10–9–03 Vol. 68 No. 196 Thursday

10–9–03 Thursday Vol. 68 No. 196 Oct. 9, 2003

Pages 58261–58574

VerDate jul 14 2003 22:46 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4710 Sfmt 4710 E:\FR\FM\09OCWS.LOC 09OCWS

1 II Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003

The FEDERAL REGISTER (ISSN 0097–6326) is published daily, SUBSCRIPTIONS AND COPIES Monday through Friday, except official holidays, by the Office of the Federal Register, National Archives and Records PUBLIC Administration, Washington, DC 20408, under the Federal Register Subscriptions: Act (44 U.S.C. Ch. 15) and the regulations of the Administrative Paper or fiche 202–512–1800 Committee of the Federal Register (1 CFR Ch. I). The Assistance with public subscriptions 202–512–1806 Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, DC 20402 is the exclusive distributor of the official General online information 202–512–1530; 1–888–293–6498 edition. Periodicals postage is paid at Washington, DC. Single copies/back copies: The FEDERAL REGISTER provides a uniform system for making Paper or fiche 202–512–1800 available to the public regulations and legal notices issued by Assistance with public single copies 1–866–512–1800 Federal agencies. These include Presidential proclamations and (Toll-Free) Executive Orders, Federal agency documents having general FEDERAL AGENCIES applicability and legal effect, documents required to be published by act of Congress, and other Federal agency documents of public Subscriptions: interest. Paper or fiche 202–741–6005 Documents are on file for public inspection in the Office of the Assistance with Federal agency subscriptions 202–741–6005 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. What’s NEW! The seal of the National Archives and Records Administration Federal Register Table of Contents via e-mail authenticates the Federal Register as the official serial publication Subscribe to FEDREGTOC, to receive the Federal Register Table of established under the Federal Register Act. Under 44 U.S.C. 1507, Contents in your e-mail every day. the contents of the Federal Register shall be judicially noticed. The Federal Register is published in paper and on 24x microfiche. If you get the HTML version, you can click directly to any document It is also available online at no charge as one of the databases in the issue. on GPO Access, a service of the U.S. Government Printing Office. To subscribe, go to http://listserv.access.gpo.gov and select: The online edition of the Federal Register www.access.gpo.gov/ Online mailing list archives nara, available through GPO Access, is issued under the authority of the Administrative Committee of the Federal Register as the FEDREGTOC-L official legal equivalent of the paper and microfiche editions (44 Join or leave the list U.S.C. 4101 and 1 CFR 5.10). It is updated by 6 a.m. each day Then follow the instructions. the Federal Register is published and includes both text and graphics from Volume 59, Number 1 (January 2, 1994) forward. For more information about GPO Access, contact the GPO Access User Support Team, call toll free 1-888-293-6498; DC area 202- 512-1530; fax at 202-512-1262; or via email at [email protected]. The Support Team is available between 7:00 a.m. and 5:30 p.m. Eastern Time, Monday–Friday, except official holidays. The annual subscription price for the Federal Register paper edition is $699, or $764 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 $264. Six month subscriptions are available for one-half the annual rate. The charge for individual copies in paper form is $10.00 for each issue, or $10.00 for each group of pages as actually bound; or $2.00 for each issue in microfiche form. All prices include regular domestic postage and handling. International customers please add 40% for foreign handling. Remit check or money order, made payable to the Superintendent of Documents, or charge to your GPO Deposit Account, VISA, MasterCard, American Express, or Discover. Mail to: New Orders, Superintendent of Documents, P.O. Box 371954, Pittsburgh, PA 15250-7954; or call toll free 1-866-512-1800, DC area 202-512-1800; or go to the U.S. Government Online Bookstore site, [email protected]. 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: 68 FR 12345. Postmaster: Send address changes to the Superintendent of Documents, Federal Register, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington DC 20402, along with the entire mailing label from the last issue received.

VerDate jul 14 2003 22:46 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4710 Sfmt 4710 E:\FR\FM\09OCWS.LOC 09OCWS

2 III

Contents Federal Register Vol. 68, No. 196

Thursday, October 9, 2003

Agricultural Marketing Service Education Department RULES NOTICES Mango promotion, research and information order, 58551– Agency information collection activities; proposals, 58555 submissions, and approvals, 58319–58320 PROPOSED RULES Mango promotion, research and information order, 58555– Employment and Training Administration 58569 RULES NOTICES Birth and adoption unemployment compensation; CFR part Agency information collection activities; proposals, removed, 58539–58549 submissions, and approvals, 58300–58301 Energy Department Agriculture Department See Federal Energy Regulatory Commission See Agricultural Marketing Service NOTICES See Forest Service Presidential permit applications: Vermont Electric Power Co., Inc., 58320–58321 Appalachian States Low-Level Radioactive Waste Commission Engineers Corps NOTICES NOTICES Meetings, 58303–58304 Meetings: Coastal Engineering Research Board, 58317–58318 Army Department See Engineers Corps Environmental Protection Agency RULES Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Air quality implementation plans; approval and NOTICES promulgation; various States: Meetings: New Mexico, 58276–58281 Radiation and Worker Health Advisory Board, 58348 PROPOSED RULES Public safety and health protection: Air quality implementation plans; approval and Chemical warfare agents GA (tabun), GB (sarin) and VX; promulgation; various States: airborne exposure limits; final recommendations New Mexico, 58295 Correction, 58348–58351 Water pollution control: Ocean dumping; site designations— Children and Families Administration Long Island Sound, CT; correction, 58295–58296 NOTICES NOTICES Meetings: Grants and cooperative agreements; availability, etc.: People with Intellectual Disabilities, President’s Watershed Initiative; nominations request, 58333–58341 Committee, 58352 Toxic and hazardous substances control: New chemicals— Receipt and status information, 58341–58345 Commerce Department Water pollution control: See Foreign-Trade Zones Board Marine discharges of vessel sewage, prohibition; See International Trade Administration petitions, etc.— See National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration New York, 58345–58346

Commission of Fine Arts Executive Office of the President NOTICES See Management and Budget Office Meetings, 58317 See Presidential Documents

Customs and Border Protection Bureau Federal Aviation Administration RULES RULES Merchandise, special classes: Airworthiness directives: Import restrictions— Boeing, 58268–58273 Cambodia; archaeological materials; correction, 58371 Pilatus Aircraft Ltd., 58265–58268 Pratt & Whitney; correction, 58273 Defense Department Stemme GmbH & Co., 58263–58265 See Engineers Corps PROPOSED RULES See Navy Department Airworthiness directives: Bombardier, 58283–58285, 58287–58289 Delaware River Basin Commission Dassault, 58285–58287 NOTICES New Piper Aircraft, Inc., 58289–58291 Meetings and hearings, 58318–58319 Rolls-Royce plc, 58291–58293

VerDate jul<14>2003 22:59 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4748 Sfmt 4748 E:\FR\FM\09OCCN.SGM 09OCCN IV Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Contents

Federal Communications Commission Food and Drug Administration NOTICES RULES Agency information collection activities; proposals, Human drugs: submissions, and approvals, 58346–58347 Skin protectant drugs (OTC)— Astringent products; final monograph, 58273 Federal Election Commission NOTICES Debarment orders: NOTICES Islam, Amirul; termination, 58352–58353 Meetings; Sunshine Act, 58347 Foreign-Trade Zones Board Federal Energy Regulatory Commission NOTICES NOTICES Applications, hearings, determinations, etc.: Electric rate and corporate regulation filings: Florida ANR Pipeline Co., 58331 Chevron Products Co.; petroleum product storage East Tennessee Natural Gas Co., 58331–58332 facility, 58304 Hydroelectric applications, 58332–58333 Louisiana Applications, hearings, determinations, etc.: Murphy Oil USA, Inc.; oil refinery complex, 58304– ANR Pipeline Co., 58321–58322 58305 Appalachian Power Co., 58322 South Carolina Bonneville Power Administration, 58322–58323 Fuji Photo Film, Inc.; medical imaging products and CenterPoint Energy Gas Transmission Co., 58324 color negative photographic film and paper CenterPoint Energy-Mississippi River Transmission Corp., production facilities, 58305 58323–58324 Colorado Interstate Gas Co., 58324 Forest Service Columbia Gas Transmission Co., 58324–58325 NOTICES Columbia Gas Transmission Corp., 58325 Environmental statements; notice of intent: Dominion Transmission, Inc., 58325–58326 Malheur National Forest, OR, 58301–58303 Eastern Shore Natural Gas Co., 58326–58327 Southwestern Region— East Tennessee Natural Gas Co., 58326 National Forest land and resource management plans; Honeoye Storage Corp., 58327 Mexican spotted owl and northern goshawk; Iroquois Gas Transmission, L.P., 58327 canceled, 58303 Katy Storage and Transportation, L.P., 58327–58328 Meetings: Midwestern Gas Transmission Co., 58328 Resource Advisory Committees— MIGC, Inc., 58328 Eastern Idaho, 58303 PG&E Gas Transmission, Northwest Corp., 58329 Glenn/Colusa County, 58303 Portland Natural Gas Transmission Co., 58329 Questar Southern Trails Pipeline Co., 58329–58330 Health and Human Services Department TransColorado Gas Transmission Co., 58330 See Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Transwestern Pipeline Co., 58330–58331 See Children and Families Administration Viking Gas Transmission Co., 58331 See Food and Drug Administration Homeland Security Department Federal Reserve System See Customs and Border Protection Bureau NOTICES See Transportation Security Administration Banks and bank holding companies: Formations, acquisitions, and mergers, 58347–58348 Housing and Urban Development Department NOTICES Federal Retirement Thrift Investment Board Agency information collection activities; proposals, NOTICES submissions, and approvals, 58353–58354 Meetings; Sunshine Act, 58348 Interior Department See Fish and Wildlife Service Fine Arts Commission See Land Management Bureau See Commission of Fine Arts International Trade Administration Fish and Wildlife Service NOTICES PROPOSED RULES Antidumping: Endangered Species Act; interagency cooperation: Honey from— National Fire Plan; implementation, 58298–58299 Argentina, 58305–58306 NOTICES Potassium permanganate from— Endangered and threatened species: China, 58306–58307 Recovery plans— North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA); Sierra Nevada bighorn sheep, 58355–58356 binational panel reviews: Endangered and threatened species permit applications, Durum wheat and hard red spring wheat from— 58354–58355 Canada, 58307–58308 Marine mammal permit applications, 58316–58317 Meetings: Labor Department Aquatic Nuisance Species Task Force, 58356 See Employment and Training Administration

VerDate jul<14>2003 22:59 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4748 Sfmt 4748 E:\FR\FM\09OCCN.SGM 09OCCN Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Contents V

See Labor-Management Standards Office Nuclear Regulatory Commission NOTICES Labor-Management Standards Office Environmental statements; availability, etc.: RULES Dominion Nuclear Connecticut, Inc., 58363–58364 Labor-management standards: Meetings: Labor organization annual financial reports, 58373–58538 Nuclear Waste Advisory Committee, 58364–58365 Operating licenses, amendments; no significant hazards Land Management Bureau considerations; biweekly notices; correction, 58365– NOTICES 58366 Environmental statements; availability, etc.: Applications, hearings, determinations, etc.: Farmington Resource Area, NM, 58356 Florida Power & Light Co. et al., 58363 Meetings: Resource Advisory Councils— Office of Management and Budget Front Range, 58357 See Management and Budget Office Realty actions; sales, leases, etc.: Colorado, 58357 Postal Service Minnesota, 58357 RULES Nevada, 58357–58358 Domestic Mail Manual: Recreation management restrictions, etc.: Nonprofit standard mail matter; eligibility requirements, Bannock County, ID; closure to all motorized vehicles, 58273–58276 mountain biking, camping, horseback riding, and other recreational activities, 58358 Presidential Documents Survey plat filings: PROCLAMATIONS Montana, 58358–58361 Special observances: Withdrawal and reservation of lands: Child Health Day (Proc. 7716), 58571–58574 Arizona, 58361 ADMINISTRATIVE ORDERS Child Survival and Health Care Fund, transferal and Management and Budget Office consolidation of U.N. Population Fund allocated NOTICES monies to (Presidential Determination No. 2003-41 of Circulars, etc.: September 30, 2003), 58261 Regulatory analysis (Circular A-4), 58366 National Archives and Records Administration Presidio Trust NOTICES NOTICES Nixon Presidential historical materials; opening of Meetings: materials, 58361–58362 Board of Directors, 58366 National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Railroad Retirement Board RULES NOTICES Fishery conservation and management: Agency information collection activities; proposals, Northeastern United States fisheries— submissions, and approvals, 58366–58367 Tilefish, 58281–58282 PROPOSED RULES Securities and Exchange Commission Endangered Species Act; interagency cooperation: NOTICES National Fire Plan; implementation, 58298–58299 Public Utility Holding Company Act of 1935 filings, 58367– International fisheries regulations: 58368 Fisheries treaty with Pacific Island Countries; impact on Self-regulatory organizations; proposed rule changes: human environment; meetings, 58296–58298 Cincinnati Stock Exchange, Inc., 58368–58369 NOTICES Marine mammals: Transportation Department Incidental taking; authorization letters, etc.— See Federal Aviation Administration Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory; Northwest Atlantic Ocean; oceanographic survey; cetaceans and Transportation Security Administration pinnipeds, 58308–58315 RULES Meetings: Organization, functions, and authority delegations: North Pacific Fishery Management Council, 58315 Agency transition to Homeland Security Department South Atlantic Fishery Management Council, 58315– Correction, 58281 58316 NOTICES Permits: Agency information collection activities; proposals, Marine mammals, 58316–58317 submissions, and approvals, 58353 National Science Foundation Veterans Affairs Department NOTICES PROPOSED RULES Meetings; Sunshine Act, 58362 Loan guaranty: Hybrid adjustable rate mortgages, 58293–58295 Navy Department NOTICES NOTICES Meetings: Inventions, Government-owned; availability for licensing, Cemeteries and Memorials Advisory Committee, 58369– 58318 58370

VerDate jul<14>2003 22:59 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4748 Sfmt 4748 E:\FR\FM\09OCCN.SGM 09OCCN VI Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Contents

Gulf War Veterans’ Illnesses Research Advisory Part V Committee, 58370 Executive Office of the President, Presidential Documents, 58571–58574

Separate Parts In This Issue

Part II Reader Aids Labor Department, Labor-Management Standards Office, Consult the Reader Aids section at the end of this issue for 58373–58538 phone numbers, online resources, finding aids, reminders, Part III and notice of recently enacted public laws. Labor Department, Employment and Training To subscribe to the Federal Register Table of Contents Administration, 58539–58549 LISTSERV electronic mailing list, go to http:// listserv.access.gpo.gov and select Online mailing list Part IV archives, FEDREGTOC-L, Join or leave the list (or change Agriculture Department, Agricultural Marketing Service, settings); then follow the instructions. 58551–58569

VerDate jul<14>2003 22:59 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4748 Sfmt 4748 E:\FR\FM\09OCCN.SGM 09OCCN Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / 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 Proclamations: 7716...... 58573 Administrative Orders: Presidential Determinations: No. 2003-41...... 58261 7 CFR 1206...... 58552 Proposed Rules: 1206...... 58556 14 CFR 39 (5 documents) ...... 58263, 58265, 58268, 58271, 58273 Proposed Rules: 39 (5 documents) ...... 58283, 58285, 58287, 58289, 58291 19 CFR 12...... 58371 20 CFR 604...... 58540 21 CFR 347...... 58273 29 CFR 403...... 58374 408...... 58374 38 CFR Proposed Rules: 36...... 58293 39 CFR 111...... 58273 40 CFR 52...... 58276 Proposed Rules: 52...... 58295 228...... 58295 49 CFR 1503...... 58281 50 CFR 648...... 58281 Proposed Rules: 300...... 58296 402...... 58298

VerDate jul 14 2003 22:51 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4711 Sfmt 4711 E:\FR\FM\09OCLS.LOC 09OCLS 58261

Federal Register Presidential Documents Vol. 68, No. 196

Thursday, October 9, 2003

Title 3— Presidential Determination No. 2003–41 of September 30, 2003

The President Transfer of Funds from International Organizations and Programs (IO&P) Funds to the Child Survival and Health Programs Fund

Memorandum for the Secretary of State

Consistent with the authority vested in me by the Constitution and laws of the United States, including section 610 of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, as amended (FAA), I hereby determine it is necessary for the purposes of the FAA that the $25 million in FY 2003 International Organiza- tions and Programs funds that were reserved to be allocated for the United Nations Population Fund be transferred to, and consolidated with, the Child Survival and Health Programs Fund, and such funds are hereby transferred and consolidated. You are hereby authorized and directed to report this determination to the Congress and to arrange for its publication in the Federal Register. W THE WHITE HOUSE, Washington, September 30, 2003.

