100 miles to the south of consent of the United States. deliveries,’’ since they could export the grain Tacoma, Mitsubishi Corp. a leading Japanese As for the Seattle elevator, the Seattle rather than meet contract obligations. trading company, recently announced it has Times business correspondent Patrick Reacting to the initial announcement of the acquired about a 10% stake in the Kalama Harrington recently reported, ‘‘with Cargill purchase one Illinois farmer also speculated Export Company LLC equally owned by now planning to shift operations to Tacoma that if Continental was unable to successfully ConAgra Inc. and Archer Daniels Midland after all, it remains to be seen whether there compete financially with other grain trading Co. (‘‘Supermarkup to the World’’). Kalama is a player big enough to fill its shoes.’’ companies to the extent that it was willing Export Company LLC operates a grain ‘‘Cargill, even before it acquired to sell its assets to a competitor why would elevator along the Columbia River in Continental last month, was the nation’s anyone believe that an independent elevator Washington State, with hourly shipping largest exporter of grain; Continental was the operator could achieve success in such a capacity of around 3,000 tons and storage second largest. Illinois-based Archer Daniels concentrated market? capacity of about 50,000 tons. It also plans Midland, another large grain company, had ‘‘Throughput Arrangements’’ High Costs to increase storage capacity to 90,000 tons by earlier expressed interest in the facility, Discourage Competition the end of 2000. according to Port of Seattle officials, but Yet Cargill spokeswoman Lori Johnson said spokesmen for the company refused to The Department of Justice’s willingness to the Justice Department was concerned that comment.’’ use ‘‘throughput agreements’’ as part of its her company would have too much business Cargill/Continental divestiture order has concentrated in the Pacific Northwest Banking on the Futures received sharp criticism from Dan McGuire, because of Continental’s leasing of the The issues of concentration in the grain a member of the American Corn Growers Tacoma grain-storage facility. ‘‘We fought the trade, even prior to the Continental purchase Association and the Nebraska Farmers Justice Department; not to include Seattle,’’ by Cargill was promising to become a major Union. said Johnson. ‘‘We still need to sit down with issue in the year 2000, when new delivery ‘‘Our department,’’ he said, ‘‘will take a Port officials and talk about the options and terms take effect for the Chicago Board of close look at this proposed merger. It is our make it work for everyone,’’ she said. ‘‘But Trade’s (CBOT) corn and soybean futures job to further competition in private business we do have an obligation under the lease.’’ contracts as Toledo, Ohio, will cease being a and industry, and if we allow Samson and According to the DofJ’s divestiture order delivery point for the CBOT contracts, and Delilah to merge we may be doing the the Seattle port elevator may enter into a delivery points will instead be clustered up consumer a disservice.’’ Standard Throughput Agreement with and down the Illinois River where a large The chairman of Samson protested Cargill, or any joint venture involving the portion of grain facilities, on the northern vigorously that merging with Delilah would Tacoma elevator to which Cargill is a party portion of that river, are owned by Cargill or not stifle competition, but would help it. (the ‘‘Cargill Joint Venture’’), provided that: Continental, and likely will be combined. ‘‘The public will be the true beneficiary of (1) The Acquirer has no interest in Cargill or In its ‘‘Complaint’’ the DofJ stresses that by this merger,’’ he said. ‘‘The larger we are, the the ‘‘Cargill Joint Venture’’; (2) the consolidating the Cargill and Continental more services we can perform, and the lower throughput agreement gives Cargill or the river elevators on the Illinois River, their prices we can charge.’’ ‘‘Joint Venture’’ no more rights concerning proposed transaction would concentrate The president of Delilah backed him up. the operations of the facility than are approximately 80% of the authorized ‘‘In the Communist system the people don’t commonly granted to sublessees in Standard delivery capacity for settlement of Chicago have a choice. They must buy from the state. Throughput Agreements; and (3) Cargill or Board of Trade corn and soybean futures In our capitalistic society the people can buy the ‘‘Cargill Joint Venture’’ obtains contracts in two firms. ‘‘This concentration,’’ from either the Samson or the Delilah continuing rights to move no more than 8.5 they emphasize, ‘‘would increase the Company.’’ million bushels of grain and oilseeds likelihood of price manipulation of futures ‘‘But if you merge, ’’ someone pointed out, combined in any given month through the contracts by those firms, resulting in higher ‘‘there will be only one company left in the Seattle port elevator. risks for buyers and sellers of futures United States.’’ ‘‘Moreover,’’ the Justice Department states, contracts.’’ ‘‘Exactly,’’ said the president of Delilah. ‘‘the United States must be satisfied, in its For farmers like Floyd Schultz who ‘‘Thank God for the free enterprise system.’’ sole discretion, that any Standard currently transports his grain by truck just The Anti-Trust Division of the Justice Throughput Agreement that may be four miles to Lockport, Illinois where he can Department studied the merger for months. negotiated between Cargill or the ‘Cargill choose between Cargill and Continental grain Finally the Attorney General made this Joint Venture’ and the Acquirer of the Seattle terminals, sitting side by along a canal ruling. ‘‘While we find drawbacks to only port elevator: (1) Would leave the Acquirer leading to the Illinois River, the proposed one company being left in the United States, with sufficient capacity for it to be a viable merger of the two grain companies will leave we feel the advantages to the public far and effective competitor for the purchase of the nearest competitor an Archer Daniels outweigh the disadvantages.’’ corn and soybeans in the Pacific Northwest Midland terminal 30 miles and another 10 ‘‘Therefore, we’re making an exception in draw area; and (2) would not adversely affect cents a bushel in shipping costs away. While this case and allowing Samson and Delilah the Acquirer’s ability or incentives to Cargill could lower its prices and improve its to merge.’’ compete vigorously for the origination of margins, he notes, ‘‘we as farmers would be ‘‘I would like to announce that the Samson corn and soybeans in the Pacific Northwest the ones who pay.’’ and Delilah Company is now negotiating at draw area, by raising the Acquirer’s costs, In Marvin Hayenga and Robert Wisner’s the White House with the President to buy lowering its efficiency, or otherwise 1998 study, ‘‘Cargill’s Acquisition of the United States. The Justice Department interfering in the ability or incentive of the Continental Grain’s Grain Merchandising will naturally study this merger to see if it Acquirer to compete effectively.’’ Business,’’ (see above), the authors obvious violates any of our strong anti-trust laws.’’ The DofJ notes, however, that Cargill need area of concern at that time was the northern August 30, 1999. not divest the Seattle port elevator if it does section of the Illinois River. They noted at Department of Justice, Antitrust Division, San not buy, lease or otherwise acquire an the time that even if the Continental sale to Francisco Office. interest in Continental’s port elevator at or Cargill was approved, ADM will remain the From: Riley Lewis (Forest City, Iowa) near Tacoma, Washington. largest firm on the river, controlling 36% of Sent: Wednesday, June 23, 1999 6:52 AM If another firm, however, acquires the storage space. To: WEB JPR Tacoma port elevator pursuant to a right of Faced with such a situation Sid Love, Subject: Cargill-Continental Merger first refusal (and Cargill retains the Seattle analyst with Joe Kropf & Sid Love Consulting As your dept. dwells on the merger- port elevator), Cargill shall not subsequently Services in Overland Park, Kansas, told the acquisition of Continental Grain by Cargill I purchase or lease the Tacoma port elevator. Wall Street Journal that he regrets the would like to comment as a 5th Generation If another firm acquires the Tacoma port possible departure of Continental from the Iowa farmer on the merits. I am against it—
VerDate 20
VerDate 20
Sincerely, Roger W. Fones, to do so and mainly focus on the human Jerome McCollom, Chief, Transportation, Energy and element involved. I want you to know how Agriculture Section, Antitrust Division— this will affect me and my community and Department of Justice, August 30, 1999, U.S. Department of Justice, 325 Seventh hundreds of thousands like myself and their Antitrust Division, San Francisco Office. Street, N.W., Suite 500, Washington DC communities across this country. Alta Vista, KS 66834 20530. I am a farmer from Northeast Missouri. I October 8, 1999. Dear Mr. Fones: Antitrust legislation is in wish I could tell you that the proposed Roger W. Fones, place to protect consumers and competitors acquisition would leave me with one fewer Chief, Transportation, Energy & Agriculture against a company dominating the market choice when it came time to market the grain Section, Antitrust Division, U.S. and taking unfair advantage. For that reason, I raise. I can not make that claim as there is Department of Justice, 325 Seventh I object to the Cargill purchase of no Continental elevator in my area. I wish Street, N.W., Suite 500, Washington, D.C. Continental’s grain operations. This purchase there were because then my choices of 20530, FAX: 202–307–2784. would move Cargill from the category of elevators would almost be double what they now are. I say almost because I have one Dear Mr. Fones: Please do not approve dominator to the category of terminator of corporate mergers and buyouts such as everyone else. soybean processor (ADM) who normally pays Cargill with Continental Grain or Smithfield When I hear that the Cargill/Continental 7–10 cents more that their competitor (?), Foods with Murphy Farms and Tyson Food’s sale is in your hands, I hope that you will Bunge, who does not process soybeans at Pork Group. I believe such mergers and consider the impact on rural communities of their location. It is reversed for corn and buyouts serve to weaken American national this merger. I have had the chance to see wheat as Bunge outbids ADM by substantial security by forcing reliance upon foreign these big players operate firsthand. I live margins on these two crops 90% of the time. markets rather than promoting a sound across the road from a Cargill hog operation. Thus you can see why I would welcome domestic agriculture production and delivery The arrogance of these corporate fellows is another elevator, regardless of who owns it. system. astonishing. Making these guys more Following are some of my reasons for While capitalism favors competition, such powerful would be another nail in the coffin opposing the merger: mergers and buyouts represent the same for diverse rural communities like mine. 1. This area of northeast Missouri, west command and control favored by When independent operators are put out of central Illinois, and southeast Iowa are all communism. Totalitarian food production business by big operators, as has happened part of a captive draw area for ADM in and delivery systems have failed in all in my community, everybody suffers. The regards to soybean purchases. As recently as nations where they were the dominant markets have already gotten so concentrated 10 years ago this tri-state area had no less system. Why would Americans believe such that an out-of-favor producer can be cut off than 4 competitive bidders for soybeans. Two a system could work here? We use food and from being able to make a living. The big processors, ADM and Quincy Soybean Co., medicine as a political tool with nations operators create environmental disasters that and two river terminals, MFA Incorporated reliant on imports. Do we truly wish to open are impossible to regulate. When regulators and Bunge. All of the soybeans purchased at our own country to similar political get involved, they are ignored or tied up in the small country elevators eventually ended leveraging? court. up being sold to one of these 4 purchasers. The merging of Cargill and Continental Consumers are hurt by this concentration, Within the last 10 years ADM has purchased Grain will not favorably improve grain prices too. Consumers suffer from price-fixing and Quincy Soybean Co. and Bunge has bought for farm producers. As farm stability from lack of choice in the marketplace. out MFA Inc.’s river terminal. That leaves the weakens, so does it’s surrounding National policy has made corporations area where we are today with ADM and a community. As communities lose their more powerful, and this needs to stop. These non-competitive Bunge. I know first hand economic base, they lose their ability to big operations do not treat producers like what a lack of competition means when it is adapt to fluctuations of market, economy and independent businessman. Instead, they are time to sell my crops. social unrest. paid as little as possible while keeping as 2. I use the Chicago Board of Trade to Through the past decades, we have seen a much as possible in the corporation. This hedge my grain. I do not pretend to be an reduction in the number of industry hurts us all. expert on the operation of the board but it competitors of steel, auto and textile Please do all you can to stop this merger. concerns me when one firm will control 80% manufacturing as well as food and fiber Sincerely, of the delivery points for futures settlement. production. The reduction to a few industry I have read that this could lead to giants has given the impression of reduced Margot Ford McMillen manipulation of futures contracts. consumer prices and strong economy. Sept. 27, 1999. 3. The United States agricultural However, such mega-corporations are not I am very much opposed to the Cargill- community has been caught up in a frenzy flexible. Labor problems, interest rates, continental merger. Can’t anyone see what is of mergers and buyouts. This may be the consumer choice, environmental impact, and happening? Going big is not better—look weakest argument to make legally, but it is many other factors can result in massive what is happening to our schools, our little the strongest from the human element employee lay-offs, plant closings, towns etc.—look at our grain prices now—the standpoint. This merger, like most of those unmanageable pollutants, labor strikes, farms are all getting too big—soon there will before, is really a double edged sword. One unstable housing, overburdening of be only a few farms left in each county— side of the blade cuts out the inefficiencies community services and other negative please use some common sense in this of smaller entities when they increase impacts that are too great for the community situation! economic size. The other edge cuts the fabric to effectively handle. of Rural America. Each business we lose, be I believe in world trade, competitive trade Darlene Milbreadt, it a elevator, seed company or machinery with choice and options rather than singular Echo, MN 56237. manufacturer lessens competition among avenues. I support the government use of September 28, 1999. those who we do business with. This anti-trust laws when corporate mergers and lessening of competition drives up cost takeovers threaten the competitive edge of all Mr. Roger W. Fones, which in turn drives producers from America for the sake of exorbitant short-term Chief, Transportation, Energy & Agriculture business. gain for relatively few beneficiaries. Thank Section, Antitrust Division, United States It is extremely difficult for anyone not in you for your consideration. Department of Justice, 325 Seventh the rural areas of the Midwest to fully Sincerely, Street N.W., Suite 500, Washington, D.C. understand rural infrastructure. I live near a 20530. Carissa McKenzie town with a population of 2700. This size Re: United States of America v. Cargill, Inc. community, like thousands across this Westminster College and Continental Grain Company country, depends upon farmers and ranchers Dear Mr. Fones: I am writing to express my to provide a large portion of the fuel for their 501 Westminster Avenue, Fulton, Missouri opposition to Cargill Inc. purchasing the economic engines. Consolidation is killing 65251–1299, 314 642–3361 grain division of Continental Grain Co. I will rural America. Will stopping this merger or October 1, 1999. leave the technical analysis to those qualified any other single acquisition reverse this
VerDate 20
VerDate 20
Department of Justice. please disapprove this merger on the grounds elevators or at the Chicago Board of Trade. Dr. Fones: I urge you to Conduct a more that with the merger-mania of the past 20 Now comes a point of jeopardy which we Complete investigation into the sale of years, the agricultural industry has become perceive exists in one small portion of the Cargill-Continental Grain, before submitting a so concentrated that there is no free market. divestitures listed in the final judgment of final judgment. Both the meat-packing plants and grain the civil action claim filed under Section 7 Farm income in the United States is down companies have gained a dangerous of the Clayton Act, as amended (15 U.S.C. by 70%. stranglehold on U.S. food production and 18). Depressed prices are running farmers and prices. Shouldn’t our anti-trust laws protect I respectfully refer to Page 2, of the Final small town business people. the people from such monopolies? Judgment (Definitions) Paragraph F, Please delay the Comments deadline for Eventually, even our farmer co-ops will ‘‘Caruthersville river elevator‘‘. Although this another 60 days. have little influence in agriculture when they elevator has a mailing address of Route 1, I appreciate your consideration. are up against such giants. Caruthersville, MO 63830, it is known locally as the Cottonwood Point facility, which is Sincerely, It is probable that thousands of family farmers will be going out of business this located 10 miles south of Caruthersville, near N. Ramsey, year—a tragedy for their families and for the the Arkansas border. The nearest town and Mesquite, TN 75150. nation. For the most part their only postoffice is Cooter, Missouri, three miles customers are the corporation giants which west. A modern bridge crossing to Tennessee September 22, 1999. can name their own price—way below the along Interstate 155, leads to other elevators Dear Mr. Roger Fones: The merger of cost of production, and the result of the over- (within sight of the Continental elevator at Cargill & Continental Grain Co. Is a major concentration in the agricultural industry. Cottonwood Point). We have no trepidation concern of ours. This merger will take away What safeguards are in place to make or fear of monopoly practices from Cargill, our market freedom. Already we are hurting certain that food will continue to be which has an elevator at New Madrid, because to few people control our markets affordable if family farms become a thing of Missouri 45 miles to the north. The present and tell us what they will give us and we the past? fear is that one of the largest members of the have to take it. Please use our anti-trust laws to protect all International Grain Cartels is interested in I always believed the anti-trust laws were Americans. purchasing the Continental facility at to protect the little man but it seems like no Cottonwood Point. We learn that Bunge Sincerely, one abides by them any more and they just Grain Company may have entered into find ways to go around them. We know that Lois Schank negotiations to purchase the Continental it is not fair! Cargill is already one of the top elevator, which would pose a definite lack of 4 firms in beef, pork, turkey, chicken, corn, Clyde Southern competition for local grain farmers in their soybean and production in merger would just Steele, MO 63877. choice of port outlets in the area. The make these more powerful. proximity of current Bunge elevators in our Thank you for reading this, July 23, 1999. area of operation could artificially depress The Honorable Judge Gladys Kessler, Mrs. Jan Richardson the prices offered for our grain. U.S. District Court, District of Columbia, 333 • Nearby—Bunge has an elevator at A copy has also been sent to Attorney Constitution Ave., NW, Washington, D.C. Caruthersville (10 miles), one at Huffman, General Ken Salazor. 20001. Arkansas (8 miles), one at Booths Point September 18, 1999. Civil Action #991875 Filed 7–8–99. (across the river in Tennessee at the Interstate Judge Gladys Kessler, Dear Judge Kessler: I write to you as a Bridge—15 miles), and one at Heloise U.S. District Court for the District of second-generation farmer located in the directly across the river in Tennessee within Columbia, 333 Constitution Ave. N.W., Missouri Bootheel area, along the Mississippi eyesight of Continental. Washington, D.C. 20001. River at the juncture of Missouri, Arkansas • If Bunge purchases Continental at Re: United States of America v. Cargill, Inc. and Tennessee. My family is primarily Cottonwood Point, this would given them a and Continental Grain Company engaged in the production of soybeans, total of seven elevators along the river within Dear Judge Kessler: Presently before you wheat, corn, and rice and we have a fifty-mile distance. awaiting your approval is a ‘‘Final Judgment’’ experienced the great advantage of river It is common knowledge locally that other filed by the U.S. Department of Justice barge transportation of our farm produce for large grain trading facilities are interested in relative to the purchase of the grain many years. We like to think that we purchasing the Continental facility at merchandising division of Continental Grain contribute to the prosperity of our nation by Cottonwood Point. Cargill would probably Co. by the Cargill Corp. our involvement in international trade, not to provide trade opportunities without restraint In the name of economic and social justice mention our bountiful production that has of trade in the area, and of course we would and the preservation of the family farm alleviated hunger and starvation throughout be happy to see Continental remain at its system of agriculture in the United States I the world. current location and with the same urge you to recommend that the Department The above civil action involves the ownership. of Justice withdraw its ‘‘Final Judgment’’, Continental Grain Elevator which is located However, we would like to offer one caveat study in far greater detail this ill-advised sale at Cottonwood Point (a historic ferry in regard to the selection or location of any and carefully consider the grave anti-trust crossing), some ten miles south of our county grain-trading firm at the current Continental issues that it presents and the dire seat at Caruthersville, and within a couple of Cottonwood Point site. The owners and consequences to both producers and miles of Arkansas. We have been privileged operator must be large enough to trade and consumers of our food supply. to sell grain to all of the grain elevators offer strong competition in the International Sincerely, within this area, and conditions have always trading arena. It would likely be impossible been amicable. In this flat alluvial valley, we for a small independent grain elevator to Howard H. Sargent, can see many of the elevators along the river, offer competitive prices to local producers if Consumer, Boulder, CO 80303. and the Continental Storage Tanks are within it did not have the ability to compete and sight of our farm. trade in a worldwide arena of International Central City, NE 68826 I certainly agree with Joel Klein’s statement trade. Sept. 26, 1999. in the Attorney General press release, which During this critical time of agriculture Department of Justice, states ‘‘This enforcement action demonstrates stress, it is imperative that we continue to United States Government, Washington, D.C. the Department’s commitment to preserve have strong competition and fair prices for 20510. competition in agriculture.’’ Over the years I producers in our area. Therefore, we strongly ATTN: Dept. for Comments on proposed have seen significant improvement in insist that Bunge Grain should not be Cargill-Continental merger competition along the river, and producers in allowed to purchase the Continental Grain Dear Sirs: I am writing to voice my concern other parts of the nation are envious of the facility at Cottonwood Point, thus creating a on the proposed Cargill buyout of prices we receive on the spot market and the near monopoly situation which would Continental Grain Co. I would ask you to ability to book a favorable basis at local invalidate the current anti-trust action.
VerDate 20
Sincerely, everybody else’s wages increase with the Section, Antitrust Division, US Department of Justice, 325 Seventh Clyde Southern years. Not ours! Look at rural America’s communities. Street, NW, Suite 500, Washington, DC October 12, 1999. Their livelihood depends on what the farmer 20530. Mr. Tom Miller, buys in town. There are many vacant stores Dear Mr. Fones: I WISH TO REQUEST Iowa State Attorney General, Hoover State in rural America. When the farmer doesn’t THAT YOU GRANT FURTHER Office Building, Des Moines, Iowa. have money, he stops buying everything but CONSIDERATION TO THE PROPOSED Re: Cargil-Continental Grain Merger the bare necessities. It will trickle to the big CARGILL AND CONTINENTAL GRAIN cities eventually. Think depression! It’s SALE. PLEASE GRANT A SIXTY DAY Dear Mr. Miller: As a graduate of one of the already here in rural America. finest Universities in the middlewest, Iowa COMMENT PERIOD EXTENSION AS I The U.S. Department of Justice needs to KNOW THAT MANY PEOPLE DID NOT State at Ames, with a major in soils and a further investigate this merger and stop it! COMMENT AS THEY WERE MADE TO minor in Agricultural Economics, I strongly Also extend the deadline for comment and BELIEVE BY MEDIA PRESENTATIONS urge you to vote NO for this merger. This really get out in the rural communities and THAT IT WAS A ‘‘DONE DEAL.’’ merger will dictate less market choices for on the farms. See and listen to what its really Please conduct a more thorough farmers, large and small alike. Today, a like. Feel the hopelessness and pain! investigation and abide by your requirements bushels of corn, (56 pounds of beautiful raw What can the government do? Show us you to give all facets of the matter due protein) will not buy a cheap hamburger in care and stop this merger. Investigate who or consideration. Thank you for your attention many restaurants. This merger, IF what is really controlling the market. It’s not to the issue and your service to all the APPROVED, will lower the farmer’s share of the farmers who work so hard to feed the American public. We would not wish to the retail market even still more. people! believe the allegations that such a takeover Following my senior year at Iowa State, I Sincerely, with extremely grave consequences for took advantage of the long established ISU farmer and the consuming public would not Ag. travel trip. It was a 10,000 mile Ellen Stebbins have your serious evaluation. accredited trip visiting areas in Detroit, Washington, D.C., Gainsville, Austin, and Pennack, MN 56279 With sincere respects, Denver. With four major stops per day, we October 6, 1999. Dr. Frankie M. Summers studied crops, soils, and we also visited with Roger W. Fones farmers and ranchers along the way. One Chief of Transportation, Energy And Greenwich, NY 12834 very interesting stop was along the lake area Agriculture Section, Antitrust Division, October 4, 1999. in Michigan where a overseas grain buyer/ US Dept of Justice, 325 7th St., NW, Suite Judge Gladys Kessler, shipper was located by the name of Spencer. 550, Washington, DC 20530. U.S. District Court for the District of (No relation to me). I would like to see our Dear Mr. Fones: As a retired owner of a 160 Columbia, 333 Constitution Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20001. government encourage the escalation of these acre farm, my first interest is in farming and small shippers. This would increase I am writing to protest the Cargill-Continental Re: United States of America v. Cargill, Inc. competition and help the family farmer win merger. Why are these big companies and Continental Grain Company a fairer share of the consumer’s food dollar. allowed to merge? Many years ago when I Dear Judge Kessler: Presently before you Please vote no for the merger of giant self was in school there were antitrust laws to awaiting your approval is a ‘‘Final Judgment’’ serving corporations like Cargil and prevent monopolies. It seems that filed by the U.S. Department of Justice Continental. monopolies are now allowed so that among relative to the purchase of the grain Sincerely, others, farmers have no say in setting prices merchandising division of Continental Grain on their products. Co. by the Cargill Corp. Lyle D. Spencer, Monopolies are not only bad for farmers, Legal precedent, according to the Goldfield, Iowa. they are bad for telephone users, cable to Department of Justice, requires that ‘‘[t]he balancing of competing social and political Blooming Prairie, MN 55917 users, medical services and huge grocery interests affected by a proposed antitrust September 28, 1999. store patrons. I think it is time to bring all consent decree must be left, in the first Mr. Roger W. Fones, of this to a stop. instance, to the discretion of the Attorney Chief, Transportation, Energy & Agriculture Please do what you can to help farmers. General. The court’s role in protecting the Section, Antitrust Division, U.S. Sincerely, public interest is one of insuring that the Department of Justice, 325 Seventh St. Eleanor Stehieg government has not breached its duty to the NW Suite 500, Washington, DC 20530. public in consenting to the decree. The court Dear Sir: The merger of Cargill and Stockton Ranch is required to determine not whether a Continental Grain Co. is a major concern to Box 182, particular decree is the one that will best the American farmer. This would increase serve society, but whether the settlement is Cargill’s monopoly of the grain trade. Why Grass Range, MT 59032 ‘‘within the reaches of the public interest.‘ ’’ should Cargill be any different than other big October 11, 1999. In its July 8, 1999 ‘‘Final Judgment’’ I monopolies? Isn’t this what anti-trust laws Roger W. Fones, believe in fact that the Department of Justice are for? Chief of Transportation, Energy, and has ‘‘breached its duty to the public in I am proud to be an American farmer. We Agriculture Section, Fax: (202) 307– consenting to the decree’’ and that its ‘‘Final feed the people! This is the most important 2784. Judgment’’ is not ‘‘within the reaches of the occupation in the world! Why can’t we be public interest.’’ Dear Mr. Fones: the merger between Cargill given the respect we deserve? We need fair Clearly, as the Department of Justice’s own and Continental will destroy any vestige of prices at today’s standard of living, not ‘‘Complaint’’ states the Cargill purchase a competitive market for grains. I urge you to yesterday’s! would ‘‘substantially lessen competition for do a more thorough investigation before If this merger goes through, Cargill will purchases of corn, soybeans, and wheat in have even more power to control the farmer’s submitting a final judgment. Also the each of the relevant geographic markets, prices and life. Look at the example of the comment period has been too short for enabling it unilaterally to depress the prices hog farmer. What a shame the small hog farmers to adequately respond to, please paid to farmers. The proposed transaction farmer has been driven to give up. Why do extend it by at least 60 days. will also make it more likely that the few all that hard work to lose money constantly? Sincerely yours, remaining grain trading companies that Prices are already so horribly poor in all Gilles Stockton purchase corn, soybeans, and wheat in these the markets we are hanging on only by the markets will engage in anticompetitive hope things will improve. When? Farmers Lakin, Kansas 67860 coordination to depress farm prices.’’ can’t wait much longer. Farmers work as October 12, 1999. Using the Department of Justice’s own hard as anybody in the world, yet can’t get Mr. Roger Fones, figures and criteria we see in its ‘‘Complaint’’ a fair price for all their hard work. Most Chief Transportation, Energy & Agriculture that even before this announced purchase the
VerDate 20