[FR Doc. 03–25782 Filed 10–8–03; 8:45 am] Billing code 4710–10–P

VerDate jul<14>2003 16:30 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4705 Sfmt 4790 E:\FR\FM\09OCO0.SGM 09OCO0 58263

Rules and Regulations Federal Register Vol. 68, No. 196

Thursday, October 9, 2003

This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER 36–AD, 901 Locust, Room 506, Kansas What Are the Provisions of This Service contains regulatory documents having general City, Missouri 64106. Information? applicability and legal effect, most of which • By fax: (816) 329–3771. are keyed to and codified in the Code of • The service bulletin is divided into By e-mail: 9–ACE–7– two parts as follows: Federal Regulations, which is published under [email protected]. Comments sent 50 titles pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 1510. 1. Flight manual limitations and electronically must contain ‘‘Docket No. placard installation: 2003–CE–36–AD’’ in the subject line. If The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by —Flight manual limitation: ‘‘The you send comments electronically as the Superintendent of Documents. Prices of operation of the engine will be limited attached electronic files, the files must new books are listed in the first FEDERAL to maximum 100% power (max. REGISTER issue of each week. be formatted in Microsoft Word 97 for continuous power).’’ Windows or ASCII. —Flight manual limitation: ‘‘Hence the You may get the service information take-off procedure (take-off with take- DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION identified in this AD from Stemme off power 115%, see section 4.5.2.2. of GmbH & Co. KG, Gustav-Meyer-Allee the Flight Manual) must not be Federal Aviation Administration 25, D–13355 Berlin, Germany; selected. Alternative procedures (i.e., telephone: 49.33.41.31.11.70; facsimile: take-off with max. continuous power 14 CFR Part 39 49.33.41.31.11.73. 100%) are published in the Flight You may view the AD docket at FAA, [Docket No. 2003–CE–36–AD; Amendment Manual.’’ 39–13327; AD 2003–20–09] Central Region, Office of the Regional —Placard: Installation of a placard close Counsel, Attention: Rules Docket No. RIN 2120–AA64 to the throttle lever with the 2003–CE–36–AD, 901 Locust, Room following: ‘‘Operation above 100% Airworthiness Directives; Stemme 506, Kansas City, Missouri 64106. Office continuous power is not allowed! (see GmbH & Co. KG Model STEMME S10– hours are 8 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday SB A31–10–1065).’’ through Friday, except Federal holidays. VT Sailplanes 2. Replacement of the lower cog FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Greg wheel (P/N: 43.15.0028) with a modified AGENCY: Federal Aviation Davison, Aerospace Engineer, FAA, cog wheel (P/N: 43:15:0043). Administration (FAA), DOT. Small Airplane Directorate, 901 Locust, ACTION: Final rule; request for Room 301, Kansas City, Missouri 64106; What Action Did the LBA Take? comments. telephone: (816) 329–4130; facsimile: The LBA classified this service (816) 329–4090. bulletin as mandatory and issued SUMMARY: The FAA is adopting a new SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: German AD Number 2002–389/2, airworthiness directive (AD) for all Discussion Effective date: April 17, 2003, in order Stemme GmbH & Co. KG Model to ensure the continued airworthiness of STEMME S10–VT sailplanes that What Events Have Caused This AD? these sailplanes in Germany. incorporate a certain gear box. This AD requires you to incorporate flight The Luftfahrt-Bundesamt (LBA), Was This in Accordance With the restrictions into the Limitations Section which is the airworthiness authority for Bilateral Airworthiness Agreement? of the sailplane flight manual and Germany, recently notified FAA that an unsafe condition may exist on all These Stemme GmbH & Co. KG Model fabricate and install a placard close to STEMME S10–VT sailplanes are the throttle lever indicating these Stemme GmbH & Co. KG Model STEMME S10–VT sailplanes that manufactured in Germany and are type- restrictions. This AD is the result of certificated for operation in the United mandatory continuing airworthiness incorporate a part number 11AG gear box (serial numbers 43YYQ001 through States under the provisions of section information (MCAI) issued by the 21.29 of the Federal Aviation airworthiness authority for Germany. 43YYQ093). The LBA reports two incidents where the lower cog wheels of Regulations (14 CFR 21.29) and the We are issuing this AD to prevent the applicable bilateral airworthiness potential for the lower cog wheel in the the affected gear box failed. In both cases, the web of the cog wheel agreement. gear box to rupture, which could result Per this bilateral airworthiness separated from the shaft. in loss of power and possible loss of agreement, the LBA has kept us control of the sailplane. What Are the Consequences if the informed of the situation described DATES: This AD becomes effective on Condition Is Not Corrected? above. October 20, 2003. This condition, if not prevented, FAA’s Determination and Requirements The Director of the Federal Register could cause the lower cog wheel in the of the Proposed AD approved the incorporation by reference gear box to rupture, which could result of certain publications listed in the in loss of power and possible loss of What Has FAA Decided? regulation as of October 20, 2003. control of the sailplane. We have examined the LBA’s We must receive any comments on findings, reviewed all available this AD by November 3, 2003. Is There Service Information That information, and determined that AD ADDRESSES: Use one of the following to Applies to This Subject? action is necessary for products of this submit comments on this AD: Stemme GmbH & Co. KG has issued type design that are certificated for • By mail: FAA, Central Region, Stemme Service Bulletin A31–10–065, operation in the United States. Office of the Regional Counsel, Am.-Index: 92a, dated February 21, Since the unsafe condition described Attention: Rules Docket No. 2003–CE– 2003. previously is likely to exist or develop

VerDate jul<14>2003 16:14 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\09OCR1.SGM 09OCR1 58264 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations

on other Stemme GmbH & Co. KG special flight permits, and alternative under the criteria of the Regulatory Model STEMME S10–VT sailplanes of methods of compliance. This material Flexibility Act. the same type design that are registered previously was included in each We prepared a summary of the costs in the United States, this AD is being individual AD. Since this material is to comply with this AD and placed it in issued to prevent the potential for the included in 14 CFR part 39, we will not the AD Docket. You may get a copy of lower cog wheel in the gear box to include it in future AD actions. this summary by sending a request to us rupture, which could result in loss of Comments Invited at the address listed under ADDRESSES. power and possible loss of control of the Include ‘‘AD Docket No. 2003–CE–36– sailplane. Will I Have the Opportunity To AD’’ in your request. Comment Prior to the Issuance of the What Does This AD Require? Rule? List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39 This AD requires you to incorporate restrictions into the Limitations Section This AD is a final rule that involves Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation of the flight manual and incorporate a requirements affecting flight safety and safety, Incorporation by reference, placard close to the throttle lever was not preceded by notice and an Safety. opportunity for public comment; indicating these restrictions. These Adoption of the Amendment restrictions and the placard are however, we invite you to submit any written relevant data, views, or referenced in Stemme Service Bulletin ■ Accordingly, under the authority A31–10–065, Am.-Index: 02a, dated arguments regarding this AD. Send your comments to an address listed under delegated to me by the Administrator, February 25, 2003. the Federal Aviation Administration In preparation of this rule, we ADDRESSES. Include ‘‘AD Docket No. 2003–CE–36–AD’’ in the subject line of amends part 39 of the Federal Aviation contacted type clubs and aircraft Regulations (14 CFR part 39) as follows: operators to obtain technical your comments. If you want us to acknowledge receipt of your mailed information and information on PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS comments, send us a self-addressed, operational and economic impacts. We DIRECTIVES did not receive any information through stamped postcard with the docket number written on it; we will date- these contacts. If received, we would ■ 1.The authority citation for part 39 stamp your postcard and mail it back to have included, in the rulemaking continues to read as follows: docket, a discussion of any information you. We specifically invite comments Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701. that may have influenced this action. on the overall regulatory, economic, environmental, and energy aspects of § 39.13 [Amended] Why Is the FAA Not Mandating the Cog the rule that might suggest a need to Wheel Replacement? modify it. If a person contacts us ■ 2. The FAA amends § 39.13 by adding We are not mandating the cog wheel through a nonwritten communication, the following new airworthiness replacement (as specified in the service and that contact relates to a substantive directive (AD): part of this AD, we will summarize the information) in this AD action because 2003–20–09 Stemme GmbH & Co. KG: of the ‘‘bootstrapping requirement.’’ contact and place the summary in the docket. We will consider all comments Amendment 39–13327; Docket No. When we issue an AD that involves 2003–CE–36–AD. requirements affecting flight safety received by the closing date and may where we do not first provide notice amend the AD in light of those When Does This AD Become Effective? comments. and an opportunity for public comment, (a) This AD becomes effective on October then we are only able to include a short- Regulatory Findings 20, 2003. term action that immediately corrects the unsafe condition. The Will This AD Impact Various Entities? Are Any Other ADs Affected by This Action? Administrative Procedures Act does not We have determined that this AD will (b) None. permit combining a long-term not have federalism implications under What Sailplanes Are Affected by This AD? requirement with a short-term action Executive Order 13132. This AD will when we do not provide prior public (c) This AD affects all Model STEMME not have a substantial direct effect on S10-VT sailplanes that: comment. We analyze the short-term the States, on the relationship between action and the long-term action (1) Incorporate a part number (P/N) 11AG the national government and the States, gear box (serial numbers 43YYQ001 through separately for justification to bypass or on the distribution of power and public notice. 43YYQ093); and responsibilities among the various (2) Are certificated in any category: The FAA may initiate future AD levels of government. action with public comment to mandate What is the Unsafe Condition Presented in the cog wheel replacement as Will This AD involve a significant rule This AD? or regulatory action? terminating action for the AFM (d) This AD is the result of mandatory requirements of this AD. This cog wheel For the reasons discussed above, I continuing airworthiness information (MCAI) replacement is optional in this AD as certify that this AD: issued by the airworthiness authority for terminating action. 1. Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory Germany. We are issuing this AD to prevent How Does the Revision to 14 CFR Part action’’ under Executive Order 12866; the potential for the lower cog wheel in the gear box to rupture, which could result in 39 Affect This Proposed AD? 2. Is not a ‘‘significant rule’’ under the loss of power and possible loss of control of DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures On July 10, 2002, we published a new the sailplane. version of 14 CFR part 39 (67 FR 47997, (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and July 22, 2002), which governs FAA’s AD 3. Will not have a significant What Must I Do To Address This Problem? system. This regulation now includes economic impact, positive or negative, (e) To address this problem, you must material that relates to altered products, on a substantial number of small entities accomplish the following:

VerDate jul<14>2003 16:14 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\09OCR1.SGM 09OCR1 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations 58265

Actions Compliance Procedures

(1) Incorporate the following flight restrictions Within the next 10 days after October 20, Either insert a copy of this portion of the AD into the Limitations Section of the flight man- 2003 (the effective date of this AD), unless or Stemme Service Bulletin A31–10–065, ual: already accomplished. Am.-Index: 02a, dated February 25, 2003, (i) ‘‘The operation of the engine will be limited into the Limitations Section of this of the to maximum 100% power (max. continuous AFM. The owner/operator holding at least a power).’’ and private pilot certificate as authorized by sec- (ii) ‘‘Hence the take-off procedure (take-off with tion 43.7 Federal Aviation Regulations (14 take-off power 115%, see section 4.5.2.2, of CFR 43.7) may do this flight manual inser- the Flight Manual) must not be selectd. Alter- tion. Make an entry into the aircraft records native procedures (i.e., take-off with max. showing compliance with these portions of continuous power 100%) are published in the the AD in accordance with section 43.9 of flight Manual.’’ the Federal Aviation regulations (14 CFR 43.9). (2) Fabricate a placard that incorporates the fol- Within the next 10 days after October 20, No specific procedures are necessary for this lowing words (using at least 1/8-inch letters) 2003 (the effective date of this AD), unless action. Stemme Service Bulletin A31–10– and install this placard close to the throttle already accomplished. 065, Am.-Index: 02a, dated February 25, lever: ‘‘Operation above 100% continuous 2003, references this action. The owner/op- power is not allowed! (see SB A31–10– erator holding at least a private pilot certifi- 1065).’’ cate as authorized by section 43.7 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR the throttle 43.7) may do the placard requirements. Make an entry into the aircraft records showing compliance with these portions of the AD in accordance with section 43.9 of the Federal Aviation (14 CFR 43.9). (3) As an alternative method of compliance to At any time as terminating action for the limi- Use the instructions in Stemme Service Bul- this AD, replace the lower cog wheel (P/N: tations and placard requirements of this AD. letin A31–10–065, Am.-Index: 02a, dated 43.15.0028) with a modified cog wheel (P/N: February 25, 2003. 43:15:0043).

Why Is the FAA Not Mandating the Cog Is There Material Incorporated by DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Wheel Replacement? Reference? (f) We are not mandating the cog wheel (h) If you choose to do the replacement Federal Aviation Administration replacement (as specified in the service required by this AD, then you must use information) in this AD action because of the Stemme Service Bulletin A31–10–065, Am.- 14 CFR Part 39 ‘‘bootstrapping requirement.’’ When we issue Index: 02a, dated February 25, 2003. The [Docket No. 2003–CE–42–AD; Amendment an AD that involves requirements affecting Director of the Federal Register approved the 39–13333; AD 2003–20–15] flight safety where we do not first provide incorporation by reference of this service notice and an opportunity for public bulletin in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) RIN 2120–AA64 comment, then we are only able to include and 1 CFR part 51. You may get a copy from Airworthiness Directives; Pilatus a short-term action that immediately corrects Stemme GmbH & Co. KG, Gustav-Meyer- Aircraft Ltd. Models PC–12 and PC–12/ the unsafe condition. Allee 25, D–13355 Berlin, Germany; 45 Airplanes (1) The Administrative Procedures Act telephone: 49.33.41.31.11.70; facsimile: does not permit combining a long-term 49.33.41.31.11.73. You may review copies at AGENCY: Federal Aviation requirement with a short-term action when FAA, Central Region, Office of the Regional we do not provide prior public comment. Administration (FAA), DOT. Counsel, 901 Locust, Room 506, Kansas City, The short-term action and the long-term ACTION: Final rule; request for Missouri 64106; or at the Office of the action are analyzed separately for comments. justification to bypass public notice. Federal Register, 800 North Capitol Street, (2) We may initiate future AD action with NW., suite 700, Washington, DC. SUMMARY: The FAA is adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for certain public comment to mandate the cog wheel Is There Other Information That Relates to Pilatus Aircraft Ltd. (Pilatus) Models replacement as terminating action for the This Subject? AFM requirements of this AD. This cog PC–12 and PC–12/45 airplanes. This AD (i) German AD Number 2002–389/2, wheel replacement is optional in this AD as requires you to inspect for certain terminating action. Effective date: April 17, 2003, also addresses installed fuel booster pumps and the subject of this AD. replace that fuel booster pump, inspect What About Alternative Methods of Compliance? Issued in Kansas City, Missouri, on other certain fuel booster pumps for September 30, 2003. defects, and either install lead (g) You may request a different method of protection spiral wrap or replace the compliance or a different compliance time Michael Gallagher, Manager, Small Airplane Directorate, Aircraft defective fuel booster pumps, for this AD by following the procedures in 14 depending on whether defects are CFR 39.13. Send your request to the Manager, Certification Service. found. This AD is the result of Standards Office, Small Airplane Directorate, [FR Doc. 03–25330 Filed 10–8–03; 8:45 am] mandatory continuing airworthiness FAA. For information on any already BILLING CODE 4910–13–P approved alternative methods of compliance, information (MCAI) issued by the contact Greg Davison, Aerospace Engineer, airworthiness authority for Switzerland. FAA, Small Airplane Directorate, 901 Locust, We are issuing this AD to detect and Room 301, Kansas City, Missouri 64106; correct any defective fuel booster pump, telephone: (816) 329–4130; facsimile: (816) which could result in electrical arcing 329–4090. from the leads in an air/fuel mixture.

VerDate jul<14>2003 16:14 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\09OCR1.SGM 09OCR1 58266 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations

Such failure could lead to a fire or What Are the Consequences if the type design that are certificated for explosion of a fuel tank. Condition Is Not Corrected? operation in the United States. Since the unsafe condition described DATES: This AD becomes effective on Such electrical arcing could lead to a October 10, 2003. fire or explosion of a fuel tank. previously is likely to exist or develop on other Pilatus Models PC–12 and PC– The Director of the Federal Register Is There Service Information That 12/45 airplanes of the same type design approved the incorporation by reference Applies to This Subject? that are registered in the United States, of certain publications listed in the this AD is being issued to detect and regulation as of October 10, 2003. Pilatus has issued: Pilatus PC12 Service Bulletin No. 28– correct any defective fuel booster pump, We must receive any comments on 011, Revision No. 1, dated July 11, 2003; which could result in electrical arcing this AD by December 10, 2003. Pilatus PC12 Maintenance Manual from the leads in an air/fuel mixture. ADDRESSES: Use one of the following to Temporary Revision No. 12–03 (12–10– Such failure could lead to a fire or submit comments on this AD: 01), dated June 6, 2003; and explosion of a fuel tank. • By mail: FAA, Central Region, Pilatus PC12 Maintenance Manual What Does This AD Require? Office of the Regional Counsel, Temporary Revision No. 28–02 (28–20– This AD requires you to incorporate Attention: Rules Docket No. 2003–CE– 04), dated June 6, 2003. the actions in the previously-referenced 42–AD, 901 Locust, Room 506, Kansas What Are the Provisions of This Service service information. City, Missouri 64106. Information? • In preparation of this rule, we By fax: (816) 329–3771. contacted type clubs and aircraft • The service information includes By e-mail: [email protected]. procedures for: operators to obtain technical Comments sent electronically must information and information on contain ‘‘Docket No. 2003–CE–42–AD’’ —Inspecting the fuel booster pumps for defects; operational and economic impacts. We in the subject line. If you send did not receive any information through comments electronically as attached —Replacing fuel booster pumps; —Installing lead protection spiral wrap; these contacts. If received, we would electronic files, the files must be and have included, in the rulemaking formatted in Microsoft Word 97 for —Incorporating Temporary Revision docket, a discussion of any information Windows or ASCII. No. 7, dated June 6, 2003, or that may have influenced this action. You may get the service information Temporary Revision No. 37, dated How Does the Revision to 14 CFR Part identified in this AD from Pilatus June 6, 2003, to the Section 2— 39 Affect This AD? Business Aircraft Ltd., Product Support Limitations section of the applicable On July 10, 2002, we published a new Department, 11755 Airport Way, pilot’s operating handbook (POH). version of 14 CFR part 39 (67 FR 47997, Broomfield, Colorado 80021; telephone: This is a temporary option and July 22, 2002), which governs FAA’s AD (303) 465–9099; facsimile: (303) 465– replacing the subject fuel booster system. This regulation now includes 6040. pump or installing the lead protection material that relates to altered products, You may view the AD docket at FAA, spiral wrap is mandatory within a special flight permits, and alternative Central Region, Office of the Regional certain time frame. Counsel, Attention: Rules Docket No. methods of compliance. This material 2003–CE–42–AD, 901 Locust, Room What Action Did the FOCA Take? previously was included in each 506, Kansas City, Missouri 64106. Office The FOCA classified this service individual AD. Since this material is hours are 8 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday bulletin as mandatory and issued Swiss included in 14 CFR part 39, we will not through Friday, except Federal holidays. AD Number HB 2003–301, dated July include it in future AD actions. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 17, 2003, in order to ensure the Compliance Time of This AD Doug Rudolph, Aerospace Engineer, continued airworthiness of these airplanes in Switzerland. What Would Be the Compliance Time of FAA, Small Airplane Directorate, 901 This AD? Locust, Room 301, Kansas City, Was This in Accordance With the The compliance time of this AD is Missouri 64106; telephone: (816) 329– Bilateral Airworthiness Agreement? 4059; facsimile: (816) 329–4090. within the next 7 calendar days after The Pilatus Models PC–12 and PC– October 10, 2003 (the effective date of SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 12/45 are manufactured in Switzerland this AD). Discussion and are type-certificated for operation in the United States under the provisions Why Is This Compliance Time Presented What Events Have Caused This AD? of section 21.29 of the Federal Aviation in Calendar Time Instead of Hours TIS? The Federal Office for Civil Aviation Regulations (14 CFR 21.29) and the The leads may rub and arc as a result (FOCA), which is the airworthiness applicable bilateral airworthiness of aircraft operation. Therefore, FAA has authority for Switzerland, recently agreement. determined that a compliance based on notified FAA that an unsafe condition Per this bilateral airworthiness calendar time should be utilized in this may exist on certain Pilatus Models PC– agreement, the FOCA has kept us AD in order to ensure that the unsafe 12 and PC–12/45 airplanes. The FOCA informed of the situation described condition is addressed on all aircraft in reports 11 reports of damaged fuel above. a reasonable time period. booster pump wires from 9 different FAA’s Determination and Requirements Comments Invited aircraft. Within the FAA service of This AD difficulty/accident report system, we Will I Have the Opportunity To found eight occurrences of damaged fuel What Has FAA decided? Comment Prior to the Issuance of the booster pump wires. This damage to the We have examined the FOCA’s Rule? electrical wires could possibly cause findings, reviewed all available This AD is a final rule that involves electrical arcing when the wires get in information, and determined that AD requirements affecting flight safety and an air/fuel mixture. action is necessary for products of this was not preceded by notice and an

VerDate jul<14>2003 16:14 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\09OCR1.SGM 09OCR1 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations 58267

opportunity for public comment; Will This AD Involve a Significant Rule Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701. however, we invite you to submit any or Regulatory Action? § 39.13 [Amended] written relevant data, views, or For the reasons discussed above, I arguments regarding this AD. Send your certify that this AD: ■ 2. The FAA amends § 39.13 by adding comments to an address listed under 1. Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory the following new airworthiness ADDRESSES. Include ‘‘AD Docket No. action’’ under Executive Order 12866; directive (AD): 2003–CE–42–AD’’ in the subject line of 2. Is not a ‘‘significant rule’’ under the your comments. If you want us to 2003–20–15 Pilatus Aircraft Ltd.: DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures Amendment 39–13333; Docket No. acknowledge receipt of your mailed (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and 2003–CE–42–AD. comments, send us a self-addressed, 3. Will not have a significant stamped postcard with the docket economic impact, positive or negative, When Does This AD Become Effective? number written on it; we will date- on a substantial number of small entities (a) This AD becomes effective on October stamp your postcard and mail it back to under the criteria of the Regulatory 10, 2003. you. We specifically invite comments Flexibility Act. Are Any Other ADs Affected By This Action? on the overall regulatory, economic, We prepared a summary of the costs environmental, and energy aspects of to comply with this AD and placed it in (b) None. the rule that might suggest a need to the AD Docket. You may get a copy of What Airplanes Are Affected by This AD? modify it. If a person contacts us this summary by sending a request to us through a nonwritten communication, (c) This AD affects Models PC–12 and PC– at the address listed under ADDRESSES. 12/45 airplanes, serial numbers 101 through and that contact relates to a substantive Include ‘‘AD Docket No. 2003–CE–42– 520, with fuel booster pump (fuel pump) part part of this AD, we will summarize the AD’’ in your request. number (P/N) 969.84.11.401, 968.84.11.403, contact and place the summary in the or 968.84.11.404 installed, that are List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39 docket. We will consider all comments certificated in any category. received by the closing date and may Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation amend the AD in light of those What Is the Unsafe Condition Presented in safety, Incorporation by reference, This AD? comments. Safety. (d) This AD is the result of mandatory Regulatory Findings Adoption of the Amendment continuing airworthiness information (MCAI) issued by the airworthiness authority for Will This AD Impact Various Entities? ■ Accordingly, under the authority Switzerland. We are issuing this AD to detect We have determined that this AD will delegated to me by the Administrator, and correct any defective fuel booster pump, not have federalism implications under the Federal Aviation Administration which could result in electrical arcing from Executive Order 13132. This AD will amends part 39 of the Federal Aviation the leads in an air/fuel mixture. Such not have a substantial direct effect on Regulations (14 CFR part 39) as follows: electrical arcing could lead to a fire or explosion of a fuel tank. the States, on the relationship between PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS the national government and the States, DIRECTIVES What Must I Do To Address This Problem? or on the distribution of power and (e) To address this problem, you must responsibilities among the various ■ 1. The authority citation for part 39 accomplish the following unless already levels of government. continues to read as follows: accomplished:

Actions Compliance Procedures

(1) Replace any installed fuel booster pump Within the next 7 calendar days after October Per Pilatus PC12 Service Bulletin No. 28-011, part number (P/N) 969.84.11.401 with a fuel 10, 2003 (the effective date of this AD). Revision No. 1, dated July 11, 2003, Pilatus pump that has the Pilatus PC12 Service Bul- PC12 Maintenance Manual Temporary Re- letin No. 28–011, Revision No. 1, dated July vision No. 12–03 (12–10–01), dated June 6, 11, 2003, modification incorporated. 2003, and Pilatus PC12 Maintenance Man- ual Temporary Revision No. 28–02 (28–20– 04), dated June 6, 2003. (2) Inspect the installed fuel booster pump P/N Within the next 7 calendar days after October Per Pilatus PC12 Service Bulletin No. 28– 968.84.11.403 or 968.84.11.404 for defects: 10, 2003 (the effective date of this AD). 011, Revision No. 1, dated July 11, 2003, (i) If defects are found, replace the fuel booster Pilatus PC12 Maintenance Manual Tem- pump with a fuel booster pump that has the porary Revision No. 12–03 (12–10–01), modification referenced in Pilatus PC12 Serv- dated June 6, 2003, and Pilatus PC12 ice Bulletin No. 28–011, Revision No. 1, Maintenance Manual Temporary Revision dated July 11, 2003. No. 28–02 (28–20–04), dated June 6, 2003, and Pilatus PC12 Maintenance Manual Temporary Revision No. 28–02 (28–20–04), dated June 6, 2003. (ii) If no defects are found: (B) Re-identify the fuel booster pump P/N and 968.84.11.403 or 968.84.11.404 by adding the suffix letter ‘‘B’’ adjacent to the serial Maintenance number on the fuel pump identification plate. (3) Do not install any part referenced in para- As of October 10, 2003 (the effective date of Not applicable. graph (e)(1) or (e)(2) of this AD unless it has this AD). been modified per Pilatus PC12 Service Bul- letin No. 28–011, Revision No. 1, dated July 11, 2003.

VerDate jul<14>2003 16:14 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\09OCR1.SGM 09OCR1 58268 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations

Actions Compliance Procedures

(4) If you have scheduled the replacement or Prior to further flight after scheduling the re- Anyone who holds at least a private pilot cer- installation required by paragraphs (e)(1) and placement of installation. The replacement tificate, as authorized by section 43.7 of the (e)(2) of this AD, but the schedule puts you or installation of paragraphs (e)(1) and Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR beyond the time to comply, you may insert (e)(2) of this AD must be accomplished 43.7), may incorporate the POH revision re- Temporary Revision No. 7, dated June 6, within 50 hours time-in-service after Octo- quired by this AD. You must make an entry 2003, or Temporary Revision No. 37, dated ber 10, 2003 (the effective date of this AD). into the aircraft records that shows compli- June 6, 2003, in the Section 2—Limitations After compliance with paragraphs (e)(1) and ance with this AD, per section 43.9 of the section of the applicable pilot’s operating (e)(2) of this AD, you may remove Tem- Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR handbook (POH) and operate the aircraft ac- porary Revision No. 7, dated June 6, 2003, 43.9). Send the following to the Small Air- cording. or Temporary Revision No. 37, dated June plane Directorate using the procedures de- 6, 2003, from the POH. scribed in paragraph (f) of this AD: the airplane model and serial number designation; the number of hours TIS on the airplane; the scheduled date for the replacement/installation; and the name and location of the authorized repair shop.

What About Alternative Methods of DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Compliance? Transport Airplane Directorate, Rules (f) You may request a different method of Federal Aviation Administration Docket, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., compliance or a different compliance time Renton, Washington; or at the Office of for this AD by following the procedures in 14 14 CFR Part 39 the Federal Register, 800 North Capitol CFR 39.13. Send your request to the Manager, [Docket No. 2001–NM–326–AD; Amendment Street, NW., suite 700, Washington, DC. Standards Office, Small Airplane Directorate, 39–13331; AD 2003–20–13] FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Don FAA. For information on any already Eiford, Aerospace Engineer, Cabin approved alternative methods of compliance, RIN 2120–AA64 Safety and Environmental Systems contact Doug Rudolph, Aerospace Engineer, Branch, ANM–150S, FAA, Seattle FAA, Small Airplane Directorate, 901 Locust, Airworthiness Directives; Boeing Aircraft Certification Office, 1601 Lind Room 301, Kansas City, Missouri 64106; Model 737–400, –500, –600, –700, and Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington telephone: (816) 329–4059; facsimile: (816) –800 Series Airplanes 329–4090. 98055–4056; telephone (425) 917–6465; AGENCY: Federal Aviation fax (425) 917–6590. Is There Material Incorporated by Administration, DOT. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: A Reference? ACTION: Final rule. proposal to amend part 39 of the Federal (g) You must do the actions required by Aviation Regulations (14 CFR part 39) to this AD per Pilatus PC12 Service Bulletin No. SUMMARY: This amendment adopts a include an airworthiness directive (AD) 28–011, Revision No. 1, dated July 11, 2003, new airworthiness directive (AD), that is applicable to certain Boeing Pilatus PC12 Maintenance Manual applicable to certain Boeing Model 737– Model 737–400, –500, –600, –700, and Temporary Revision No. 12–03 (12–10–01), 400, –500, –600, –700, and –800 series –800 series airplanes was published in dated June 6, 2003, and Pilatus PC12 Maintenance Manual Temporary Revision airplanes, that requires either the Federal Register on December 2, No. 28–02 (28–20–04), dated June 6, 2003. modification of the wiring to the 2002 (67 FR 71500). That action The Director of the Federal Register approved windshield wiper motors in the flight proposed to require modification of the the incorporation by reference of this service compartment or replacement of those wiring to the windshield wiper motors bulletin in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) windshield wiper motor/converters in the flight compartment and nose and 1 CFR part 51. You may get a copy from with new motor/converters. This action wheel well areas. For certain airplanes, Pilatus Business Aircraft Ltd., Product is necessary to prevent a reduction in that action also provided for optional Support Department, 11755 Airport Way, flight crew visibility due to stalled replacement of the windshield wiper Broomfield, Colorado 80021; telephone: (303) wiper motors during heavy precipitation motor/converters in the flight 465–9099; facsimile: (303) 465–6040. and a period of substantial crew compartment. You may review copies at FAA, Central workload, which could result in damage Comments Region, Office of the Regional Counsel, 901 to the airplane structure and injury to Locust, Room 506, Kansas City, Missouri flight crew, passengers, or ground Interested persons have been afforded 64106; or at the Office of the Federal Register, personnel during final approach for an opportunity to participate in the 800 North Capitol Street, NW., suite 700, making of this amendment. Due Washington, DC. landing. This action is intended to address the identified unsafe condition. consideration has been given to the Is There Other Information That Relates to comments received. DATES: Effective November 13, 2003. This Subject? The incorporation by reference of Request To Remove Prior/Concurrent (h) Swiss AD Number HB 2003–301, dated certain publications listed in the Requirement for Optional Replacement July 17, 2003, also addresses the subject of regulations is approved by the Director this AD. The airplane manufacturer requests of the Federal Register as of November that the FAA remove the requirement Issued in Kansas City, Missouri, on 13, 2003. specified in paragraph (b) of the October 2, 2003. ADDRESSES: The service information proposed AD to accomplish the Dorenda D. Baker, referenced in this AD may be obtained modification prior to or concurrently Acting Manager, Small Airplane Directorate, from Boeing Commercial Airplane with the replacement. The airplane Aircraft Certification Service. Group, P.O. Box 3707, Seattle, manufacturer states that the current [FR Doc. 03–25477 Filed 10–8–03; 8:45 am] Washington 98124–2207. This production airplanes with the new BILLING CODE 4910–13–P information may be examined at the wiper motor/converters, and the