U.S. grain trade was already dominated, if competition in agriculture markets, (2) own the land and other resources used in not monopolized, by Cargill and nothing in increase the imbalance of economic power production agriculture, yet input and the Department of Justice’s ‘‘Final Judgment’’ favoring agribusiness giants at the expense of production decisions are dictated by CEO’s. addresses itself to that important issue. the farmer, and (3) decrease land and Incentives for conservation of land and other Likewise, the Department of Justice must resource stewardship incentives in the resource are thus lost, and could lead to consider more that the grain buying emerging system. degradation of natural resources. operations of Cargill. The acquisition of Competition is fading in agricultural Furthermore, having land management Continental’s seventy elevators will enhance markets in part because of unprecedented decisions made by people (CEO’s) who are the economic power of Cargill as a general mergers and acquisitions, and in part because not intimate with the land is asking for matter. Such a result concerns farmers of insidious joint ventures, strategic trouble. because Cargill’s assets and economic power alliances, interlocking directorates and Those of us in major poultry production can be deployed across a range of agricultural partial ownership of related agribusiness areas have witnessed contracting for over 30 sectors. firms. These alliances, which are very years. The bottom line is that contract For example, Cargill stands out as a top- difficult to trace, result in a fuzzy web of producers invest one-half of the capital in the four firm in beef packing, cattle feedlots corporations and cooperatives that soften, if industry, yet capture a proportionally much (where Continental is the largest), pork not threaten, competition. In some circles, smaller percentage of the returns. Moreover, packing, broiler production, turkey the alliances are appropriately referred to as contract poultry producers know that if they production, animal feed plants, grain elevator ‘‘corporate incest.’’ speak out against ‘‘The Man’’ (the integrator) capacity, flour milling, dry corn milling, wet As just one example out of thousands of they will be instantly bankrupt. Is this the corn milling, soybean crushing, and ethanol alliances that threaten competition, I would kind of Society we want? production. Such a dominant position across point to a Cargill corn processing plant in Individually, many of the recent mergers, many agricultural markets will allow Cargill Eddyville, IA, which is connected by acquisitions and joint ventures involving to transfer resources between sectors pipeline to a Heartland Lysine plant nearby. large agribusiness corporations may appear according to the economic conditions that are Nearing completion is a Midwest Lysine innocuous. Collectively, however, they are prevailing at a given time. plant located in Blair, NE, which will also be quickly moving us down the road to The ability to transfer assets will allow connected to the Cargill corn processing agricultural feudalism with only a few firms Cargill to maintain its dominant status in all plant. Midwest Lysine is a joint venture controlling much of the world’s food supply. of these markets irrespective of its between Cargill Degussa Corp, while The DOJ appears to assess mergers in terms competitive prowess. Unlike farmers, who Heartland Lysine is owned by the Japanese of horizontal competition, without giving are forced into bankruptcy after a few bad firm, Ajinomoto, of lysine price-fixing fame. adequate consideration to vertical power seasons, Cargill will maintain its dominant Are Midwest Lysine and Heartland Lysine imbalances. status over time regardless of economic going to engage in rigorous competition? I respectfully request that you stop the performance over the short-term. With Hardly. Arrangements such as this do not merger of Cargill and Continental. All Continental’s assets, Cargill will become an appear to be properly considered in DOJ mergers of corporations and cooperatives even more powerful and ‘‘sophisticated’’ evaluations of mergers. alike should be blocked pending a thorough, firm, even more capable of strategic, Perhaps of more concern than softening objective evaluation of whether the frenzy of cooperative, and anti-competitive behavior. competition is the increasing economic mergers, acquisitions and alliances is in In the name of economic and social justice power of giant corporations over farmers. The Society’s best interest. and the preservation of the family farm emerging food system has a few vertically Thank you. system of agriculture in the United States I integrated supply chains like Cargill, in urge you to recommend that the Department which production is increasingly contracted Sincerely, of Justice withdraw its ‘‘Final Judgment,’’ out to farmers. With contract production, C. Robert Taylor, study in far greater detail this ill-advised sale farmers have little economic power and and carefully consider the grave anti-trust continue in farming at the discretion of the ALFA Eminent Scholar and Professor of issues that it presents and the dire supply chain corporations. Supply chain Agricultural Economics. consequences to both producers and corporations can thus extract essentially all To: Mr. Roger W. Fones consumers of our food supply. of the economic profits, leaving the contract Sent: 10/10/1999 at 2:44:56 PM Sincerely, farmer with a subsistence level of income Subject: Cargill/Continental Grain Merger composed of very low returns to management Daniel J. Swartz, and labor. Dear Sir: I respectfully request that you A SEED Europe. Agricultural cooperatives were established conduct a more thorough investigation of the under the Capper-Volstad Act as a way for Cargill/Continental grain sale before Auburn University, Alabama 36849–5406 farmers to horizontally organize to submitting a final judgment on the matter. Please extend the public comment period for College of Agriculture, Department of countervail market (economic) power held by another sixty days. Agricultural Economics, and Rural Sociology, corporations. Unfortunately, the giant 202 Comer Hall, Telephone: (334) 844–4800, cooperatives have drifted from this mission. Sincerely, FAX: (334) 844–5639 Giant cooperatives are evolving to a vertical Janice Urie, structure, run more for the benefit of September 15, 1999. managers that for benefit of the farmer Rt. 1, Box 28B, Lakin, KS 67860. Mr. Roger W. Fones, members. At best, the farmer member is Chief, Transportation, Energy & Agriculture October 11, 1999. relegated to the position held by a minority Section, Antitrust Division, United States Dear Sirs: I want to strongly oppose the stockholder in a corporation. At worst, the Department of Justice, 325 Seventh proposed merger of Cargill and Continental farmer member is a minority stockholder that Street N.W., Suite 500, Washington, D.C. Grain. cannot get his equity out of the corporation 20530. As a farmer from South Dakota we need all until death. the competing entities we can get it called Re: United States of America v. Cargill, Inc. Cooperatives have formed hundreds of and Continental Grain Company capitalism! alliances and joint ventures with the giant No No No Dear Mr. Fones: I am writing to state my corporations like Cargill. For example, Cargill opposition to Cargill’s acquisition of has a 50–50 joint venture with Delta Growers Sincerely, Continental Grain Company. My opposition Association, a Cooperative. Deals like this James H. Peht, is based not on disapproval of either Cargill have the potential for a subtle ‘‘co-opting of Keldion, SD 57634. or Continental as individual firms, but on the co-ops’’ by corporations. Thus, in my merger as it relates to the reorganization of opinion, many of the existing cooperatives October 11, 1999. global agriculture that is unprecedented in should not be viewed as countervailing Mr. Roger W. Fones, terms of size and speed. corporate power. Chief, Transportation, Energy and My objections to this merger are that it In this emerging vertically integrated Agriculture Section, Anti-Trust Division, would: (1) Continue the erosion of supply system, the giant corporations do not U.S. Department of Justice, 325 Seventh
VerDate 20
Street, NW, Suite 500, Washington, DC to buy grain down there to flood the world It’s our responsibility to secure our future for 20530. with more grain. he young people who want to be FAX: 202/307–2784 I know a very reputable grain elevator independent. owner. He is furious with Cargill. He sells his Thank you for reading my letter. Please do Dear Mr. Fones: The purpose of this letter grain to loading facilities on the river. He is is to request that you conduct further the right thing. faced to sell most of his grain to Cargill Sincerely, investigation of the Cargill-Continental Grain because of lack of competition. Cargill treats sale and that you extend the comment this elevator owner very poorly. Cargill close Scott D. Anderson. deadline for another sixty days. at 3:00, which doesn’t allow much time to The creation of a larger monopoly will not haul grain there 70 miles away. There was Mr. Roger Fones, Chief, Transportation, only depress grain prices further in this also a problem with the size of the trucks he Energy & Agriculture, Antitrust Division, US country, but also be detrimental to all uses. They don’t want him hauling there Dept. of Justice, 325 Seventh Street, NW, consumers. anymore. They are simply disrespectful #500, Washington, DC 20530. Monopolies always create higher prices for people. Re: Final Judgment on Cargill’s proposed the consuming public. They create even Farmers could buy chicken manure from a purchase of Continental Grain lower prices for those who must sell their large complex here. Cargill moved in and Dear Mr. Fones: We are very opposed to commodities to the monopolies. Grain prices bought up all the manure and are not this purchase! It will less competition and are already far below break-even. doubling the price for the manure. I am an decrease prices for farmers. This is bad for all Farmers are going broke in our state at an organic farmer. I need to stockpile manure for farmers who are not large agri businesses. We alarming rate. Across the U.S., farm income six months. I called Cargill to see if I could ask you to deny this purchase. is down by 70%. Depressed prices are pick it up myself and they said no. ruining not only farmers but all small-town Cargill also got into the scrap metal Rosie Seymour, businesses. I urge you to conduct a more industry recently. The scrap prices dropped Superior WI 54880 thorough investigation into the Cargill/ to record low levels. Both of our scrap metal Bob, buyers are going out of business in one year. Continental Sale before submitting a final Superior WI 54880 judgment on this. Is there a connection? Please give this your serious consideration. I tried to buy a bag of salt and without the Michael C. Cramey, Sincerely, Cargill name on it. Six out of eight businesses Foxboro, WI 54836 sold Cargill band salt in my town. Connie M. Cramey, Gerald Luin. We heard that other countries get very poor Chaffey Rd, Foxboro WI 54836 Litchfield, MN quality grain from Cargill. These countries would like to try farmer direct to get better Laura Cenley, Roger W. Fones: Please do not let Cargill quality. We’ve tried to do that, but the Superior, WI 54880 merge with Continental. Cargill is the most facilities would not allow that. We need Janice Watten, disliked name in Agriculture. Cargill don’t public facilities. Could the government buy Duluth, MN 55805 respect other businesses. It thinks of Cargill’s Continental Grain? Cargill also has a negative bottom line only. They are making massive impact on government for farmers. Carol Stevens, amounts of money on farmers. In the mean This company is getting too big. It doesn’t Superior, WI 54880 time farmers are making record low profits. respect other people in business. There is a Dear Mr. Roger Fones: As an independent USDA census reports 50% of farmers in the lot of people trying to make a living in this agricultural producer, I strongly urge you to U.S. are making a profit and 50% are not. country. It is unfair to let the big get bigger conduct a more thorough investigation of the They flood the market with livestock. I and the small independents get swept under Cargill/Continental Grain sale. Please extend would rather see farmers produce the the rug. the public comment period for another sixty livestock. Wouldn’t you? When I drive I will not do business with Cargill, and I days. around my county I see empty livestock know many other people who also will not. facilities everywhere. Rural America is It’s time to realize bigness is hurting Sincerely, getting very ugly. It is very depressing. independent business in this country. This is [no signature] Cargill also imports grain into the U.S. making rural US. which floods our markets and this lower our Please think PEOPLE BEFORE MONEY. It’s [FR Doc. 00–4591 Filed 3–23–00; 8:45 am] prices. Cargill is giving up in South America time to regulate how big a company can get. BILLING CODE 4410±11±M
VerDate 20
Part IV
Department of Housing and Urban Development Office of the Assistant Secretary for Community Planning and Development; Federal Property Suitable as Facilities To Assist the Homeless; Notice
VerDate 20
DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND assistance providers interested in any NAVY: Mr. Charles C. Cocks, URBAN DEVELOPMENT such property should send a written Department of the Navy, Director, Real expression of interest to HHS, addressed Estate Policy Division, Naval Facilities [Docket No. FR±4557±N±12] to Brian Rooney, Division of Property Engineering Command, Washington Federal Property Suitable as Facilities Management, Program Support Center, Navy Yard, 1322 Patterson Ave., SE, To Assist the Homeless HHS, room 5B–41, 5600 Fishers Lane, Suite 1000, Washington, DC 20374– Rockville, MD 20857; (301) 443–2265. 5065; (202) 685–9200; (These are not AGENCY: Office of the Assistant (This is not a toll-free number.) HHS toll-free numbers). Secretary for Community Planning and will mail to the interested provider an Dated: March 16, 2000. Development, HUD. application packet, which will include Fred Karnas, Jr., ACTION: Notice. instructions for completing the application. In order to maximize the Deputy Assistant Secretary for Special Needs Assistance Programs. SUMMARY: This Notice identifies opportunity to utilize a suitable unutilized, underutilized, excess, and property, providers should submit their Title V, Federal Surplus Property Program surplus Federal property reviewed by written expressions of interest as soon Federal Register Report for 3/24/00 HUD for suitability for possible use to as possible. For complete details assist the homeless. concerning the processing of Suitable/Available Properties FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: applications, the reader is encouraged to Buildings (by State) Clifford Taffet, room 7266, Department refer to the interim rule governing this Hawaii of Housing and Urban Development, program, 24 CFR part 581. Bldg. S87, Radio Trans. Fac. 451 Seventh Street SW, Washington, DC For properties listed as suitable/to be Lualualei, Naval Station, Eastern Pacific 20410; telephone (202) 708–1234; TTY excess, that property may, if Wahiawa Co: Honolulu HI 96786–3050 number for the hearing- and speech- subsequently accepted as excess by Landholding Agency: Navy impaired (202) 708–2565 (these GSA, be made available for use by the Property Number: 77199240011 telephone numbers are not toll-free), or homeless in accordance with applicable Status: Unutilized call the toll-free Title V information line law, subject to screening for other Comment: 7566 sq. ft., 1-story, needs rehab, most recent use—storage, off-site use only at 1–800–927–7588. Federal use. At the appropriate time, HUD will publish the property in a Bldg. 64, Radio Trans. Facility SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In Notice showing it as either suitable/ Naval Computer & Telecommunications Area accordance with 24 CFR part 581 and available or suitable/unavailable. Wahiawa Co: Honolulu HI 96786–3050 section 501 of the Stewart B. McKinney For properties listed as suitable/ Landholding Agency: Navy Homeless Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. unavailable, the landholding agency has Property Number: 77199310004 11411), as amended, HUD is publishing decided that the property cannot be Status: Unutilized this Notice to identify Federal buildings Comment: 3612 sq. ft., 1-story, access declared excess or made available for restrictions, needs rehab, most recent use— and other real property that HUD has use to assist the homeless, and the reviewed for suitability for use to assist storage, off-site use only property will not be available. Bldg. 442, Naval Station the homeless. The properties were Properties listed as unsuitable will reviewed using information provided to Ford Island not be made available for any other Pearl Harbor Co: Honolulu HI 96860– HUD by Federal landholding agencies purpose for 20 days from the date of this Landholding Agency: Navy regarding unutilized and underutilized Notice. Homeless assistance providers Property Number: 77199630088 buildings and real property controlled interested in a review by HUD of the Status: Excess by such agencies or by GSA regarding determination of unsuitability should Comment: 192 sq. ft., most recent use— its inventory of excess or surplus call the toll free information line at 1– storage, off-site use only Federal property. This Notice is also 800–927–7588 for detailed instructions Bldg. S180 published in order to comply with the or write a letter to Clifford Taffet at the Naval Station, Ford Island December 12, 1988 Court Order in address listed at the beginning of this Pearl Harbor Co: Honolulu HI 96860– National Coalition for the Homeless v. Notice. Included in the request for Landholding Agency: Navy Veterans Administration, No. 88–2503– review should be the property address Property Number: 77199640039 OG (D.D.C.). Status: Unutilized (including zip code), the date of Comment: 3412 sq. ft., 2-story, most recent Properties reviewed are listed in this publication in the Federal Register, the use—bomb shelter, off-site use only, Notice according to the following landholding agency, and the property relocation may not be feasible categories: Suitable/available, suitable/ number. Bldg. S181 unavailable, suitable/to be excess, and For more information regarding Naval Station, Ford Island unsuitable. The properties listed in the particular properties identified in this Pearl Harbor Co: Honolulu HI 96860– three suitable categories have been Notice (i.e., acreage, floor plan, existing Landholding Agency: Navy reviewed by the landholding agencies, sanitary facilities, exact street address), Property Number: 77199640040 and each agency has transmitted to providers should contact the Status: Unutilized HUD: (1) Its intention to make the appropriate landholding agencies at the Comment: 4258 sq. ft., 1-story, most recent property available for use to assist the following addresses: DOT: Mr. Rugene use—bomb shelter, off-site use only, homeless, (2) its intention to declare the Spruill, Principal, Space Management, relocation may not be feasible property excess to the agency’s needs, or SVC–140, Transportation Bldg. 219 (3) a statement of the reasons that the Administrative Service Center, Naval Station, Ford Island Pearl Harbor Co: Honolulu HI 96860– property cannot be declared excess or Department of Transportation, 400 7th Landholding Agency: Navy made available for use as facilities to Street, SW, Room 2310; (202) 366–4246; Property Number: 77199640041 assist the homeless. GSA: Mr. Brian K. Polly, Assistant Status: Unutilized Properties listed as suitable/available Commissioner, General Services Comment: 620 sq. ft., most recent use— will be available exclusively for Administration, Office of Property damage control, off-site use only, homeless use for a period of 60 days Disposal, 18th and F Streets, NW, relocation may not be feasible from the date of this Notice. Homeless Washington, DC 20405; (202) 501–0052; Bldg. 220
VerDate 20
Naval Station, Ford Island Bldg. 5179 Status: Excess Pearl Harbor Co: Honolulu HI 96860– Naval Public Works Comment: 25,354 sq. ft., presence of Landholding Agency: Navy Iroquois Ave. asbestos/lead paint, most recent use— Property Number: 77199640042 Ewa Beach Co: Honolulu HI 96706– admin., off-site use only Status: Unutilized Landholding Agency: Navy Bldg. 41 Comment: 620 sq. ft., most recent use— Property Number: 77199940034 Naval Air Station damage control, off-site use only, Status: Excess Brunswick Co: ME 04011– relocation may not be feasible Comment: 1328 sq. ft., possible asbestos/lead Landholding Agency: Navy Bldg. 160 paint, most recent use—residence, off-site Property Number: 77199930008 Naval Station, Pearl Harbor use only Status: Excess Pearl Harbor Co: Honolulu HI 96860– Bldg. 5183 Comment: 10,526 sq. ft., presence of Landholding Agency: Navy Naval Public Works asbestos/lead paint, most recent use— Property Number: 77199840002 Iroquois Ave. security building, off-site use only Status: Excess Ewa Beach Co: Honolulu HI 96706– New Hampshire Comment: 6070 sq. ft., needs rehab, presence Landholding Agency: Navy of lead paint, most recent use—storage/ Property Number: 77199940035 Bldg. 128 office, off-site use only Status: Excess Portsmouth Naval Shipyard Comment: 1328 sq. ft., possible asbestos/lead Portsmouth NH 03804–5000 Facility No. 92 Landholding Agency: Navy Naval Computer & Telecom. paint, most recent use—residence, off-site use only Property Number: 77199830015 Area Master Station Status: Excess Wahiawa Co: HI 96786– Bldg. 5187 Comment: 10,900 sq. ft., needs rehab, Landholding Agency: Navy Naval Public Works presence of asbestos, most recent use— Property Number: 77199930076 Iroquois Ave. storage, off-site use only Status: Excess Ewa Beach Co: Honolulu HI 96706– Bldg. 185 Comment: 1008 sq. ft., needs rehab, most Landholding Agency: Navy Portsmouth Naval Shipyard recent use—storage, off-site use only Property Number: 77199940036 Portsmouth NH 03804–5000 Status: Excess Facility No. 99 Landholding Agency: Navy Comment: 1328 sq. ft., possible asbestos/lead Naval Computer & Telecom. Area Master Property Number: 77199830016 paint, most recent use—residence, off-site Station Status: Excess use only Wahiawa Co: HI 96786– Comment: 2310 sq. ft., needs rehab, presence Landholding Agency: Navy Bldg. 5191 of asbestos, most recent use—office, off-site Property Number: 77199930077 Naval Public Works use only Status: Excess Iroquois Ave. Comment: 544 sq. ft., concrete, needs rehab, Bldg. 314 Ewa Beach Co: Honolulu HI 96705– Portsmouth Naval Shipyard presence of asbestos, most recent use— Landholding Agency: Navy storage, off-site use only Portsmouth NH 03804–5000 Property Number: 77199940037 Landholding Agency: Navy Facility No. 127 Status: Excess Property Number: 77199830017 Naval Computer & Telecom. Area Master Comment: 1328 sq. ft., possible asbestos/lead Status: Excess Station paint, most recent use—residence, off-site Comment: cement block bldg., needs rehab, Wahiawa Co: HI 96786– use only presence of asbestos, most recent use— Landholding Agency: Navy Bldg. 5193 storage, off-site use only Property Number: 77199930078 Naval Public Works Bldg. 336 Status: Excess Iroquois Ave. Comment: 198 sq. ft., needs rehab, presence Portsmouth Naval Shipyard Ewa Beach Co: Honolulu HI 96706– Portsmouth NH 03804–5000 of asbestos, most recent use—storage, off- Landholding Agency: Navy site use only Landholding Agency: Navy Property Number: 77199940038 Property Number: 77199830018 Facility No. 227 Status: Excess Status: Excess Naval Computer & Telecom. Area Master Comment: 1328 sq. ft., possible asbestos/lead Comment: metal bldg w/cement block Station paint, most recent use—residence, off-site foundation, off-site use only Wahiawa Co: HI 96786– use only Bldg. 160 Landholding Agency: Navy Maine Property Number: 77199930079 Portsmouth Naval Shipyard Status: Excess Bldg. 4 Portsmouth Co: NH 03804–5000 Comment: 2240 sq. ft., needs rehab, presence Naval Air Station Landholding Agency: Navy of asbestos, most recent use—weight room, Brunswick Co: ME 04011– Property Number: 77199910046 off-site use only Landholding Agency: Navy Status: Unutilized Property Number: 77199930005 Comment: 6080 sq. ft., possible asbestos, Facility No. 285 most recent use—storage, off-site use only Naval Computer & Telecom. Area Master Status: Excess Station Comment: 16,644 sq. ft., presence of New Jersey Wahiawa Co: HI 96786– asbestos/lead paint, most recent use— Old Bridge Housing Landholding Agency: Navy headquarters building, off-site use only Route 9 Property Number: 77199930080 Bldg. 8 Old Bridge Co: NJ 08857– Status: Excess Naval Air Station Landholding Agency: GSA Comment: 418 sq. ft., needs rehab, most Brunswick Co: ME 04011– Property Number: 54199940010 recent use—storage, off-site use only Landholding Agency: Navy Status: Excess Bldg. 5175 Property Number: 77199930006 Comment: 12 three bedroom housing units, Naval Public Works Status: Excess no long-term wastewater treatment system Iroquois Ave. Comment: 7413 sq. ft., presence of asbestos/ for property, presence of asbestos/lead Ewa Beach Co: Honolulu HI 96706– lead paint, most recent use—public works paint, needs repair Landholding Agency: Navy building, off-site use only GSA Number: 0–0–NJ–000 Property Number: 77199940033 Bldg. 12 Bldg. D1–A Status: Excess Naval Air Station Naval Weapons Station Comment: 1328 sq. ft., possible asbestos/lead Brunswick Co: ME 04011– Colts Neck Co: NJ 07722– paint, most recent use—residence, off-site Landholding Agency: Navy Landholding Agency: Navy use only Property Number: 77199930007 Property Number: 77199940024
VerDate 20
Status: Unutilized Unsuitable Properties Status: Unutilized Comment: 1134 sq. ft., presence of lead paint, Reason: Extensive deterioration Buildings (by State) most recent use—smokehouse/lunchroom, Bldg. 5A7 off-site use only Alaska Marine Corps Recruit Depot Bldg. HA–1A ‘‘Gazebo’’ San Diego Co: CA 92140– Naval Weapons Station Coast Guard Landholding Agency: Navy Cordova Co: AK 99574– Property Number: 77199930085 Colts Neck Co: NJ 07722– Landholding Agency: DOT Status: Unutilized Landholding Agency: Navy Property Number: 87200010002 Reason: Extensive deterioration Property Number: 77199940025 Status: Unutilized Bldg. 5A8 Status: Unutilized Reason: Extensive deterioration Marine Corps Recruit Depot Comment: 120 sq. ft., most recent use— California San Diego Co: CA 92140– storage, off-site use only Bldg. 210 Landholding Agency: Navy Suitable/Unavailable Properties Naval Station, San Diego Property Number: 77199930086 San Diego CA 92136– Status: Unutilized Buildings (by State) Landholding Agency: Navy Reason: Extensive deterioration Puerto Rico Property Number: 77199830001 Bldg. 5A9 Marine Corps Recruit Depot Bldgs. 501 & 502 Status: Excess Reason: Extensive deterioration San Diego Co: CA 92140– U.S. Naval Radio Transmitter Bldg. 444 Landholding Agency: Navy Facility Property Number: 77199930087 State Road No. 2 Naval Station San Diego CA 92136–5065 Status: Unutilized Juana Diaz PR 00795– Landholding Agency: Navy Reason: Extensive deterioration Landholding Agency: Navy Property Number: 77199830122 Bldg. 5B6 Property Number: 77199530007 Status: Excess Marine Corps Recruit Depot Status: Underutilized Reason: Extensive deterioration San Diego Co: CA 92140– Comment: Reinforced concrete structures, Bldg. 209 Landholding Agency: Navy limited access, needs rehab, most recent Naval Station, San Diego Property Number: 77199930088 use—transmitter and power house San Diego CA 92136–5294 Status: Unutilized Reason: Extensive deterioration Virginia Landholding Agency: Navy Property Number: 77199840001 Bldg. 5B7 Naval Medical Clinic Status: Excess Marine Corps Recruit Depot 6500 Hampton Blvd. Reason: Extensive deterioration San Diego Co: CA 92140– Norfolk Co: Norfolk VA 23508– Bldgs. 20106, 20195 Landholding Agency: Navy Landholding Agency: Navy Naval Air Weapons Station Property Number: 77199930089 Property Number: 77199010109 China Lake Co: CA 93555– Status: Unutilized Status: Unutilized Landholding Agency: Navy Reason: Extensive deterioration Comment: 3665 sq. ft., 1 story, possible Property Number: 77199930001 Bldg. 5B8 asbestos, most recent use—laundry. Status: Excess Marine Corps Recruit Depot San Diego Co: CA 92140– Land (by State) Reasons: Secured Area, Extensive deterioration Landholding Agency: Navy Virginia Bldgs. 40, 62 Property Number: 77199930090 Naval Base Naval Air Station, North Island Status: Unutilized Norfolk Co: Norfolk VA 23508– Imperial Beach Co: CA 91932– Reason: Extensive deterioration Location: Northeast corner of base, near Landholding Agency: Navy Bldg. 5B9 Willoughby housing area. Property Number: 77199930024 Marine Corps Recruit Depot Landholding Agency: Navy Status: Excess San Diego Co: CA 92140– Landholding Agency: Navy Property Number: 77199010156 Reason: Extensive deterioration Property Number: 77199930091 Status: Unutilized Bldg. 5UT4 Marine Corps Recruit Depot Status: Unutilized Comment: 60 acres; most recent use— Reason: Extensive deterioration sandpit; secured area with alternate access. San Diego Co: CA 92140– Landholding Agency: Navy Bldg. 5C6 Land—CD area Property Number: 77199930081 Marine Corps Recruit Depot Naval Base Norfolk Status: Unutilized San Diego Co: CA 92140– Norfolk VA 23511–2797 Reason: Extensive deterioration Landholding Agency: Navy Landholding Agency: Navy Bldg. 5US4 Property Number: 77199930092 Property Number: 77199830022 Marine Corps Recruit Depot Status: Unutilized Status: Unutilized San Diego Co: CA 92140– Reason: Extensive deterioration Comment: 2 acres, open space Landholding Agency: Navy Bldg. 5C7 Marine Corps Recruit Depot Suitable/To Be Excessed Property Number: 77199930082 Status: Unutilized San Diego Co: CA 92140– Buildings (by State) Reason: Extensive deterioration Landholding Agency: Navy Property Number: 77199930093 Puerto Rico Bldg. 127 Marine Corps Recruit Depot Status: Unutilized Bldg. 561 San Diego Co: CA 92140– Reason: Extensive deterioration Former Ramey AFB Landholding Agency: Navy Bldg. 5C8 Aquadilla PR 00604– Property Number: 77199930083 Marine Corps Recruit Depot Landholding Agency: Navy Status: Unutilized San Diego Co: CA 92140– Property Number: 77199630001 Reason: Extensive deterioration Landholding Agency: Navy Status: Unutilized Bldg. 5A6 Property Number: 77199930094 Comment: 102666 sq. ft. bldg. on 5.006 acres, Marine Corps Recruit Depot Status: Unutilized most recent use—manufacturing, office and San Diego Co: CA 92140– Reason: Extensive deterioration freight distribution center, presence of Landholding Agency: Navy Bldg. 5C9 asbestos Property Number: 77199930084 Marine Corps Recruit Depot
VerDate 20
San Diego Co: CA 92140– Reason: Extensive deterioration Landholding Agency: Navy Landholding Agency: Navy Bldg. 921 Property Number: 77199940011 Property Number: 77199930095 Naval Weapons Station Seal Beach Status: Unutilized Status: Unutilized Seal Beach Co: CA 90740–5000 Reason: Extensive deterioration Reason: Extensive deterioration Landholding Agency: Navy Bldg. 363 Bldg. 5D1 Property Number: 77199930110 Naval Weapons Station Marine Corps Recruit Depot Status: Unutilized Fallbrook Co: CA 92028–3187 San Diego Co: CA 92140– Reason: Extensive deterioration Landholding Agency: Navy Landholding Agency: Navy Bldg. 201 Property Number: 77199940012 Property Number: 77199930096 Naval Weapons Station Status: Unutilized Status: Unutilized Fallbrook Co: CA 92028–3187 Reason: Extensive deterioration Reason: Extensive deterioration Landholding Agency: Navy Bldg. 410 Bldg. 5D2 Property Number: 77199940002 Naval Weapons Station Marine Corps Recruit Depot Status: Unutilized Fallbrook Co: CA 92028–3187 San Diego Co: CA 92140– Reason: Extensive deterioration Landholding Agency: Navy Landholding Agency: Navy Bldg. 205 Property Number: 77199940013 Property Number: 77199930097 Naval Weapons Station Status: Unutilized Status: Unutilized Fallbrook Co: CA 92028–3187 Reason: Extensive deterioration Reason: Extensive deterioration Landholding Agency: Navy Bldg. 438 Bldg. 5D3 Property Number: 77199940003 Naval Weapons Station Marine Corps Recruit Depot Status: Unutilized Fallbrook Co: CA 92028–3187 San Diego Co: CA 92140– Reason: Extensive deterioration Landholding Agency: Navy Landholding Agency: Navy Bldg. 227 Property Number: 77199940014 Property Number: 77199930098 Naval Weapons Station Status: Unutilized Status: Unutilized Fallbrook Co: CA 92028–3187 Reason: Extensive deterioration Reason: Extensive deterioration Landholding Agency: Navy Bldg. Q100 Bldg. 5D4 Property Number: 77199940004 Naval Amphibious Base Marine Corps Recruit Depot Status: Unutilized Coronado Co: CA 92118– San Diego Co: CA 92140– Reason: Extensive deterioration Landholding Agency: Navy Landholding Agency: Navy Bldg. 230 Property Number: 77199940067 Property Number: 77199930099 Naval Weapons Station Status: Excess Status: Unutilized Fallbrook Co: CA 92028–3187 Reason: Extensive deterioration Reason: Extensive deterioration Landholding Agency: Navy Bldg. Q102 Bldg. 5D5 Property Number: 77199940005 Naval Amphibious Base Marine Corps Recruit Depot Status: Unutilized Coronado Co: CA 92118– San Diego Co: CA 92140– Reason: Extensive deterioration Landholding Agency: Navy Landholding Agency: Navy Bldg. 232 Property Number: 77199940068 Property Number: 77199930100 Naval Weapons Station Status: Excess Status: Unutilized Fallbrook Co: CA 92028–3187 Reason: Extensive deterioration Reason: Extensive deterioration Landholding Agency: Navy Bldg. 106 Bldg. 206 Property Number: 77199940006 Naval Amphibious Base Naval Weapons Station Seal Beach Status: Unutilized Coronado Co: CA 92118– Seal Beach Co: CA 90740–5000 Reason: Extensive deterioration Landholding Agency: Navy Landholding Agency: Navy Bldg. 337 Property Number: 77199940069 Property Number: 77199930105 Naval Weapons Station Status: Excess Status: Unutilized Fallbrook Co: CA 92028–3187 Reason: Extensive deterioration Reason: Extensive deterioration Landholding Agency: Navy Bldg. 111 Bldg. 432 Property Number: 77199940007 Naval Amphibious Base Naval Weapons Station Seal Beach Status: Unutilized Coronado Co: CA 92118– Seal Beach Co: CA 90740–5000 Reason: Extensive deterioration Landholding Agency: Navy Landholding Agency: Navy Bldg. 338 Property Number: 77199940070 Property Number: 77199930106 Naval Weapons Station Status: Excess Status: Unutilized Fallbrook Co: CA 92028–3187 Reason: Extensive deterioration Reason: Extensive deterioration Landholding Agency: Navy Bldg. 112 Bldg. 433 Property Number: 77199940008 Naval Amphibious Base Naval Weapons Station Seal Beach Status: Unutilized Coronado Co: CA 92118– Seal Beach Co: CA 90740–5000 Reason: Extensive deterioration Landholding Agency: Navy Landholding Agency: Navy Bldg. 339 Property Number: 77199940071 Property Number: 77199930107 Naval Weapons Station Status: Excess Status: Unutilized Fallbrook Co: CA 92028–3187 Reason: Extensive deterioration Reason: Extensive deterioration Landholding Agency: Navy Bldg. 613 Bldg. 435 Property Number: 77199940009 NAS, North Island Naval Weapons Station Seal Beach Status: Unutilized Coronado Co: CA 92118– Seal Beach Co: CA 90740–5000 Reason: Extensive deterioration Landholding Agency: Navy Landholding Agency: Navy Bldg. 349 Property Number: 77199940072 Property Number: 77199930108 Naval Weapons Station Status: Excess Status: Unutilized Fallbrook Co: CA 92028–3187 Reason: Extensive deterioration Reason: Extensive deterioration Landholding Agency: Navy Bldg. 55 Bldg. 456 Property Number: 77199940010 Naval Amphibious Base Naval Weapons Station Seal Beach Status: Unutilized Coronado Co: CA 92118– Seal Beach Co: CA 90740–5000 Reason: Extensive deterioration Landholding Agency: Navy Landholding Agency: Navy Bldg. 362 Property Number: 77199940073 Property Number: 77199930109 Naval Weapons Station Status: Excess Status: Unutilized Fallbrook Co: CA 92028–3187 Reason: Extensive deterioration