VerDate jul<14>2003 16:14 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\09OCR1.SGM 09OCR1 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations 58269

equivalent service bulletins (discussed Although we do not agree to mandate Request To Remove References to below), include the proposed wiring the replacement, we do agree that the Windshield Wiper Blade Flutter modification. It asserts that, if new compliance time of this final rule for The airplane manufacturer also states wiper motor/converters are installed, accomplishing either the modification that Boeing Service Bulletin 737–30– accomplishing the airplane wiring or replacement may be extended. The 1055 will be revised to state that it modification prior to or concurrent with wiper motor/converter manufacturer has corrects the wiper stalling problem, not the wiper motor/converter replacement confirmed that 36 months will allow it the wiper blade flutter as described in is redundant and does not add to the sufficient time to manufacture/refurbish the original issue of Boeing Service safety of the airplane. The airplane motor/converters in the new Bulletin 737–30–1054. The airplane manufacturer also states that it will configuration, provided operators order manufacturer asserts that the wiper revise Boeing Service Bulletins 737–30– the motor/converters in a timely manner blade flutter was a Boeing production 1054 and 737–30–1055 to remove the after the effective date of this final rule. issue, neither affecting safe operation of recommendation to accomplish the We have determined that a compliance the system nor prevalent in the fleet. airplane wiring modification prior to or time of 36 months will not adversely From this statement, we infer that the concurrent with the wiper motor/ affect safety and will ensure enough airplane manufacturer is requesting that converter replacement. time for production of new motor/ we remove references to loss of wiper The FAA agrees. We find that converters and enable operators to blade load leading to flutter of the wiper replacement of the new wiper motor/ comply using the preferred method. We arm from the proposed AD. We agree converters, without referencing the have revised this final rule accordingly. and have revised this final rule concurrent requirements of paragraph Request To Reference Additional accordingly. (a) of the proposed AD, will correct the Service Information Request To Clarify Description of Cause root cause of the wiper motor stalls. Both commenters request that Boeing of Unsafe Condition Therefore, we have removed the Service Bulletin 737–30–1055, Revision requirement to accomplish the airplane The airplane manufacturer requests 1, dated March 6, 2003, which describes wiring modification specified in that we clarify the cause of the reported procedures for replacement of the wiper paragraph (b) of this final rule incidents stated in the Discussion motor/converters for Model 737–400 (paragraph (a) of the proposed AD) prior section of the proposed AD. The and ‘‘500 series airplanes equipped with airplane manufacturer explains that to or concurrent with the replacement brushless windshield wiper motor/ specified in paragraphs (c) and (d) of further investigation of the windshield converters, be added to the proposed wiper stalling problem revealed the root this final rule (paragraph (b) of the AD for accomplishing the optional proposed AD). cause of the stalling to be inadequate replacement for those airplanes. Both backlash or clearance between the gears Request To Mandate Optional commenters further point out that this inside the wiper motor’s converter, Replacement service bulletin was not included in the causing large internal losses due to proposed AD. friction between the gears, not the result One commenter requests that we We agree. Since the issuance of the mandate the proposed optional of inadequate torque caused by proposed AD, we have reviewed and insufficient electrical current as replacement of the windshield wiper approved Revision 1 of Boeing Service motor/converters provided in paragraph described in the proposed AD. Bulletins 737–30–1054 and 737–30– In light of the results of the additional (b) of the proposed AD, because the 1055, both dated March 6, 2003, which investigation described previously, we proposed wiring modification and wiper describe procedures for the replacement agree that the cause of the wiper motor/ blade load reduction specified in of the wiper motor/converters. The converter stalling could be more paragraph (a) of the proposed AD would proposed AD referenced the original accurately described. However, the only make the flight crew’s visibility issue of Boeing Service Bulletin 737– Discussion section is not repeated in a worse due to wiper blade load 30–1054 as the appropriate source of final rule, so no change to this final rule reduction. This commenter also service information for accomplishment is necessary in this regard. requested an extension of compliance of the replacement for Model 737–600, time to allow adequate time to produce –700, and –800 series airplanes. The Request To Revise the Description of enough replacements. The other procedures specified in Revision 1 are Location of the Modification commenter, the airplane manufacturer, essentially similar to those in the The other commenter requests that we requests that we allow operators to original issue of the service bulletins. revise the proposed AD to exclude accomplish either the modification or We have changed this final rule to references to the ‘‘nose wheel well replacement. reference Revision 1 of those service areas.’’ The commenter points out that We partially agree with the bulletins as the appropriate sources of Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737– commenters’ requests. We do not agree service information for the replacement. 30A1052 does not specify a wiring that the optional replacement should be We have also added paragraph (d) to modification in the those areas. We mandated. While we do agree that this final rule to add the replacement for agree and have revised this final rule to replacing the windshield wiper motor/ Model 737–400 and –500 series remove references to the nose wheel converters is preferable to modifying the airplanes, and added new paragraphs (e) well areas. wiring to the windshield wiper motor, and (f) to this final rule to give credit to we have determined that the required operators for replacements Request To Allow Designated modification will provide an acceptable accomplished before the effective date Engineering Representative (DER) level of safety for the affected airplanes. of this AD per the original issue of Approval Therefore, we have changed this final Boeing Service Bulletins 737–30–1054 The airplane manufacturer requests rule to add a new paragraph (a), and re- and 737–30–1055. Replacement, that certification of the new wiper lettered subsequent paragraphs accomplished after the effective date of motor/converter installed on airplanes accordingly, to clarify that operators this AD, shall be done in accordance without the wiring modification or have the option of accomplishing either with Boeing Service Bulletin 737–30– production equivalent be accomplished the modification or replacement. 1055, Revision 1, dated March 6, 2003. by DER approval of revised Boeing

VerDate jul<14>2003 16:14 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\09OCR1.SGM 09OCR1 58270 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations

Service Bulletins 737–30–1054 and estimated to be $157,950, or $975 per For the reasons discussed above, I 737–30–1055. airplane. certify that this action (1) is not a We do not agree. Because we have The wiper motor/converter ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ under revised this final rule to allow operators replacement, if accomplished in lieu of Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a to accomplish the replacement per the wiring modification, will take ‘‘significant rule’’ under DOT Boeing Service Bulletins 737–30–1054 approximately 3 work hours per Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 and 737–30–1055, as applicable, as airplane to accomplish, at an average FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and (3) explained previously, there is no need labor rate of $65 per work hour. Parts will not have a significant economic for DER approval. No change to this cost will be minimal. Based on these impact, positive or negative, on a final rule is necessary in this regard. figures, the cost impact of the substantial number of small entities replacement required by this AD is under the criteria of the Regulatory Conclusion estimated to be $31,590, or $195 per Flexibility Act. A final evaluation has After careful review of the available airplane. been prepared for this action and it is data, including the comments noted The cost impact figures discussed contained in the Rules Docket. A copy above, the FAA has determined that air above are based on assumptions that no of it may be obtained from the Rules safety and the public interest require the operator has yet accomplished any of Docket at the location provided under adoption of the rule with the changes the requirements of this AD action, and the caption ADDRESSES. that no operator would accomplish previously described. The FAA has List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39 determined that these changes will those actions in the future if this AD neither increase the economic burden were not adopted. The cost impact Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation on any operator nor increase the scope figures discussed in AD rulemaking safety, Incorporation by reference, actions represent only the time of the AD. Safety. necessary to perform the specific actions Changes to 14 CFR Part 39/Effect on the actually required by the AD. These Adoption of the Amendment AD figures typically do not include ■ Accordingly, pursuant to the authority incidental costs, such as the time On July 10, 2002, the FAA issued a delegated to me by the Administrator, required to gain access and close up, new version of 14 CFR part 39 (67 FR the Federal Aviation Administration planning time, or time necessitated by 47997, July 22, 2002), which governs the amends part 39 of the Federal Aviation other administrative actions. Regulations (14 CFR part 39) as follows: FAA’s airworthiness directives system. Currently, there are no affected Model The regulation now includes material 737–400 or –500 series airplanes on the PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS that relates to altered products, special U.S. Register. However, should an DIRECTIVES flight permits, and alternative methods airplane be imported and placed on the ■ of compliance. However, for clarity and U.S. Register in the future, the wiring 1. The authority citation for part 39 consistency in this final rule, we have modification, if accomplished in lieu of continues to read as follows: retained the language of the NPRM the wiper motor/converter replacement, Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701. regarding that material. will take approximately 20 work hours § 39.13 [Amended] Change to Labor Rate Estimate to accomplish, at an average labor rate of $65 per work hour. Required parts ■ 2. Section 39.13 is amended by adding We have reviewed the figures we have will be provided by the airplane the following new airworthiness used over the past several years to manufacturer at no cost to operators. directive: calculate AD costs to operators. To Based on these figures, the cost impact 2003–20–13 Boeing: Amendment 39–13331. account for various inflationary costs in of the wiring modification will be Docket 2001–NM–326–AD. the airline industry, we find it necessary $1,300 per airplane. Applicability: Model 737–400 and –500 to increase the labor rate used in these Should an affected Model 737–400 or series airplanes, as listed in Boeing Alert calculations from $60 per work hour to –500 series airplane be imported and Service Bulletin 737–30A1052, dated October $65 per work hour. The cost impact placed on the U.S. Register in the future, 12, 2000; and Model 737–600, –700, and information, below, reflects this wiper motor/converter replacement, if –800 series airplanes, as listed in Boeing increase in the specified hourly labor accomplished in lieu of the wiring Alert Service Bulletin 737–30A1049, dated rate. modification, will take approximately 4 June 1, 2000; certificated in any category. work hours to accomplish the Note 1: This AD applies to each airplane Cost Impact identified in the preceding applicability replacement of the wiper motor/ provision, regardless of whether it has been There are approximately 483 converters, at an average labor rate of airplanes of the affected design in the modified, altered, or repaired in the area $65 per work hour. Parts cost will be subject to the requirements of this AD. For worldwide fleet. The FAA estimates that minimal. Based on these figures, the airplanes that have been modified, altered, or 162 Model 737–600, –700, and –800 cost impact of the replacement will be repaired so that the performance of the series airplanes of U.S. registry will be $260 per airplane. requirements of this AD is affected, the affected by this AD. owner/operator must request approval for an The wiring modification, if Regulatory Impact alternative method of compliance in accomplished in lieu of the wiper The regulations adopted herein will accordance with paragraph (g) of this AD. motor/converter replacement, will take not have a substantial direct effect on The request should include an assessment of approximately 15 work hours per the States, on the relationship between the effect of the modification, alteration, or repair on the unsafe condition addressed by airplane to accomplish, at an average the national Government and the States, this AD; and, if the unsafe condition has not labor rate of $65 per work hour. or on the distribution of power and been eliminated, the request should include Required parts will be provided by the responsibilities among the various specific proposed actions to address it. airplane manufacturer at no cost to levels of government. Therefore, it is Compliance: Required as indicated, unless operators. Based on these figures, the determined that this final rule does not accomplished previously. cost impact of the wiring modification have federalism implications under To prevent a reduction in flight crew required by this AD on U.S. operators is Executive Order 13132. visibility due to stalled wiper motors during

VerDate jul<14>2003 16:14 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\09OCR1.SGM 09OCR1 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations 58271