VerDate 20
OT68 Space & Navy Warfare Systems Center Status: Excess Camp Pendleton Co: CA 92055– San Diego Co: CA 92152-5001 Reason: Extensive deterioration Landholding Agency: Navy Landholding Agency: Navy Bldg. 32927 Property Number: 77200010097 Property Number: 77200010076 Marine Corps Base Status: Excess Status: Unutilized Camp Pendleton Co: CA 92055– Reason: Extensive deterioration Reason: Floodway Landholding Agency: Navy Bldg. 43336 Bldg. 1234 Property Number: 77200010087 Marine Corps Base Marine Corps Base Status: Excess Camp Pendleton Co: CA 92055– Camp Pendleton Co: CA 92055– Reason: Extensive deterioration Landholding Agency: Navy Landholding Agency: Navy Bldg. 130167 Property Number: 77200010098 Property Number: 77200010077 Marine Corps Base Status: Excess Status: Excess Camp Pendleton Co: CA 92055– Reason: Extensive deterioration Reason: Extensive deterioration Landholding Agency: Navy Bldg. 43337 Bldg. 1439 Property Number: 77200010088 Marine Corps Base Marine Corps Base Status: Excess Camp Pendleton Co: CA 92055– Camp Pendleton Co: CA 92055– Reason: Extensive deterioration Landholding Agency: Navy Landholding Agency: Navy Bldg. 130175 Property Number: 77200010099 Property Number: 77200010078 Marine Corps Base Status: Excess Status: Excess Camp Pendleton Co: CA 92055– Reason: Extensive deterioration Reason: Extensive deterioration Landholding Agency: Navy Bldg. 52651 Bldg. 1443 Property Number: 77200010089 Marine Corps Base Marine Corps Base Status: Excess Camp Pendleton Co: CA 92055– Camp Pendleton Co: CA 92055– Reason: Extensive deterioration Landholding Agency: Navy Landholding Agency: Navy Bldg. 20176 Property Number: 77200010100 Property Number: 77200010079 Marine Corps Base Status: Excess Status: Excess Camp Pendleton Co: CA 92055– Reason: Extensive deterioration Reason: Extensive deterioration Landholding Agency: Navy Connecticut Bldg. 2231 Property Number: 77200010090 DG1–DG8, DG10–DG–27 Marine Corps Base Status: Excess Dolphin Gardens Camp Pendleton Co: CA 92055– Reason: Extensive deterioration Naval Submarine Base New London Landholding Agency: Navy Bldg. 201487 Groton Co: New London Ct 06349– Property Number: 77200010080 Marine Corps Base Landholding Agency: Navy Status: Excess Camp Pendleton Co: CA 92055– Status: Unutilized Reason: Extensive deterioration Landholding Agency: Navy Reason: Extensive deterioration Bldg. 2232 Property Number: 77200010091 Marine Corps Base Status: Excess Florida Camp Pendleton Co: CA 92055– Reason: Extensive deterioration Bldg. 648 Landholding Agency: Navy Bldg. 1684 Naval Air Station Property Number: 77200010081 Marine Corps Base Pensacola Co: Escambia FL 32508– Status: Excess Camp Pendleton Co: CA 92055– Landholding Agency: Navy Reason: Extensive deterioration Landholding Agency: Navy Property Number: 77199920087 Bldg. 2582 Property Number: 77200010092 Status: Unutilized Marine Corps Base Status: Excess Reason: Secured Area Camp Pendleton Co: CA 92055– Reason: Extensive deterioration Bldg. 1882 Landholding Agency: Navy Bldg. 16146 Naval Air Station Property Number: 77200010082 Marine Corps Base Pensacola Co: Escambia FL 32508– Status: Excess Camp Pendleton Co: CA 92055– Landholding Agency: Navy Reason: Extensive deterioration Landholding Agency: Navy Property Number: 77199920088 Bldg. 2583 Property Number: 77200010093 Status: Unutilized Marine Corps Base Status: Excess Reasons: Secured Area, Extensive Camp Pendleton Co: CA 92055– Reason: Extensive deterioration deterioration Landholding Agency: Navy Bldg. 43332 Bldg. 3228 Property Number: 77200010083 Marine Corps Base Naval Air Station Status: Excess Camp Pendleton Co: CA 92055– Pensacola Co: Escambia FL 32508– Reason: Extensive deterioration Landholding Agency: Navy Landholding Agency: Navy Bldg. 21544 Property Number: 77200010094 Property Number: 77199920089 Marine Corps Base Status: Excess Status: Unutilized Camp Pendleton Co: CA 92055– Reason: Extensive deterioration Reason: Secured Area Landholding Agency: Navy Bldg. 43333 Bldg. 3604 Property Number: 77200010084 Marine Corps Base Naval Air Station Status: Excess Camp Pendleton Co: CA 92055– Pensacola Co: Escambia FL 32508– Reason: Extensive deterioration Landholding Agency: Navy Landholding Agency: Navy Bldg. 21549 Property Number: 77200010095 Property Number: 77199920090 Marine Corps Base Status: Excess Status: Unutilized Camp Pendleton Co: CA 92055– Reason: Extensive deterioration Reason: Secured Area Landholding Agency: Navy Bldg. 43334 Bldg. 3605 Property Number: 77200010085 Marine Corps Base Naval Air Station Status: Excess Camp Pendleton Co: CA 92055– Pensacola Co: Escambia FL 32508– Reason: Extensive deterioration Landholding Agency: Navy Landholding Agency: Navy Bldg. 25131 Property Number: 77200010096 Property Number: 77199920091 Marine Corps Base Status: Excess Status: Unutilized Camp Pendleton Co: CA 92055– Reason: Extensive deterioration Reason: Secured Area Landholding Agency: Navy Bldg. 43335 Bldg. 3626 Property Number: 77200010086 Marine Corps Base Naval Air Station
VerDate 20
Pensacola Co: Escambia FL 32508– Naval Submarine Base Bldg. 3151 Landholding Agency: Navy Kings Bay Co: Camden GA 31547– U.S. Naval Forces Property Number: 77199920092 Landholding Agency: Navy COMNAVMARIANAS Status: Unutilized Property Number: 77199940019 Waterfront Annex Co: GU 96540–0051 Reason: Secured Area Status: Unutilized Landholding Agency: Navy Bldg. 3674 Reason: Secured Area Property Number: 77199930051 Naval Air Station Guam Status: Unutilized Reasons: Within 2000 ft. of flammable or Pensacola Co: Escambia FL 32508– Bldg. 296 Landholding Agency: Navy explosive material, Secured Area, Communications Annex Extensive deterioration Property Number: 77199920093 Dededo Co: GU 96537– Status: Unutilized Landholding Agency: Navy Bldg. 3152 Reason: Secured Area Property Number: 77199920132 U.S. Naval Forces Bldg. A–146 Status: Unutilized COMNAVMARIANAS Boca Chica Annex Reason: Secured Area Waterfront Annex Co: GU 96540–0051 Landholding Agency: Navy Naval Air Station Structures 312, 1792 Property Number: 77199930052 Key West Co: Monroe FL 33040– COMNAVMARIANAS Status: Unutilized Landholding Agency: Navy Waterfront Annex Co: GU 96540– Reasons: Within 2000 ft. of flammable or Property Number: 77199930027 Landholding Agency: Navy explosive material, Secured Area, Status: Unutilized Property Number: 77199930002 Extensive deterioration Reason: Extensive deterioration Status: Excess Bldg. A–232 Reason: Secured Area Bldg. 3153 Boca Chica Annex Structures 2020, 2021 U.S. Naval Forces Naval Air Station COMNAVMARIANAS COMNAVMARIANAS Key West Co: Monroe FL 33040– Waterfront Annex Co: GU 96540– Waterfront Annex Co: GU 96540–0051 Landholding Agency: Navy Landholding Agency: Navy Landholding Agency: Navy Property Number: 77199930028 Property Number: 77199930003 Property Number: 77199930053 Status: Unutilized Status: Excess Status: Unutilized Reason: Extensive deterioration Reason: Secured Area Reasons: Within 2000 ft. of flammable or explosive material, Secured Area, Bldg. A–4020 Bldg. 3171 Extensive deterioration Boca Chica Annex COMNAVMARIANAS Bldg. 3154 Naval Air Station Waterfront Annex Co: GU 96540– U.S. Naval Forces Key West Co: Monroe FL 33040– Landholding Agency: Navy COMNAVMARIANAS Landholding Agency: Navy Property Number: 77199930004 Waterfront Annex Co: GU 96540–0051 Property Number: 77199930029 Status: Excess Landholding Agency: Navy Status: Unutilized Reasons: Secured Area, Extensive Property Number: 77199930054 Reason: Extensive deterioration deterioration Status: Unutilized Bldg. 76 Bldg. 3451 Reasons: Within 2000 ft. of flammable or U.S. Naval Forces Naval Air Station explosive material, Secured Area, COMNAVMARIANAS Pensacola Co: Escambia FL 32508– Extensive deterioration Waterfront Annex Co: GU 96540–0051 Landholding Agency: Navy Bldg. 3155 Property Number: 77199940066 Landholding Agency: Navy Property Number: 77199930047 U.S. Naval Forces Status: Unutilized COMNAVMARIANAS Reason: Secured Area Status: Unutilized Reasons: Within 2000 ft. of flammable or Waterfront Annex Co: GU 96540–0051 Georgia explosive material, Secured Area, Landholding Agency: Navy Property Number: 77199930055 Bldg. 3012 Extensive deterioration Status: Unutilized Naval Submarine Base Bldg. 264 Reasons: Within 2000 ft. of flammable or Kings Bay Co: Camden GA 31547– U.S. Naval Forces explosive material, Secured Area, Landholding Agency: Navy COMNAVMARIANAS Extensive deterioration Property Number: 77199910001 Waterfront Annex Co: GU 96540–0051 Status: Unutilized Landholding Agency: Navy Bldg. 3268A Reason: Extensive deterioration Property Number: 77199930048 U.S. Naval Forces Status: Unutilized COMNAVMARIANAS Facility 5001 Reasons: Within 2000 ft. of flammable or Waterfront Annex Co: GU 96540–0051 Naval Submarine Base explosive material, Secured Area, Landholding Agency: Navy Kings Bay Co: Camden GA 31547– Extensive deterioration Property Number: 77199930056 Landholding Agency: Navy Status: Unutilized Property Number: 77199940016 Bldg. 2012 U.S. Naval Forces Reasons: Within 2000 ft. of flammable or Status: Unutilized explosive material, Secured Area, Reason: Secured Area COMNAVMARIANAS Waterfront Annex Co: GU 96540–0051 Extensive deterioration Facility 5002 Landholding Agency: Navy Bldg. 4400 Naval Submarine Base Property Number: 77199930049 U.S. Naval Forces Kings Bay Co: Camden GA 31547– Status: Unutilized COMNAVMARIANAS Landholding Agency: Navy Reasons: Secured Area, Extensive Waterfront Annex Co: GU 96540–0051 Property Number: 77199940017 deterioration Landholding Agency: Navy Status: Unutilized Bldg. 3114 Property Number: 77199930057 Reason: Secured Area U.S. Naval Forces Status: Unutilized Facility 5003 COMNAVMARIANAS Reasons: Secured Area, Extensive Naval Submarine Base Waterfront Annex Co: GU 96540–0051 deterioration Kings Bay Co: Camden GA 31547– Landholding Agency: Navy Bldg. 4402 Landholding Agency: Navy Property Number: 77199930050 U.S. Naval Forces Property Number: 77199940018 Status: Unutilized COMNAVMARIANAS Status: Unutilized Reasons: Within 2000 ft. of flammable or Waterfront Annex Co: GU 96540–0051 Reason: Secured Area explosive material, Secured Area, Landholding Agency: Navy Facility 5935 Extensive deterioration Property Number: 77199930058
VerDate 20
Status: Unutilized Landholding Agency: Navy Naval Station, Ford Island Reasons: Secured Area, Extensive Property Number: 77199230012 Pearl Harbor Co: Honolulu HI 96860– deterioration Status: Unutilized Landholding Agency: Navy Bldg. 4414 Reasons: Within 2000 ft. of flammable or Property Number: 77199640036 U.S. Naval Forces explosive material, Extensive Status: Unutilized COMNAVMARIANAS Deterioration, Secured Area Reason: Extensive deterioration Waterfront Annex Co: GU 96540–0051 Bldg. Q75, Naval Magazine Bldg. 40 Landholding Agency: Navy Lualualei Branch Naval Magazine Lualualei Property Number: 77199930059 Lualualei Co: Oahu HI 96792– Co: Oahu HI 96792–4301 Status: Unutilized Landholding Agency: Navy Landholding Agency: Navy Reasons: Secured Area, Extensive Property Number: 77199230013 Property Number: 77199830028 deterioration Status: Unutilized Status: Unutilized Bldg. 4425 Reasons: Extensive Deterioration, Secured Reason: Extensive deterioration U.S. Naval Forces Area Bldg. 50 COMNAVMARIANAS Bldg. 7, Naval Magazine Naval Magazine Lualualei Waterfront Annex Co: GU 96540–0051 Lualualei Branch Co: Oahu HI 96792–4301 Landholding Agency: Navy Lualualei Co: Oahu HI 96792– Landholding Agency: Navy Property Number: 77199930060 Landholding Agency: Navy Property Number: 77199830029 Status: Unutilized Property Number: 77199230014 Status: Unutilized Reasons: Secured Area, Extensive Status: Unutilized Reason: Extensive deterioration deterioration Reasons: Extensive Deterioration, Secured Bldg. Q76 Bldgs. 4426–4428 Area Naval Magazine Lualualei U.S. Naval Forces Bldg. 6, Pear Harbor Co: Oahu HI 96792–4301 COMNAVMARIANAS Richardson Recreational Area Landholding Agency: Navy Waterfront Annex Co: GU 96540–0051 Honolulu Co: Honolulu HI 96860– Property Number: 77199830030 Landholding Agency: Navy Landholding Agency: Navy Status: Unutilized Property Number: 77199930061 Property Number: 77199410003 Reason: Extensive deterioration Status: Unutilized Status: Unutilized Bldg. Q334 Reasons: Secured Area, Extensive Reason: Extensive deterioration Naval Magazine Lualualei deterioration Bldg. 10, Pear Harbor Co: Oahu HI 96792–4301 Bldg. 5408 Richardson Recreational Area Landholding Agency: Navy U.S. Naval Forces Honolulu Co: Honolulu HI 96860– Property Number: 77199830031 COMNAVMARIANAS Landholding Agency: Navy Status: Unutilized Waterfront Annex Co: GU 96540–0051 Property Number: 77199410004 Reason: Extensive deterioration Landholding Agency: Navy Status: Unutilized Bldg. S380 Property Number: 77199930062 Reason: Extensive deterioration Naval Magazine Lualualei Status: Unutilized Bldg. 9 Co: Oahu HI 96792–4301 Reasons: Within 2000 ft. of flammable or Navy Public Works Center Landholding Agency: Navy explosive material, Secured Area, Kolekole Road Property Number: 77199830032 Extensive deterioration Lualualei Co: Honolulu HI 96782– Status: Unutilized Bldg. 5540 Landholding Agency: Navy Reason: Extensive deterioration U.S. Naval Forces Property Number: 77199530009 Bldg. S381 COMNAVMARIANAS Status: Excess Naval Magazine Lualualei Waterfront Annex Co: GU 96540–0051 Reasons: Within 2000 ft. of flammable or Co: Oahu HI 96792–4301 Landholding Agency: Navy explosive material, Secured Area Landholding Agency: Navy Property Number: 77199930063 Bldg. X5 Property Number: 77199830033 Status: Unutilized Nanumea Road Status: Unutilized Reasons: Within 2000 ft. of flammable or Pearl Harbor Co: Honolulu HI 96782– Reason: Extensive deterioration explosive material, Secured Area, Landholding Agency: Navy Bldg. Q410 Extensive deterioration Property Number: 77199530010 Naval Magazine Lualualei Bldg. 5541 Status: Excess Co: Oahu HI 96792–4301 U.S. Naval Forces Reason: Secured Area Landholding Agency: Navy COMNAVMARIANAS Bldg. SX30 Property Number: 77199830034 Waterfront Annex Co: GU 96540–0051 Nanumea Road Status: Unutilized Landholding Agency: Navy Pearl Harbor Co: Honolulu HI 96860– Reason: Extensive deterioration Property Number: 77199930064 Landholding Agency: Navy Bldg. Q422 Status: Unutilized Property Number: 77199530011 Naval Magazine Lualualei Reasons: Within 2000 ft. of flammable or Status: Excess Co: Oahu HI 96792–4301 explosive material, Secured Area, Reason: Secured Area Landholding Agency: Navy Extensive deterioration Bldg. 98 Property Number: 77199830035 Small Craft Bldg. Pearl Harbor Naval Shipyard Status: Unutilized U.S. Naval Forces Pearl Harbor Co: Honolulu HI 96860– Reason: Extensive deterioration COMNAVMARIANAS Landholding Agency: Navy Bldg. 429 Waterfront Annex Co: GU 96540–0051 Property Number: 77199620032 Naval Magazine Lualualei Landholding Agency: Navy Status: Excess Co: Oahu HI 96792–4301 Property Number: 77199930065 Reason: Extensive deterioration Landholding Agency: Navy Status: Unutilized Bldg. Q13 Property Number: 77199830036 Reasons: Within 2000 ft. of flammable or Naval Station, Ford Island Status: Unutilized explosive material, Secured Area, Pearl Harbor Co: Honolulu HI 96860– Reason: Extensive deterioration Extensive deterioration Landholding Agency: Navy Bldg. 431 Hawaii Property Number: 77199640035 Naval Magazine Lualualei Bldg. 126, Naval Magazine Status: Unutilized Co: Oahu HI 96792–4301 Waikele Branch Reason: Extensive deterioration Landholding Agency: Navy Lualualei Co: Oahu HI 96792– Bldg. Q14 Property Number: 77199830037
VerDate 20
Status: Unutilized Molokai Training Support Facility Naval Training Center Reason: Extensive deterioration Molokai Co: HI 96820– Great Lakes Co: IL 60088–5000 Bldg. 447 Landholding Agency: Navy Landholding Agency: Navy Naval Magazine Lualualei Property Number 77199930069 Property Number: 77199920057 Co: Oahu HI 96792–4301 Status: Unutilized Status: Unutilized Landholding Agency: Navy Reason: Extensive deterioration Reason: Secured Area Property Number: 77199830038 Bldg. 108 Bldg. 1200 Status: Unutilized Molokai Training Support Facility Naval Training Center Reason: Extensive deterioration Molokai Co: HI 96820– Great Lakes Co: IL 60088–5000 Facility S–721 Landholding Agency: Navy Landholding Agency: Navy Naval Station Property Number 77199930070 Property Number: 77199920058 Status: Unutilized Pearl Harbor Co: Honolulu HI 96860– Status: Unutilized Reason: Extensive deterioration Landholding Agency: Navy Reason: Secured Area Bldg. 330 Property Number: 77199840042 Bldg. 1400 Status: Excess NCTAMS PAC Wahiawa Co: HI 96786– Naval Training Center Reason: Secured Area Great Lakes Co: IL 60088–5000 Facility S–897 Landholding Agency: Navy Property Number: 77199940061 Landholding Agency: Navy Naval Station Property Number: 77199920059 Pearl Harbor Co: Honolulu HI 96860– Status: Excess Reason: Extensive deterioration Status: Unutilized Landholding Agency: Navy Reason: Secured Area Property Number: 77199840043 Bldg. 348 Bldg. 1600 Status: Excess NCTAMS PAC Reason: Secured Area Wahiawa Co: HI 96786– Naval Training Center Landholding Agency: Navy Great Lakes Co: IL 60088–5000 Facility S–937 Property Number: 77199940062 Landholding Agency: Navy Naval Station Status: Excess Property Number: 77199920060 Pearl Harbor Co: Honolulu HI 96860– Reason: Extensive deterioration Status: Unutilized Landholding Agency: Navy Reason: Secured Area Property Number: 77199840044 Bldg. 349 Status: Excess NCTAMS PAC Bldg. 2600 Reason: Secured Area Wahiawa Co: HI 96786– Naval Training Center Landholding Agency: Navy Great Lakes Co: IL 60088–5000 Facility 19 Property Number: 77199940063 Landholding Agency: Navy Naval Station Status: Excess Pearl Harbor Co: Honolulu HI 96860– Property Number: 77199920061 Reason: Extensive deterioration Landholding Agency: Navy Status: Unutilized Property Number: 77199840045 Illinois Reason: Secured Area Status: Excess Bldg. 415 Maine Reason: Secured Area Naval Training Center Aircraft Hanger #2 Facility 63 201 N. Decatur Ave. Naval Air Station Naval Computer & Telecomm. Station Great Lakes IL Brunswick Co: Cumberland ME 04011– Wahiawa Co: HI 96786– Landholding Agency: Navy Landholding Agency: Navy Landholding Agency: Navy Property Number: 77199840023 Property Number: 77199810015 Property Number: 77199920013 Status: Unutilized Status: Excess Status: Excess Reason: Secured Area Reason: Extensive deterioration Reason: Extensive deterioration Bldg. 1015 Bldg. 13 Facility SX30 Naval Training Center Naval Air Station Naval Public Works Center 201 N. Decatur Ave. Brunswick Co: Cumberland ME 04011– Pearl Harbor Co: Honolulu HI 96860– Great Lakes IL Landholding Agency: Navy Landholding Agency: Navy Landholding Agency: Navy Property Number: 77199840005 Property Number: 77199920027 Property Number: 77199840024 Status: Excess Status: Excess Status: Unutilized Reason: Extensive deterioration Reason: Secured Area, Extensive Reason: Secured Area deterioration Bldg. 15 Bldg. 1016 Naval Air Base Bldg. 102 Naval Training Center Brunswick Co: Cumberland ME 04011– Molokai Training Support Facility 201 N. Decatur Ave. Landholding Agency: Navy Molokai Co: HI 96820– Great Lakes IL Property Number: 77199840006 Landholding Agency: Navy Landholding Agency: Navy Status: Excess Property Number: 77199930066 Property Number: 77199840025 Reason: Extensive deterioration Status: Unutilized Status: Unutilized Reason: Extensive deterioration Reason: Secured Area Bldg. 16 Naval Air Base Bldg. 103 Bldg. 910 Brunswick Co: Cumberland ME 04011– Molokai Training Support Facility Naval Training Center Landholding Agency: Navy Molokai Co: HI 96820– Great Lakes Co: IL 60088–5000 Property Number: 77199840007 Landholding Agency: Navy Landholding Agency: Navy Property Number: 77199930067 Property Number: 77199920055 Status: Excess Status: Unutilized Status: Unutilized Reason: Extensive deterioration Reason: Extensive deterioration Reason: Secured Area Maryland Bldg. 104 Bldg. 800 15 Bldgs. Molokai Training Support Facility Naval Training Center Naval Air Warfare Center Molokai Co: HI 96820– Great Lakes Co: IL 60088–5000 Patuxent River Co: St. Mary’s MD 20670– Landholding Agency: Navy Landholding Agency: Navy 5304 Property Number 77199930068 Property Number: 77199920056 Landholding Agency: Navy Status: Unutilized Status: Unutilized Property Number: 77199730062 Reason: Extensive deterioration Reason: Secured Area Status: Unutilized Bldg. 107 Bldg. 1000 Reason: Extensive deterioration
VerDate 20
Mississippi Construction Battalion Center Berth 2 Bldg. 78 Gulfport Co: Harrison MS 39501– Portsmouth Naval Shipyard Naval Construction Battalion Center Landholding Agency: Navy Portsmouth NH 03804–5000 Gulfport Co: Harrison MS 39501–5001 Property Number: 77199930015 Landholding Agency: Navy Landholding Agency: Navy Status: Unutilized Property Number: 77199840014 Property Number: 77199830047 Reasons: Secured Area, Extensive Status: Underutilized Status: Unutilized deterioration Reason: Secured Area Reasons: Secured Area, Extensive Bldg. 412 Berth 11 deterioration Construction Battalion Center Portsmouth Naval Shipyard Bldg. 113 Gulfport Co: Harrison MS 39501– Portsmouth NH 03804–5000 Naval Construction Battalion Center Landholding Agency: Navy Landholding Agency: Navy Gulfport Co: Harrison MS 39501–5001 Property Number: 77199930016 Property Number: 77199840015 Landholding Agency: Navy Status: Unutilized Status: Underutilized Property Number: 77199830048 Reasons: Secured Area, Extensive Reason: Secured Area Status: Unutilized deterioration Parcel #1 Reasons: Secured Area, Extensive New Hampshire Portsmouth Naval Shipyard deterioration Portsmouth Co: NH 03804–5000 Bldg. 89 Landholding Agency: Navy Bldg. 147 Portsmouth Naval Shipyard Naval Construction Battalion Center Property Number: 77199910002 Portsmouth NH 03804–5000 Status: Underutilized Gulfport Co: Harrison MS 39501–5001 Landholding Agency: Navy Landholding Agency: Navy Reasons: Within 2000 ft. of flammable or Property Number: 77199830086 explosive material, Secured Area Property Number: 77199830049 Status: Unutilized Status: Unutilized Reason: Secured Area Parcel #2 Reasons: Secured Area, Extensive Portsmouth Naval Shipyard Bldg. 99 deterioration Portsmouth Co: NH 03804–5000 Portsmouth Naval Shipyard Landholding Agency: Navy Bldg. 187 Portsmouth NH 03804–5000 Naval Construction Battalion Center Property Number: 77199910003 Landholding Agency: Navy Status: Underutilized Gulfport Co: Harrison MS 39501–5001 Property Number: 77199830088 Landholding Agency: Navy Reasons: Within 2000 ft. of flammable or Status: Unutilized explosive material, Secured Area Property Number: 77199830050 Reason: Secured Area Status: Unutilized Parcel #3 Bldg. 115 Reasons: Secured Area, Extensive Portsmouth Naval Shipyard Portsmouth Naval Shipyard deterioration Portsmouth Co: NH 03804–5000 Portsmouth NH 03804–5000 Bldg. 7 Landholding Agency: Navy Landholding Agency: Navy Property Number: 77199910004 Construction Battalion Center Property Number: 77199830089 Gulfport Co: Harrison MS 39501– Status: Underutilized Status: Unutilized Reasons: Within 2000 ft. of flammable or Landholding Agency: Navy Reason: Secured Area Property Number: 77199930010 explosive material, Extensive deterioration Bldg. 178 Status: Unutilized Bldg. 55 Portsmouth Naval Shipyard Reasons: Secured Area, Extensive Portsmouth Naval Shipyard Portsmouth NH 03804–5000 deterioration Portsmouth Co: NH 03804–5000 Landholding Agency: Navy Landholding Agency: Navy Bldg. 75 Property Number: 77199830090 Construction Battalion Center Property Number: 77199940020 Status: Unutilized Status: Unutilized Gulfport Co: Harrison MS 39501– Reason: Secured Area Landholding Agency: Navy Reason: Secured Area Bldg. 298 Property Number: 77199930011 Bldg. 150 Portsmouth Naval Shipyard Status: Unutilized Portsmouth Naval Shipyard Portsmouth NH 03804–5000 Reasons: Secured Area, Extensive Portsmouth Co: NH 03804–5000 Landholding Agency: Navy deterioration Landholding Agency: Navy Property Number: 77199830091 Property Number: 77199940021 Bldg. 179 Status: Unutilized Construction Battalion Center Status: Unutilized Reasons: Within 2000 ft. of flammable or Reason: Secured Area Gulfport Co: Harrison MS 39501– explosive material, Secured Area Landholding Agency: Navy New Jersey Bldg. H–21 Property Number: 77199930012 Portsmouth Naval Shipyard Bldg. 188 Status: Unutilized Portsmouth NH 03804–5000 Naval Air Engineering Station Reasons: Secured Area, Extensive Landholding Agency: Navy Lakehurst Co: Ocean NJ 08733–5000 deterioration Property Number: 77199830092 Landholding Agency: Navy Structure 262 Status: Unutilized Property Number: 77199830065 Construction Battalion Center Reasons: Within 2000 ft. of flammable or Status: Unutilized Gulfport Co: Harrison MS 39501– explosive material, Secured Area Reason: Extensive deterioration Landholding Agency: Navy Dry Dock 1 Bldg. 473 Property Number: 77199930013 Portsmouth Naval Shipyard Naval Air Engineering Station Status: Unutilized Portsmouth NH 03804–5000 Lakehurst Co: Ocean NJ 08733–5000 Reasons: Secured Area, Extensive Landholding Agency: Navy Landholding Agency: Navy deterioration Property Number: 77199840012 Property Number: 77199920024 Bldg. 279 Status: Underutilized Status: Unutilized Construction Battalion Center Reason: Secured Area Reason: Extensive deterioration Gulfport Co: Harrison MS 39501– Dry Dock 3 Bldg. 474 Landholding Agency: Navy Portsmouth Naval Shipyard Naval Air Engineering Station Property Number: 77199930014 Portsmouth NH 03804–5000 Lakehurst Co: Ocean NJ 08733–5000 Status: Unutilized Landholding Agency: Navy Landholding Agency: Navy Reasons: Secured Area, Extensive Property Number: 77199840013 Property Number: 77199920025 deterioration Status: Underutilized Status: Unutilized Bldg. 326 Reason: Secured Area Reason: Extensive deterioration
VerDate 20
Bldgs. 220, 234, 236 Camp Lejeune Co: Onslow NC 28542–0004 Status: Unutilized Naval Air Engineering Station Landholding Agency: Navy Reason: Extensive deterioration Lakehurst Co: Ocean NJ 08733–5000 Property Number: 77199920063 Facility 22 Landholding Agency: Navy Status: Unutilized Naval Support Station Property Number: 77199930017 Reasons: Secured Area, Extensive Philadelphia Co: PA 19111–5098 Status: Unutilized deterioration Landholding Agency: Navy Reason: Extensive deterioration Bldg. 2159 Property Number: 77199940060 28 Sheds Marine Corps Air Station, Cherry Point Status: Excess Naval Weapons Station Havelock Co: Craven NC 28532– Reason: Extensive deterioration Colts Neck Co: NJ 07722– Landholding Agency: Navy Puerto Rico Landholding Agency: Navy Property Number: 77199920146 Property Number: 77199940026 Status: Unutilized Bldg. 433 Status: Unutilized Reasons: Secured Area, Extensive Naval Station Roosevelt Roads Reason: Extensive deterioration deterioration Ceiba PR 00735– Landholding Agency: Navy North Carolina Structure 3758 Property Number: 77199830066 Marine Corps Air Station, Cherry Point Bldg. 96 Status: Unutilized Havelock Co: Craven NC 28532– Reason: Extensive deterioration Marine Corps Air Station, Cherry Point Landholding Agency: Navy Havelock Co: Craven NC 28533– Property Number: 77199920147 Bldg. 434 Naval Station Roosevelt Roads Landholding Agency: Navy Status: Excess Ceiba PR 00735– Property Number: 77199820111 Reasons: Secured Area, Extensive Landholding Agency: Navy Status: Unutilized deterioration Reasons: Secured Area, Extensive Property Number: 77199830067 deterioration Bldg. 8027 Status: Unutilized Marine Corps Air Station, Cherry Point Reason: Extensive deterioration Bldg. 97 Bogue Co: NC 28584– Bldg. 464 Marine Corps Air Station, Cherry Point Landholding Agency: Navy Naval Station Roosevelt Roads Havelock Co: Craven NC 28533– Property Number: 77199930043 Ceiba PR 00735– Landholding Agency: Navy Status: Excess Property Number: 77199820112 Landholding Agency: Navy Reasons: Secured Area, Extensive Property Number: 77199830068 Status: Unutilized deterioration Reasons: Secured Area, Extensive Status: Unutilized deterioration Bldg. 8028 Reason: Extensive deterioration Marine Corps Air Station, Cherry Point Bldg. 169 Bldg. 762 Bogue Co: NC 28584– Naval Station Roosevelt Roads Marine Corps Air Station, Cherry Point Landholding Agency: Navy Havelock Co: Craven NC 28533– Ceiba PR 00735– Property Number: 77199930044 Landholding Agency: Navy Landholding Agency: Navy Status: Excess Property Number: 77199820113 Property Number: 77199830069 Reasons: Secured Area, Extensive Status: Unutilized Status: Unutilized deterioration Reasons: Secured Area, Extensive Reason: Extensive deterioration deterioration Bldg. 1649 Bldg. 763 Marine Corps Air Station, Cherry Point Bldg. 196 Naval Station Roosevelt Roads Havelock Co: Craven NC 28533– Ceiba PR 00735– Marine Corps Air Station, Cherry Point Landholding Agency: Navy Havelock Co: Craven NC 28533– Landholding Agency: Navy Property Number: 77199940022 Property Number: 77199830070 Landholding Agency: Navy Status: Excess Property Number: 77199820114 Status: Unutilized Reasons: Secured Area, Extensive Reason: Extensive deterioration Status: Unutilized deterioration Reasons: Secured Area, Extensive Bldg. 1927 deterioration Pennsylvania Naval Station Roosevelt Roads Bldg. 477 Bldg. 524 Ceiba PR 00735– Marine Corps Air Station, Cherry Point Naval Systems Engineering Station Landholding Agency: Navy Havelock Co: Craven NC 28533– Philadelphia PA 19112– Property Number: 77199830071 Landholding Agency: Navy Landholding Agency: Navy Status: Unutilized Property Number: 77199820115 Property Number: 77199830023 Reason: Extensive deterioration Status: Unutilized Status: Unutilized Bldg. 175 Reasons: Within 2000 ft. of flammable or Reason: Extensive deterioration Naval Station Roosevelt Roads explosive material, Secured Area, Bldg. 152 Ceiba PR 00735– Extensive deterioration Naval Air Station Willow Grove Landholding Agency: Navy Bldg. 3422 Willow Grove Co: Montgomery PA 19113– Property Number: 77199830072 Marine Corps Air Station, Cherry Point Landholding Agency: Navy Status: Unutilized Havelock Co: Craven NC 28533– Property Number: 77199930018 Reason: Extensive deterioration Landholding Agency: Navy Status: Excess Former No. 2091 Property Number: 77199820116 Reason: Extensive deterioration Naval Station Roosevelt Roads Status: Unutilized Bldg. 185 Ceiba PR 00735– Reasons: Secured Area, Extensive Naval Air Station Willow Grove Landholding Agency: Navy deterioration Willow Grove Co: Montgomery PA 19113– Property Number: 77199830073 Bldg. TC–849 Landholding Agency: Navy Status: Unutilized Camp Lejeune Property Number: 77199930019 Reason: Extensive deterioration Camp Lejeune Co: Onslow NC 28542–0004 Status: Excess Bldg. 261/1692 Landholding Agency: Navy Reason: Extensive deterioration Naval Station Roosevelt Roads Property Number: 77199920062 Bldg. 603 Ceiba PR 00735– Status: Unutilized Naval Support Station Landholding Agency: Navy Reasons: Secured Area, Extensive Mechanicsburg Co: Cumberland PA 17055– Property Number: 77199830074 deterioration 0788 Status: Unutilized Bldg. TC–852 Landholding Agency: Navy Reason: Extensive deterioration Camp Lejeune Property Number: 77199940015 B–38
VerDate 20