heavy precipitation and a period of Inspector, who may add comments and then ceiling access panel/door from falling substantial crew workload, which could send it to the Manager, Seattle ACO. down and blocking the aisle, which result in damage to the airplane structure and Note 2: Information concerning the would impede evacuation in an injury to flight crew, passengers, or ground existence of approved alternative methods of emergency. This action is intended to personnel during final approach for landing; compliance with this AD, if any, may be address the identified unsafe condition. accomplish the following: obtained from the Seattle ACO. DATES: Effective November 13, 2003. Compliance Time Special Flight Permit The incorporation by reference of (a) For all airplanes: Within 36 months (h) Special flight permits may be issued in certain publications listed in the after the effective date of this AD, do the accordance with sections 21.197 and 21.199 regulations is approved by the Director actions specified in paragraph (b) of this AD, of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR of the Federal Register as of November or paragraph (c) or (d) of this AD, as 21.197 and 21.199) to operate the airplane to 13, 2003. applicable. a location where the requirements of this AD ADDRESSES: The service information Modification can be accomplished. referenced in this AD may be obtained (b) Modify the wiring to the left and right Incorporation by Reference from Boeing Commercial Airplane windshield wiper motors in the flight (i) Unless otherwise specified in this AD, Group, P.O. Box 3707, Seattle, compartment (including changing certain the actions shall be done in accordance with Washington 98124–2207. This wire bundles, reducing the windshield wiper Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 737–30A1049, information may be examined at the blade force to between 3.5 and 4.5 pounds, dated June 1, 2000; Boeing Alert Service Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), and doing an operational test of the Bulletin 737–30A1052, dated October 12, Transport Airplane Directorate, Rules windshield wiper system), per Boeing Alert 2000; Boeing Service Bulletin 737–30–1054, Docket, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Service Bulletin 737–30A1052, dated October Revision 1, dated March 6, 2003; or Boeing 12, 2000 (for Model 737–400 and –500 series Renton, Washington; or at the Office of Service Bulletin 737–30–1055, Revision 1, the Federal Register, 800 North Capitol airplanes); or Boeing Alert Service Bulletin dated March 6, 2003; as applicable. This 737–30A1049, dated June 1, 2000 (for Model incorporation by reference was approved by Street, NW., suite 700, Washington, DC. 737–600, –700, and –800 series airplanes); as the Director of the Federal Register in FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: applicable. accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR Keith Ladderud, Aerospace Engineer, Replacement part 51. Copies may be obtained from Boeing Cabin Safety and Environmental Commercial Airplane Group, P.O. Box 3707, Systems Branch, ANM–150S, FAA, (c) For Model 737–600, –700, and –800 Seattle, Washington 98124–2207. Copies may Seattle Aircraft Certification Office, series airplanes: Replace the left and right be inspected at the FAA, Transport Airplane windshield wiper motor/converters in the 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 98055–4056; telephone flight compartment (including increasing the Washington; or at the Office of the Federal blade force of the windshield wipers to Register, 800 North Capitol Street, NW., suite (425) 917–6435; fax (425) 917–6590. between 6.5 and 7.5 pounds; and doing an 700, Washington, DC. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: A operational test of the windshield wiper proposal to amend part 39 of the Federal Effective Date system), per Boeing Service Bulletin 737–30– Aviation Regulations (14 CFR part 39) to 1054, Revision 1, dated March 6, 2003. (j) This amendment becomes effective on include an airworthiness directive (AD) (d) For Model 737–400 and –500 series November 13, 2003. airplanes equipped with brushless that is applicable to certain Boeing windshield wiper motor/converters: Replace Issued in Renton, Washington, on October Model 727–200 series airplanes was the left and right windshield wiper motor/ 2, 2003. published in the Federal Register on converters in the flight compartment Vi L. Lipski, April 16, 2003 (68 FR 18569). That (including increasing the blade force of the Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, action proposed to require installation windshield wipers to between 6.5 and 7.5 Aircraft Certification Service. of four lanyards on the forward access pounds; and doing an operational test of the [FR Doc. 03–25491 Filed 10–8–03; 8:45 am] panel/door. windshield wiper system), per Boeing BILLING CODE 4910–13–P Service Bulletin 737–30–1055, Revision 1, Comments dated March 6, 2003. Interested persons have been afforded Credit for Previously Accomplished DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION an opportunity to participate in the Replacements making of this amendment. Due (e) Replacement of the left and right Federal Aviation Administration consideration has been given to the windshield wiper motor/converters single comment received. accomplished prior to the effective date of 14 CFR Part 39 this AD per Boeing Service Bulletin 737–30– Request To Revise Applicability [Docket No. 2003–NM–48–AD; Amendment 1054, dated May 9, 2002, is considered 39–13332; AD 2003–20–14] The commenter, the manufacturer, acceptable for compliance with the requests that the applicability of the requirements of paragraph (c) of this AD. RIN 2120–AA64 proposed AD be revised to include only (f) Replacement of the left and right those airplanes that remain in a windshield wiper motor/converters Airworthiness Directives; Boeing passenger configuration and to exclude accomplished prior to the effective date of Model 727–200 Series Airplanes this AD per Boeing Service Bulletin 737–30– those certified to permanently fly in a 1055, dated November 14, 2002, is AGENCY: Federal Aviation cargo configuration. The commenter considered acceptable for compliance with Administration, DOT. also requests that special consideration the requirements of paragraph (d) of this AD. ACTION: Final rule. be given to airplanes that are presently Alternative Methods of Compliance parked (out of service). The commenter SUMMARY: This amendment adopts a states that, of the total number of (g) An alternative method of compliance or new airworthiness directive (AD), airplanes affected by the proposed AD adjustment of the compliance time that provides an acceptable level of safety may be applicable to certain Boeing Model 727– and still in flying condition, used if approved by the Manager, Seattle 200 series airplanes, that requires approximately 50 percent have been Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), FAA. installation of four lanyards on the converted to a cargo configuration. The Operators shall submit their requests through forward access panel/door. This action commenter adds that there are 20 an appropriate FAA Principal Maintenance is necessary to prevent the forward affected airplanes in active service that

VerDate jul<14>2003 16:14 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\09OCR1.SGM 09OCR1 58272 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations

have retained the passenger Cost Impact amends part 39 of the Federal Aviation configuration, which represents 22 There are approximately 100 Regulations (14 CFR part 39) as follows: percent of the total affected fleet, and airplanes of the affected design in the that the remaining flyable passenger PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS worldwide fleet. The FAA estimates that DIRECTIVES fleet is presently parked. 78 airplanes of U.S. registry will be The FAA does not agree that the affected by this AD, that it will take ■ 1. The authority citation for part 39 applicability of the AD should be approximately 1 work hour per airplane continues to read as follows: revised. Airplanes that have been to accomplish the required actions, and modified to fly in a cargo configuration Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701. that the average labor rate is $65 per may still be subject to the unsafe work hour. Based on these figures, the § 39.13 [Amended] condition addressed by this AD. cost impact of the AD on U.S. operators Numerous supplemental type ■ 2. Section 39.13 is amended by adding is estimated to be $5,070, or $65 per certificates (STC) exist, which, the following new airworthiness airplane. depending on the configuration, may or directive: The cost impact figure discussed may not have the forward ceiling access above is based on assumptions that no 2003–20–14 Boeing: Amendment 39–13332. panel/door installed. Airplanes in the Docket 2003–NM–48–AD. operator has yet accomplished any of cargo configuration, which do have the the requirements of this AD action, and Applicability: Model 727–200 series forward ceiling access panel/door that no operator would accomplish airplanes, certificated in any category, installed are still subject to this AD. those actions in the future if this AD as listed in Boeing Special Attention However, operators of airplanes in the were not adopted. The cost impact Service Bulletin 727–25–0298, dated cargo configuration that do not have the figures discussed in AD rulemaking February 13, 2003. forward ceiling panel/door installed actions represent only the time Note 1: This AD applies to each airplane may request that the cargo modification necessary to perform the specific actions identified in the preceding applicability be approved as an alternate method of actually required by the AD. These provision, regardless of whether it has been compliance, as explained in Note 1 of figures typically do not include modified, altered, or repaired in the area this AD pertaining to altered products. subject to the requirements of this AD. For incidental costs, such as the time No change to the final rule is necessary airplanes that have been modified, altered, or required to gain access and close up, in this regard. repaired so that the performance of the We do not agree that special planning time, or time necessitated by requirements of this AD is affected, the consideration is necessary for airplanes other administrative actions. owner/operator must request approval for an that have been parked. Those airplanes Regulatory Impact alternative method of compliance in accordance with paragraph (b) of this AD. need only comply with the The regulations adopted herein will The request should include an assessment of requirements of this AD before they not have a substantial direct effect on the effect of the modification, alteration, or return to service. No change to the final the States, on the relationship between repair on the unsafe condition addressed by rule is necessary in this regard. the national Government and the States, this AD; and, if the unsafe condition has not or on the distribution of power and been eliminated, the request should include Conclusion specific proposed actions to address it. After careful review of the available responsibilities among the various data, including the comment noted levels of government. Therefore, it is Compliance: Required as indicated, unless above, the FAA has determined that air determined that this final rule does not accomplished previously. safety and the public interest require the have federalism implications under To prevent the forward ceiling access panel/door from falling down and blocking adoption of the rule as proposed. Executive Order 13132. For the reasons discussed above, I the aisle, which would impede evacuation in Changes to 14 CFR Part 39/Effect on the certify that this action (1) is not a an emergency, accomplish the following: AD ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ under Lanyard Installation On July 10, 2002, the FAA issued a Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a (a) Within 18 months after the effective new version of 14 CFR part 39 (67 FR ‘‘significant rule’’ under DOT date of this AD, install 4 lanyards on the 47997, July 22, 2002), which governs the Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 forward ceiling access panel/door, in FAA’s airworthiness directives system. FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and (3) accordance with Boeing Special Attention The regulation now includes material will not have a significant economic Service Bulletin 727–25–0298, dated that relates to altered products, special impact, positive or negative, on a February 13, 2003. flight permits, and alternative methods substantial number of small entities Alternative Methods of Compliance of compliance. However, for clarity and under the criteria of the Regulatory (b) An alternative method of compliance or consistency in this final rule, we have Flexibility Act. A final evaluation has adjustment of the compliance time that retained the language of the NPRM been prepared for this action and it is provides an acceptable level of safety may be regarding that material. contained in the Rules Docket. A copy used if approved by the Manager, Seattle of it may be obtained from the Rules Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), FAA. Change To Labor Rate Estimate Docket at the location provided under Operators shall submit their requests through We have reviewed the figures we have the caption ADDRESSES. an appropriate FAA Principal Maintenance used over the past several years to Inspector, who may add comments and then List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39 calculate AD costs to operators. To send it to the Manager, Seattle ACO. account for various inflationary costs in Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation Note 2: Information concerning the the airline industry, we find it necessary safety, Incorporation by reference, existence of approved alternative methods of Safety. compliance with this AD, if any, may be to increase the labor rate used in these obtained from the Seattle ACO. calculations from $60 per work hour to Adoption of the Amendment $65 per work hour. The cost impact Special Flight Permits information, below, reflects this ■ Accordingly, pursuant to the authority (c) Special flight permits may be issued in increase in the specified hourly labor delegated to me by the Administrator, accordance with sections 21.197 and 21.199 rate. the Federal Aviation Administration of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR

VerDate jul<14>2003 16:14 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\09OCR1.SGM 09OCR1 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations 58273

21.197 and 21.199) to operate the airplane to SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: A final Fishers Lane, Rockville, MD 20857, a location where the requirements of this AD rule airworthiness directive, FR Doc. 301–827–2307. can be accomplished. 03–24486, applicable to Pratt & Whitney SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In the Incorporation by Reference PW4000 series turbofan engines, was Federal Register of June 13, 2003 (68 FR (d) The actions shall be done in accordance published in the Federal Register on 35290), FDA solicited comments with Boeing Special Attention Service September 30, 2003 (68 FR 56143). The concerning the direct final rule for a 75- Bulletin 727–25–0298, dated February 13, following correction is needed: day period ending August 27, 2003. 2003. This incorporation by reference was ■ On page 56145, in the second column, FDA stated that the effective date of the approved by the Director of the Federal direct final rule would be on October Register in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) under § 39.13 [Amended], in the sixth and 1 CFR part 51. Copies may be obtained line, add ‘‘Amendment 39–13318.’’ after 27, 2003, 60 days after the end of the from Boeing Commercial Airplane Group, ‘‘Pratt & Whitney:’’. comment period, unless any significant P.O. Box 3707, Seattle, Washington 98124– Issued in Burlington, MA, on October 3, adverse comment was submitted to FDA 2207. Copies may be inspected at the FAA, 2003. during the comment period. FDA did Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Jay J. Pardee, not receive any significant adverse Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington; or at the comments. Office of the Federal Register, 800 North Manager, Engine and Propeller Directorate, Capitol Street, NW., suite 700, Washington, Aircraft Certification Service. Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321, 351, 352, 353, DC. [FR Doc. 03–25577 Filed 10–8–03; 8:45 am] 355, 360, 371. Effective Date BILLING CODE 4910–13–P Accordingly, the amendments issued (e) This amendment becomes effective on thereby are effective. November 13, 2003. Dated: October 3, 2003. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND Jeffrey Shuren, Issued in Renton, Washington, on October HUMAN SERVICES 2, 2003. Assistant Commissioner for Policy. Vi L. Lipski, Food and Drug Administration [FR Doc. 03–25648 Filed 10–8–03; 8:45 am] Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, BILLING CODE 4160–01–S Aircraft Certification Service. 21 CFR Part 347 [FR Doc. 03–25490 Filed 10–8–03; 8:45 am] [Docket No. 78N–021A] BILLING CODE 4910–13–P POSTAL SERVICE RIN 0910–AA01 39 CFR Part 111 DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Skin Protectant Drug Products for Over-the-Counter Human Use; Eligibility Requirements for Certain Federal Aviation Administration Astringent Drug Products; Final Nonprofit Standard Mail Matter Monograph; Direct Final Rule; AGENCY: Postal Service. 14 CFR Part 39 Confirmation of Effective Date ACTION: Final rule. [Docket No. 2000–NE–47–AD; Amendment AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, 39–13318; AD 2003–19–15] HHS. SUMMARY: In this final rule, the Postal Service adopts an amendment to RIN 2120–AA64 ACTION: Direct final rule; confirmation of effective date. Domestic Mail Manual standards that Airworthiness Directives; Pratt & expands eligibility for Nonprofit Whitney PW4000 Series Turbofan SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Standard Mail rates by exempting Engines; Correction Administration (FDA) is confirming the certain matter soliciting monetary effective date of October 27, 2003, for donations from application of the AGENCY: Federal Aviation the final rule that appeared in the cooperative mail rule. Administration, DOT. Federal Register of June 13, 2003 (68 FR EFFECTIVE DATE: November 13, 2003. ACTION: Final rule; correction. 35290). The direct final rule amends the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: SUMMARY: This document makes a regulation that established conditions Jerome M. Lease, Mailing Standards, correction to Airworthiness Directive under which over-the-counter (OTC) United States Postal Service, 703–292– (AD) 2003–19–15, applicable to Pratt & skin protectant astringent drug products 4184. are generally recognized as safe and Whitney PW4000 series turbofan SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In a engines. AD 2003–19–15 was published effective and not misbranded. This proposed rule published in the Federal in the Federal Register on September action revises some labeling for Register on May 6, 2003 (68 FR 23937– 30, 2003 (68 FR 56143). In the astringent drug products to be 23939), the Postal Service proposed to amendatory language, under § 39.13 consistent with the final rule for OTC expand the eligibility for Nonprofit [Amended], the amendment number of skin protectant drug products (68 FR Standard Mail rates by exempting the new action was inadvertently 33362, June 4, 2003) and adds labeling certain fundraising mailings from the omitted. This document corrects that for certain small packages (styptic application of the cooperative mail rule. omission. In all other respects, the pencils). This document confirms the For the reasons explained herein, the original document remains the same. effective date of the direct final rule. Postal Service adopts the proposal, with EFFECTIVE DATE: October 9, 2003. This action is part of FDA’s ongoing minor modifications. review of OTC drug products. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: The proposal provided background Diane Cook, Aerospace Engineer, Engine DATES: Effective date confirmed: concerning Nonprofit Standard Mail Certification Office, FAA, Engine and October 27, 2003. eligibility; the traditional role of Propeller Directorate, 12 New England FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Congress in expansion of eligibility for Executive Park, Burlington, MA 01803– Gerald M. Rachanow, Center for Drug these rates; the history of the 5299; telephone (781) 238–7133; fax Evaluation and Research (HFD–560), cooperative mail rule and its application (781) 238–7199. Food and Drug Administration, 5600 to fundraising mailings; recent concerns