Naval Station Roosevelt Roads Landholding Agency: Navy Texas Ceiba PR 00735– Property Number: 77199920123 Bldgs. 1561, 1562, 1563 Landholding Agency: Navy Status: Underutilized Naval Air Station Joint Reserve Base Property Number: 77199830075 Reason: Secured Area Ft. Worth Co: Tarrant TX 76127–6200 Status: Unutilized Bldg. 458 Landholding Agency: Navy Reason: Extensive deterioration STOP 71⁄2 Compound, Naval Reservation Property Number: 77199820050 Bldg. 781 San Juan Co: PR 34051– Status: Unutilized Naval Station Roosevelt Roads Landholding Agency: Navy Reasons: Secured Area, Extensive Ceiba Co: PR 00735– Property Number: 77199920124 deterioration Landholding Agency: Navy Status: Unutilized Bldg. 1190 Property Number: 77199910006 Reason: Extensive deterioration Naval Air Station Joint Reserve Base Status: Unutilized Bldgs. 461, 2157 Ft. Worth Co: Tarrant TX 76127–6200 Reason: Extensive deterioration STOP 71⁄2 Compound, Naval Reservation Landholding Agency: Navy Bldg. 1740 San Juan Co: PR 34051– Property Number: 77199820053 Naval Base Roosevelt Roads Landholding Agency: Navy Status: Unutilized Ceiba Co: PR 00735– Property Number: 77199920125 Reasons: Secured Area Landholding Agency: Navy Status: Underutilized Bldg. 1820 Property Number: 77199910007 Reason: Secured Area Naval Air Station Joint Reserve Base Status: Unutilized Bldgs. 28–29 Ft. Worth Co: Tarrant TX 76127–6200 Reason: Extensive deterioration STOP 71⁄2 Compound, Naval Reservation Landholding Agency: Navy Bldg. 1933 San Juan Co: PR 34051– Property Number: 77199820054 Naval Base Roosevelt Roads Landholding Agency: Navy Status: Unutilized Ceiba Co: PR 00735– Property Number: 77199920126 Reasons: Secured Area, Extensive Landholding Agency: Navy Status: Unutilized deterioration Property Number: 77199910008 Reason: Extensive deterioration Facilities 105 and 105C Status: Unutilized Bldgs. 30–31 Naval Station Reason: Extensive deterioration STOP 71⁄2 Compound, Naval Reservation Corpus Christi Co: Nueces TX 78419–5021 Bldgs. 1934 San Juan Co: PR 34051– Landholding Agency: Navy Naval Base Roosevelt Roads Landholding Agency: Navy Property Number: 77199910012 Ceiba Co: PR 00735– Property Number: 77199920127 Status: Unutilized Landholding Agency: Navy Status: Unutilized Reason: Extensive deterioration Property Number: 77199910009 Reason: Extensive deterioration Bldg. 101 Status: Unutilized Bldg. 104 Naval Air Station Reason: Extensive deterioration STOP 71⁄2 Compound, Naval Reservation Corpus Christi Co: Nueces TX 78419–5021 Bldg. 1976 San Juan Co: PR 34051– Landholding Agency: Navy Naval Base Roosevelt Roads Landholding Agency: Navy Property Number: 77199940052 Ceiba Co: PR 00735– Property Number: 77199920128 Status: Excess Landholding Agency: Navy Status: Unutilized Reason: Extensive deterioration Property Number: 77199910010 Reason: Extensive deterioration Bldg. 198 Status: Unutilized Bldg. 459 Naval Air Station Reason: Extensive deterioration STOP 71⁄2 Compound, Naval Reservation Corpus Christi Co: Nueces TX 78419–5021 Bldg. 2001 San Juan Co: PR 34051– Landholding Agency: Navy Naval Base Roosevelt Roads Landholding Agency: Navy Property Number: 77199940053 Ceiba Co: PR 00735– Property Number: 77199920129 Status: Excess Landholding Agency: Navy Status: Unutilized Reason: Extensive deterioration Property Number: 77199910011 Reason: Extensive deterioration Bldg. 1104 Status: Unutilized Structure 460 Naval Air Station Reason: Extensive deterioration STOP 71⁄2 Compound, Naval Reservation Corpus Christi Co: Nueces TX 78419–5021 4 Bldgs. San Juan Co: PR 34051– Landholding Agency: Navy STOP 71⁄2 Compound, Naval Reservation Landholding Agency: Navy Property Number: 77199940054 San Juan Co: PR 34051– Property Number: 77199920130 Status: Excess Location: 440, 441, 442, 443 Status: Underutilized Reason: Extensive deterioration Landholding Agency: Navy Reason: Secured Area Bldg. 1198 Property Number: 77199920120 Rhode Island Naval Air Station Status: Underutilized Corpus Christi Co: Nueces TX 78419–5021 Reason: Secured Area Bldg. 52 Landholding Agency: Navy Gould Island, Naval Station Bldg. 444 Property Number: 77199940055 Newport Co: RI 00000– STOP 71⁄2 Compound, Naval Reservation Status: Excess Landholding Agency: Navy San Juan Co: PR 34051– Reason: Extensive deterioration Property Number: 77199930020 Landholding Agency: Navy Status: Excess Bldg. 1823 Property Number: 77199920121 Reasons: Not accessible by road, Extensive Naval Air Station Status: Underutilized Corpus Christi Co: Nueces TX 78419–5021 deterioration Reason: Secured Area Landholding Agency: Navy Bldgs. 445–447 Tennessee Property Number: 77199940056 STOP 71⁄2 Compound, Naval Reservation 20 Bldgs. Status: Excess San Juan Co: PR 34051– Naval Support Activity Reason: Extensive deterioration Landholding Agency: Navy Millington Co: Shelby TN 38054– Bldg. H–9 Property Number: 77199920122 Location: 766, 1597–1598, 5238, 435–446, Naval Air Station Status: Underutilized S239, S75, 1211, 1379 Corpus Christi Co: Nueces TX 78419–5021 Reason: Secured Area Landholding Agency: Navy Landholding Agency: Navy 6 Bldgs. Property Number: 77199940027 Property Number: 77199940057 STOP 71⁄2 Compound, Naval Reservation Status: Excess Status: Excess San Juan Co: PR 34051– Reasons: Secured Area, Extensive Reason: Extensive deterioration Location: 448, 449, 450, 451, 452, 455 deterioration Bldg. H–45
VerDate 20
Naval Air Station Williamsburg VA 23185– Property Number: 77199920071 Corpus Christi Co: Nueces TX 78419–5021 Landholding Agency: Navy Status: Excess Landholding Agency: Navy Property Number: 77199830084 Reason: Extensive deterioration Property Number: 77199940058 Status: Unutilized Bldg. 454 Status: Excess Reasons: Secured Area, Extensive Norfolk Naval Shipyard Reason: Extensive deterioration deterioration Portsmouth Co: VA 23709– Bldg. H–54 Bldg. 1256 Landholding Agency: Navy Naval Air Station Naval Amphibious Base Little Creek Property Number: 77199920072 Corpus Christi Co: Nueces TX 78419–5021 Norfolk Co: VA 23521–2616 Status: Excess Landholding Agency: Navy Landholding Agency: Navy Reason: Extensive deterioration Property Number: 77199940059 Property Number: 77199910013 Bldg. 708 Status: Excess Status: Excess Norfolk Naval Shipyard Reason: Extensive deterioration Reason: Extensive deterioration Portsmouth Co: VA 23709– Virginia Bldg. W219 Landholding Agency: Navy Naval Base Norfolk Property Number: 77199920073 Fleet Training Center Norfolk Co: VA 23511– Status: Excess Fire Fighting Training Facility Landholding Agency: Navy Reason: Extensive deterioration SDA–323, SDA–324, SDA–325, SDA–326 Property Number: 77199910014 Bldg. 709 Norfolk, VA 23511– Status: Excess Norfolk Naval Shipyard Landholding Agency: Navy Reason: Secured Area Portsmouth Co: VA 23709– Property Number: 77199740010 Bldg. SP76AQ Landholding Agency: Navy Status: Unutilized Naval Air Station Property Number: 77199920074 Reason: Extensive deterioration Norfolk Co: VA 23511–2797 Status: Excess Bldg. 02 Landholding Agency: Navy Reason: Extensive deterioration Naval Weapons Station Property Number: 77199910051 Bldg. 710 Yorktown Co: York VA 23691– Status: Excess Norfolk Naval Shipyard Landholding Agency: Navy Reason: Extensive deterioration Portsmouth Co: VA 23709– Property Number: 77199810073 Bldg. CA502 Landholding Agency: Navy Status: Excess Naval Station Norfolk Property Number: 77199920075 Reason: Extensive deterioration Norfolk Co: VA 23511– Status: Excess Bldg. 2208 Landholding Agency: Navy Reason: Extensive deterioration Naval Medical Clinic Property Number: 77199910052 Bldg. 711 Quantico, VA Status: Excess Norfolk Naval Shipyard Landholding Agency: Navy Reason: Secured Area Portsmouth Co: VA 23709– Property Number: 77199820001 Bldg. 3074 Landholding Agency: Navy Status: Unutilized Marine Corps Base Property Number: 77199920076 Reason: Extensive deterioration Quantico Co: VA 22134– Status: Excess Bldgs. 358, 359 Landholding Agency: Navy Reason: Extensive deterioration Cheatham Annex Property Number: 77199920026 Bldg. 712 Williamsburg, VA 23185– Status: Unutilized Norfolk Naval Shipyard Landholding Agency: Navy Reason: Extensive deterioration Portsmouth Co: VA 23709– Property Number: 77199820023 Bldg. SC–319 Landholding Agency: Navy Status: Excess Armed Forces Staff College Property Number: 77199920077 Reason: Extensive deterioration Norfolk Naval Base Status: Excess Bldgs. CAD–43 Norfolk Co: VA 23511–1702 Reason: Extensive deterioration Cheatham Annex Landholding Agency: Navy Bldg. 713 Williamsburg, VA 23185– Property Number: 77199920067 Norfolk Naval Shipyard Landholding Agency: Navy Status: Excess Portsmouth Co: VA 23709– Property Number: 77199820024 Reason: Extensive deterioration Landholding Agency: Navy Status: Excess Bldg. 449 Property Number: 77199920078 Reason: Extensive deterioration Norfolk Naval Shipyard Status: Excess Bldg. CAD–102 Portsmouth Co: VA 23709– Reason: Extensive deterioration Cheatham Annex Landholding Agency: Navy Bldg. 714 Williamsburg, VA 23185– Property Number: 77199920068 Norfolk Naval Shipyard Landholding Agency: Navy Status: Excess Portsmouth Co: VA 23709– Property Number: 77199820025 Reason: Extensive deterioration Landholding Agency: Navy Status: Excess Bldg. 450 Property Number: 77199920079 Reason: Extensive deterioration Norfolk Naval Shipyard Status: Excess Bldg. CAD–102A Portsmouth Co: VA 23709– Reason: Extensive deterioration Cheatham Annex Landholding Agency: Navy Bldg. 715 Williamsburg VA 23185– Property Number: 77199920069 Norfolk Naval Shipyard Landholding Agency: Navy Status: Excess Portsmouth Co: VA 23709– Property Number: 77199820026 Reason: Extensive deterioration Landholding Agency: Navy Status: Excess Bldg. 451 Property Number: 77199920080 Reason: Extensive deterioration Norfolk Naval Shipyard Status: Excess Bldg. CAD–127 Portsmouth Co: VA 23709– Reason: Extensive deterioration Cheatham Annex Landholding Agency: Navy Bldg. 716 Williamsburg VA 23185– Property Number: 77199920070 Norfolk Naval Shipyard Landholding Agency: Navy Status: Excess Portsmouth Co: VA 23709– Property Number: 77199820027 Reason: Extensive deterioration Landholding Agency: Navy Status: Excess Bldg. 453 Property Number: 77199920081 Reason: Extensive deterioration Norfolk Naval Shipyard Status: Excess Bldg. CAD–40 Portsmouth Co: VA 23709– Reason: Extensive deterioration Cheatham Annex Landholding Agency: Navy Bldg. 717
VerDate 20
Norfolk Naval Shipyard Coal Handling Facilties Landholding Agency: Navy Portsmouth Co: VA 23709– Puget Sound Naval Shipyard Property Number: 77199930022 Landholding Agency: Navy #908, 919, 926–929 Status: Excess Property Number: 77199920082 Bremerton WA 98314–5000 Reasons: Within 2000 ft. of flammable or Status: Excess Landholding Agency: Navy explosive material, Secured Area, Reason: Extensive deterioration Property Number: 77199820142 Extensive deterioration Bldg. 718 Status: Excess Bldg. 527 Norfolk Naval Shipyard Reason: Within 2000 ft. of flammable or Naval Station Bremerton Portsmouth Co: VA 23709– explosive material Bremerton Co: WA 98314– Landholding Agency: Navy Bldg. 193 Landholding Agency: Navy Property Number: 77199920083 Puget Sound Naval Shipyard Property Number: 77199930023 Status: Excess Bremerton WA 98310– Status: Excess Reason: Extensive deterioration Landholding Agency: Navy Reasons: Within 2000 ft. of flammable or Bldg. 1454 Property Number: 77199820143 explosive material, Secured Area Norfolk Naval Shipyard Status: Unutilized Bldg. 97 Portsmouth Co: VA 23709– Reason: Contamination Naval Air Station Landholding Agency: Navy Bldg. 202 Whidbey Island Property Number: 77199920084 Naval Air Station Whidbey Island Oak Harbor Co: WA 98278– Status: Excess Oak Harbor WA 98278– Landholding Agency: Navy Reason: Extensive deterioration Landholding Agency: Navy Property Number: 77199930040 Bldg. 3170 Property Number: 77199830019 Status: Unutilized Marine Corps Base Status: Excess Reason: Extensive deterioration Quantico Co: VA 22134– Reason: Within 2000 ft. of flammable or Bldg. 331 Landholding Agency: Navy explosive material Naval Undersea Warfare Center Property Number: 77199940064 Bldg. 2649 Keyport Co: Kitsap WA 98345– Status: Unutilized Naval Air Station Whidbey Island Landholding Agency: Navy Reason: Extensive deterioration Oak Harbor WA 98278– Property Number: 77199930041 Bldgs. 1252, 1277 Landholding Agency: Navy Status: Unutilized Marine Corps Base Property Number: 77199830020 Reasons: Secured Area, Extensive Quantico Co: VA 22134– Status: Excess deterioration Landholding Agency: Navy Reasons: Within 2000 ft. of flammable or Bldg. 786 Property Number: 77199940065 explosive material, Extensive deterioration Naval Undersea Warfare Center Status: Unutilized Bldg. 35, 36 Keyport Co: Kitsap WA 98345– Reason: Extensive deterioration Naval Radio Station T Jim Creek Landholding Agency: Navy Washington Arlington Co: Snohomish WA 98223– Property Number: 77199930042 Landholding Agency: Navy Status: Unutilized Bldg. 6661 Property Number: 77199830076 Reasons: Secured Area, Extensive Naval Submarine Base, Bangor Status: Unutilized deterioration Silverdale Co: Kitsap WA 98315–6499 Reason: Extensive deterioration Bldg. 15 Landholding Agency: Navy Naval Air Station, Whidbey Island Property Number: 77199730039 Bldg. 918 Oak Harbor Co: WA 98278–3500 Status: Unutilzied Puget Sound Naval Shipyard Reason: Secured Area Bremerton WA 98314–5000 Landholding Agency: Navy Property Number: 77199930071 Bldg. 604 Landholding Agency: Navy Property Number: 77199840020 Status: Unutilized Manchester Fuel Department Reason: Extensive deterioration Port Orchard WA 98366– Status: Unutilized Landholding Agency: Navy Reasons: Within 2000 ft. of flammable or Bldg. 119 Property Number: 77199810170 explosive material, Secured Area Naval Air Station, Whidbey Island Status: Excess Bldg. 894 Oak Harbor Co: WA 98278–3500 Reason: Within 2000 ft. of flammable or Naval Undersea Warfare Center Landholding Agency: Navy explosive material, Secured Area Keyport Co: Kitsap WA 98345–7610 Property Number: 77199930072 Landholding Agency: Navy Status: Unutilized Bldg. 288 Reason: Extensive deterioration Fleet Industrial Supply Center Property Number: 77199920085 Bremerton WA 98314–5100 Status: Underutilized Bldg. 853 Landholding Agency: Navy Reasons: Within 2000 ft. of flammable or Naval Air Station, Whidbey Island Property Number: 77199810171 explosive material, Secured Area Oak Harbor Co: WA 98278–3500 Status: Excess Bldg. 73 Landholding Agency: Navy Reason: Within 2000 ft. of flammable or Naval Undersea Warfare Center Property Number: 77199930073 explosive material, Secured Area Keyport Co: Kitsap WA 98345— Status: Unutilized Reason: Extensive deterioration Bldg. 47 Landholding Agency: Navy Naval Radio Station T Jim Creek Property Number: 77199920152 Bldg. 854 Arlington Co: Snohomish WA 98223– Status: Underutilized Naval Air Station, Whidbey Island Landholding Agency: Navy Reasons: Within 2000 ft. of flammable or Oak Harbor Co: WA 98278–3500 Property Number: 77199820056 explosive material, Secured Area Landholding Agency: Navy Status: Unutilized Bldg. 210A Property Number: 77199930074 Reason: Secured Area, Extensive Naval Station Bremerton Status: Unutilized deterioration Bremerton Co: WA 98314— Reason: Extensive deterioration Bldg. 48 Landholding Agency: Navy Bldg. 166 Naval Radio Station T Jim Creek Property Number: 77199930021 Puget Sound Naval Shipyard Arlington Co: Snohomish WA 98223– Status: Excess Bremerton Co: WA 98314–5000 Landholding Agency: Navy Reasons: Within 2000 ft. of flammable or Landholding Agency: Navy Property Number: 77199820057 explosive material, Secured Area Property Number: 77199930101 Status: Unutilized Bldg. 511 Status: Excess Reason: Secured Area, Extensive Naval Station Bremerton Reason: Secured Area deterioration Bremerton Co: WA 98314— Bldg. 287
VerDate 20
Puget Sound Naval Shipyard Portion/Off Heritage Road North Carolina Bremerton Co: WA 98314–5000 San Diego CA 90012–1408 0.85 parcel of land Landholding Agency: Navy Landholding Agency: Navy Property Number: 77199930102 Marine Corps Air Station, Property Number: 77199820049 Cherry Point Status: Excess Status: Excess Reason: Secured Area Havelock Co: Craven NC 28533– Reason: Within 2000 ft. of flammable or Landholding Agency: Navy Bldg. 418 explosive material Puget Sound Naval Shipyard Property Number: 77199740074 Land Bremerton Co: WA 98314–5000 Status: Unutilized Landholding Agency: Navy Naval Construction Battalion Center Reason: Secured Area Port Hueneme Co: Ventura CA 93043–4301 Property Number: 77199930103 Washington Status: Excess Landholding Agency: Navy Reason: Secured Area Property Number: 77199940001 Land-Port Hadlock Detachment Bldg. 858 Status: Underutilized Naval Ordnance Center Puget Sound Naval Shipyard Reason: Secured Area Pacific Division Bremerton Co: WA 98314–5000 Maryland Port Hadlock Co: Jefferson WA 98339– Landholding Agency: Navy Landholding Agency: Navy Property Number: 77199930104 6 Acres Property Number: 77199640019 Status: Excess Naval Air Station Status: Underutilized Reason: Secured Area Patuxent River Co: MD 20670– Reasons: Within 2000 ft. of flammable or Landholding Agency: Navy Land (by State) explosive material, Secured Area Property Number: 77199940023 California Status: Unutilized [FR Doc. 00–6989 Filed 3–23–00; 8:45 am] Space Surv. Field Station Reason: Secured Area BILLING CODE 4210±29±M
VerDate 20
Part V
Department of the Interior Fish and Wildlife Service
50 CFR Part 17 Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Determination of Threatened Status for the Contiguous U.S. Distinct Population Segment of the Canada Lynx and Related Rule; Final Rule
VerDate 20
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR long legs and large feet make it highly the lynx is highly adapted (Ruggiero et adapted for hunting in deep snow. al. 1999b). Fish and Wildlife Service The bobcat (Lynx rufus) is a North We consider lynx in the contiguous American relative of the lynx. United States to be part of a larger 50 CFR Part 17 Compared to the lynx, the bobcat has metapopulation whose core is located in RIN 1018±AF03 smaller paws, shorter ear tufts, and a the northern boreal forest of central more spotted pelage (coat), and only the Canada; lynx populations emanate from Endangered and Threatened Wildlife top of the tip of the tail is black. The this area (Buskirk et al. 1999b; and Plants; Determination of paws of the lynx have twice the surface McKelvey et al. 1999a, 1999b). The Threatened Status for the Contiguous area as those of the bobcat (Quinn and boreal forest extends south into the U.S. Distinct Population Segment of Parker 1987). The lynx also differs in its contiguous United States along the the Canada Lynx and Related Rule body proportions in comparison to the Cascade and Rocky Mountain Ranges in bobcat. Lynx have longer legs, with hind the West, the western Great Lakes AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, legs that are longer than the front legs, Region, and along the Appalachian Interior. giving the lynx a ‘‘stooped’’ appearance Mountain Range of the northeastern ACTION: Final rule. (Quinn and Parker 1987). Bobcats are United States. At its southern margins, largely restricted to habitats where deep the boreal forest becomes naturally SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and snows do not accumulate (Koehler and fragmented into patches of varying size Wildlife Service (Service), determine Hornocker 1991). Hybridization as it transitions into other vegetation threatened status for the contiguous U.S. (breeding) between lynx and bobcat is types. These southern boreal forest Distinct Population Segment of the not known (Quinn and Parker 1987). habitat patches are small relative to the Canada lynx (Lynx canadensis), with a Classification of the Canada lynx (also extensive northern boreal forest of special rule, pursuant to the Endangered Canada and Alaska, which constitutes Species Act of 1973, as amended. This called the North American lynx) has been subject to revision. In accordance the majority of the lynx range. population segment occurs in forested Many of these southern boreal forest with Wilson and Reeder (1993), we portions of the States of Colorado, habitat patches within the contiguous currently recognize the lynx in North Idaho, Maine, Michigan, Minnesota, United States are able to support America as Lynx canadensis. We Montana, New Hampshire, New York, resident populations of lynx and their previously used the latin name L. lynx Oregon, Utah, Vermont, Washington, primary prey species. It is likely that canadensis for the lynx (Jones et al. and Wisconsin. The contiguous U.S. some of the habitat patches act as 1992; S. Williams, Texas Tech Distinct Population Segment of the lynx sources of lynx (recruitment is greater is threatened by the inadequacy of University, pers. comm. 1994). Other than mortality) that are able to disperse existing regulatory mechanisms. Current scientific names still in use include and potentially colonize other patches U.S. Forest Service Land and Resource Felis lynx or F. lynx canadensis (Jones (McKelvey et al. 1999a). Other habitat Management Plans include programs, et al. 1986; Tumlison 1987). patches act as ‘‘sinks’’ where lynx practices, and activities within the The historical and present range of mortality is greater than recruitment and authority and jurisdiction of Federal the lynx north of the contiguous United lynx are lost from the overall land management agencies that may States includes Alaska and that part of population. The ability of naturally threaten lynx or lynx habitat. The lack Canada that extends from the Yukon dynamic habitat to support lynx of protection for lynx in these Plans and Northwest Territories south across populations may change as the habitat render them inadequate to protect the the United States border and east to undergoes natural succession following species. New Brunswick and Nova Scotia. In the natural or manmade disturbances (i.e., contiguous United States, lynx fire, clearcutting). In addition, EFFECTIVE DATE: April 24, 2000. historically occurred in the Cascades fluctuations in the prey populations ADDRESSES: The complete file for this Range of Washington and Oregon; the may cause some habitat patches to rule is available for inspection, by Rocky Mountain Range in Montana, change from being sinks to sources and appointment, during normal business Wyoming, Idaho, eastern Washington, vice versa. Throughout this document, hours at the Montana Field Office, U.S. eastern Oregon, northern Utah, and we use the term ‘‘resident population’’ Fish and Wildlife Service, 100 N. Park Colorado; the western Great Lakes to refer to a group of lynx that has Avenue, Suite 320, Helena, Montana Region; and the northeastern United exhibited long-term persistence in an 59601. States region from Maine southwest to area based on a variety of factors, such FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: New York (McCord and Cardoza 1982; as evidence of reproduction, successful Kemper McMaster, Field Supervisor, Quinn and Parker 1987) (see recruitment into the breeding cohort, Montana Field Office (see ADDRESSES ‘‘Distribution and Status’’ section). and maintenance of home ranges. We section) (telephone 406/449–5225; In the contiguous United States, the use the word ‘‘transient’’ to refer to a facsimile 406/449–5339). distribution of the lynx is associated lynx moving from one place to another with the southern boreal forest, within suitable habitat. Another word Background comprising of subalpine coniferous we use throughout the document is The Canada lynx, hereafter referred to forest in the West and primarily mixed ‘‘dispersing,’’ which refers to lynx that as lynx, is a medium-sized cat with long coniferous/deciduous forest in the East have left suitable habitat for various legs; large, well-furred paws; long tufts (Aubry et al. 1999) (see ‘‘Distribution reasons, such as competition or lack of on the ears; and a short, black-tipped and Status’’ section); whereas in Canada food. When dispersing lynx leave tail (McCord and Cardoza 1982). Adult and Alaska, lynx inhabit the classic suitable habitat and enter habitats that males average 10 kilograms (22 pounds) boreal forest ecosystem known as the are unlikely to sustain lynx, these in weight and 85 centimeters (33.5 taiga (McCord and Cardoza 1982; Quinn individuals are considered lost from the inches) in length (head to tail), and and Parker 1987; Agee 1999; McKelvey metapopulations unless they return to females average 8.5 kilograms (19 et al. 1999b). Within these general forest boreal forest. pounds) and 82 centimeters (32 inches) types, lynx are most likely to persist in Lynx use large woody debris, such as (Quinn and Parker 1987). The lynx’s areas that receive deep snow, for which downed logs and windfalls, to provide
VerDate 20
VerDate 20
O’Donoghue et al. 1997; Poole 1997). many of these records is unknown; reported within the contiguous United Subadult lynx disperse even when prey trapping records may have errors, track States. is abundant (Poole 1997), presumably as identification is extremely difficult, and Within the contiguous United States, an innate response to establish home observations may be wrong. Long-term the lynx range extends into different ranges. An extreme example of the trapping data have been used to regions that are separated from each apparent emigration of lynx from understand population trends for other by ecological barriers consisting of Canada to the contiguous United States various species; however, because unsuitable lynx habitat. These regions is the numerous occurrences of lynx trapper effort can change, trapping are the Northeast, the Great Lakes, the that were frequently documented in returns may not accurately reflect Northern Rocky Mountains/Cascades, atypical habitat, such as in North population trends. Data showing few and the Southern Rocky Mountains. In Dakota, during the early 1960s and lynx trapped could be a result of general, lynx in each of these regions are 1970s. In these years harvest returns decreased trapper effort, not necessarily associated with habitats that are indicated unprecedented cyclic lynx a decreased population. These factors southern extensions of the boreal forest highs for the 20th century in Canada hamper our understanding of lynx (Aubry et al. 1999). Differences in local (Adams 1963; Harger 1965; Mech 1973; population dynamics and status in the climate, primarily precipitation, and Gunderson 1978; Thiel 1987; McKelvey contiguous United States and preclude effects of elevation have resulted in et al. 1999b). We believe that many of us from drawing definitive conclusions climax forest types that differ in the these animals were dispersing and were about lynx population trends. Data are eastern regions compared to the West either lost from the population because too incomplete to infer much beyond (Buskirk et al. 1999b). The climax forest they were in areas that are unable to simple occurrence (McKelvey et al. in the East is primarily deciduous or support lynx or they were able to return 1999b) and distribution of lynx in the mixed deciduous/coniferous whereas in to suitable habitat. contiguous United States. However, the West the climax forest is coniferous (Buskirk et al. 1999b). While the four Distribution and Status despite these difficulties, trapping data is the best information available on lynx regions of lynx range in the contiguous The complexities of lynx life-history presence throughout much of its range United States are ecologically unique and population dynamics, combined in the contiguous United States and and discreet, in each of these regions the with a general lack of reliable historic or therefore was relied upon in our lynx is associated with the southern current lynx data for the contiguous analysis. boreal forest and, with the exception of United States, make it difficult for us to Data that would help us determine the Southern Rockies, they are each ascertain the past or present population whether resident populations of lynx geographically connected to the much status of lynx in the contiguous United existed historically or exist currently in larger population of lynx in Canada. For States. Lynx population dynamics in the a more detailed description of the many States are generally unavailable. contiguous United States may not be the significance of each region within the Given the available data and the same as in the northern boreal forests of overall U.S. population, see the propensity of lynx to disperse, at this Canada and Alaska. Regarding lynx in ‘‘Distinct Population Segment’’ section. the northern boreal forests of Canada time it is impossible to determine with Northeast Region—Based on an and Alaska, we know the following— certainty whether reports of lynx in analysis of cover types and elevation northern lynx populations undergo many States were—(1) merely zones containing most of the lynx extreme fluctuations in response to dispersing animals from northern occurrences, McKelvey et al. (1999b) snowshoe hare population cycles; lynx populations that were effectively lost determined that, at the broad scale, most disperse when hare populations decline; from the metapopulation because they lynx occurrence records in the lynx are capable of dispersing long did not join or establish resident Northeast were found within the distances; recruitment of young into the populations, (2) animals that were a part ‘‘Mixed Forest-Coniferous Forest- population seems to cease during cyclic of a resident population that persisted Tundra’’ cover type at elevations lows of snowshoe hare populations; and for many generations, or (3) a mixture of ranging from 250 to 750 meters (820 to lynx maintain home ranges (Mowat et both members of resident populations 2,460 feet). This habitat type in the al. 1999). We do not know the extent to and dispersing animals. northeast U.S. occurs along the northern which the northern lynx populations There are several plausible Appalachian Mountain range from influence lynx occurrence in the explanations for a lack of lynx records, southeastern Quebec, western New contiguous United States. Because of the such as (1) the true absence of lynx, (2) Brunswick, and western Maine, south naturally fragmented habitat and lower lynx populations are at a cyclic low, (3) through northern New Hampshire. This density hare populations in the lack of adequate surveys, or (4) habitat type becomes naturally more contiguous United States, we expect decreased trapper effort. We suspect fragmented and begins to diminish to lynx in the contiguous United States to that some areas in the contiguous the south and west, with a disjunct occur at naturally lower densities than United States naturally act as ‘‘sinks’’ segment running north-south through in the north. for lynx where mortality is higher than Vermont, an extensive patch of habitat Historic lynx data in the contiguous recruitment and lynx are lost from the in the Adirondacks of northern New United States are scarce and exist overall population (McKelvey et al. York, and with a few more distant and primarily in the form of trapping 1999a). Sink habitats are most likely isolated patches in Pennsylvania (see records. Many States did not those places on the periphery of the Figure 8.23 in McKelvey et al. 1999b). differentiate between bobcats and lynx southern boreal forest in the contiguous Within this habitat type, the highest in trapping records, referring to both as United States where habitat becomes frequency of lynx occurrences were in ‘‘lynxcats.’’ Therefore, long-term lynx more fragmented and more distant from the Picea rubens (red spruce), Abies trapping data is not available for most larger lynx populations. balsamea (balsam fir), Acer saccharum States. Surveys designed specifically for In the following discussions, we (sugar maple), Betula spp. (birch), Fagus lynx were rarely conducted, and many describe available lynx data, habitat, grandifolia (beech) forest (McKelvey et reports (e.g., visual observations, snow and other elements that frame our al. 1999b). tracks) of lynx were collected incidental understanding of lynx in the various The entire region south of the St. to other activities. The reliability of regions and States where lynx have been Lawrence River must be considered in
VerDate 20
VerDate 20
VerDate 20
VerDate 20
Friends of the Loomis Forest, in litt. program. Anecdotal reports compiled by returns were substantially lower than 1999). Lewis and Wenger (1998) indicated the those recorded in the early 1960s and Although Washington has the best occurrence of lynx in atypical habitats. 1970s, leading to concern that lynx lynx data in the contiguous U.S., we Based on the time frames when populations in Montana were at or near cannot identify population changes or collected, these records likely were their lowest levels in the past several trend from this data. It is clear that dispersing transient individuals. decades (Hash 1990; S. Conn, Montana resident lynx populations exist in Between 1960 and 1991, 35 verified Trappers Association, in litt. 1990). The Washington. The lynx population in records exist for Idaho, with 13 of these State established quotas that were Washington has been roughly estimated from 1982 to 1991 (McKelvey et al. incrementally decreased from 135 in at 96–191 (Washington Department of 1999b). From 1991 until recently, there 1982 down to a Statewide quota of 2 Wildlife 1993) and 225 individuals had been no verified records of lynx beginning in 1991 (B. Giddings, in litt. (Brittell et al. 1989). However, these from Idaho (McKelvey et al. 1999b); 1994). In 1999, Montana’s lynx harvest population estimates may be high however, until the past year, no lynx season was closed. because of assumed similar habitat surveys were conducted in Idaho. Harvest records, winter track surveys suitability and lynx densities across the Preliminary results from recent DNA conducted since 1990/1991, and trapper range, which is not the case surveys suggest the presence of lynx in logbooks, led Montana Department of (Washington Department of Wildlife northern and north-central Idaho (J. Fish, Wildlife, and Parks to conclude 1993). Since 1993, the lynx has been Weaver, Wildlife Conservation Society, that the State’s lynx population has listed as a State threatened species in litt. 1999). recovered and is distributed throughout (Washington Department of Wildlife Prior to 1977, the species was what it determined to be ‘‘predicted 1993). Richardson (1999) recommended considered a predator, subject to lynx habitat’’ (P. Graham, in litt. 1998). retaining the lynx as a threatened unrestricted harvest with no closed Montana Department of Fish, Wildlife, species in the State because the status season and no bag limit. In 1990, in and Parks estimated the lynx population of the lynx had not changed appreciably response to concern over the status of as 1,040 lynx in 1994 (B. Giddings, in in Washington. lynx in Idaho, the Idaho Department of litt. 1994). This estimate was Oregon—Historic lynx records exist Fish and Game instituted a Statewide determined using a habitat area/density from nine counties in Oregon (Bailey harvest quota of three lynx per year. In index, which is likely inaccurate, given 1936; Nellis 1971). McKelvey (1999b) 1997/1998, Idaho closed the lynx broad assumptions regarding habitat documented 12 verified lynx records for trapping/hunting season because no suitability and lynx distribution. Oregon in the past century. Based on the lynx had been captured in several years. We conclude that a resident time frames when collected and Although records of lynx in Idaho are population of lynx is distributed locations in atypical habitat, some of relatively common and boreal forest throughout its historic range in these records likely were dispersing habitat is contiguous with adjacent Montana. However, available data are transient individuals. Recent States and Canada where lynx not sufficient to determine either observations of lynx have been reported populations are known to exist, we population trend (increasing or from the Cascades and the Blue cannot clearly substantiate either the decreasing) or estimates of population Mountains in northeastern Oregon historic or current presence of resident size. Furthermore, we now question the (Csuti et al. 1997; R. Anderson, lynx populations in Idaho, nor can we interpretations we made in the proposed Wallowa-Whitman National Forest, in identify population changes or trend rule as well as those made by the other litt. 1998), and preliminary DNA survey with the available information. sources that harvest returns in the 1980s results also suggest the presence of lynx Montana—In Montana, numerous and 1990s reflected substantially in the Cascade Range in Oregon (Weaver historic and current lynx records exist reduced populations (see ‘‘Factor B’’ in and Amato 1999). Lynx have rarely been throughout the Rocky Mountain Conifer the ‘‘Summary of Factors’’ section). We reported harvested in Oregon, although Forest in the western part of the State now know that harvest returns in the the season for lynx is essentially open (McKelvey et al. 1999b; P. Graham, early 1960s and 1970s represented because the State does not regulate lynx Montana Department of Fish, Wildlife, unprecedented cyclic highs for the 20th harvest, however we do not believe any and Parks, in litt. 1998). Reproduction century (McKelvey et al. 1999b). lynx have been harvested because there has been documented (Brainerd 1985). Therefore, it is possible that lower lynx are no records of lynx trapping or pelts Many records exist of lynx harvested in harvest returns in the 1980s were not collected in Oregon (C. Carson, pers. eastern Montana’s Great Plains Region unusual compared to harvest returns comm., USFWS, Office of Management in the 1960s (Hoffman et al. 1969); prior to 1960. Lynx harvest returns for Authority (OMA), 2000). Based on the however, we suspect these were British Columbia and Alberta since 1919 limited available information, we dispersing transient animals associated demonstrate the variability of cyclic cannot substantiate the historic or with cyclic highs in northern lynx amplitudes throughout the past century current presence of a resident lynx populations during the early 1960s. (McKelvey et al. 1999b) and lead us to population in Oregon. Since 1950, Montana lynx harvest suspect that cycles in Montana were Idaho—According to Rust (1946), records exhibit cycles (McKelvey et al. similar. lynx were not abundant but were 1999b), although accurate harvest Wyoming—Most historical and recent distributed throughout northern Idaho records were not kept until 1977 when records of lynx in Wyoming are from the in the early 1940s, occurring in 8 of the lynx were classified as a furbearer. The northwestern mountain ranges (Reeve et 10 northern and north-central counties. harvest data reflect the extreme highs of al. 1986; McKelvey et al. 1999b). McKelvey et al. (1999b) located a the early 1960s and 1970s that were McKelvey et al. (1999b) found only 30 number of lynx specimen records from documented throughout Canada. Since verified records Statewide since 1856. Idaho collected during the early 1900s. 1977, Montana’s largest lynx harvest Documented reports of lynx in Harvest records for Idaho are unreliable occurred in both 1979 and 1984 when Yellowstone National Park are rare (S. because no distinction was made 62 lynx were taken in each season Consolo-Murphy, Yellowstone National between lynx and bobcats until 1982 (McKelvey et al. 1999b; B. Giddings, Park, pers. comm. 1994); no recent when Idaho Department of Fish and Montana Department of Fish, Wildlife, verified records exist from the Greater Game initiated a mandatory pelt tagging and Parks, in litt. 1994). These harvest Yellowstone Ecosystem (McKelvey et al.
VerDate 20
1999b). However, no lynx surveys have The southern boreal forest of Colorado southeastern Wyoming have been been conducted in this area. Elsewhere, and southeastern Wyoming is isolated confirmed (Reeve et al. 1986). However, lynx have been reported from the Big from boreal forest in Utah and McKelvey et al. (1999b) found two Horn Mountains in north-central northwestern Wyoming by the Green specimens collected prior to 1900 in Wyoming (Reeve et al. 1986; McKelvey River Valley and the Wyoming basin southeastern Wyoming. There is a et al. 1999b). Until 1957, lynx had (Findley and Anderson 1956 in general lack of information in Wyoming, bounties place on them in the State. McKelvey et al. 1999b). These habitats particularly southeastern Wyoming, that Since 1973, the lynx has been listed as likely act as a barrier that reduces or limits our ability to assess historical and a protected non-game species and precludes opportunities for immigration current status of the lynx. harvest was closed. Because of and emigration from the Northern Rocky In summary, we believe that a connectivity with lynx populations and Mountains/Cascades Region and resident lynx population historically habitat in Montana, we suspect that Canada, effectively isolating lynx in the occurred in the Southern Rockies lynx were historically resident in southern Rocky Mountains in Colorado Region in both Colorado and northwestern Wyoming. and southeastern Wyoming (Halfpenny southeastern Wyoming, based on the In 1996 the Wyoming Game and Fish et al. 1982; Koehler and Aubry 1994). A records of lynx in Colorado and the Department began a lynx study in west- majority of the lynx occurrence records persistence of contiguous habitat in central Wyoming. Production of kittens in Colorado and southeastern Wyoming, southeastern Wyoming with the was documented in 1998 (Squires and are associated with the ‘‘Rocky Colorado habitat. This resident Laurion 1999). This may indicate the Mountain Conifer Forest’’ type. The population may now be extirpated. presence of a resident population in this occurrences in the Southern Rockies Other Reports or Sightings—Lynx local area (Ruggiero et al. 1999b). were generally at higher elevations observations in Nevada, North Dakota, However, using available information (1,250 to over 3,750 meters (4,100– South Dakota, Iowa, Nebraska, Indiana, we are unable to determine status or 12,300 feet)) than were all other Ohio, and Virginia are considered trend of lynx throughout Wyoming. occurrences in the West (McKelvey et individuals dispersing subsequent to Utah—There are few historic reports al. 1999b). periods of cyclic high lynx numbers in of lynx in Utah (McKay 1991; McKelvey Colorado—The montane and Canada (Hall and Kelson 1959; Burt et al. 1999b). Nearly all the reliable lynx subalpine forest ecosystems in Colorado 1954 in Brocke 1982; McKelvey et al. reports are from the Uinta Mountain are naturally highly fragmented 1999b; S. Johnson, Indiana Department Range along the Wyoming border (Thompson 1994), which we believe of Natural Resources, in litt. 1994; P. (McKay 1991). McKelvey et al. (1999b) limits the size of lynx populations. A Jones, Ohio Department of Natural found only 10 verified records of lynx total of 78 lynx reports rated as positive Resources, in litt. 1994; W. Jobman, U.S. in Utah since 1916; no verified records (22) or probable (56) exist in State Fish and Wildlife Service, in litt. 1997; exist since 1991. However, recent records since the late 1800s (J. Mumma, Smithsonian Institute, in litt. 1998). unverified reports of lynx in the Uintas Colorado Division of Wildlife, in litt. During the early 1960s, lynx moved into persist (Bates, Utah Department of 1998); although McKelvey et al. (1999b) the Great Plains and the Midwest Wildlife, pers. comm. 1999). The lynx is considered only 17 of these records Region of the U.S. associated with an listed as a State sensitive species with ‘‘verified.’’ The last verified lynx unprecedented cyclic high in Canada closed harvest seasons. Based on the specimens were taken in 1974 (Gunderson 1978; Mech 1980; limited available information we cannot (Halfpenny et al. 1982). No verified DeStefano 1987; South Dakota Natural substantiate either the historic or records of lynx exist since 1974; Heritage Program, in litt. 1994). These current presence of a resident lynx however, extensive survey efforts have records are outside of the southern population in Utah. resulted in reports of lynx tracks boreal forests where most lynx In summary, we believe the Northern (Halfpenny and Miller 1981; Thompson occurrences are found (McKelvey et al. Rockies/Cascades Region supports the and Halfpenny 1989; Anderson 1990; 1999b). We conclude that these most viable resident lynx populations in Thompson and Halfpenny 1991; unsuitable habitats are unable to sustain the contiguous U.S., while recognizing Andrews 1992; Carney 1993; Fitzgerald lynx and that these records represent that, at best, lynx in the contiguous U.S. 1994; Colorado Division of Wildlife et dispersing individuals that are lost from are naturally rare. Strong evidence al. 1997). The lynx has been listed as a the metapopulation unless they return exists to support the presence of State endangered species since 1976 to boreal forest. We do not consider resident lynx populations distributed (Colorado Division of Wildlife et al. these States to be within the contiguous throughout much of the forest types 1997) and harvest of the species is U.S. range of lynx. considered lynx habitat in Montana and currently closed. Distinct Population Segment Washington. We expect that resident Few, if any, native lynx continue to lynx populations exist in contiguous exist in Colorado (J. Mumma, in litt. For a species to be listable under the habitats in Idaho and northwestern 1998). As a result, in 1997, the Colorado Endangered Species Act (Act), it must Wyoming. We believe that lynx have Division of Wildlife, in cooperation be a ‘‘species’’ as defined in the Act. always occurred intermittently in with numerous government and private The Act defines ‘‘species’’ as a species, Oregon and Utah, although we cannot entities, began a program to introduce subspecies, or Distinct Population determine the historic or current lynx from Canada and Alaska into Segment (DPS) of a vertebrate species. presence of resident populations in Colorado in an attempt to reestablish a On February 7, 1996, the Service and either of these States. Recently initiated viable lynx population. Forty-one lynx the National Marine Fisheries Service DNA surveys in all the States within were released into the wild beginning in published final policy guidance this region should further refine our early spring 1999. It is too early to concerning recognition of Distinct understanding of the status of lynx in predict the success of this effort. Vertebrate Population Segments for this region. Wyoming—‘‘Rocky Mountain Conifer consideration under the Act (61 FR Forest’’ in southeastern Wyoming is 4722). We follow the Vertebrate Southern Rockies contiguous with that of Colorado. None Population Policy when considering Colorado represents the extreme of the reports of lynx in the Medicine listing a vertebrate species as southern edge of the range of the lynx. Bow and Laramie Ranges in endangered or threatened in only a
VerDate 20
VerDate 20
VerDate 20
VerDate 20
VerDate 20
VerDate 20
VerDate 20
VerDate 20
VerDate 20
VerDate 20
VerDate 20
VerDate 20
VerDate 20
VerDate 20
‘‘Table 1’’). The Forest Service and BLM within wilderness or scenic river Prevedal, in litt. 1999). However, the 43 manage over 24 million acres of lynx designations (D. Prevedal, in litt. 1999), percent of federally managed lynx forest forest types. Of federally managed lynx both of which provide restrictions on types that are in developmental status forest types, 57 percent (roughly 14 land use beneficial to lynx. Additional are managed for multiple uses that may, million acres) lies within areas with large tracts of lynx forest types occur in on local scales, conflict with lynx nondevelopmental status. Sixty-seven Glacier (735,310 acres) and Yellowstone conservation. percent of this 14 million acres lie (1,910,590 acres) National Parks (D.
TABLE 1.ÐAMOUNT OF LYNX FOREST TYPES IN GEOGRAPHIC REGIONS IN THE CONTIGUOUS U.S., AMOUNT OF LYNX FOREST TYPES (LFT) ON FOREST SERVICE (FS) AND BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT (BLM) LANDS, AND FEDERAL LAND ALLOCATIONS IN LYNX FOREST TYPES (DATA FROM U.S. FOREST SERVICE AND BUREAU OF LAND MANAGE- MENT 1999)
Percent Total acres FS/BLM Percent all Total acres Total acres FS/BLM Percent LFT in LFT in Geographic region LFT, all LFT on LFT non- LFT on nondevel- nondevel- ownerships FS/BLM developed FS/BLM oped allo- oped allo- allocations cations cations
Cascades ...... 4.2 M 4.1 M 3.6 M 99 87 85 Northern Rockies ...... 34.3 M 24.8 M 14.1 M 72 57 41 Southern Rockies ...... 6.5 M 5.3 M 1.4 M 82 25 23
The Cascades and Southern Rockies cumulative total of 56 percent of Forest Apps 1999; Squires and Laurion 1999; regions encompass substantively Service and BLM lands is managed in J. Organ, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, smaller proportions of lynx forest types. nondevelopmental status, comprising pers. comm. 1999). Lynx occurrence In the Cascades Region, 99 percent of over 40 percent of lynx forest types, records provide evidence that lynx lynx forest types are managed by the allowing for 44 percent to be managed continue to be broadly distributed Forest Service, less than 1 percent by for multiple uses which may conflict throughout lynx forest types in the the BLM, and less than 1 percent is in with lynx conservation. National Parks Northern Rockies/Cascades and other ownerships (see ‘‘Table 1’’). The in the western regions add several Southern Rockies (McKelvey et al. Forest Service and BLM manage million acres of lynx forest types in 1999b), both inside and outside of the approximately 4 million acres of lynx more or less undeveloped status. nondevelopmental allocation areas forest types. Of federally managed lynx We conclude that timber harvest within the last decade (U.S. Forest forest types, 87 percent (3.5 million activities and precommercial thinning Service and Bureau of Land acres) lies within areas with may reduce the quality of snowshoe Management 1999). nondevelopmental allocations and 13 hare habitat and red squirrel habitat in Because of the preponderance of lynx percent occur in areas of developmental local areas of the Northern Rockies/ forest types on Forest Service, BLM, and status, where multiple use management Cascades and Southern Rockies, and National Park system lands, Federal occurs. Ninety percent of this 3.5 thus may negatively affect lynx at local land management assumes the largest million acres is in wilderness or in key scales. Furthermore, the large single role in the conservation of lynx watersheds under the Pacific Northwest percentage of Federal lands in in western portions of its range. We Forest Plan, and the remaining 10 developmental status and managed for believe that the large amounts of lynx percent is in matrix lands including late multiple use may, on local scales, forest types managed in successional reserves, which allows conflict with lynx conservation. nondevelopmental allocations, limited timber harvest such as salvage However, based on the large proportion especially in designated wilderness harvest (D. Prevedal, in litt. 1999). In of lynx forest types managed in areas, protects lynx in the Northern Washington and Oregon, the National nondevelopmental status compared to Rockies/Cascades and Southern Rockies Park Service manages an additional the proportion of managed lynx forest and contributes to the likelihood of 200,000 acres of lynx forest types (D. types affected, current regional effects of persistence of lynx into the future. The Prevedal, in litt. 1999). timber harvest and thinning appear to forests upon which lynx depend have In the Southern Rockies, 76 percent of occur at levels that are not likely had less timber harvest, road the lynx forest types are managed by the threatening the Northern Rockies/ construction, and have been modified Forest Service, about 5 percent by the Cascades and Southern Rockies lynx much less than other drier forests (U.S. BLM, and 19 percent is in other populations. Forest Service and Bureau of Land ownerships (see ‘‘Table 1’’). Federally Federal land management in Management 1997). In addition, managed lynx forest types amount to developmental allocations often significant portions of these forests are over 5 million acres. Of the federally maintains conditions suitable for lynx, within areas that do not have roads and managed lynx forest types, only 25 and these lands constitute important have habitat that has been classified as percent (1.4 million acres) lies within landscapes providing regional wilderness. Natural fires are more likely areas with nondevelopmental status connectivity. Construction of roads, allowed to burn in wilderness or areas while the other 75 percent are in timber harvest, and fire suppression without roads, which helps retain developmental status and are managed occur in developmental allocations. diversity in structural stages and create for multiple uses that may, on local However, recent studies of lynx have habitat mosaics in forests for the future. scales, conflict with lynx conservation. documented lynx presence and Also, in the Northern Rockies/Cascades Considering the Northern Rockies, reproduction in a variety of managed Region there are strong habitat Cascades and Southern Rockies, a landscapes (Koehler 1990; Staples 1995; connections to lynx populations in
VerDate 20
Canada. The Northern Rockies/Cascades of the wilderness areas also have the Cascades, fire return intervals in Region has the highest potential for completed similar fire plans, with the many lynx forest types are very long, maintaining a viable lynx population remaining plans close to completion (B. 200–500 years (Agee 1999). Mixed- within the DPS, based upon the large Noblit, U.S. Forest Service, in litt. 1999). severity fire regimes were not common; amount of lynx forest types, the large Glacier and Yellowstone National Parks therefore, fire suppression is not a factor portions of habitat in nondevelopmental allow natural fires to burn under many limiting lynx in the Cascades. In the management, and strong regional conditions. In the Cascades, two of three Northern and Southern Rockies, fire connections to lynx forest types and wilderness areas have fire management intervals also are long and fire regimes lynx populations in Canada. plans in place (B. Naney, U.S. Forest are typically intense (Agee 1999). Where Natural fire has an important role in Service, Okanogan, pers. comm. 1999). mixed-severity fire regimes occur in the forest ecology in western mountain Further, the 1994 Federal Wildland Fire Northern and Southern Rockies, lynx ranges of the United States. Some Policy directs the Department of the habitat quality may be affected at some researchers believe that fire suppression Interior and the Department of local scales, especially outside of during the past 50 years has allowed Agriculture to use a full range of wilderness areas, resulting in adverse certain forest types to mature, thereby potential responses to fire, from full effects to individual lynx. However, reducing habitat suitability for suppression to allowing more fires to considering a larger scale, the current snowshoe hares and Canada lynx burn large areas thereby allowing fires effects of fire suppression alone are not (Brittell et al. 1989; Fox 1978; Koehler to assume a larger role in maintaining threatening the Northern Rockies/ 1990; Washington Department of forest health in the future (B. Meuchel, Cascades and Southern Rockies lynx at Wildlife 1993; T. Bailey, U.S. Fish and pers. comm. 1999; D. Milburn, pers. the population level at this time. Wildlife Service, in litt. 1994; W. Hann, comm. 1999). However, natural fire While recent studies of lynx have U.S. Forest Service, in litt. 1999). regimes are not necessarily restored documented lynx presence and However, others argue that fire because prescriptive criteria to manage reproduction in a variety of managed suppression is most likely affecting lynx these natural wildland fires remain landscapes (Koehler 1990; Staples 1995; habitat in areas where the historical conservative. Apps 1999; Squires and Laurion 1999; frequency of fires is shorter than the Currently, outside large wilderness J. Organ, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, length of time fires have been areas in all western regions, most fires pers. comm. 1999), we remain suppressed (P. Stickney, U.S. Forest are suppressed. Most fires (98 percent) concerned about the maintenance of Service, pers. comm. 1994; Agee 1999). are successfully extinguished when lynx habitat conditions, especially since Fire suppression in areas with a history small and only a small proportion of a large percentage of lands managed by of infrequent fire has probably not had fires burn large areas (B. Meuchel, U.S. the Forest Service and BLM are in much impact (Habeck 1985; Agee 1993). Forest Service, pers. comm. 1999; D. developable status and allow programs, In the western boreal forest zone, long Milburn, U.S. Forest Service, pers. practices and activities that may impact natural fire return intervals (150–300 comm. 1999). Fires are extinguished lynx and their primary prey, snowshoe years) signify that removal of fire has largely due to costs, firefighter safety, hare. Lynx occur naturally at very low not been as significant as in the West local human safety and property densities in the contiguous United with lower-severity fire regimes and concerns. The majority of these fires States (see ‘‘Background’’ section). It is return intervals (30–90 years), even occur outside lynx forest types at lower imperative that snowshoe hare and though fire suppression has been in elevations in drier forests. However, alternate prey populations be supported effect for much of this century (Agee fires igniting in the lynx forest types by habitat on Federal lands into the 1993, Agee 1998 in Agee 1999). More outside, and some fires inside, future, to ensure the persistence of lynx frequent fires of lower intensity do wilderness are suppressed, which can in the contiguous United States. occur in some boreal forest types (W. reduce the amount of early seral forests Substantive declines in prey species, Hann, in litt. 1999), although they compared to natural conditions and/or especially snowshoe hare, may result in typically comprise a small proportion of change species composition and a prey base insufficient to support lynx the total area burned (Agee 1999). In structural components of forests (W. populations. Therefore, amendment of forests with high-severity fire regimes, a Hann, in litt. 1999). The total area that Forest Plans to provide protection for number of smaller fires burn a small would have burned had such fires been lynx and lynx habitat is needed to proportion of the forests, while fewer allowed to burn is likely not substantive conserve habitat for lynx and its prey on larger fires account for most of the area when compared to the proportion of the Federal forest lands. Without such burned (McKelvey and Busse 1996 in landscape burned by the large, high- amendments, the species is threatened. McKelvey et al. 1999d; Agee 1999). intensity fires typical of lynx forest Northeast Lynx forest types in the West include a types. However, the resulting pattern of preponderance of forest types with long vegetation mosaic and the mix of stand In the Northeast Region, softwoods natural fire return intervals and high- age classes may be altered, as the large that provided Canada lynx habitat were fire intensity (S. Arno, U.S. Forest fires may burn areas more uniformly logged extensively during the late 1800s Service, in litt. 1998; Agee 1999), which due to lack of fire breaks that would and early 1900s (Jackson 1961; Barbour suggests that removal of fire in lynx have been created by past, smaller fires et al. 1980; Belcher 1980; Irland 1982). forest types has not been as significant (D. Milburn, pers. comm. 1999). Other Over a short time period, timber as in the lower-severity fire regimes of natural processes such as insects, extraction during this era resulted in the the West (Agee 1998 in Agee 1999). disease, and wind-throw also can play replacement of late-successional conifer In the Northern Rockies, most of the a role in affecting the vegetation forest with extensive tracts of very early wilderness areas in Montana and Idaho mosaics. successional habitat, which eliminated have fire management plans that affect Based on available information on fire cover for lynx and hare (Jackson 1961; more than 5 million acres that allow suppression and upon available habitat Keener 1971). In the Northeast Region, naturally caused fires to burn during assessments, we conclude that at the slash, accumulated during logging certain periods and in certain areas (N. present time, fire suppression effects are operations, fueled wildfires that burned Warren, U.S. Forest Service, in litt. less evident in lynx forest types than in vast acreage of softwood forest (Belcher 1999). In Wyoming and Utah, one-third many other forest types in the West. In 1980; J. Lanier, pers. comm. 1994). This
VerDate 20
VerDate 20
VerDate 20
VerDate 20
VerDate 20
VerDate 20
VerDate 20
The range of the bobcat overlaps the lynx (Buskirk et al. 1999a). Now, ski and indicating that coyote competition has lynx range within the contiguous United snowmobile trails and roads that are negatively affected the contiguous States and southern Canada. Like the maintained for winter recreation and United States lynx DPS (Aubry et al. coyote, the bobcat is a generalist forest management create packed snow 1999). predator that feeds on a wide variety of corridors that give other species access Little is known about lynx habits in prey, including snowshoe hares to lynx winter habitat (Koehler and snow-free seasons. A greater diversity of (McCord and Cardoza 1982; Koehler and Aubry 1994; U.S. Forest Service et al. prey and habitats available during this Hornocker 1991). Although lynx in the 1999), although significant amounts of time may reduce the negative effects of southern boreal forests evolved with habitat remain relatively undisturbed by competition. Furthermore, because lynx bobcats, competition between these humans in the interior of large blocks of have co-evolved with bobcats and species is suspected because of their lynx forest types on Federal lands in the mountain lions, and in most areas lynx similar size and appearance (Buskirk et West, especially in designated have coexisted with coyotes for many al. 1999a). Bobcats remain restricted to wilderness and National Parks (U.S. decades, we suspect some level of areas with low snow depths (Koehler Forest Service and Bureau of Land segregation of habitat and prey among and Hornocker 1991; Buskirk et al. Management 1999). It appears that these species. In summer in Idaho, 1999a). Parker et al. (1983) speculated bobcats remain restricted to areas with coyotes, bobcats, and mountain lions that bobcats displaced lynx from all low snow depths (Koehler and Hornock used different topographic and habitat areas on Cape Breton Island, Nova 1991; Buskirk et al. 1999a), and that features, allowing habitat and prey Scotia, except high elevations, where lynx and lion winter habitats typically resources to be partitioned among these snow accumulation limited the bobcat’s do not overlap (H. Quigley, pers. comm. species; coyotes used lower elevations range. We have no evidence that 1999). than bobcats who used lower elevations than lions (Koehler and Hornocker competition with bobcats has negatively Coyotes use packed snowtrails and 1991). All of the elevations used in this affected the contiguous United States now occupy the winter habitats of lynx study were within the range recorded DPS. (Murray and Boutin 1991; Murray et al. Buskirk et al. (1999a) advanced the for lynx occurrences in the West 1994; Staples 1995; O’Donoghue et al. theory that mountain lions compete (McKelvey et al. 1999b); however, the 1997, 1998a, 1998b) and, therefore, are with lynx, based on a few records of data for lynx were not recorded by a concern as a potential lynx competitor mountain lions killing lynx and season. We suspect these data are more in winter. Studies of lynx, coyotes, and presumed increasing mountain lion representative of elevations lynx use in populations. Interactions between lynx hares from the Yukon Territory and winter rather than snow-free seasons and lions would most likely occur Alaska provide some information with because much of the lynx data are from during snowfree seasons because lions which to consider potential for trapping records, an activity that occurs generally do not occupy the same winter competition between lynx and coyote in during winter. habitats as lynx (H. Quigley, Hornocker winter (Murray and Boutin 1991; In summary, we conclude lynx Wildlife Institute, pers. comm. 1999). It Murray et al. 1994; Staples 1995; movements may be negatively is generally accepted that mountain lion O’Donoghue et al. 1997, 1998a, 1998b). influenced by high traffic volume on numbers in the West have increased, Coyotes adapted their behavioral roads that bisect suitable lynx habitat, therefore the rate of encounters between patterns for hunting in snow by such as in the Southern Rockies and in lynx and mountain lions has probably selecting snow that was shallower and some parts of the Northern Rockies/ increased (H. Quigley, pers. comm. harder; whereas lynx successfully Cascades Region. We suspect that 1999). Deer (Odocoileus spp.) are the hunted in all habitats where hares were highways with high volumes of traffic primary prey of mountain lions (Dixon found (Murray and Boutin 1991; Murray and associated suburban developments 1982) and are an important food item for et al. 1994; O’Donoghue et al. 1998a). inhibit dispersal and movements within coyotes (Parker 1995) and bobcats Coyotes and lynx both preferred home ranges, and may contribute to loss (McCord and Cardoza 1982; Koehler and snowshoe hares over alternate prey of habitat connectivity. However, roads Hornocker 1991). In Idaho, mountain during all phases of the hare cycle do not appear to be a significant direct lion kills were frequently visited by (O’Donoghue et al. 1998a). During the cause of lynx mortality. We find no bobcats and coyotes (Koehler and snowshoe hare decline, lynx switched information demonstrating that forest Hornocker 1991). Lions kill coyotes and to hunting red squirrels, whereas roads negatively impact resident lynx bobcats, often in defense of food caches coyotes switched to hunting voles populations. Packed snowtrails facilitate (Boyd and O’Gara 1985; Koehler and (O’Donoghue et al. 1998b). In Alaska, the movement of coyotes into formerly Hornocker 1991). Lynx occasionally Staples (1995) believes that the 42 inaccessible deep snow habitats feed on ungulates or scavenge from percent dietary overlap between lynx occupied by lynx; however, we have no carcasses (Brand et al. 1976); we expect and coyote observed during a cyclic low evidence that competition with coyotes, interactions between mountain lions in the hare cycle indicated the potential mountain lions or bobcats is negatively and lynx would most likely occur in for competition; however, we are not affecting lynx at a population-level defense of food caches, as with coyotes aware of research or other evidence scale. and bobcats. Despite numerous indicating that coyote competition has Finding mountain lion studies within the negatively affected the lynx populations western range of the lynx, incidents of in Canada. In fact, we expect that the We conclude that, in the contiguous lions killing lynx are extremely rare (H. variability of snow conditions and United States, lynx populations occur at Quigley, pers. comm. 1999). No frequency of fresh snows in the winter naturally low densities and that the evidence exists that mountain lions habitats that support lynx continually rarity of lynx at the southern portion of exert a population-level impact on lynx. reduce or alter the availability of their range compared to more northern Historically, interactions between snowtrails and shallow snow depths populations is normal. This rarity is lynx and potential competitors were used by coyotes in lynx habitat, making based largely on low densities of limited in winter because most it more difficult for coyotes to snowshoe hares, their primary prey. competitors cannot effectively move effectively hunt in these areas regularly Low snowshoe hare densities are likely through the deep snow habitats of the during the winter. No evidence exists a result of naturally patchy, transitional
VerDate 20
VerDate 20
VerDate 20
VerDate 20
Species Vertebrate population Historic range where endangered or Status When Critical Special Common name Scientific name threatened listed habitat rules
MAMMALS ******* Lynx, Canada ...... Lynx canadensis ...... U.S.A. (AK, CO, ID, CO, ID, ME, MI, MN, T 692 NA 17.40 (k) ME, MI, MN, MT, MT, NH, NY, OR, NH, NY, OR, UT, UT, VT, WA, WI, VT, WA, WI, WY) WY. Canada. *******
3. Section 17.40 is amended by (2) What activities are prohibited for imported or transported into the adding paragraph (k) to read as follows: wild lynx? All prohibitions and contiguous United States. provisions of 50 CFR 17.31 and 17.32 (ii) Lynx that were either born or held § 17.40 Special rulesÐmammals apply to wild lynx found in the in captivity and then released into the * * * * * contiguous United States. wild are considered wild. (k) Canada lynx (Lynx canadensis). (3) What is considered a captive lynx? (4) What activities are allowed for captive lynx? (1) What lynx does this special rule (i) For purposes of this paragraph (k), (i) Take. You may take lawfully apply to? The regulations in this captive lynx means lynx, whether alive obtained captive lynx without a permit. paragraph (k) apply to all wild and or dead, and any part or product, if the (ii) Import and export. You may captive lynx in the contiguous United specimen was in captivity at the time of export captive live lynx, parts or States. the listing, born in captivity, or lawfully products of captive lynx provided the