VerDate jul<14>2003 16:14 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\09OCR1.SGM 09OCR1 58274 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations

raised by nonprofit representatives understands that the primary concern of relationship. The conditions suggested concerning application of the Congress and the nonprofit industry in include: (1) A restriction against any cooperative mail rule on fundraising seeking changes in this area was to officer, director, principal, or fiduciary mail and potential effects on nonprofit benefit nonprofit organizations. of the party that is ineligible to mail at organizations; and proposed legislation Admittedly, the Postal Service does not nonprofit rates (hereafter ‘‘ineligible to exempt certain fundraising mail from have independent knowledge to verify participant’’) or a corporate affiliate or application of the rule. The proposal the accuracy of the commenter’s claims, close relative of the ineligible also explained the Postal Service’s since the Postal Service does not participant serving as an officer, reluctance to propose a rulemaking on monitor or regulate the business director, or key employee of the these issues since expansion of relationships between nonprofit nonprofit; (2) a requirement that the eligibility for nonprofit rates has organizations and professional arrangement between the nonprofit and traditionally been accomplished fundraisers. The comment did not ineligible participant be governed by a through legislation. Nevertheless, as the provide evidence to substantiate its written contract, and that this contract proposal discussed, the Postal Service claim. Moreover, both nonprofit be signed by a board member or officer determined to embark upon this organizations and associations of the nonprofit; (3) a requirement that rulemaking with the understanding that representing them, who obviously have the donations be deposited in a bank it represented the consensus of parties an interest in this question, urge account under the nonprofit’s exclusive with an interest in nonprofit issues, adoption of the proposal or a modified control; (4) a requirement that the including bipartisan Congressional version of it. This suggests, and some of ineligible participant have no support, representatives of both these comments specifically state, that ownership or control over the list of nonprofit organizations and professional the change will benefit at least some donors responding to the solicitation, fundraisers, and the Postal Service; that nonprofit organizations. Accordingly, beyond a limited contingent security it was needed to assist nonprofit the Postal Service does not find it interest; (5) a requirement that the organizations in obtaining support appropriate to reject the proposal, as ineligible participant not retain necessary to fund their programs; and urged by this comment. ownership rights to intellectual property that this result could be accomplished The comments that urge the in the fundraising package developed at more quickly administratively than imposition of restrictions narrowing the the nonprofit’s expense; (6) a legislatively. proposed exemption from the requirement that, in instances where the The Postal Service received 67 cooperative mail rule do so for reasons ineligible participant extends credit to comments concerning its proposal, related to those raised by comments the nonprofit, the credit terms are not including one that was received late but seeking withdrawal of the proposal. conditioned upon the continued was considered. The commenters were That is, although they do not urge employment of the ineligible diverse, including nonprofit rejection of the new policy, these participant; and (7) a requirement that organizations and organizations comments express concern that some the mailing not constitute an excess representing such organizations; professional fundraisers may use the benefit transaction as defined by the professional fundraisers and new rules to take advantage of Internal Revenue Service. As explained, organizations representing these inexperienced or unsophisticated the Postal Service has determined to commercial entities; Congressional nonprofit organizations. adopt the fourth suggestion, in part. representatives; private individuals; and At the outset, it should be noted that Other than that item, for the reasons an organization representing state the proposed rule does not dictate the discussed below, the Postal Service has officials that regulate charities. The terms of the relationship between determined not to adopt the restrictions comments also presented a broad range nonprofit organizations and fundraisers. suggested by these commenters. of views. A significant majority of the If anything, it increases the options First, based on comments received by comments urged the Postal Service to available to the parties. For instance, it the Postal Service, it is clear there is adopt the rule as proposed. A small does not prevent nonprofits from significant disagreement as to whether number of comments, concerned with entering the type of principal-agent any, much less these, additional potential abuses, recommended relationship with fundraisers restrictions should be adopted. As limitation of the proposed rule. Of these contemplated by the cooperative mail discussed above, and in the earlier commenters, a small number rule. And, as urged by the numerous Federal Register notice, the Postal recommended that the Postal Service parties that sought the Postal Service Service proposed its rule change withdraw the proposal, while the rulemaking in this area, it allows the reluctantly, based on an understanding remainder recommended that it be nonprofits to consider other there was a broad consensus among adopted with additional restrictions. In relationships to retain the services of interested parties supporting it. contrast, a lesser number of comments professional fundraisers. Although there appears to remain a recommended that the exemption from The Postal Service does not doubt that general consensus in support of the application of the cooperative mail rule the proposed change in its standards proposal, there is no consensus be expanded even further. Additionally, will provide individual nonprofit supporting any of the suggested several comments recommended that organizations the freedom to enter additional restrictions. the rule should be retroactive. agreements that, in hindsight, at least a Second, even if the Postal Service One of the comments that urged few will conclude to have been unwise. found it appropriate to consider withdrawal of the rule argued that the However, the Postal Service does not additional postal standards in this area, rule would primarily benefit believe that this provides the it is not convinced that the standards commercial fundraisers, rather than justification, at least at this time, to suggested are necessarily appropriate. nonprofit organizations, while the other adopt the additional restrictions urged The Postal Service understands the spoke more generally of potential abuse. by some comments. Those proposals nonprofit universe to be diverse. For If the former assertion were proven to be recommend that the Postal Service example, nonprofits may be large or true, it would give the Postal Service require nonprofits and fundraisers to small, well-established or relatively reason to consider withdrawing the adhere, and certify their compliance, to new, relatively well-funded or not well- proposal. That is, the Postal Service a variety of conditions concerning their funded, run by a permanent paid staff

VerDate jul<14>2003 16:14 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\09OCR1.SGM 09OCR1 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations 58275

or all-volunteer. It seems to us difficult enforcement activity. For instance, if it would be best for some organizations. to impose a set of restrictions that is alleged that parties are not in Of course, it could be argued that should be universally applied to all of compliance, despite mailing at the increasing the options available to these organizations. However, that is nonprofit rates while certifying they did nonprofits will increase the likelihood what the comments suggest. comply, it is likely that the Postal that some, particularly the least Third, even if the terms suggested by Service would be expected to sophisticated, will make the wrong the commenters are reasonable, the need investigate the assertions. Unlike choice. However, as observed above, the to impose them by regulation is not violations of the current cooperative appropriate safeguard against this clear to the Postal Service. That is, mail rule, which often can be possibility would seem to be the although the need to ensure that determined by examination of the education of nonprofits to make the best nonprofit organizations are not subject parties’ contractual arrangements, some choices in their particular to abuses by commercial entities is a of the proposed conditions would likely circumstances, rather than eliminating laudable objective, it might be require a more extensive investigation. options that might be prove to be the accomplished, or at least attempted, For example, the restriction against best choice for some of them. through alternatives to regulation. For officers and others with close ties to the Finally, the Postal Service is example, education or training of ineligible participant (including the concerned that adoption of the proposed nonprofits may prove to be sufficient, close relatives of these individuals) conditions may create conflicts with particularly if it is true that adherence serving as officers, directors, or key state or federal statutes and that, if such to the suggestions is financially employees of the nonprofit would conflicts occur, mailers would be placed beneficial for the nonprofit. There are a require an exhaustive examination of in the untenable position of determining number of interested entities that might the organization charts and employment whether to comply with the statutes or provide this education and training: rolls of each organization. Determining with postal regulations. Indeed, as associations representing nonprofit whether there is a violation of the IRS discussed in the notice announcing the organizations; associations representing excess benefit transaction standard proposed rule in 65 FR 23939 , ensuring fundraisers; and government entities would require Postal Service employees that our customers ‘‘do not that regulate professional fundraisers to develop expertise in these standards unintentionally violate the laws of those and nonprofits. The Postal Service and to obtain the information needed to states that regulate the financial encourages these associations and apply them. Given the possibility of IRS arrangements between nonprofits and government agencies to undertake investigations of the parties under the certain types of professional efforts to educate nonprofit same standard, this requirement would fundraisers’’ was one of the motives organizations and to take other create the risk of duplicative underlying the rulemaking. The Postal appropriate measures to protect government efforts. Service is aware that all states have nonprofits from potential abuses. We There is also the likelihood that the agencies with oversight over charitable also encourage nonprofit organizations proposed conditions will create solicitations, including state Attorney to utilize these resources and to review practical, administrative hardships for Generals; Secretaries of State; and their existing and proposed fundraising some nonprofits. For example, the Departments of Consumer Protection, arrangements and consider whether the requirement that the donated funds be Consumer and Regulatory Affairs, terms of those arrangements are in their deposited in a bank account controlled Agriculture and Consumer Services, best interests. The Postal Service will be exclusively by the nonprofit could Commerce, Commerce and Consumer happy to assist, as appropriate, in these prove difficult for nonprofits that, Protection, Professional and Financial efforts. because of size or other concerns, are ill- Regulation, Business Regulation, or Fourth, the Postal Service also has equipped to handle such accounts. Regulation and Licensing, or a doubts that the procedures suggested by Similarly, the requirement that the combination of such state agencies. The some of the comments are board members or officers sign Postal Service is aware also that most administratively feasible. The comments fundraising agreements could create states have laws regulating the did not appear to suggest that the Postal difficulties for organizations that relationship between professional Service undertake the difficult task of delegate these responsibilities to other fundraisers and their nonprofit clients. independently verifying mailers’ parties. As the Postal Service is aware At the present time, it appears that at compliance with the proposed from its own purchasing procedures, it least 28 states have enacted some type conditions. Rather, they suggested that is not unusual for employees that are of financial distribution requirement on the parties each sign the postage not officers to be given authority to sign charitable fundraisers and, if anything, statements certifying compliance with contracts. we understand that the trend toward the new standards and that the Postal Adoption of the proposed conditions such state oversight is increasing. Service rely upon these statements. also could work to the financial Additionally, there are a number of However, the Postal Service does not detriment of some nonprofits. The federal agencies with the authority and require all parties to sign the postage proposed rule provides additional expertise to enact and enforce standards statement at this time and, when options for nonprofits, thereby giving concerning these relationships, such as analogous proposals have been raised in them additional choices in their efforts the Federal Trade Commission, Internal the past, mailers have pointed out the to find the arrangement that will Revenue Service, and Department of logistical problems they would face if maximize the benefit to the nonprofit. Justice. Under an exemption of required to sign postage statements for For instance, it may be beneficial for fundraising mailings from the mail prepared and entered by their some nonprofits to consider cooperative mail rule, the states and agents. Moreover, even if it is not arrangements concerning donor lists, federal agencies will be able to adopt contemplated by the commenters that intellectual property rights, and credit and enforce their standards without the Postal Service will seek to enforce terms beyond those that would be concern that such action might be in the suggested conditions beyond permitted under the proposed conflict with postal rules. ensuring that the parties sign the conditions. Limiting the choices As alluded to above, the Postal postage statement, it is unlikely that the available to nonprofits might, in some Service has determined to adopt a Postal Service can avoid all other instances, take away the option that condition concerning donor lists (i.e.,

VerDate jul<14>2003 16:14 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\09OCR1.SGM 09OCR1 58276 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations

the lists of persons contributing fundraising mailings seeking monetary List of Subjects in 39 CFR Part 111 donations in response to the donations and does not apply to Administrative practice and solicitation). Under this condition, the mailings promoting any goods or procedure, Postal Service. exemption from application of the services. The suggestion goes beyond cooperative mail rule will apply only the consensus agreement that led to the PART 111—[AMENDED] where the nonprofit organization is rulemaking. Moreover, as the Postal given a list of the donors, contact Service explained in the notice ■ 1. The authority citation for 39 CFR information for those persons, and the discussing the proposal, adoption of the part 111 continues to read as follows: amount of their donations. Based on suggestion would create significant Authority: 5 U.S.C. 552(a); 39 U.S.C. 101, past reviews of fundraising agreements, potential for abuse by commercial 401, 403, 404, 414, 3001–3011, 3201–3219, the Postal Service believes that this organizations and may place small 3403–3406, 3621, 3626, 5001. condition is already generally followed businesses and other for-profit in the fundraising industry. Moreover, organizations who sell similar goods ■ 2. Add the following to Domestic Mail compliance with this condition and services at a competitive Manual section E670.5.3: ‘‘Exception: generally can be determined by postal disadvantage. The suggestion that the effective November 13, 2003, this officials from review of the agreement proposal be expanded to cover only standard no longer applies to mailings by between the fundraiser and the products and services of nominal value an organization authorized to mail at nonprofit. Finally, to guard against the does not alter these considerations; if Nonprofit Standard Mail rates soliciting possibility that some nonprofits will be anything, it could create concerns in monetary donations to the authorized better served financially if not subject to administering what is included within mailer and not promoting or otherwise this condition, postal standards will that standard. facilitating the sale or lease of any goods allow them to waive the receipt of this The Postal Service also has or service. This exception applies only listing, as long as that is done in writing. determined not to expand this where the organization authorized to Based on these considerations, the rulemaking to cover the other mail at Nonprofit Standard Mail rates is Postal Service has determined not to documents (e.g., thank you letters, given a list of each donor, contact adopt at this time the remaining newsletters, confirmations of donations) information (e.g., address, telephone restrictions suggested by some identified in the comments. These number) for each, and the amount of the comments. Nevertheless, they do raise suggestions are beyond the scope of the donation or waives in writing the receipt significant concerns and the Postal rulemaking as well as the consensus of this list.’’ Service’s Consumer Advocate will favoring the exemption of certain An appropriate amendment to 39 CFR monitor implementation of the rule to fundraising mailings from application of part 111 to reflect these changes will be determine whether abuses are occurring. the cooperative mail rule. Moreover, the published. As promised in the proposal, if such need for a rulemaking to address these abuses or other unintended documents is unclear. The Postal Stanley F. Mires, consequences occur after the Service is not aware of any general Chief Counsel, Legislative. rulemaking, the Postal Service will concern regarding its policies involving [FR Doc. 03–25643 Filed 10–8–03; 8:45 am] consider a further rulemaking or other these documents. Some of them may, in BILLING CODE 7710–12–P administrative actions. fact, be generally sent as First-Class Several commenters, although in Mail, and thereby they are not eligible favor of the proposal, assert that the for Nonprofit Standard Mail rates in any ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION rulemaking did not go far enough. They case. AGENCY assert that the exemption from the Finally, several commenters suggest cooperative mail rule should also cover that the proposed policy be made 40 CFR Part 52 the sale of products and services, at retroactive. The Postal Service has [NM–46–1–7615a; FRL–7571–1] least those of nominal value, as well as determined not to do so and, as a variety of documents including explained in its proposal, the change in Approval and Promulgation of brochures, thank you letters, letters policy is prospective only, effective on Implementation Plans; New Mexico; confirming the amount of donations, the date of enactment. A retroactive Revision to Motor Vehicle Emission newsletters, and ‘‘chase’’ letters. The change could open the Postal Service to Budgets in Bernalillo County, New Postal Service understands the latter to an undetermined number of refund Mexico Carbon Monoxide Air Quality refer to letters that follow up on claims. Maintenance Plan Using MOBILE6 telemarketing fundraising campaigns For these reasons, the Postal Service and remind donors that their pledges adopts the rule as proposed but, in AGENCY: Environmental Protection have not been paid. Assuming that addition to the condition described Agency (EPA). understanding of ‘‘chase’’ letters is above, makes three minor changes. First, ACTION: Direct final rule. correct, the Postal Service considers the proposed revision was to apply only them to be a solicitation for monetary to nonprofit organizations authorized to SUMMARY: The EPA is taking direct final donations within the proposal. mail at the nonprofit rates. The rule is action approving the State Accordingly, as long as they do not changed to apply to all customers Implementation Plan (SIP) revisions for contain other disqualifying material, authorized to mail at Nonprofit Bernalillo County, New Mexico, which such letters would be exempt from Standard Mail rates. Second, the is a carbon monoxide maintenance area. application of the cooperative mail rule. proposed rule is revised to make clear This SIP revision was submitted to EPA The Postal Service has determined not that the exception from application of by the Governor of New Mexico on May to expand the proposal to provide that the cooperative mail rule applies only 15, 2003. More specifically, EPA is pieces promoting the sale of products where the monetary donations solicited approving the county’s revised Motor and services also be exempted from are for the entity authorized to mail at Vehicle Emissions Budget (MVEB) for application of the cooperative mail rule. nonprofit rates. Finally, the language is carbon monoxide (CO) for 1996, 1999, As explained in the proposal, the revised to make clear that the exception 2002, 2005 and 2006. This budget was exemption is strictly limited to is prospective only. developed using EPA’s latest emissions

VerDate jul<14>2003 16:14 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\09OCR1.SGM 09OCR1 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations 58277

modeling program, MOBILE6. This A. How Can I Get Copies of This Document adverse comments were received and submittal updates the maintenance plan and Other Related Information? the direct final approval was by establishing new transportation B. How and To Whom Do I Submit withdrawn. After addressing the conformity MVEBs for use by the Mid- Comments? comments received, the EPA gave final V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews Region Council of Governments, the approval to the budget revisions for area’s Metropolitan Planning I. Background 1996–2010 on May 24, 2000 (65 FR Organization (MPO). These budgets will In 1990, the City of Albuquerque/ 33455). The revised MVEBs are as continue to maintain the total on-road Bernalillo County (Albuquerque) in follows, in tons of CO emissions per mobile source emissions for the area at New Mexico had a CO design value of day: 1996, 266.99; 1999, 229.09; 2002, or below the attainment level for the CO 11.1 parts per million, exceeding the 209.1; 2005, 205.67; 2006, 205.86; and National Ambient Air Quality Standard National Ambient Air Quality Standard 2010, 222.46. (NAAQS). (NAAQS) of 9 parts per million (8-hour II. What Is MOBILE6? DATES: This rule is effective on average basis). Consequently, MOBILE6 is the latest in a series of November 24, 2003 without further Albuquerque was classified as a EPA emissions factor models for notice, unless EPA receives adverse moderate nonattainment area for CO estimating pollution from on-road motor comment by November 10, 2003. If EPA under the Clean Air Act (the Act). As vehicles in states outside of California receives such comment, EPA will required by the Act, on November 5, and represents the first major update of publish a timely withdrawal in the 1992, New Mexico submitted for EPA the preexisting MOBILE model since Federal Register informing the public approval a revision to the SIP to address 1993. The release of this model was that this rule will not take effect. Albuquerque’s CO nonattainment. ADDRESSES: Written comments on this Different parts of the November 1992 announced in a Federal Register notice action should be addressed to Mr. SIP submittal were approved at different published on January 29, 2002 (67 FR Thomas H. Diggs, Chief, Air Planning times, with approval of all aspects 4254). This date marks the beginning of Section (6PD–L), at the EPA Region 6 completed in June of 1996. the two-year grace period, after which office listed below. Electronic comments Air quality data in the Albuquerque all areas must use MOBILE6 for should be sent either to area showed no violations of the CO emissions factor modeling for [email protected] or to http:// NAAQS between 1992 and 1995, transportation conformity purposes. www.regulations.gov, which is an meeting the first criterion for MOBILE6 calculates emissions of alternative method for submitting redesignation. On April 14, 1995, New carbon monoxide and other pollutants electronic comments to EPA. To submit Mexico submitted a request that from passenger cars, motorcycles, buses, comments, please follow the detailed Albuquerque be redesignated to and light-duty and heavy-duty trucks. instructions described in the Final attainment for CO. EPA proposed The model accounts for the emission Action part of this document. Copies of approval of this request on February 16, impacts of factors such as changes in the State’s submittal and other 1996. This approval was made effective vehicle emissions standards, changes in documents relevant to this action are on July 15, 1996. vehicle populations, and variation in available for public inspection during The Act also requires a periodic local conditions such as temperature, normal business hours at the following inventory of all emissions from area, humidity, fuel quality, and air quality locations. Anyone wanting to examine mobile, and stationary sources. The programs. these documents should make an 1993 emission inventory found the MOBILE6 is used to calculate current appointment with the appropriate office following CO emissions levels, in tons and future inventories of motor vehicle at least two working days in advance. per day: Stationary sources, 3.18; area emissions at the national and local Environmental Protection Agency, sources, 111.60; On-road mobile level. These inventories are used to Region 6, Air Planning Section (6PD–L), sources, 274.16; and nonroad mobile make decisions about air pollution 1445 Ross Avenue, Dallas, Texas, sources, 45.74. Total CO emissions were policies and programs at the local, state 75202–2733. 434.69 tons per day. and national level. Inventories based on City of Albuquerque Environmental This inventory was further updated in MOBILE6 are also used to meet the Health Department, 1 Civic Plaza, 1996. This updated inventory reflected federal Clean Air Act’s SIP and Albuquerque, New Mexico 87103. the following CO emissions levels, in transportation conformity requirements. Telephone 505–768–2600. tons per day: On-road mobile sources, The MOBILE model was first FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. 266.99; nonroad mobile sources, 50.90; developed in 1978 and MOBILE6 is the Peggy Wade, Air Planning Section area sources, 67.19; and stationary first major update of the model since (6PD–L), Environmental Protection sources, 3.92. Total CO emissions were 1993. It has been updated many times Agency, Region 6, 1445 Ross Avenue, inventoried at 389.0 tons per day. to reflect changes in vehicle fleet Dallas, Texas, 75202–2733, telephone The Albuquerque/Bernalillo County composition and fuels, to incorporate (214) 665–7247 or [email protected]. area submitted further revisions to its EPA’s growing understanding of vehicle emissions, and to cover new emissions SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: maintenance plan emissions budgets on regulations and modeling needs. Throughout this document whenever February 4, 1999, using the MOBILE5 ‘‘we’’, ‘‘us’’, or ‘‘our’’ is used, we mean emission factor modeling program. III. Analysis of the State’s Submittal the EPA. These revisions, for years 1996–2006, increased the budgets for mobile and A. Why Were Updated Carbon Outline stationary source emissions but Monoxide Budgets Established? I. Background decreased the budget for area source The existing MVEBs for CO were last II. What Is MOBILE6? emissions, resulting in an overall modified through a SIP revision III. Analysis of the State’s Submittal A. Why Were Updated Carbon Monoxide decrease in budgeted emissions. These approved and made effective by EPA on Budgets Established? revisions also established a 2010 May 24, 2000 (65 FR 33455). B. Recalculating the Motor Vehicle emissions budget. A direct final rule To address and accommodate the Emissions Budget with MOBILE6 approving these revisions was release of MOBILE6 as the latest EPA- IV. Final Action published December 20, 1999. However, approved emissions factor model, the

VerDate jul<14>2003 16:14 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\09OCR1.SGM 09OCR1 58278 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations

governor of New Mexico submitted a requirement that the latest planning For all budget years, MOBILE6 SIP revision to EPA on May 15, 2003. assumptions continue to be valid is met estimates a greater production of CO The MVEBs contained in the current CO and this SIP revision continues to use than MOBILE5a. Although the maintenance plan were calculated with these estimates. Additionally, work has MOBILE6 emissions are estimated to be a previous emissions factor model, already begun on the required second higher than that previously predicted by MOBILE5a. This submittal revises the ten-year maintenance plan, due to EPA MOBILE5a, the model still demonstrates Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets for in June of 2004. With this expected greater relative emissions reductions the years 1996, 1999, 2002, 2005 and submission, the MPO will update the benefits. Recall that only the budget 2006 using MOBILE6. Note that only the emissions inventory in its entirety with estimates for on-road mobile source MVEBs are being revised using the the latest planning assumptions and emissions (the MVEBs) are being revised MOBILE6 model; budgets for the other demographic data. with the MOBILE6 model. Changes in source categories will remain unchanged as the MOBILE6 model does B. Recalculating the Motor Vehicle the MVEBs will, however, affect the not affect these categories. However, Emissions Budget With MOBILE6 overall CO budgets and CO baseline level even though the amount of CO in changes in the estimated amount of CO Because of the significant difference produced by the on-road mobile source in modeling results between the the other source categories (nonroad category will affect the CO baseline previous version of the emissions factor mobile, area, and stationary) will remain level and the CO totals by year. model, MOBILE5a, and the updated unchanged. The MOBILE6 Guidance Therefore, the baseline level and version, MOBILE6, the on-road mobile provides that nonattainment and amounts of total CO by year will be source category in the emissions maintenance areas may revise the on- revised in response to the MOBILE6 inventory was recalculated for all years road mobile emissions inventory and analysis. represented in the ten-year maintenance MVEBs without revising the entire SIP The EPA guidance document, Policy time frame of the SIP using MOBILE6. and other emission inventory categories, Guidance on the Use of MOBILE6 for This inventory provides the basis for if the SIP continues to demonstrate SIP Development and Transportation determining the MVEBs for CO. The maintenance of the standard when the Conformity, issued by John Seitz on MVEBs are the same as the total MOBILE5a-based on-road mobile source January 18, 2002 (‘‘MOBILE6 estimated CO, in tons per day, for the inventories are replaced with MOBILE6 Guidance’’), states that nonattainment on-road mobile source category in the inventories. To demonstrate this, the and maintenance areas may forgo the emissions inventory. For all years following table shows the entire requirement to update all planning beyond 2006 (the last modeled year), the emission inventory, with the on-road assumptions when updating the MVEBs MVEB will be held at the 2006 level. mobile source category replaced with with MOBILE6, if the area can The table below compares the existing the resultant MOBILE6-derived demonstrate that these assumptions MVEBs with the revised MVEBs have not changed since the last budget estimates. The revised MVEBs are submitted with this SIP revision. revision. For CO, population is the most shown, along with the currently important assumption underlying the approved inventories from the other MOTOR VEHICLE EMISSION BUDGETS CO forecasts as it has a direct impact on source categories. These inventories were approved in a revision to the CO the number of miles driven. Comparing Existing Proposed the Albuquerque/Bernalillo County Year (CO in (CO in Change maintenance plan on May 24, 2000 (65 population figure for the year 2000 used tpd) tpd) FR 33455). in the last SIP revision (556,248) to the population for the same area recorded in 1996 ...... 266.90 416.31 149.32 the 2000 Census (556,678) results in a 1999 ...... 229.09 373.05 143.96 difference of 0.077%, less than 1%. 2002 ...... 209.01 369.53 160.52 2005 ...... 205.67 367.28 161.61 Because the estimated figure matches so 2006 ...... 205.86 312.65 106.79 closely with the actual census count, the

INVENTORY SOURCE CATEGORY [CO in tpd]

Proposed Off-road Revised Year MOBILE6 mobile Area Stationary total MVEBs sources sources sources inventory

1996 ...... 416.31 50.90 67.19 3.92 538.32 1999 ...... 373.05 52.68 69.87 27.40 523.00 2002 ...... 369.53 54.46 72.60 27.54 524.13 2005 ...... 367.28 56.25 75.25 27.68 526.46 2006 ...... 312.65 56.84 76.09 27.72 473.30

The 1996 figure found in the revised Albuquerque/Bernalillo County area to new analysis indicates that the total column, 538.32 tpd, is the new CO be in attainment of the NAAQS. Albuquerque/Bernalillo County area baseline level as calculated with Essentially, this baseline represents the actually had a larger amount of CO in MOBILE6. The original baseline level, ‘‘cap’’ of emissions from all sources. The the airshed in 1996, yet still met the as approved on May 24, 2000, was 389.0 results of MOBILE6 modeling, which NAAQS. The following table illustrates tpd. This level represents the amount of raises the baseline level, indicates that the relative gain in emissions reductions CO, in tons per day, which may be the initial CO baseline, as determined when comparing the MOBILE5a-derived emitted by all sources and still allow the using MOBILE5a, was set too low. This estimates with those of MOBILE6.

VerDate jul<14>2003 16:14 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\09OCR1.SGM 09OCR1 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations 58279

Cap under Cap under Year MOBILE5a MOBILE6 Difference (in tpd) (in tpd) (in tpd)

1996 ...... 389.0 538.32 164 2006 ...... 366.51 473.30 106.79 Decrease in CO Emissions (in tpd) ...... ¥22.49 ¥65.02 Percent Reduction ...... 5.78 12.08

The greater decline in emissions seen of the rule that are not the subject of an copyrighted material, CBI, or other with MOBILE6 between 1996 and 2006 adverse comment. information whose disclosure is can be attributed to the sensitivity of the restricted by statute. When EPA A. How Can I Get Copies of This model to local parameters incorporated identifies a comment containing Document and Other Related into MOBILE6 and the control programs copyrighted material, EPA will provide Information? in place in Albuquerque/Bernalillo a reference to that material in the County. So, although the emissions cap 1. The Regional Office has established version of the comment that is placed in is higher with MOBILE6, that difference an official public rulemaking file the official public rulemaking file. The is due to the sensitivity of the newer available for inspection at the Regional entire printed comment, included the model. Office. The EPA has established an copyrighted material, will be available MOBILE6 offers a more robust and official public rulemaking file for this at the Regional Office for public accurate estimate of emissions than action under NM–46–1–7615. The inspection. prior versions of the model. Comparing official public file consists of the just the MOBILE5a and MOBILE6 on- documents specifically referenced in B. How and To Whom Do I Submit road mobile source estimates indicates this action, any public comments Comments? that MOBILE6 shows a relative received, and other information related You may submit comments reduction in CO emissions that is to this action. Although a part of the electronically, by mail, or through hand approximately twice as much as that official record, the public rulemaking delivery/courier. To ensure proper seen with MOBILE5a. file does not include Confidential receipt by EPA, identify the appropriate Business Information (CBI) or other rulemaking identification number, NM– IV. Final Action information whose disclosure is 46–1–7615, in the subject line on the We have evaluated the State’s restricted by statute. The official public first page of your comment. Please submittal and have determined that it rulemaking file is the collection of ensure your comments are submitted meets the applicable requirements of the materials that is available for public within the specified comment period. Act and EPA regulations, and is viewing at the Air Planning Section, Comments received after the close of the consistent with EPA policy. Therefore, EPA Region 6, 1445 Ross Avenue, comment period will be marked ‘‘late.’’ we are approving Albuquerque’s request Dallas, Texas, 75202. The EPA requests EPA is not required to consider these to revise the MVEBs in its carbon that, if at all possible, you contact the late comments. monoxide maintenance SIP using rulemaking contact listed as the Further 1. Electronically. If you submit an MOBILE6, EPA’s latest emission factor Information Contact to schedule your electronic comment as prescribed modeling program. inspection. The Regional Office’s below, EPA recommends that you The EPA is publishing this rule official hours of business are Monday include your name, mailing address, without prior proposal because we view through Friday, 8:30 to 4:30 excluding and an e-mail address or other contact this as a noncontroversial amendment Federal holidays. information in the body of your and anticipate no adverse comments. 2. Copies of the State submittal are comment. Also include this contact However, in the proposed rules section also available for public inspection information on the outside of any disk of this Federal Register publication, we during official business hours, by or CD ROM you submit, and in any are publishing a separate document that appointment at the local air agency. cover letter accompanying the disk or will serve as the proposal to approve the City of Albuquerque Environmental CD ROM. This ensures you can be SIP revision if adverse comments are Health Department, 1 Civic Plaza, identified as the source of the comment received. This rule will be effective on Albuquerque, New Mexico 87103. and allows EPA to contact you in case November 24, 2003 without further Telephone 505–768–2600. EPA cannot read your comment due to notice unless we receive adverse 3. Electronic Access. You may access technical difficulties or needs further comment by November 10, 2003. If we this Federal Register document information on the substance of your receive adverse comments, we will electronically through the comment. The EPA’s policy is that EPA publish a timely withdrawal in the Regulations.gov Web site located at will not edit your comment, and any Federal Register informing the public http://www.regulations.gov where you identifying or contact information that the rule will not take effect. We will can find, review, and submit comments provided in the body of a comment will address all public comments in a on Federal rules that have been be included as part of the comment that subsequent final rule based on the published in the Federal Register, the is placed in the official public file, and proposed rule. We will not institute a Government’s legal newspaper, which made available in EPA’s electronic second comment period on this action. are open for comment. public record. If EPA cannot read your Any parties interested in commenting The EPA’s policy on public comments comment due to technical difficulties must do so at this time. Please note that indicates that, whether submitted and cannot contact you for clarification, if we receive adverse comment on an electronically or in paper, all comments EPA may not be able to consider you amendment, paragraph, or section of will be made available for public comment. this rule and if that provision may be viewing at the EPA Regional Office, as i. Electronic Mail (e-mail). Comments severed from the remainder of the rule, EPA receives them and without change, may be sent by e-mail to Thomas Diggs we may adopt as final those provisions unless the comment contains ([email protected]). The EPA’s e-