VerDate 20
VerDate 20
Part VI
Department of Education Office of Elementary and Secondary Education; Safe and Drug-Free Schools and Communities National Programs— Federal Activities Grants Program—The Challenge Newsletter; Notices
VerDate 20
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION directions, research-based activities, and • Resources and helplines for other information related to effective obtaining information and materials on Office of Elementary and Secondary drug and violence prevention practices drug and violence prevention. Education; Safe and Drug-Free through The Challenge newsletter. The While applicants are expected to Schools and Communities National primary audience for The Challenge is address in their applications the topics ProgramsÐFederal Activities Grants classroom teachers. and types of articles described in the ProgramÐThe Challenge Newsletter Applicants must demonstrate above list, the list is by no means comprehensive. Applicants are AGENCY: Department of Education. extensive knowledge of elements of encouraged to offer suggestions on ways ACTION: Notice of final priority and effective drug and violence prevention to communicate with the field on a selection criteria for fiscal year 2000 and programs and current research in the broad range of key issues, including subsequent years. area of drug and violence prevention. Funds under the Safe and Drug-Free information on classroom practices, SUMMARY: The Assistant Secretary Schools Program reach 97 percent of the assessments, and appropriate strategies. announces a final priority, eligible nation’s school districts. While most Frequency of past publication of The applicants, and selection criteria for school districts have implemented drug Challenge has ranged from 6–10 times fiscal year (FY) 2000 and, at the and violence prevention activities in per year, and the number of pages has discretion of the Assistant Secretary, for some form, too often these activities are ranged from 4–26 pages per issue. The subsequent years under the Safe and narrow in scope and are not based on number of copies has been 50,000 per Drug-Free Schools and Communities science. Many school districts lack data issue. These numbers are offered as National Programs—Federal Activities on the effects of their drug and violence guides based on past practice, and are Grants Program. The Assistant Secretary prevention programs on student not requirements of the current takes this action to focus Federal behavior. They need information about competition. Applicants are encouraged financial assistance on an identified programs that have proven to be to offer suggestions regarding the length national need—the development and effective or promising that they can and frequency of publication, as well as dissemination of a newsletter with adopt for their students. Although number of copies per issue and information about effective practices to research exists on drug and violence dissemination plan. prevent drug use and violent behavior prevention strategies that have positive The applicant funded under the among youth. The Challenge newsletter results, too often this research is not absolute priority in this notice will have will provide a communication link on known to school personnel, and does the responsibility to design, develop, current and future program directions, not get translated into practice. The publish, disseminate, and manage all research-based activities, and other Challenge will provide classroom aspects of The Challenge consistent information related to effective drug and teachers and other professionals with with the specific requirements in the violence prevention strategies between information about effective or promising absolute priority below. In submitting the U.S. Department of Education and drug and violence prevention programs their proposals for funding, applicants State and local educational agencies and and strategies, articles by experts in the are encouraged to offer suggestions and other public and private organizations prevention field, and other timely ideas for The Challenge in addition to involved with prevention of youth drug information covering a broad range of those specified in the absolute priority. use and violent behavior. topics that comprise the expanding Public Comments EFFECTIVE DATE: This notice takes effect knowledge base on drug and violence On January 25, 2000, the Assistant on April 24, 2000. prevention. Secretary published a notice of Eligible Applicants: Eligible With regard to content, the following proposed priority, eligible applicants, applicants under this competition are information describes examples of and selection criteria for this public and private nonprofit topics and types of articles that have competition in the Federal Register (65 organizations and individuals. been featured in past issues of The FR 3948–3950). In response to the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Gail Challenge: Assistant Secretary’s invitation to Beaumont, Safe and Drug-Free Schools • Information about principles of comment, the Department received Program, U.S. Department of Education, effective drug and violence prevention comments from two organizations. In 400 Maryland Avenue, SW, Room programs. response to the comments received, the 3E310, Washington, DC 20202–6123, • Key elements or characteristics of Assistant Secretary made two (202) 260–3954. Fax: (202) 260–7767. successful drug and violence prevention l modifications—one to the Internet: gail [email protected]. programs. An individual who uses a TDD may supplementary information section of • Research studies and data related to the notice and one to the selection call the Federal Information Relay drug and violence prevention. Service (FIRS) at 1–800–877–8339. criteria—as noted in the analysis of • Articles by recognized experts in comments and changes and elsewhere Note: This notice of final priority does not solicit applications. A notice inviting fields related to safe and drug-free in this notice. schools. applications under this competition is Analysis of Comments and Changes published elsewhere in this issue of the • Articles describing model programs. Federal Register. • Information that describes Highlight More Classroom Practices, SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This discretionary grant activities funded Assessments, and Appropriate notice contains the final priority for under the Safe and Drug-Free Schools Strategies fiscal year 2000, and related selection and Communities Program, National Comment: One commenter suggested criteria. Under the absolute priority, the Programs, including resources and that, in order to benefit classroom Assistant Secretary intends to award products resulting from the activities. teachers, the content of the newsletter one cooperative agreement for up to 36 • Timely information on special should highlight more classroom months; this cooperative agreement will topics such as emerging trends in use of practices, assessments, and appropriate support a means of communicating with specific drugs, or early warning signs of strategies rather than the items the field on current and future program violent behavior. identified in the Federal Register.
VerDate 20
Discussion: The Department agrees and complexity of the proposed stated that measuring the impact on that the newsletter should include projects. recipients of reading an article or an information for classroom teachers such Changes: None. entire issue will be complicated and the as classroom practices, assessments, and Comment: One commenter suggested validity of those studies can be appropriate strategies, but not to the that the adequacy of resources such as questionable. In addition, the exclusion of other topics listed in adequate office space, computer commenter stated that the large number supplementary information. hardware and software, database of points (25% of the total possible) The supplementary information capabilities for the subscriber database, seems to imply an expectation of a provided in the Notice of Proposed and established relationships with sophisticated evaluation plan, which Priority includes a list of suggested, but graphic designers, printers, and mailing can be costly. Those costs would likely not mandatory, topics and types of houses are also important reduce the number or size or both, of the articles that have been featured in past considerations. The commenter issues that can be produced, which issues of The Challenge. suggested also increasing the point would in turn reduce the likelihood of Changes: The supplementary value to ensure that offerors possess the measurable impact. information section of this notice is necessary non-staff resources and Discussion: The Department places amended to include a statement that capabilities. high importance on the quality of the applicants are encouraged to offer Discussion: The Department agrees project evaluation, which is reflected in suggestions about communicating that it is important to consider resources the relatively high point score assigned information about classroom practices, such as those described by the to this criterion. Evaluation is also assessments, and appropriate strategies. commenter, but that consideration of addressed in the absolute priority, those resources can be accomplished by which includes the statement that Definition of ‘‘Newsletter’’, adding a factor to the ‘‘Adequacy of applicants must propose projects that: Specifications Regarding Length, Resources’’ selection criterion without ‘‘evaluate on an ongoing basis the Frequency of Publication increasing the overall point score for impact of The Challenge on the Comment: One commenter sought this criterion. intended audience, and use evaluation clarification of the meaning of the term Change: The comment is addressed by results for continuous improvement of ‘‘newsletter’’ in terms of length and adding the following factor under the the newsletter.’’ The evaluation plan frequency of publication envisioned for ‘‘Adequacy of Resources’’ selection and methods of evaluation will vary, 5 The Challenge, expressing the concern criterion: ‘‘The adequacy of support, depending on the objectives and design that without more clarification including facilities, equipment, of The Challenge proposed by each proposals might be very different and supplies, and other resources, from the applicant. The Department intends for difficult to compare. applicant organization or the lead the award recipient to solicit customer Discussion: The dictionary definition applicant organization’’ for 5 points. feedback, and assess customer for the term ‘‘newsletter’’ is ‘‘a printed The overall point score of 10 points for satisfaction regarding content, design, sheet, pamphlet, or small newspaper the ‘‘Adequacy of Resources’’ selection format, frequency of publication, length, containing news or information of criterion remains the same. The point and other relevant aspects of the interest chiefly to a special group.’’ score for the factor ‘‘the extent to which newsletter, and leaves it to the applicant While a specific definition of the costs are reasonable in relation to to develop a suitable plan to collect and ‘‘newsletter’’ is not provided for this the objectives, design, and potential use the information for quality priority, the dictionary definition significance of the proposed project’’ is improvement. provides a general frame of reference. reduced from 10 to 5 points. Changes: None The supplementary information in the Absolute Priority Notice of Proposed Priority states that Organizational Experience as a past publication of The Challenge has Selection Factor Under 34 CFR 75.105(c)(3) and the ranged from 6—10 times per year, and Comment: One commenter stated that Safe and Drug-Free Schools and the number of pages has ranged from organizational experience/qualifications Communities Act of 1994, the Secretary 4—26 pages per issue. These numbers is nowhere to be found within the gives an absolute preference to are offered as guides based on past proposed selection criteria, and applications that meet the following practice, and are not requirements. The commented that organizational priority. The Secretary funds under this Department chose not to be prescriptive experience and qualifications would be competition only applications that meet in terms of length and frequency of an important selection factor. this absolute priority. Under the publication, opting instead to encourage Discussion: The Department agrees absolute funding priority for this applicants to offer their suggestions. that organizational experience and competition, applicants must propose Proposals will be reviewed individually qualifications is an important selection projects that: on their own merits against the selection factor. Qualifications and experience of (1) Design, develop, publish, and criteria. key personnel and other factors for disseminate The Challenge, a newsletter Changes: None. ensuring high-quality products and for educators, prevention specialists, services from the proposed project are and other professionals in fields related Selection Criteria—Adequacy of addressed under the selection criterion to education and drug and violence Resources ‘‘Quality of Management Plan’’. prevention to provide information about Comment: One commenter asked if Changes: None. effective practices to prevent drug use peer reviewers should be determining and violent behavior among youth. whether costs are reasonable, and based Selection Criteria—Quality of Project (2) Manage all aspects of The on what qualifications. Evaluation Challenge, including developing Discussion: Peer reviewers for all Comment: One commenter questioned contents of each issue, writing or grant competitions have as one of their why so many points (25) are allocated soliciting articles for each issue, tasks assessing budgets submitted by to the ‘‘Quality of Project Evaluation’’ preparing artwork, handling all design applicants and determining if costs are criterion since The Challenge is not a and pre-production tasks, and printing reasonable, based on the design, scope, demonstration project. The commenter and mailing.
VerDate 20
(3) Create, maintain, and expand a (a) The adequacy of the management Electronic Access to This Document subscriber data base for ED. plan to achieve the objectives of the You may view this document, as well (4) Evaluate on an ongoing basis the proposed project on time and within as all other Department of Education impact of The Challenge on the budget, including clearly defined documents published in the Federal intended audience, and use evaluation responsibilities, timelines, and Register, in text or Adobe Portable results for continuous improvement of milestones for accomplishing project Document Format (PDF) on the Internet the newsletter. tasks. (5) at either of the following sites: (5) Develop, create, and maintain a (b) The adequacy of mechanisms for Web site to post each issue and receive http://ocfo.ed.gov/fedreg.htm ensuring high-quality products and http://www.ed.gov/news.html reader comments and suggestions. services from the proposed project, To use the PDF you must have the (6) Agree to have content of the including qualifications and experience Adobe Acrobat Reader Program with newsletter reviewed and approved by of key personnel in writing and editing Search, which is available free at either the Department of Education prior to newsletters for education, prevention of the previous sites. If you have publication. and related fields. (10) questions about using the PDF, call the Selection Criteria (c) The extent to which the time U.S. Government Printing Office (GPO), commitments of the project director and The following selection criteria will toll free, at 1–888–293–6498; or in the principal investigator and other key be used to evaluate applications for one Washington, DC area at (202) 512–1530. project personnel are appropriate and cooperative agreement under this Note: The official version of this document adequate to meet the objectives of the competition. The maximum score for all is the document published in the Federal proposed project. (5) these criteria is 100 points. The Register. Free Internet access to the official maximum score for each criterion or (d) How the applicant will ensure that edition of the Federal Register and the Code factor under that criterion is indicated a diversity of perspectives are brought to of Federal Regulations is available on GPO bear in the operation of the proposed Access at: http://www.access.gpo.gov/nara/ in parentheses. index.html (1) Significance. (10 points) project, including those of students, In determining the significance of the faculty, parents, the business Program Authority: 20 U.S.C. 7131 proposed project, the following factor is community, a variety of disciplinary and professional fields, recipients or Dated: March 21, 2000. considered: The potential contribution (Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance of the proposed project to increased beneficiaries of services, or others, as appropriate. (5) Number 84.184P Office of Elementary and knowledge or understanding of Secondary Education—Safe and Drug-Free educational problems, issues, or (5) Quality of project evaluation. (25 Schools and Communities National effective strategies. points) Programs—Federal Activities—The (2) Quality of the project design. (30 In determining the quality of the Challenge Newsletter) points) evaluation, the following factors are Michael Cohen, In determining the quality of the considered: Assistant Secretary for Elementary and design of the proposed project, the (a) The extent to which the evaluation Secondary Education. following factors are considered: plan provides for an ongoing evaluation [FR Doc. 00–7300 Filed 3–23–00; 8:45 am] (a) The extent to which the goals, of the effectiveness of The Challenge BILLING CODE 4000±01±U objectives, and outcomes to be achieved newsletter, and its impact on the by the proposed project are clearly intended audience. (10) specified and measurable. (10) (b) The extent to which the evaluation DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION (b) The extent to which the design of results will be used for continuous [CFDA No: 84.184P] the proposed project is appropriate to, improvement of The Challenge. (5) and will successfully address, the needs (c) The extent to which the methods Office of Elementary and Secondary of the target population or other of evaluation are appropriate to the Education; Safe and Drug-Free identified needs. (5) context within which the project Schools and Communities National (c) The extent to which the proposed operates. (5) ProgramsÐFederal Activities Grants project represents an exceptional ProgramÐThe Challenge Newsletter approach to the priority or priorities (d ) The extent to which the methods established for the competition. (15) of evaluation will provide performance AGENCY: Department of Education. feedback and permit periodic (3) Adequacy of resources. (10 points) ACTION: assessment of progress toward achieving Notice Inviting Applications for In determining the adequacy of New Awards for Fiscal Year 2000. resources for the proposed project, the intended outcomes. (5) following factors are considered: Intergovernmental Review Purpose of the Program: To fund one (a) The adequacy of support, cooperative agreement for the including facilities, equipment, This program is subject to the development and dissemination of The supplies, and other resources, from the requirements of Executive Order 12372 Challenge newsletter to provide applicant organization or the lead and the regulations in 34 CFR Part 79. information about effective practices to applicant organization. (5) The objective of the Executive order is prevent drug use and violent behavior (b) The extent to which the costs are to foster an intergovernmental among youth. reasonable in relation to the objectives, partnership and a strengthened Eligible Applicants: Public and design, and potential significance of the federalism by relying on processes private nonprofit organizations and proposed project. (5) developed by State and local individuals. (4) Quality of management plan. (25 government for coordination and review Applications available: March 24, points) of proposed Federal financial assistance. 2000. In determining the quality of the In accordance with the order, this Deadline for Receipt of Applications: management plan for the proposed document is intended to provide early April 24, 2000. project, the following factors are notification of the Department’s specific Note: All applications must be received by considered: plans and actions for this program. the Department’s Application Control Center
VerDate 20
VerDate 20
Part VII
Environmental Protection Agency 40 CFR Part 755 Methyl Tertiary Butyl Ether (MTBE); Advance Notice of Intent To Initiate Rulemaking Under the Toxic Substances Control Act To Eliminate or Limit the Use of MTBE as a Fuel Additive in Gasoline; Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
VerDate 20
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION monoxide (CO). In some cases this person. Please follow the detailed AGENCY requirement is met through the use of instructions for each method as MTBE. While the use of MTBE as a fuel provided in Unit I. of the 40 CFR Part 755 additive in gasoline has helped to SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION. To ensure reduce harmful air emissions, it has also proper receipt by EPA, it is imperative [OPPT±62164; FRL±6496±1] caused widespread and serious that you identify docket control number contamination of the nation’s drinking OPPTS–62164 on the first page of your Methyl Tertiary Butyl Ether (MTBE); water supplies. Unlike other response. Advance Notice of Intent to Initiate components of gasoline, MTBE FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For Rulemaking Under the Toxic dissolves and spreads readily in the Substances Control Act to Eliminate or general information contact: Barbara groundwater underlying a spill site, Cunningham, Director, Office of Limit the Use of MTBE as a Fuel resists biodegradation, and is difficult Additive in Gasoline Program Management and Evaluation, and costly to remove from groundwater. Office of Pollution Prevention and AGENCY: Environmental Protection Low levels of MTBE can render drinking Toxics (7401), Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). water supplies unpotable due to its Agency, Ariel Rios Bldg., 1200 offensive taste and odor. At higher ACTION: Advance Notice of Proposed Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, levels, it may also pose a risk to human Rulemaking. DC 20460; telephone number: (202) health. The United States Geological 554–1404; e-mail address: TSCA- SUMMARY: Methyl Tertiary Butyl Ether Survey (USGS) has found that the [email protected]. occurrence of MTBE in groundwater is (MTBE) is a chemical compound that is For technical information contact: strongly related to its use as a fuel used as a fuel additive in gasoline. Karen Smith, Office of Transportation additive in the area, finding detections Refiners have primarily added MTBE to and Air Quality, Fuels and Energy of MTBE in 21% of ambient gasoline to meet the Clean Air Act Division (6406J), Environmental groundwater tested in areas where (CAA) requirement that areas with Protection Agency, Ariel Rios Bldg., MTBE is used in RFG compared with severe problems in attaining the 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., 2% of ambient groundwater in areas National Ambient Air Quality Standard Washington, DC 20460; telephone using conventional gasoline. EPA is (NAAQS) for ozone use Reformulated number: (202) 564–9674; e-mail address: today providing an advance notice of its Gasoline (RFG) containing 2% oxygen [email protected]. by weight. Many States have also intent to initiate a rulemaking pursuant SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: voluntarily chosen to use RFG as a to section 6 of the Toxic Substances means of addressing marginal, Control Act (TSCA) to eliminate or limit I. General Information moderate, or serious ozone the use of MTBE as a fuel additive. EPA A. Does this Action Apply to Me? nonattainment, and some refiners use seeks public comment on a number of MTBE to boost the octane of gasoline. In aspects of this anticipated regulatory Entities potentially regulated by a addition to the RFG program, the CAA action, including whether the Agency limit or ban on the use of MTBE as a also required the establishment of a should take action to address any fuel fuel additive in gasoline are those Wintertime Oxygenated Fuel additives other than MTBE. entities that refine, import, or blend (Wintertime Oxyfuel) program. Under DATES: Comments, identified by docket gasoline with additives, or that this program, gasoline must contain control number OPPTS–62164, must be transport, store, or sell gasoline, or 2.7% oxygen by weight during the received on or before May 8, 2000. otherwise introduce gasoline into wintertime in areas that are not in ADDRESSES: Comments may be commerce. Potentially regulated attainment for the NAAQS for carbon submitted by mail, electronically, or in categories include:
NAICS SIC Examples of regulated Categories codes codes entities
Industry 324110 2911 Petroleum refiners, blenders, and importers Industry 422710 5171 Gasoline marketers and distributors 422720 5172
This listing is not intended to be your business is affected by this action, document, on the Home Page select exhaustive, but rather provides a guide you should carefully examine this ‘‘Laws and Regulations’’ and then look for readers regarding entities likely to be ANPRM. If you have any questions up the entry for this document under regulated by an action resulting from regarding the applicability of this action the ‘‘Federal Register—Environmental this ANPRM. Other types of entities not to a particular entity, consult the Documents.’’ You can also go directly to listed in this table could also be directly technical person listed under FOR the Federal Register listings at http:// affected, particularly if future action FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/. includes limits directed at gasoline B. How Can I Get Additional 2. In person. The Agency has release prevention or water remediation, Information, Including Copies of this established an official record for this rather than the MTBE content of Document or Other Related Documents? action under docket control number gasoline. The North American Industrial OPPTS–62164. The official record Classification System (NAICS) and 1. Electronically. You may obtain consists of the documents specifically Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) electronic copies of this document, and referenced in this ANPRM, any public codes have been provided to assist you certain other related documents that comments received during an applicable and others in determining whether or might be available electronically, from comment period, and other information not this action applies to certain the EPA Internet Home Page at http:// related to this action, including any entities. To determine whether you or www.epa.gov/. To access this information claimed as Confidential
VerDate 20
Business Information (CBI). This official CBI. Electronic comments must be number assigned to this action on the record includes the documents that are submitted as an ASCII file avoiding the first page of your response. You may physically located in the docket, as well use of special characters and any form also provide the name, date, and as the documents that are referenced in of encryption. Comments and data will Federal Register citation. those documents and in this ANPRM. also be accepted on standard disks in II. Introduction The public version of the official record WordPerfect 6.1/8.0 or ASCII file does not include any information format. All comments in electronic form This ANPRM initiates an Agency claimed as CBI. The public version of must be identified by docket control rulemaking to address the threat to the the official record, which includes number OPPTS–62164. Electronic nation’s drinking water resources from printed, paper versions of any electronic comments may also be filed online at contamination by MTBE, a widely used comments submitted during an many Federal Depository Libraries. additive in gasoline. This rulemaking applicable comment period, is available will be conducted under TSCA section for inspection in the TSCA D. How Should I Handle CBI 6, 15 U.S.C. 2605. It is EPA’s intent to Nonconfidential Information Center, Information That I Want to Submit to conduct this rulemaking as quickly as North East Mall, Rm. B–607, Waterside the Agency? reasonably practicable. EPA’s review of Mall, 401 M St., SW., Washington, DC. Do not submit any information existing information on contamination The Center is open from noon to 4 p.m., electronically that you consider to be of drinking water resources by MTBE Monday through Friday, excluding legal CBI. You may claim information that indicates substantial evidence of a holidays. The telephone number for the you submit to EPA in response to this significant risk to the nation’s drinking Center is (202) 260–7099. For additional document as CBI by marking any part or water supply. A comprehensive information related to this ANPRM, see all of that information as CBI. approach to such risk must include the Office of Air and Radiation (OAR) Information so marked will not be consideration of either reducing or Docket, A–99–01, The Blue Ribbon disclosed except in accordance with eliminating the use of MTBE as a Panel to Review the Use of Oxygenates procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2. gasoline additive. As a result, EPA is in Gasoline. The index for OAR docket In addition to one complete version of initiating this process pursuant to the A–99–01 can be found at http:// the comment that includes any unreasonable risk provision under www.epa.gov/oms/consumer/fuels/ information claimed as CBI, a copy of TSCA section 6 to eliminate or greatly oxypanel/blueribb.htm. the comment that does not contain the reduce the use of MTBE as a gasoline 3. Fax-on-Demand. Using a faxphone information claimed as CBI must be additive. EPA is interested in comments call (202) 401–0527 and select item submitted for inclusion in the public on both the risk and these possible 4005 for an index of items in this version of the official record. responses to it. category. Information not marked confidential MTBE is a common and widely used will be included in the public version additive in gasoline. It is an oxygenate, C. How and to Whom Do I Submit meaning it increases the oxygen content Comments? of the official record without prior notice. If you have any questions about of the gasoline. It is also a source of You may submit comments through CBI or the procedures for claiming CBI, octane in gasoline. It is widely used in the mail, in person, or electronically. To please consult the technical person those parts of the country where oxygenated gasoline is required, either ensure proper receipt by EPA, it is identified under FOR FURTHER by Federal or State law. For example, imperative that you identify docket INFORMATION CONTACT. control number OPPTS–62164 on the the 1990 amendments to the CAA first page of your response. Commenters E. What Should I Consider as I Prepare require that Federal RFG meet a 2.0% should be aware that their comments My Comments for EPA? oxygen content requirement by weight. may be placed on an Internet docket EPA invites you to provide your MTBE is the primary oxygenate used by web site. This information may include views on any issue relevant to this refiners to meet this requirement, which the commenters name and address. ANPRM. EPA has identified particular applies to over 30% of the country’s 1. By mail. Submit your comments to: subjects in Unit VI. regarding which gasoline. When MTBE is used to meet Document Control Office (7407), Office comment would be particularly this requirement, the gasoline is of Pollution Prevention and Toxics appreciated. You may find the following blended so it contains about 11% MTBE (OPPT), Environmental Protection suggestions helpful for preparing your by volume. In other parts of the country, Agency, Ariel Rios Bldg., 1200 comments: MTBE is sometimes used in Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, 1. Explain your views as clearly as conventional or non-RFG as a source of DC 20460. possible. octane. Significantly more MTBE is 2. In person or by courier. Deliver 2. Describe any assumptions that you used in RFG and other oxygenated your comments to: OPPT Document used. gasoline programs than is used in Control Office (DCO) in East Tower Rm. 3. Provide copies of any technical conventional gasoline. G–099, Waterside Mall, 401 M St., SW., information and/or data you used that Current data on MTBE levels in Washington, DC. The DCO is open from support your views. ground and surface waters indicate 8 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through 4. If you estimate potential burden or widespread and numerous detections at Friday, excluding legal holidays. The costs, explain how you arrived at the low levels of MTBE, with a more limited telephone number for the DCO is (202) estimate that you provide. number of detections at higher levels. 260–7093. If your comments are 5. Provide specific examples to Given MTBE’s widespread use as a received after 3 p.m., they will be dated illustrate your concerns. gasoline additive and the large volumes as received the next business day. 6. Offer alternative ways to address of gasoline that are stored, transported, 3. Electronically. You may submit the concerns identified by EPA. and used in all areas of the country, your comments electronically by e-mail 7. Make sure to submit your releases of MTBE to the nation’s ground to: ‘‘[email protected],’’ or mail your comments by the deadline in this and surface waters occur in a number of computer disk to the address identified ANPRM. ways. Leakage from the gasoline storage above. Do not submit any information 8. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, and distribution system is a major electronically that you consider to be be sure to identify the docket control source of contamination, but the
VerDate 20
VerDate 20
VerDate 20
VerDate 20
VerDate 20
VerDate 20
VerDate 20
VerDate 20
VerDate 20
VerDate 20
VerDate 20
VerDate 20
VerDate 20
Experiment. Inhalation Toxicology. Environmental Science and Technology. Annual 1998. Vol. 1. Table S4. p. 17. 6:521–528. 32, 3666–3672. 1998. June 1999. 9. API. Odor Threshold Studies 22. Squillance, Paul, et al. A 33. The Report of the Blue Ribbon Performed with Gasoline and Gasoline Preliminary Assessment of the Panel on Oxygenates in Gasoline. combined with MTBE, ETBE, and Occurrence and Possible Sources of Achieving Clean Air and Clean Water. TAME. Washington DC. API #4592. MTBE in Ground Water of the United 34. Delzer, G.C., Zogorski, J.S., Lopes, 1993. States, 1993–1994. Environmental T.J., and Bosshart, R.L. Occurrence of 10. Oxygenated Fuels Association. Science and Technology. Vol. 30. No. 5. Gasoline Oxygenate MTBE and BTEX Technical Memorandum: Taste and pp. 1721–1730. 1996. Compounds in Urban Stormwater in the Odor Properties of Methyl Tertiary 23. Zogorski, John, et al. MTBE United States, 1991–1995. USGS Water- Butyl Ether and Implications for Setting Summary of Findings and Research by Resources Investigations Report. 96– a Secondary Maximum Contaminant the U.S. Geological Survey. Proceedings 4145. 1996. Level. Prepared by Malcolm Pirnie. of the 1998 Annual Conference of the 35. Office of Science and Technology 1998. American Water Works Association. Policy, National Science and 11. CENR. 1997 Interagency 24. Moran, Michael J., Zogorski, John Technology Council. Interagency Assessment of Oxygenated Fuels. S., and Squillance, Paul J. USGS. MTBE Assessment of Oxygenated Fuels. June Committee on the Environment and in Ground Water of the United States— 1997. Natural Resources (CENR), Office of Occurrence, Potential Sources, and Long 36. Huggins, Jack. Submitted written Science and Technology Policy (OSTP), Range Transport. Published in comments on behalf of the Renewable National Science and Technology Proceedings of the 1999 Water Fuels Association at the April 1999 Center, (NSTC). June 1997. Resources Conference. American Water Meeting of the Blue Ribbon Panel on 12. USEPA, Office of Research and Works Association. Oxygenates in Gasoline. Development. 1994 Health Risk 25. Squillace, Paul, USGS. MTBE in 37. Letter from Agriculture Secretary Perspectives on Fuel Oxygenates. Report the Nation’s Ground Water, National Dan Glickman to Senator Tom Harkin, EPA/600R–94/217. Water—Quality Assessment (NAWQA) dated November 15, 1999. Attached 13. International Agency for Research Program Results, Presentation Before the Analysis entitled ‘‘Economic Analysis of on Cancer Monographs.Evaluation of Blue Ribbon Panel on Oxygenates in Replacing MTBE with Ethanol in the Methyl Tertiary Butyl Ether. Vol. 73. p. Gasoline. April 29, 1999. United States.’’ 26. USGS/USEPA Joint Study. 339. 1999 38. USDA. Economic Analysis of Preliminary Findings of the 12-State 14. National Institute of Replacing MTBE with Ethanol in the MTBE Drinking Water Retrospective. Environmental Health Sciences, 27. State of Maine Bureau of Health, United States. November 1999. National Toxicology Program. Summary Department of Human Services, Bureau 39. DOE. Estimating the Refining of RG1, RG2, and NTP Board of Waste Management & Remediation, Impacts of Revised Oxygenate Subcommittee Recommendations for the Department of Environmental Requirements for Gasoline: Follow-up Report on Carcinogens. Ninth Protection, Maine Geological Survey, Findings. May 1999. Edition.1998. and the Department of Conservation. 40. California Energy Commission. 15. Office of Science and Technology Maine MTBE Drinking Water Study, Supply and Cost Alternatives to MTBE Policy, National Science and The Presence of MTBE and other in Gasoline. October 1998. Technology Council. Interagency Gasoline Compounds in Maine’s 41. MathPro. Potential Economic Assessment of Oxygenated Fuels. June Drinking Water—Preliminary Report. Benefits of the Feinstein-Bilbray Bill. 1997. 1998. March 18, 1999. 16. National Research Council (NRC). 28. Siddiqui, Mohamed, et al. 42. Moran, Michael J., Zogorski, John Toxicological and Performance Aspects Occurrence of Perchlorate and Methyl S., and Squillance, Paul J. USGS. MTBE of Oxygenated Motor Vehicle Fuels. Tertiary Butyl Ether (MTBE) in Ground in Ground Water of the United States June 1996. Water of the American Water System. Occurrence, Potential Sources, and Long 17. The Alliance for Proper Gasoline American Water Works Service Range Transport, Published in Handling. http://www.gas-care.org. New Company Inc. September 30, 1998. Proceedings of the 1999 Water Alliance Launches Consumer ‘‘Gas 29. Buscheck, T. E., Gallagher, D. J., Resources Conference. American Water Care’’ Campaign to Prevent Small Kuehne, D. L., Zuspan, C. R. Occurrence Works Association. Gasoline Spills. Press Release dated, and Behavior of MTBE in Groundwater. 43. Blue Ribbon Panel. Achieving July 27, 1999. Presented at: Underground Storage Tank Clean Air and Clean Water. The Report 18. Hunter, B., et al. Impact of Small Conference: ’98 & Beyond. Los Angeles, of the Blue Ribbon Panel on Oxygenates Gasoline Spills on Groundwater, CA. Sacramento, CA. State of California in Gasoline. p. 85. September 1999. preliminary report abstract presented at Water Resources Control Board. April 44. Office of Science and Technology the Maine Water Conference Meeting, 1998. Policy, National Science and April 1999, and NESCAUM, RFG/MTBE 30. Hitzig, Robert, et al. Study Reports Technology Council. Interagency Findings and Recommendations. LUST Programs Are Feeling Effects of Assessment of Oxygenated Fuels. June Boston, MA. August 1999. MTBE Releases. Soil and Ground Water 1997. 19. NESCAUM, RFG/MTBE Findings Clean-Up. pp. 15–19. August-September 45. California Energy Commission. and Recommendations. Boston, MA. p. 1998. Supply and Cost Alternatives to MTBE 4. August 1999. 31. Robbins, G.A., Henebry, B.J., in Gasoline. October 1998. 20. NESCAUM, RFG/MTBE Findings Schmitt, B.M., Bartolomeo, F.B., Green, 46. Estimate provided by industry and Recommendations. Boston, MA. A., and Zack, P. Evidence for MTBE in representative via personal August 1999. Heating Oil. Groundwater Monitoring communication Sheldon Thompson, 21. Reuter, J. E., et al. Concentrations, and Remediation. Vol. 19. No.2. pp.65– Senior Vice President and Chief Sources and Fate of the Gasoline 69. 1999. Administrative Officer, Sunoco, Inc. via Oxygenate Methyl Ter-Butyl Ether 32. U.S. Energy Information telephone communication and inquiry. (MTBE) in a Multiple-Use Lake. Administration. Petroleum Supply February 2000.
VerDate 20
47. NESCAUM, RFG/MTBE Findings various levels of government.’’ Under this point, that the potential action and Recommendations. Boston, MA. Executive Order 13132, EPA may not discussed in this ANPRM will have a August 1999. issue a regulation that has federalism significant economic impact on small 48. NESCAUM, RFG/MTBE Findings implications, that imposes substantial business. Comments on the potential and Recommendations. Boston, MA. direct compliance costs, and that is not economic impact of such an action on August 1999. required by statute, unless the Federal small businesses will help the Agency VIII. Regulatory Assessment government provides the funds meet its obligations under the RFA, as Requirements necessary to pay the direct compliance amended by SBREFA, and will provide costs incurred by State and local information to assist the Agency in its A. Executive Order 12866 governments, or EPA consults with efforts to minimize any significant Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR State and local officials early in the economic impact of such an action for 51735, October 4, 1993), the EPA must process of developing the proposed potentially affected small businesses. regulation. The EPA also may not issue determine whether a regulatory action is D. Children’s Health Protection ‘‘significant’’ and therefore subject to a regulation that has federalism Office of Management and Budget implications and that preempts State Executive Order 13045, entitled (OMB) review and the requirements of law unless the EPA consults with State ‘‘Protection of Children from the Executive Order. The Executive and local officials early in the process Environmental Health Risks and Safety Order defines ‘‘significant regulatory of developing the proposed regulation. Risks’’ (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997) action’’ as one that is likely to result in If EPA complies by consulting, applies to any rule that: a rule that may: Executive Order 13132 requires EPA to 1. Is determined to be ‘‘economically 1. Have an annual effect on the provide to OMB, in a separately significant’’ as defined under E.O. economy of $100 million or more, or identified unit of the preamble to the 12866. adversely affects in a material way the rule, a federalism summary impact 2. Concerns an environmental health economy, a sector of the economy, statement. The federalism summary or safety risk that EPA has reason to productivity, competition, jobs, the impact statement must include a believe may have a disproportionate environment, public health or safety, or description of the extent of EPA’s prior effect on children. State, local, or tribal governments or consultation with State and local If the regulatory action meets both communities; officials, a summary of the nature of criteria, the Agency must evaluate the 2. Creates a serious inconsistency or their concerns and the EPA’s position environmental health or safety effects of otherwise interferes with an action supporting the need to issue the the planned rule on children, and taken or planned by another agency; regulation, and a statement of the extent explain why the planned regulation is 3. Materially alters the budgetary to which the concerns of State and local preferable to other potentially effective impact of entitlements, grants, user fees, officials have been met. Also, when EPA and reasonably feasible alternatives or loan programs or the rights and transmits a draft final rule with considered by the Agency. obligations of recipients thereof; or federalism implications to OMB for While E.O. 13045 does not require 4. Raises novel legal or policy issues review pursuant to Executive Order EPA to evaluate the health or safety arising out of legal mandates, the 12866, EPA must include a certification risks of actions discussed in an ANPRM, President’s priorities, or the principles from the agency’s Federalism Official the Agency is, nonetheless, soliciting set forth in the Executive Order. stating that EPA has met the comment on such risks. The potential A draft of this ANPRM was reviewed requirements of Executive Order 13132 action discussed in this ANPRM might by OMB prior to publication, as in a meaningful and timely manner. involve issues related to health or safety required by E.O. 12866. Any changes EPA has determined that the risks. To the extent that this is the case, made in response to OMB suggestions or requirements of Executive Order 13132 the potential action would be intended recommendations will be documented do not apply to this ANPRM, and to minimize or eliminate any such risks in the public record. therefore the Executive Order does not for all people who utilize groundwater apply to this ANPRM. B. Federalism resources, including children. We C. Small Business Concerns request comment on whether there are Executive Order 13132, entitled health or safety considerations related to ‘‘Federalism’’ (64 FR 43255, August 10, Section 603 of the Regulatory the potential action discussed in this 1999), requires EPA to develop an Flexibility Act (RFA), 5 U.S.C. 601 et ANPRM that may disproportionately accountable process to ensure seq., as amended by the Small Business affect children. ‘‘meaningful and timely input by State Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act and local officials in the development of (SBREFA) of 1996, Public Law 104–121, List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 755 regulatory policies that have federalism requires the Administrator to assess the Environmental protection, Air implications.’’ ‘‘Policies that have economic impact of proposed rules on pollution, Fuel additives, Hazardous federalism implications’’ is defined in small entities, including small substances, Water resources. the Executive Order to include businesses. The Agency accordingly regulations that have ‘‘substantial direct requests comment on the potential Dated: March 20, 2000. effects on the States, on the relationship economic impact on small business of Carol M. Browner, between the national government and the limitation or elimination of MTBE as Administrator. the States, or on the distribution of an oxygenate or octane enhancer in [FR Doc. 00–7323 Filed 3–21–00; 2:11 pm] power and responsibilities among the gasoline. EPA does not anticipate, at BILLING CODE 6560±50±F
VerDate 20
Part VIII
Department of Transportation Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 91 Removal of the Prohibition Against Certain Flights Within the Territory and Airspace of Serbia-Montenegro; Final Rule
VerDate 20
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Any person may obtain a copy of this Montenegro no longer exists. The FAA document by submitting a request to the has determined that the territory of Federal Aviation Administration Federal Aviation Administration, Office Serbia-Montenegro can be safely of Rulemaking, ARM–1, 800 overflown by civil aircraft. 14 CFR Part 91 Independence Ave., SW, Wasington, DC Regulatory Analyses [Docket No. 29508; Special Federal Aviation 20591, or by calling (202) 267–9680. Regulation (SFAR) No. 84] Communications must identify the The FAA has determined that this docket number of this action. action is not a ‘‘significant regulatory Removal of the Prohibition Against Persons interested in being placed on action’’ under Executive Order 12866, Certain Flights Within the Territory and the mailing list for future rules should nor is it considered a ‘‘significant rule’’ Airspace of Serbia-Montenegro request from the above office a copy of under DOT Regulatory Policies and Advisory Circular No. 11–2A, Notice of Procedures (44 FR 11034; February 26, AGENCY: Federal Aviation Proposed Rulemaking Distribution 1979). Because this amendment removes Administration (FAA), DOT. System, which describes the application a restriction that is no longer warranted, ACTION: Final rule; removal. procedure. the FAA finds that notice and public procedure under 5 U.S.C. 553(b) are SUMMARY: This action removes Special Small Entity Inquiries unnecessary. The FAA also certifies that Federal Aviation Regulation (SFAR) No. The Small Business Regulatory this rule will not have a significant 84, which prohibit flight operations Enforcement Fairness Act (SBREFA) of economic impact, positive or negative, within the territory and airspace of 1996 requires the FAA to comply with on a substantial number of small entities Serbia-Montenegro by any United States small entity requests for information or under the criteria of the Regulatory air carrier or commercial operator, by advice about compliance with statutes Flexibility Act. any person exercising the privileges of and regulations within its jurisdiction. an airman certificate issued by the FAA Therefore, any small entity that has a Therefore, on the basis of the except persons operating U.S.-registered question regarding this document may foregoing information, I have aircraft for foreign air carriers, or by an contact their local FAA official. Internet determined that the immediate removal operator using an aircraft registered in users can find additional information on of SFAR 84 from 14 CFR Part 91 is the United States unless the operator of SBREFA on the FAA’s web page at appropriate. The Department of State such aircraft is a foreign air carrier. This http://www.faa.gov/avr/arm/sbrefa.htm has been advised of, and has no action is taken because the North and may send electronic inquiries to the objection to, this action. Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) following Internet address: 9–AWA– List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 91 has ceased air strikes against Serb forces [email protected]. Air traffic control, Aircraft, Airmen, in Serbia-Montenegro, which has Background reduced the threat of hostile actions Airports, Aviation safety, Freight, against persons and aircraft engaged in From March 21, 1999, through June Serbia-Montenegro. 10, 1999, NATO conducted air strikes flight operations within the airspace of The Amendment Serbia-Montenegro. against Serb military forces in Serbia- Montenegro. As a result, the FAA EFFECTIVE DATE: March 24, 2000. For the reasons set forth above, the determined that the potential for hostile Federal Aviation Administration FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: action against U.S. civil aircraft amends Part 91 of chapter I of title 14, David Catey, Air Transportation operating over the territory of Serbia- of the Code of Federal Regulations by Division, Flight Standards Service, Montenegro warranted a prohibition of removing SFAR 84 as follows: Federal Aviation Administration, 800 flight in that region. Accordingly, in Independence Avenue, SW, exercising its statutory safety authority, PART 91ÐGENERAL OPERATING AND Washington, DC 20591. Telephone: the FAA issued a final rule prohibiting FLIGHT RULES (202) 267–8166. certain U.S. civil aircraft operations SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: within the territory and airspace of 1. The authority citation for part 91 Serbia-Montenegro. SFAR No. 84 continues to read as follows: Availability of This Action prohibits flight operations within the Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40103, 40113, An electronic copy of this document territory and airspace of Serbia- 40120, 44101, 44111, 44701, 44709, 44711, may be downloaded, using a modem Montenegro by any United States air 44712, 44715, 44716, 44717, 44722, 46306, and suitable communications software, carrier or commercial operator, by any 46315, 46316, 46502, 46504, 46506, 46507– from the FAA regulations section of the person exercising the privileges of an 47122, 47508, 47528–47531. Fedworld electronic bulletin board airman certificate issued by the FAA, or PART 91 [AMENDED] service (telephone: (703) 321–3339) or by an operator using an aircraft the Government Printing Office’s (GPO) registered in the United States unless 2. Special Federal Aviation electronic bulletin board service the operator of such aircraft is a foreign Regulation No. 84 is removed. (telephone: (202) 512–1661). air carrier. Internet users may reach the FAA’s Following the cessation of NATO air Issued in Washington, DC, on March 21, web page at http://www.faa.gov/avr/ strikes on June 10, 1999, there has been 2000. arm/nprm/nprm.htm or the GPO’s web a reduction in tensions. As a result, the Jane F. Garvey, page at http://www.access. gpo.gov/nara FAA has determined that the risk of Administrator. for access to recently published hostile military action against civil [FR Doc. 00–7340 Filed 3–23–00; 8:45 am] rulemaking documents. aircraft by armed elements in Serbia- BILLING CODE 4910±13±M
VerDate 20
Part IX
Department of Transportation Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 91 Special Visual Flight Rules; Final Rule
VerDate 20
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Aviation Rulemaking Advisory service (telephone (703) 321–3339), the Committee (ARAC) with no dissenting Government Printing Office’s electronic Federal Aviation Administration opinions. In addition, the FAA believes bulletin board service (telephone (202) that the amendment will be well 512–1661). 14 CFR Part 91 received by the public. Internet users may reach the FAA’s [Docket No. FAA±2000±7110; Amdt; No. 91± Unless a written adverse or negative web page at http://www.faa.gov/avr/ 262] comment or a written notice of intent to arm/nprm/nprm.htm or the Government submit an adverse or negative comment Printing Office’s web page at http:// RIN 2120±AG94 is received on this direct final rule www.access.gpo.gov/nara for access to within the comment period, the recently published rulemaking Special Visual Flight Rules regulation will become effective on the documents. This direct final rule also AGENCY: Federal Aviation date specified. After the close of the may be accessed on the DMS at the Administration (FAA), DOT. comment period, the FAA will publish electronic address listed in the ACTION: Direct final rule; request for a document in the Federal Register ADDRESSES section above. comments. indicating that no adverse or negative Any person may obtain a copy of this comments were received and document by submitting a request to the SUMMARY: This action amends the confirming the date on which the final Federal Aviation Administration, Office language regarding aircraft operating in rule will become effective. of Rulemaking, ARM–1, 800 accordance with Special Visual Flight If the FAA does received, within the Independence Avenue SW, Washington, Rules (SVFR). Specifically, this action comment period, an adverse or negative DC 20591, or by calling (202) 267–9680. will permit a general aviation pilot at a comment, or written notice of intent to Communications must identify the satellite airport where weather reporting submit such a comment, a document amendment number of docket number is not available, to depart in withdrawing the direct final rule will be of this final rule. meteorological conditions less than published in the Federal Register, and Persons interested in being placed on basic Visual Flight Rules (VFR) weather a notice of proposed rulemaking the mailing list for future rulemaking minimums provided that the pilot (NPRM) may be published with a new documents should request from the determines that he has the requisite comment period. above office a copy of Advisory Circular No. 11–2A, Notice of Proposed flight visibility. The FAA is taking this Comments Invited action to reduce the number of Rulemaking Distribution System, which unnecessary flight delays being faced by Although this action is in the form of describes the application procedure. a final rule and was not preceded by an general aviation aircraft while providing Small Entity Inquiries an equivalent level of safety. NPRM, comments are invited on this document. Interested persons are The Small Business Regulatory DATES: Effective May 23, 2000. Comments must be received by April invited to participate in this action by Enforcement Fairness Act (SBREFA) of 24, 2000. submitting such written data, views, or 1996, requires the FAA to comply with arguments as they may desire. small entity requests for information or ADDRESSES: Comments on this Comments relating to the advice about compliance with statues document should be mailed or environmental, energy, federalism, or and regulations within its jurisdiction. delivered, in duplicate, to: United States economic impact that might result from Therefore, any small entity that has a Department of Transportation Dockets, adopting the proposals in this document question regarding this document may Docket No. FAA–2000–7110, 400 also are invited. Substantive comments contact their local FAA official. Internet Seventh Street, SW., Room Plaza 401, should be accompanied by cost users can find additional information on Washington, DC 20590. Comments may estimates. Comments must identify the SBREFA in the ‘‘Quick Jump’’ section of be filed and examined in Room Plaza regulatory docket or notice number and the FAA’s web page at http:// 401 between 10 a.m. and 5 p.m. be submitted in duplicate to the Rules www.faa.gov/avr/arm/sbrefa.htm and weekdays, except Federal holidays. Docket address specified above. may send electronic inquiries to the Comments also may be sent All comments received, as well as a following Internet address: 9–AWA– electronically to the Dockets report summarizing each substantive [email protected]. Management System (DMS) at the public comment contact with FAA Background following Internet address: http:// personnel on this rulemaking, will be dms.dot.gov/. Commenters who wish to filed in the docket. The docket is The current language of §§ 91.155 and file comments electronically should available for public inspection before 91.157 have causes confusion as to the follow the instruction on the DMS web and after the comment closing date. application of VFR weather minimums site. Commenters wishing the FAA to in controlled airspace at satellite FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Avis acknowledge receipt of their comments airports, and prompted numerous P. Person, Airspace and Rules Division submitted in response to this document inquiries and requests for clarification. (ATA–400), Air Traffic Airspace must include a pre-addressed, stamped In particular, concerns have been raised Management Program, Federal Aviation postcard with those comments on which as to whether the ceiling at a satellite Administration, 800 Independence the following statement is made: airport can be determined by a pilot on Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20591; ‘‘Comments to Docket No. [FAA–2000– the ground in takeoff position. telephone number (202) 267–8783. 7110].’’ The postcard will be date On January 9, 1995, the FAA SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: stamped and mailed to the commenter. requested that the Aviation Rulemaking Advisory Committee on Air Traffic Direct Final Rule Procedure Availability of Final Rules Issues (ARAC) review §§ 91.155 and The FAA anticipates that this An electronic copy of this document 91.157 and recommend language that regulation will not result in adverse or may be downloaded using a modem and would be more easily understood by the negative comments; therefore, the FAA suitable communications software from aviation community. In response, the is issuing it as a direct final rule. The the FAA regulations section of the ARAC established a working group amendment was recommended by the FedWorld electronic bulletin board composed of representatives from the
VerDate 20
Air Traffic Control Association, Inc. section 1.1 and must be determined by each Federal agency shall propose or (ATCA), the Aircraft Owners and Pilots a pilot from the cockpit while an aircraft adopt a regulation only upon a reasoned Association (AOPA), the Experimental is airborne. The current rules do not determination that the benefits of the Aircraft Association (EAA), the permit flight visibility to be determined intended regulation justify its costs. Helicopter Association International by a pilot on the ground. Second, the Regulatory Flexibility Act (HAI), and the National Business requires agencies to analyze the Discussion of the Recommendation Aviation Association (NBAA) to review economic effect of regulatory changes this matter. As a result of this review of The ARAC working group on small businesses and other small §§ 91.155 and 91.157, the working group recommended that the FAA permit entities. Third, the Office of concluded that misunderstandings those general aviation pilots operating Management and Budget directs occur when applying the visibility in accordance with part 91 to determine agencies to assess the effect of minimums on the ground for SVFR whether visibility minimums exist for regulatory changes on international operations from a satellite airport. The SVFR departure at satellite airports trade. In conducting these analyses, the ARAC recommended that the FAA when weather reporting capabilities do FAA has determined that this direct resolve the problem by permitting part not exist at the satellite airport. The final rule: (1) will generate benefits that 91 general aviation pilots in takeoff working group rationale is that there is justify its costs and is not a ‘‘significant position to determine whether visibility little difference between a pilot’s ability regulatory action’’ as defined in the minimums exist for SVFR departure at to determine visibility in flight versus Executive Order; (2) is not significant as satellite airports when weather on the ground. defined in the Department of reporting is not available at the satellite The FAA has reviewed and accepted Transportation’s Regulatory Policies and airport. the ARAC recommendation. Thus, the Procedures; (3) will not have a A satellite airport, is an airport that FAA is amending § 91.157 to allow significant impact on a substantial exists within the same airspace area as pilots to determined if visibility number of small entities; (4) will not the primary airport that determines the minimums exist on the ground for SVFR constitute a barrier to international airspace designation. SVFR operations departure provided the following trade; and (5) will not contain any are aircraft operating in accordance with conditions are satisfied: 1) the flight is Federal intergovernmental or private clearances within controlled airspace in conducted under part 91; and 2) the sector mandates. These analyses are meteorological conditions less than the airport at which the aircraft is located is presented here in the preamble. basic VFR weather minimums. a satellite airport that does not have This direct final rule allows pilots Under current rules, an SVFR weather reporting capabilities. The who are on the ground (in controlled air clearance must be requested and pilot’s visibility determination on the space at satellite airports) to determine approved by the nearest air traffic ground for SVFR departure is not an whether visibility conditions meet or control (ATC) facility to operate within official ground visibility report since the exceed the minimums necessary to a Class B, C, D, or E surface area when pilot’s report is not equivalent to that of allow flight departure under special the weather does not meet VFR flight an official weather observer. visual flight rules (SVFR) when these weather minimums. This clearance Consequently, the rule expands the term allows operations below 10,000 feet satellite airports do not have weather ‘‘flight visibility’’ as opposed to ‘ground reporting capabilities. Previously, if mean sea level (MSL) within the lateral visibility’’ but limits that expansion to boundaries of a controlled airspace satellite airports were experiencing SVFR departure under § 91.157. weather conditions that would have surface area, with limited exceptions, This action is intended to reduce provided the following conditions are permitted takeoff under SVFR, but the unnecessary delays for part 91 weather at the primary airport was not satisfied: (1) the pilot receives a operations and clarify the appropriate clearance from ATC; (2) the pilot favorable, the pilot was required to means of determining visibility delay departure until either the weather remains clear of clouds; (3) SVFR minimums for SVFR departure from operations are conducted only between conditions improved at the primary satellite airports when that airport does airport or the pilot received a flight sunrise and sunset; and (4) the ground not have weather reporting capabilities. visibility report indicates that at least 1 visibility report indicating at least 1 statute mile of visibility exists. If ground Paperwork Reduction Act statute mile of visibility. This direct final rule will clarify the language visibility is not reported, flight visibility In accordance with the Paperwork regarding departure under SVFR and must be determined to be at least 1 Reduction of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3507(d), reduce the number of unnecessary flight statute mile. there are no requirements for delays while providing an equivalent Ground visibility is defined in 14 CFR information collection associated with level of safety. section 1.1 as the ‘‘prevailing horizontal this rule. visibility near the Earth’s surface as The direct final rule is expected to reported by the United States Weather International Compatibility impose no costs on the FAA or airspace Service or an accredited observer.’’ The FAA has reviewed corresponding users since no additional resources will Because ground visibility is considered International Civil Aviation be needed to implement this rule. In an official report, pilots and air traffic Organization international standards fact, the direct final rule may reduce the controllers are more likely to rely on a and recommended practices and Joint unnecessary number of flight delays, ground visibility report than a flight Aviation Authorities regulations, where however, information is not available to visibility report which is reported by a they exist, and has identified no calculate this number. The FAA pilot. But in the absence of a ground differences in these proposed contends that safety will not be visibility report, § 91.157(c)(2) currently amendments and the foreign adversely affected as a result of this allows a pilot departing under SVFR to regulations. rulemaking. rely on a flight visibility report, which In view of the fact that this direct final may have been reported by a pilot in Regulatory Evaluation Summary rule will result in potential cost-savings, flight who is not required to be an Changes to Federal Regulations must while maintaining an equivalent level of official weather observer. Flight undergo several economic analyses. safety, the FAA has determined that his visibility is also defined in 14 CFR First, Executive Order 12866 directs that direct final rule will be cost-beneficial.
VerDate 20
Final Regulatory Flexibility Executive Order 13132, Federalism. It regulatory action’’ under section 3(F) of Determination has determined that this action will not Executive Order 12866 and, therefore, The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 have a substantial direct effect on the its not subject to review by the Office of establishes ‘‘as a principle of regulatory States, on the relationship between the Management and Budget; (2) is not a issuance that agencies shall endeavor, national Government and the States, or ‘‘significant rule’’ under Department of consistent with the objective of the rule on the distribution of power and Transportation Regulatory Policies and and of applicable statues, to fit responsibilities among the various Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, regulatory and informational levels of government. Therefore, the 1979; and (3) if promulgated, will not requirements to the scale of the FAA has determined that this direct have a significant economic impact, business, organizations, and final rule does not have federalism positive or negative, on a substantial governmental jurisdictions subject to implications. number of small entities under the regulation.’’ To achieve that principle, Unfunded Mandates Reform Act criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act. the Act requires agencies to solicit and Title II of the Unfunded Mandates List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 91 consider flexible regulatory proposals Reform Act of 1995 (the Act), enacted as and to explain the rational for their Air Traffic Control, Aircraft, Public Law 104–4 on March 22, 1995, actions. The Act covers a wide-range of Airplanes, Airports, Airspace, Weather. requires each Federal agency, to the small entities, including small extent permitted by law, to prepare a The Amendment businesses, not-for-profit organizations written assessment of the effects of any and small governmental jurisdictions. Federal mandate in a proposed or final In consideration of the foregoing, the Agencies must perform a review to Federal Aviation Administration determine whether a proposed or final agency rule that may result in the expenditure of $100 million or more amends part 91 of Title 14, Code of rule will have a significant economic Federal Regulations as follows: impact on a substantial number of small (when adjusted annually for inflation) entities. If the determination is that it in any one year by State, local, and PART 91ÐAIR TRAFFIC AND will, the agency must prepare a tribal governments in the aggregate, or GENERAL OPERATING RULES regulatory flexibility analysis (RFA) as by the private sector. Section 204(a) of the Act, 2 U.S.C. 1534(a), requires the described in the Act. 1. The authority citation for part 91 Federal agency to develop an effective However, if an agency determines that continues to read as follows: a proposed or final rule is not expected process to permit timely input by Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40103, 40113, to have a significant economic impact elected officers (or their designees) of State, local, and tribal governments on 40120. 44101, 44701, 44709, 44711, 44712, on a substantial number of small 44715, 44716, 44717, 44722, 46306, 46315, entities, section 605(b) of the 1980 act a proposed ‘‘significant intergovernmental mandate.’’ A 46316, 46502, 46504, 46506, 47122, 47508, provides that the head of the agency and 47528–47531. may so certify and an RFA is not significant intergovernmental mandate’’ required. The certification must include under the Act is any provision in a 2. Section 91.157(c)(2) is revised and a statement providing the factual basis Federal agency regulation that would paragraph (d) is added to read as for this determination, and the impose an enforceable duty upon State, follows: reasoning should be clear. local, and tribal governments in the The FAA has conducted the required aggregate of $100 million (adjusted § 91.157 Special VFR weather minimums. review of this direct final rule and has annually for inflation) in any one year. * * * * * determined that it will impose no costs Section 203 of the Act, 2 U.S.C. 1533, (c) * * * which supplements section 204(a), on the FAA or airspace users, and (2) If ground visibility is not reported, provides that, before establishing any therefore, will not have a significant unless flight visibility is at least 1 regulatory requirements that might economic impact on a substantial statute mile. For the purposes of this significantly or uniquely affect small number of small entities. Accordingly, paragraph, the term flight visibility governments, the agency shall have pursuant to the Regulatory Flexibility includes the visibility from the cockpit developed a plan, which, among other Act, 5 U.S.C. 605(b), the Federal of an aircraft in takeoff position if: Aviation Administration certifies that things, mut provide for notice to (i) The flight is conducted under this this direct final rule will not have a potentially affected small governments, part 91; and significant impact on a substantial if any, and for a meaningful and timely number of small entities. However, the opportunity for these small governments (ii) The airport at which the aircraft is FAA solicits comments from the public to provide input in the development of located is a satellite airport that does not regarding this determination of no regulatory proposals. have weather reporting capabilities. significant impact. This direct final rule does not contain (d) The determination of visibility by any Federal intergovernmental or a pilot in accordance with paragraph International Trade Impact Assessment private sector mandate that exceeds (c)(2) of this section is not an official The provisions of this rule will have $100 million a year. weather report or an official ground little impact on trade for both U.S. firms Agency Findings visibility report. doing business in foreign countries and The FAA has determined that this Issued in Washington, DC on March 21, foreign firms doing business in the 2000. United States. regulation is noncontroversial and unlikely to result in adverse or negative Jane F. Garvey, Federalism Implications comments. For the reasons discussed in Administrator. The FAA has analyzed this proposed the preamble, I certify that this [FR Doc. 00–7341 Filed 3–23–00; 8:45 a.m.] rule under the principles and criteria of regulation (1) is not a ‘‘significant BILLING CODE 4910±13±M
VerDate 20
Reader Aids Federal Register Vol. 65, No. 58 Friday, March 24, 2000
CUSTOMER SERVICE AND INFORMATION CFR PARTS AFFECTED DURING MARCH
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 the revision date of each title. Laws 523±5227 3 CFR 601...... 14781 761...... 14432 Presidential Documents Proclamations: 762...... 14432 7276...... 11197 Executive orders and proclamations 523±5227 915...... 15203 7277...... 11199 The United States Government Manual 523±5227 916...... 15205 7278...... 11455 917...... 15205 7279...... 11733 Other Services 993...... 12061 7280...... 12903 955...... 12442 Electronic and on-line services (voice) 523±4534 7281...... 15201 985...... 15832 Privacy Act Compilation 523±3187 Executive Orders: 989...... 15214 Public Laws Update Service (numbers, dates, etc.) 523±6641 12170 (See Notice of 1421...... 13865 TTY for the deaf-and-hard-of-hearing 523±5229 March 13, 2000)...... 13863 1427...... 13865 12957 (Continued by 1464...... 10933 Notice of March 13, ELECTRONIC RESEARCH 1710...... 14207, 14785 2000) ...... 13863 1721...... 10933 World Wide Web 12959 (See Notice of 3019...... 14406 March 13, 2000)...... 13863 Full text of the daily Federal Register, CFR and other Proposed Rules: 13059 (See Notice of publications: 6...... 14478 March 13, 2000)...... 13863 20...... 11483 http://www.access.gpo.gov/nara 13146...... 11201 27...... 10979 Federal Register information and research tools, including Public 13147...... 13233 28...... 10979, 12140 Inspection List, indexes, and links to GPO Access: Administrative Orders: 29...... 13915 Memorandum of http://www.nara.gov/fedreg 57...... 14652 January 5, 2000 ...... 15823 97...... 13917 E-mail Presidential Determinations: 201...... 12952 PENS (Public Law Electronic Notification Service) is an E-mail No. 2000-15 of 205...... 15579 service for notification of recently enacted Public Laws. To February 24, 2000 ...... 10931 360...... 14926 subscribe, send E-mail to No. 2000-16 of 930...... 15580 February 29, 2000 ...... 15797 1140...... 10981 [email protected] No. 2000-17 of March 1160...... 14484 with the text message: 2, 2000 ...... 15821 1205...... 12146 subscribe PUBLAWS-L your name Notices: 1210...... 14485 March 13, 2000 ...... 13863 1306...... 12141 Use [email protected] only to subscribe or unsubscribe to 1307...... 12141 PENS. We cannot respond to specific inquiries. 4 CFR 1309...... 12141 Reference questions. Send questions and comments about the 27...... 15203 1710...... 12952 Federal Register system to: 28...... 15203 1717...... 12952 1718...... 12952 [email protected] 5 CFR The Federal Register staff cannot interpret specific documents or Ch. LXXIII ...... 15825 8 CFR regulations. 213...... 14431 3...... 15835, 15846 315...... 14431 212 ...... 14774, 15835, 15846 FEDERAL REGISTER PAGES AND DATE, MARCH 335...... 14431 214...... 14774 531...... 15875 240...... 15835, 15846 10931±11196...... 1 532...... 15521 245...... 15835, 15846 11197±11454...... 2 792...... 13659 274a...... 15835, 15846 11455±11734...... 3 Proposed Rules: 248...... 14774 11735±11858...... 6 3...... 14477 278A ...... 14774 11859±12060...... 7 213...... 14477 299...... 15835, 15846 315...... 14477 12061±12426...... 8 9 CFR 12427±12904...... 9 7 CFR 74...... 15216 12905±13234...... 10 78...... 12064 13235±13658...... 13 2...... 12427 75...... 15830 93...... 15216 13659±13864...... 14 205...... 13512 94...... 15521 13865±14206...... 15 210...... 12429 Proposed Rules: 14207±14430...... 16 215...... 12429 71...... 11485 14431±14780...... 17 220...... 12429 77 ...... 11485, 11912, 15877 14781±15052...... 20 225...... 12429 78...... 11485 15053±15202...... 21 226...... 12429 93...... 12486 15203±15520...... 22 301...... 11203 98...... 12486 15521±15822...... 23 457...... 11457 113...... 12151 15823±16116...... 24 600...... 14781 130...... 12486
VerDate 20-MAR-2000 20:48 Mar 23, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4712 Sfmt 4712 E:\FR\FM\24MRCU.LOC pfrm04 PsN: 24MRCU ii Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 58 / Friday, March 24, 2000 / Reader Aids
317...... 14486 10937, 10938, 11204, 11459, 228...... 11507, 15043 15547, 15548, 15862 318...... 14486, 14489 11859, 11861, 12071, 12072, 229...... 11507 301...... 11211, 11215 319...... 144867, 14489 12073, 12075, 12077, 12080, 230...... 11507, 15500 601...... 15862 327...... 14489 12081, 12082, 12084, 12085, 232...... 11507 602 ...... 11205, 11211, 11215 12460, 12462, 12463, 13668, 381...... 14486 239...... 11507, 15500 Proposed Rules: 13871, 13875, 13877, 14207, 240...... 11507 1 ...... 11012, 11269, 15587 590...... 11486 14209, 14822, 14826, 14827, 248...... 12354 301...... 11271, 11272 14831, 14834, 14838, 14844, 249...... 11507 10 CFR 14846, 14847, 14849, 14852, 250...... 11507 27 CFR 15226, 15230, 15232, 15531, 259...... 11507 4...... 11889 72 ...... 11458, 12444, 14790 15534, 15536, 15537, 15857, 260...... 11507 5...... 11889 170...... 11204 15858 269...... 11507 7...... 11889 600...... 14406 71 ...... 11369, 11461, 11866, 270...... 11507, 15500 16...... 11889 820...... 15218 12630, 12917, 12918, 14344, 274...... 11507, 15500 75...... 15058 Proposed Rules: 14855, 14856, 14857, 15859, 18 CFR Proposed Rules: Ch. XVIII ...... 13700 15860, 15861 00...... 15115 21...... 11488 91...... 16112, 16114 35...... 12088 4...... 12490 50...... 11488 95...... 14442 157 ...... 11461, 12115, 15234 70...... 15115 380...... 15234 52...... 11488 97 ...... 13669, 13671, 13673, 75...... 15115 54...... 11488 15540, 15541, 15544 19 CFR 90...... 15115 1260...... 14406 100...... 11488 12...... 12470 Proposed Rules: 28 CFR 430...... 14128 24...... 13880 25...... 13703 70...... 14406 431...... 10984 111...... 13880 39 ...... 11006, 11505, 11940, 178...... 13880 960...... 11755 11942, 12489, 12957, 13251, 29 CFR 963...... 11755 13919, 13921, 13923, 14216, 20 CFR 95...... 14406 14218, 15278, 15280, 15584, 4022...... 14752, 14753 220...... 14458 15878, 15880, 15882 4044...... 13905, 14752 11 CFR 322...... 14459 71 ...... 12153, 12957, 13704, 4050...... 14752 108...... 15221 404...... 11866 13705, 13707, 14497, 15282, 416...... 11866 Proposed Rules: Proposed Rules: 15586 1614...... 11019 9038...... 15273 108...... 15113 21 CFR 1910...... 11948, 13254 109...... 15113 20...... 11881 30 CFR 12 CFR 111...... 15113 101...... 11205 129...... 15113 202...... 11467 5...... 12905 176...... 13675 191...... 15113 177...... 15057 206...... 11467, 14022 204...... 12916 255...... 11009 178...... 15545 250...... 14469, 15862 208...... 14810, 15050 938...... 15553 15 CFR 524...... 13904 225 ...... 14433, 14440, 15053 558...... 11888 Proposed Rules: 303...... 15526 14...... 14406 640...... 13678 914...... 11950, 12492 340...... 14816 734...... 12919 868...... 11464 31 CFR 362...... 15526 736...... 14858 870...... 11465 701...... 15224 738...... 12919, 14857 1301...... 13235 103...... 13683 740...... 12919, 14857 724...... 10933 1308...... 13235 742...... 12919, 14857 32 CFR 745...... 10933 Proposed Rules: 743...... 12919 22...... 14406 Ch. IX...... 13663 101...... 14219 744...... 12919, 14444 314...... 12154 32...... 14406 925...... 13866 748...... 12919 668...... 13906 950...... 13866 756...... 14857, 14861 22 CFR 776...... 15059 1501...... 12064, 14819 762...... 14858 22...... 14211 33 CFR 1510...... 15050 766...... 14862 23...... 14211 Proposed Rules: 770...... 14857 41...... 14768 26...... 14863 3...... 12320 774 ...... 12919, 13879, 14862 51...... 14211 95...... 14223 100...... 15558 8...... 15111 16 CFR 139...... 14764 208...... 12320 145...... 14406 110...... 11892 1615...... 12924 117 ...... 11893, 12943, 15238 225...... 12320 226...... 14406 1616...... 12924 127...... 10943 325...... 12320 Proposed Rules: 1630...... 12929 22...... 13253 140...... 14226 567...... 12320 1631...... 12929 141...... 14226 614...... 14491 1632...... 12935 23 CFR 142...... 14226 620...... 14494 Proposed Rules: 1340...... 13679 143...... 14226 709...... 11250 307...... 11944 144...... 14226 716...... 10988 312...... 11947 24 CFR 145...... 14226 741...... 10988 313...... 11174 200...... 15043 146...... 14226 742...... 15275 401...... 15452 147...... 14226 17 CFR 1750...... 13251 402...... 15452 154...... 10943 1...... 12466 905...... 14422 155...... 10943, 14470 4...... 10939, 12938 159...... 10943 13 CFR Proposed Rules: 15...... 14452 81...... 12632 161...... 14863 Proposed Rules: 16...... 14452 990...... 11525 164...... 10943 124...... 12955 17...... 14452 165...... 14864 200...... 12469 25 CFR 167...... 12944 240...... 13235 290...... 14461 177...... 14223 14 CFR 242...... 13235 183...... 10943 25...... 13666 Proposed Rules: 26 CFR Proposed Rules: 39...... 10934, 4...... 11253, 12318 1 ...... 11205, 11467, 12471, 100 ...... 11274, 13926, 14498
VerDate 20-MAR-2000 20:48 Mar 23, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4712 Sfmt 4712 E:\FR\FM\24MRCU.LOC pfrm04 PsN: 24MRCU Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 58 / Friday, March 24, 2000 / Reader Aids iii
110...... 13926, 14498 262...... 12378 134...... 11904 247...... 14400 165 ...... 13926, 14498, 14501, 268...... 14472 151...... 10943 252 ...... 14397, 14400, 14402 14502, 15283, 15285 271...... 14472 153...... 10943 1806...... 12484 175...... 11410 300...... 13697, 14475 154...... 10943 1808...... 12484 177...... 11410 302...... 14472 160...... 10943 1811...... 12484 179...... 11410 431...... 15091 161...... 10943 1813...... 12484 181...... 11410 445...... 14344 162...... 10943 1815...... 12484 183...... 11410 Proposed Rules: 163...... 10943 1825...... 12484 51...... 11024 164...... 10943 1835...... 12484 34 CFR 52 ...... 11027, 11275, 11524, 170...... 10943 1837...... 12484 74...... 14406 12494, 12495, 12499, 12958, 174...... 10943 1842...... 12484 1100...... 11894 13260, 13709, 14506, 14510, 175...... 10943 1848...... 12484 Proposed Rules: 14930, 15286, 15287, 15883 182...... 10943 1851...... 12484 606...... 15115 63...... 11278 189...... 11904 2409...... 12950 607...... 15115 81...... 14510 190...... 10943 Proposed Rules: 608...... 15115 141...... 11372 193...... 10943 Ch. 9 ...... 13416 152...... 15883 195...... 10943 36 CFR 156...... 15884 199...... 10943, 11904 49 CFR Ch. XV ...... 14760 438...... 11755 515...... 15252 1...... 15077 503...... 11278 Proposed Rules: 19...... 14406 3...... 15077 755...... 16094 2...... 11410 193...... 10950 13...... 15077 10...... 11410 350...... 15092 42 CFR 701...... 11735, 11736 15...... 11410 355...... 15092 1210...... 14406 121...... 15252 24...... 11410 385...... 11904 571...... 11751 Proposed Rules: 405...... 13911 25...... 11410 212...... 11680 410...... 13911 26...... 11410 572...... 10961, 15254 261...... 11680 Proposed Rules: 28...... 11410 Proposed Rules: 295...... 11680 410...... 13082 30...... 11410 Ch I...... 11541 1190...... 12493 493...... 14510 70...... 11410 40...... 13261, 15118 90...... 11410 171...... 11028 1191...... 12493 43 CFR 1280...... 15592 114...... 11410 172...... 11028 12...... 14406 169...... 11410 173...... 11028 37 CFR 3500...... 11475 175...... 11410 174...... 11028 1...... 14864 188...... 11410 175...... 11028 45 CFR 199...... 11410 176...... 11028 Proposed Rules: 74...... 14406 177...... 11028 201...... 14227, 14505 47 CFR 400...... 15410 178...... 11028 38 CFR 401...... 15410 1...... 14476 179...... 11028 612...... 11740 20...... 15559 180...... 11028 3...... 12116 613...... 11740 22...... 15559 190...... 15290 19...... 14471 24...... 14213, 15559 191...... 15290 20...... 14471 46 CFR 27...... 12483 192...... 15290 21...... 12117, 13893 28...... 10943 54...... 12135 195...... 15290 Proposed Rules: 30...... 10943 73 ...... 11476, 11477, 11750, 222...... 15298 3...... 13254 32...... 10943 13250 229...... 15298 34...... 10943 76...... 12135, 15559 39 CFR 35...... 10943 80...... 15559 111...... 12946 38...... 10943 90...... 15559 50 CFR Proposed Rules: 39...... 10943 99...... 15559 17 ...... 14876, 14886, 14896, 20...... 11023 54...... 10943 Proposed Rules: 16052 111...... 13258 56...... 10943 Ch. I ...... 15599 300...... 14907 913...... 14229 58...... 10943 1...... 13933 622...... 12136 952...... 13707 61...... 10943 2...... 14230 635...... 15873 63...... 10943 26...... 14230 648 ...... 11478, 11909, 15110, 40 CFR 76...... 10943 27...... 14230 15576 9...... 15090 77...... 10943 54...... 13933 660...... 11480 30...... 14406 78...... 10943 61...... 13933 679 ...... 10978, 11247, 11481, 51...... 11222 91...... 11904 69...... 13933 11909, 12137, 12138, 13698, 52 ...... 10944, 11468, 12118, 92...... 10943 73 ...... 11537, 11538, 11539, 14918, 14924, 15271, 15272, 12472, 12474, 12476, 12481, 95...... 10943 11540, 11541, 11955, 12155, 15577 12948, 13239, 13694, 14212, 96...... 10943 13260, 13261, 15600, 15885, Proposed Rules: 14873, 15240, 15244, 15864 97...... 10943 15886 16...... 11756 55...... 15867 105...... 10943 17 ...... 12155, 12181, 13262, 60...... 13242 108...... 10943 48 CFR 13935, 14513, 14931, 14935, 63...... 11231, 15690 109...... 10943 Ch. 2 ...... 14380 15887 68...... 13243 110...... 10943 Ch. 5 ...... 11246 216...... 11542 86...... 11898 111...... 10943 202...... 14397 223...... 12959 136...... 14344 114...... 10943 204...... 14397 224...... 12959, 13935 141...... 11372 115...... 11904 207...... 14397 300...... 13284 148...... 14472 119...... 10943 208...... 14397, 14400 600...... 11956 180 ...... 10946, 11234, 11243, 125...... 10943 212...... 14400 622...... 11028, 14518 11736, 12122, 12129, 15248 132...... 11904 222...... 14397, 14402 648 ...... 11029, 11956, 14519 261...... 14472 133...... 11904 244...... 14400 679 ...... 11756, 11973, 12500
VerDate 20-MAR-2000 20:48 Mar 23, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4712 Sfmt 4712 E:\FR\FM\24MRCU.LOC pfrm04 PsN: 24MRCU iv Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 58 / Friday, March 24, 2000 / Reader Aids
REMINDERS Mitsubishi; published 2-4-00 COMMERCE DEPARTMENT Local exchange carriers, The items in this list were Twin Commander Aircraft National Oceanic and low-volume long distance editorially compiled as an aid Corp.; published 2-4-00¶ Atmospheric Administration users, and Federal-State to Federal Register users. Fishery conservation and Joint Board on Universal ServiceÐ Inclusion or exclusion from RULES GOING INTO management: Access charge reform and this list has no legal EFFECT MARCH 25, 2000 Northeastern United States significance. fisheriesÐ price cap performance review; comments due Deep-sea red crab; AGRICULTURE by 3-30-00; published comments due by 3-31- DEPARTMENT 3-15-00 RULES GOING INTO 00; published 3-1-00 EFFECT MARCH 24, 2000 Agricultural Marketing Wireless telecommunications Deep-sea red crab; Service servicesÐ correction; comments Spearmint oil produced inÐ ADMINISTRATIVE due by 3-31-00; Specialized mobile radio COMMITTEE OF THE Far West; published 3-24-00 published 3-17-00 (SMR) systems in 800 FEDERAL REGISTER MHz frequency band; DEFENSE DEPARTMENT future development Federal Register, COMMENTS DUE NEXT Administrative Committee Federal Acquisition Regulation facilitation; comments WEEK (FAR): Federal Register publications; due by 3-27-00; prices, availability and Deferred research and published 3-23-00 AGRICULTURE official status; published 2- development costs; Radio stations; table of DEPARTMENT 23-00 comments due by 3-27- assignments: Agricultural Marketing 00; published 1-26-00 AGRICULTURE Alabama and Florida; Service Drafting principles; DEPARTMENT comments due by 3-27- Cotton classing, testing, and comments due by 3-27- 00; published 2-16-00 Supplemental standards of standards: 00; published 1-26-00 ethical conduct for Texas; comments due by 3- employees of the Upland cotton; official color ENERGY DEPARTMENT 27-00; published 2-16-00 Department of Agriculture; grade determination; Energy Efficiency and Television broadcasting: published 3-24-00 comments due by 3-31- Renewable Energy Office Broadcast licensees; public 00; published 3-1-00 HOUSING AND URBAN Energy conservation: interest obligations; Raisins produced from grapes DEVELOPMENT Weatherization assistance comments due by 3-27- grown inÐ DEPARTMENT program for low-income 00; published 1-26-00 California; comments due by Mortgage and loan insurance persons; comments due FEDERAL DEPOSIT 3-31-00; published 1-31- programs: by 3-27-00; published 1- INSURANCE CORPORATION 00 26-00 Multifamiliy Reform Act; Consumer financial information implementation; published AGRICULTURE ENVIRONMENTAL privacy; comments due by 2-23-00 DEPARTMENT PROTECTION AGENCY 3-31-00; published 2-22-00 Animal and Plant Health INTERIOR DEPARTMENT Air programs: FEDERAL RESERVE Inspection Service SYSTEM Fish and Wildlife Service Stratospheric ozone Exportation and importation of protectionÐ Consumer financial information Endangered and threatened animals and animal privacy; comments due by species: Essential-use allowances ; products: allocation; comments 3-31-00; published 2-22-00 Riparian brush rabbit and Canine and equine semen due by 3-27-00; FEDERAL TRADE riparian woodrat; from Canada; comments published 2-25-00 COMMISSION published 2-23-00 due by 3-27-00; published Air programs; approval and Consumer financial JUSTICE DEPARTMENT 1-26-00 promulgation; State plans information; privacy Immigration and AGRICULTURE for designated facilities and requirements; comments Naturalization Service DEPARTMENT pollutants: due by 3-31-00; published Immigration: Forest Service Georgia; comments due by 3-1-00 Haitian nationals; status Alaska National Interest Lands 3-27-00; published 2-25- GENERAL SERVICES adjustment; published 3- Conservation Act: 00 ADMINISTRATION 24-00 TItle VII implementation Air quality implementation Federal Acquisition Regulation Nicaraguan and Cuban (subsistence priority) plans; approval and (FAR): nationals; status promulgation; various Kenai Peninsula Deferred research and adjustment; published 3- States: determination; development costs; 24-00 comments due by 3-31- California; comments due by comments due by 3-27- TRANSPORTATION 00; published 2-22-00 3-29-00; published 3-14- 00; published 1-26-00 00 DEPARTMENT Alaska National Interest Lands Drafting principles; Federal Aviation Conservation Act; Title VIII New Mexico; comments due comments due by 3-27- Administration implementation (subsistence by 3-29-00; published 2- 00; published 1-26-00 Air traffic operating and flight priority): 28-00 INTERIOR DEPARTMENT rules, etc.: Fish and wildlife; Hazardous waste program Fish and Wildlife Service Serbia-Montenegro; flights subsistence taking; authorizations: Alaska National Interest Lands within territory and comments due by 3-27- Louisiana; comments due by Conservation Act: airspace; prohibition 00; published 2-2-00 3-29-00; published 2-28- Fish and wildlife resources removed (SFAR No. 84); COMMERCE DEPARTMENT 00 on public lands; published 3-24-00 Missouri; comments due by Anticybersquatting Consumer preference for subsistence 3-29-00; published 2-28- Airworthiness directives: Protection Act; abusive useÐ 00 Empresa Brasileira de domain registrations Kenai Peninsula; Aeronautica S.A.; involving personal names; FEDERAL comments due by 3-31- published 2-4-00 resolution issues; comments COMMUNICATIONS 00; published 2-22-00 Eurocopter France; due by 3-30-00; published COMMISSION Alaska National Interest Lands published 3-9-00 2-29-00 Common carrier services: Conservation Act; Title VIII
VerDate 20-MAR-2000 20:48 Mar 23, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4712 Sfmt 4711 E:\FR\FM\24MRCU.LOC pfrm04 PsN: 24MRCU Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 58 / Friday, March 24, 2000 / Reader Aids v
implementation (subsistence POSTAL SERVICE MD10-30/30F airplanes; session of Congress which priority): International Mail Manual: comments due by 3-27- have become Federal laws. It Fish and wildlife; International surface mail; 00; published 2-25-00 may be used in conjunction subsistence taking; postal rate changes; Transport airplane fuel tank with ``P L U S'' (Public Laws comments due by 3-27- comments due by 3-31- system design review, Update Service) on 202±523± 00; published 2-2-00 00; published 3-1-00 flammability reduction, and 6641. This list is also Endangered and threatened maintenance and inspection available online at http:// SECURITIES AND requirements; comments www.nara.gov/fedreg. species: EXCHANGE COMMISSION Columbian sharp-tailed due by 3-27-00; published Practice and procedure: The text of laws is not grouse; status review; 2-16-00 published in the Federal comments due by 3-27- Market information fees and TRANSPORTATION Register but may be ordered 00; published 1-24-00 revenues; public DEPARTMENT in ``slip law'' (individual dissemination; comments Research and Special Tidewater goby; comments pamphlet) form from the due by 3-31-00; published Programs Administration due by 3-31-00; published 12-17-99 Superintendent of Documents, 2-15-00 Hazardous materials: Privacy of Consumer Financial U.S. Government Printing LIBRARY OF CONGRESS Hazardous materials Office, Washington, DC 20402 Information (Regulation S- transportationÐ Copyright Office, Library of P); comments due by 3-31- (phone, 202±512±1808). The Compatibility with Congress 00; published 3-8-00 text will also be made International Atomic Digital Millennium Copyright available on the Internet from Securities: Energy Agency Act: GPO Access at http:// Selective disclosure and regulations; comments www.access.gpo.gov/nara/ Circumvention of copyright insider trading; comments due by 3-29-00; index.html. Some laws may protection systems for due by 3-29-00; published published 12-28-99 not yet be available. access control 12-28-99 technologies; exemption to TREASURY DEPARTMENT SMALL BUSINESS prohibition; comments due Comptroller of the Currency S. 376/P.L. 106±180 ADMINISTRATION by 3-31-00; published 3- Consumer financial information Open-market Reorganization Small business size standards: 17-00 privacy; comments due by for the Betterment of 3-31-00; published 2-22-00 NATIONAL AERONAUTICS Compliance with other International AND SPACE agency programs; TREASURY DEPARTMENT Telecommunications Act (Mar. ADMINISTRATION comments due by 3-27- Customs Service 17, 2000; 114 Stat. 48) 00; published 1-26-00 Country of origin marking; Federal Acquisition Regulation Last List March 16, 2000 (FAR): TRANSPORTATION comments due by 3-27-00; Deferred research and DEPARTMENT published 1-26-00 development costs; Federal Aviation TREASURY DEPARTMENT comments due by 3-27- Administration Internal Revenue Service Public Laws Electronic 00; published 1-26-00 Airworthiness directives: Income taxes: Notification Service Drafting principles; Agusta S.p.A.; comments Source of compensation for (PENS) comments due by 3-27- due by 3-27-00; published labor or personal services; 00; published 1-26-00 1-26-00 comments due by 3-29- Airbus; comments due by 3- 00; published 1-21-00 NATIONAL CREDIT UNION PENS is a free electronic mail 27-00; published 2-24-00 Procedure and administration: ADMINISTRATION notification service of newly Credit unions: Alexander Schleicher Combat zone service and enacted public laws. To Consumer financial Segelflugzeugbau; Presidentially declared subscribe, go to www.gsa.gov/ information; privacy comments due by 3-31- disaster; tax-related archives/publaws-l.html or requirements; comments 00; published 3-1-00 deadline relief; comments send E-mail to due by 3-31-00; published Empresa Brasileira de due by 3-30-00; published [email protected] with 3-1-00 Aeronautica S.A.; 12-30-99 the following text message: PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT comments due by 3-27- TREASURY DEPARTMENT SUBSCRIBE PUBLAWS-L OFFICE 00; published 2-24-00 Thrift Supervision Office Your Name. Absence and leave: Eurocopter Deutschland Consumer financial information GMBH; comments due by privacy; comments due by Sick leave for family care 3-27-00; published 1-25- 3-31-00; published 2-22-00 Note: This service is strictly purposes; comments due 00 for E-mail notification of new by 3-27-00; published 2-9- laws. The text of laws is not 00 Airworthiness standards: LIST OF PUBLIC LAWS available through this service. Prevailing rate systems; Special conditionsÐ PENS cannot respond to comments due by 3-30-00; McDonnell Douglas Model This is a continuing list of specific inquiries sent to this published 2-29-00 MD-10-10/10F and public bills from the current address.
VerDate 20-MAR-2000 20:48 Mar 23, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 4712 Sfmt 4711 E:\FR\FM\24MRCU.LOC pfrm04 PsN: 24MRCU