VerDate jul<14>2003 16:14 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00017 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\09OCR1.SGM 09OCR1 58280 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations

mail system is not an ‘‘anonymous will not have a significant economic Business Regulatory Enforcement access’’ system. If you send an e-mail impact on a substantial number of small Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides comment directly without going through entities under the Regulatory Flexibility that before a rule may take effect, the Regulations.gov, EPA’s e-mail system Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.). Because this agency promulgating the rule must automatically captures your e-mail rule approves pre-existing requirements submit a rule report, which includes a address. E-mail addresses that are under state law and does not impose copy of the rule, to each House of the automatically captured by EPA’s e-mail any additional enforceable duty beyond Congress and to the Comptroller General system are included as part of the that required by state law, it does not of the United States. EPA will submit a comment that is placed in the official contain any unfunded mandate or report containing this rule and other public file, and made available in EPA’s significantly or uniquely affect small required information to the U.S. Senate, electronic public record. governments, as described in the the U.S. House of Representatives, and ii. Regulations.gov. Your use of Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 the Comptroller General of the United Regulations.gov is an alternative method (Pub. L. 104–4). States prior to publication of the rule in of submitting electronic comments to This rule also does not have tribal the Federal Register. A major rule EPA. Go directly to Regulations.gov at implications because it will not have a cannot take effect until 60 days after it http://www.regulations.gov, then select substantial direct effect on one or more is published in the Federal Register. EPA at the top of the page and to ‘‘Go’’ Indian tribes, on the relationship This action is not a ‘‘major rule’’ as button. The list of current EPA actions between the Federal Government and defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). available for comment will be listed. Indian tribes, or on the distribution of Please follow the online instructions for power and responsibilities between the Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean submitting comments. The system is an Federal Government and Indian tribes, Air Act, petitions for judicial review of ‘‘anonymous access’’ system, which as specified by Executive Order 13175 this action must be filed in the United means EPA will not know your identity, (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000). This States Court of Appeals for the e-mail address, or other contact action also does not have Federalism appropriate circuit by December 8, information unless you provide it in the implications because it does not have 2003. Filing a petition for body of your comment. substantial direct effects on the States, reconsideration by the Administrator of iii. Disk or CD ROM. You may submit on the relationship between the national this final rule does not affect the finality comments on a disk or CD ROM that government and the States, or on the of this rule for the purposes of judicial you mail to mailing address identified distribution of power and review nor does it extend the time in Section 2, directly below. These responsibilities among the various within which a petition for judicial electronic submissions will be accepted levels of government, as specified in review may be filed, and shall not in WordPerfect, Word, or ASCII file Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, postpone the effectiveness of such rule format. Avoid the use of special August 10, 1999). This action merely or action. This action may not be characters and any form of encryption. approves a state rule implementing a challenged later in proceedings to iv. By Mail. Send your comments to Federal standard, and does not alter the enforce its requirements. (See section Mr. Thomas Diggs, Chief, Air Planning relationship or the distribution of power 307(b)(2).) Section (6PD–L), 1445 Ross Avenue, and responsibilities established in the List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 Dallas, Texas, 75202–2733, Attention: Clean Air Act. This rule also is not NM–46–1–7615. subject to Executive Order 13045 Environmental protection, Air v. By Hand Delivery or Courier. ‘‘Protection of Children from pollution control, Carbon monoxide, Deliver your comments to: Mr. Thomas Environmental Health Risks and Safety Reporting and recordkeeping Diggs, Chief, Air Planning Section Risks’’ (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), requirements. because it is not economically (6PD–L), 1445 Ross Avenue, Dallas, Dated: September 30, 2003. Texas, 75202–2733. Such deliveries are significant. only accepted during the Regional In reviewing SIP submissions, EPA’s Richard E. Greene, Office’s normal hours of operation. The role is to approve state choices, Regional Administrator, Region 6. provided that they meet the criteria of Regional Office’s official hours of ■ 40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows: business are Monday through Friday, the Clean Air Act. In this context, in the 8:30 to 4:30 excluding Federal holidays. absence of a prior existing requirement PART 52—[AMENDED] for the State to use voluntary consensus V. Statutory and Executive Order standards (VCS), EPA has no authority Reviews ■ 1. The authority citation for part 52 to disapprove a SIP submission for continues to read as follows: Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR failure to use VCS. It would thus be 51735, October 4, 1993), this action is inconsistent with applicable law for Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ and EPA, when it reviews a SIP submission, Subpart GG—New Mexico therefore is not subject to review by the to use VCS in place of a SIP submission Office of Management and Budget. For that otherwise satisfies the provisions of this reason, this action is also not the Clean Air Act. Thus, the ■ 2. In § 52.1620, the table in paragraph subject to Executive Order 13211, requirements of section 12(d) of the (e) entitled ‘‘EPA approved ‘‘Actions Concerning Regulations That National Technology Transfer and nonregulatory provisions and quasi- Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. regulatory measures in the New Mexico Distribution, or Use’’ (66 FR 28355, May 272 note) do not apply. This rule does SIP’’ is amended by adding one new 22, 2001). This action merely approves not impose an information collection entry to the end of the table to read as state law as meeting Federal burden under the provisions of the follows: requirements and imposes no additional Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 § 52.1620 Identification of plan. requirements beyond those imposed by U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). state law. Accordingly, the The Congressional Review Act, 5 * * * * * Administrator certifies that this rule U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small (e) * * *

VerDate jul<14>2003 16:14 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00018 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\09OCR1.SGM 09OCR1 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations 58281

EPA APPROVED NONREGULATORY PROVISIONS AND QUASI-REGULATORY MEASURES IN THE NEW MEXICO SIP

Applicable geographic State submittal/effec- Expla- Name of SIP provision or nonattainment area tive date EPA approval date nation

******* Maintenance plan for carbon monoxide—Albuquerque/ Bernalillo County ...... February 12, 2003 ...... [October 9, 2003 and ...... Bernalillo County, New Mexico: Update of carbon FR page citation]. monoxide budgets using MOBILE6. *******

[FR Doc. 03–25543 Filed 10–8–03; 8:45 am] Background DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE BILLING CODE 6560–50–P On August 19, 2003, TSA published National Oceanic and Atmospheric a final rule in the Federal Register (68 Administration FR 49718), making technical changes to DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND various provisions of chapter XII, title 50 CFR Part 648 SECURITY 49 (Transportation) of the Code of [I.D. 092603D] Transportation Security Administration Federal Regulations (CFR), mainly in response to enactment of the Homeland Fisheries of the Northeastern United 49 CFR Part 1503 Security Act of 2002 (HSA). In addition, States; Tilefish Fishery; Continuation the rule revises any references to our of Specifications for the 2004 Fishing [Docket No. TSA–2003–14702; Amendment location address or mailing address, as Year Nos. 1500–1, 1502–1, 1503–1, 1510–3, 1511– necessary due to TSA’s physical move AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries 2, 1540–5, 1542–1, 1544–4, 1546–1 1548– of its headquarters facilites and 1, and 1550–1] Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and personnel from Washington, DC, to Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), RIN 1652–AA20 Arlington, Virginia. TSA inadvertently Commerce. left out the correct mailing address for ACTION: Notification of continuation of Transportation Security Administration the Enforcement Docket in certain specifications for fishing year 2004. Transition to Department of Homeland sections of part 1503. This document Security; Technical Amendments adds the correct mailing address to SUMMARY: NMFS announces that it will Reflecting Organizational Changes; these sections, changing the address continue the 2003 quota specifications Correction from 400 Seventh Street, SW., for the golden tilefish fishery for the Washington, DC 20590 to 601 South 2004 fishing year. Accordingly, the total AGENCY: Transportation Security 12th Street, Arlington, VA 22202–4220. allowable landings (TAL) for the 2004 Administation (TSA), DHS. fishing year will remain at 1.995– ACTION: Final rule; correction. Correction million lb (905,172–kg). The intent of this action is to notify the public that SUMMARY: In rule FR Doc. 03–20927, published The document contains a there will be no change in the fishery on August 19, 2003 (68 FR 49718), make correction to the final rule published in specifications for tilefish for the fishing the following correction: the Federal Register on August 19, year beginning November 1, 2003. 2003. That rule makes technical changes On page 49720, in the second column, DATES: Effective from November 1, 2003, to various provisions of chapter XII, title add to the end of amendatory through October 31, 2004. 49 of the Code of Federal Regulations, instruction 9. for §§ 1503.5(b)(2), mainly in response to enactment of the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 1503.16(f), 1503.209(b), 1503.210(a), Douglas W. Christel, 978–281–9141; fax Homeland Security Act of 2002. In and 1503–233(a) the following addition, the rule revises any references 978–281–9135; e-mail instructions: ‘‘and remove the words to our location address or mailing [email protected]. ‘400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington, address, as necessary due to TSA’s SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: physical move of its headquarters DC 20590’ and add in their place, the Background facilities and personnel from words ‘601 South 12th Street, Arlington, Washington, DC, to Arlington, Virginia. VA 22202–4220’.’’ The final rule implementing the TSA inadvertently left out the correct Issued in Arlington, Virginia, on October 3, Tilefish Fishery Management Plan mailing address for the Enforcement 2003. (FMP) became effective on November 1, Docket in certain sections of part 1503. Mardi Ruth Thompson, 2001 (66 FR 49136, September 26, 2001). Pursuant to the tilefish This document adds the correct mailing Deputy Chief Counsel for Regulations. address to these sections. regulations at 50 CFR 648.290, the [FR Doc. 03–25574 Filed 10–8–03; 8:45 am] DATES: Effective October 9, 2003. Tilefish FMP Monitoring Committee BILLING CODE 4910–62–M (Monitoring Committee) will meet after FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: the completion of each stock Marisa Mullen, Office of the Chief assessment, or at the request of the Mid- Counsel, TSA–2, Transportation Atlantic Fishery Management Council Security Administration, West Building, (Council) Chairman, to review tilefish Floor 8, 601 South 12th Street, landings information and any other Arlington, VA 22202–4220; telephone relevant available data to determine if (571) 277–2706; e–mail the annual quota requires modification [email protected]. to respond to changes to the stock’s SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: biological reference points or to ensure

VerDate jul<14>2003 16:14 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00019 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\09OCR1.SGM 09OCR1 58282 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations

that the rebuilding schedule is did not request that the Monitoring affected by this decision. Accordingly, maintained. Additional management Committee meet to determine if the for the 2004 fishing year, unless measures or revisions to existing annual quota requires modification to otherwise modified by the Council and measures could also be considered at respond to stock conditions. NMFS, the 1.995–million lb (905,172– this time to ensure that the TAL would Furthermore, the Council, at its August kg) TAL is applicable to the entire not be exceeded. Furthermore, up to 3 2003 meeting, voted on research set- fishery and will not be distributed percent of the TAL could be set aside for aside proposals that did not include a among permit categories according to a given fishing year for the purpose of request for a tilefish research set-aside the regulations at § 648.290(b). funding research. In the event that a allocation for the upcoming fishing year. new stock assessment is not completed Therefore, NMFS informs the public Classification or the Council Chairman does not that the 2003 quota specifications of This action is required by 50 CFR part request that the Monitoring Committee 1.995–million lb (905,172–kg) for the 648 and is exempt from review under meet, the regulations further specify that golden tilefish fishery will remain in Executive Order 12866. the previous year’s specifications will effect for the 2004 fishing year remain effective and that NMFS will (November 1, 2003, through October 31, Authority: : 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq. issue notification in the Federal 2004). October 3, 2003.Bruce C. Morehead,Acting Register to inform the public. A recent decision in the case of Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, A new tilefish stock assessment is not Hadaja v. Evans set aside the permit National Marine Fisheries Service. scheduled to occur until 2004. categories for the tilefish fishery. [FR Doc. 03–25641 Filed 10–8–03; 8:45 am] Consequently, the Council Chairman However, the TAL for the fishery is not BILLING CODE 3510–22–S

VerDate jul<14>2003 16:14 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00020 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\09OCR1.SGM 09OCR1 58283

Proposed Rules Federal Register Vol. 68, No. 196

Thursday, October 9, 2003

This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER Administration (FAA), Transport request to change the service bulletin contains notices to the public of the proposed Airplane Directorate, ANM–114, reference as two separate issues. issuance of rules and regulations. The Attention: Rules Docket No. 2001–NM– • purpose of these notices is to give interested For each issue, state what specific 266–AD, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., change to the proposed AD is being persons an opportunity to participate in the Renton, Washington 98055–4056. rule making prior to the adoption of the final requested. rules. Comments may be inspected at this • location between 9 a.m. and 3 p.m., Include justification (e.g., reasons or Monday through Friday, except Federal data) for each request. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION holidays. Comments may be submitted Comments are specifically invited on via fax to (425) 227–1232. Comments the overall regulatory, economic, Federal Aviation Administration may also be sent via the Internet using environmental, and energy aspects of the following address: 9-anm- the proposed rule. All comments 14 CFR Part 39 [email protected]. Comments sent submitted will be available, both before [Docket No. 2001–NM–266–AD] via fax or the Internet must contain and after the closing date for comments, ‘‘Docket No. 2001–NM–266–AD’’ in the in the Rules Docket for examination by RIN 2120–AA64 subject line and need not be submitted interested persons. A report in triplicate. Comments sent via the summarizing each FAA-public contact Airworthiness Directives; Bombardier Internet as attached electronic files must concerned with the substance of this Model DHC–8–102, –103, –106, –201, be formatted in Microsoft Word 97 or proposal will be filed in the Rules –202, –301, –311, and –315 Airplanes 2000 or ASCII text. Docket. AGENCY: Federal Aviation The service information referenced in Commenters wishing the FAA to Administration, DOT. the proposed rule may be obtained from acknowledge receipt of their comments ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking Bombardier, Inc., Bombardier Regional submitted in response to this action (NPRM). Aircraft Division, 123 Garratt Boulevard, must submit a self-addressed, stamped Downsview, Ontario M3K 1Y5, Canada. postcard on which the following SUMMARY: This document proposes the This information may be examined at supersedure of an existing airworthiness statement is made: ‘‘Comments to the FAA, Transport Airplane Docket Number 2001–NM–266–AD.’’ directive (AD), applicable to certain Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Bombardier DHC–8–102, –103, –106, The postcard will be date stamped and Renton, Washington; or at the FAA, returned to the commenter. –201, –202, –301, –311, and –315 New York Aircraft Certification Office, airplanes, that currently requires 10 Fifth Street, Third Floor, Valley Availability of NPRMs inspections to detect breakage in the Stream, New York. struts of the rear mount strut assemblies Any person may obtain a copy of this on the left and right engine nacelles, FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jon NPRM by submitting a request to the and replacement of any broken struts. Hjelm, Aerospace Engineer, Airframe FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, The existing AD also requires eventual Branch, ANE–171, FAA, New York ANM–114, Attention: Rules Docket No. replacement of all currently installed Aircraft Certification Office, 10 Fifth 2001–NM–266–AD, 1601 Lind Avenue, struts with new and/or reworked struts, Street, Third Floor, Valley Stream, New SW., Renton, Washington 98055–4056. as terminating action for the York 11581; telephone (516) 256–7523; Discussion inspections. This action would require fax (516) 568–2716. new repetitive inspections of the strut SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On February 14, 1994, the FAA issued assemblies for cracking of struts Comments Invited AD 94–04–09, amendment 39–8829 (59 replaced per the existing AD, and FR 8393, February 22, 1994), applicable replacement of any cracked strut with a Interested persons are invited to to certain Bombardier Model DHC–8– new, machined strut. This action also participate in the making of the 100 and DHC–8–300 airplanes, to would change the applicability of the proposed rule by submitting such require inspections to detect breakage in existing AD by adding certain airplanes written data, views, or arguments as the engine rear mount strut assemblies, and removing certain other airplanes, they may desire. Communications shall and replacement of broken struts. That and would include an optional identify the Rules Docket number and AD also requires eventual replacement terminating action for the repetitive be submitted in triplicate to the address of all currently installed struts with new inspections. The actions specified by specified above. All communications and/or reworked struts, as terminating the proposed AD are intended to received on or before the closing date action for the inspections. That action prevent failure of the engine rear mount for comments, specified above, will be was prompted by several reports of struts, which could result in reduced considered before taking action on the failure of the engine rear mount struts, structural integrity of the nacelle and proposed rule. The proposals contained due to fracture at one of the rosette engine support structure. This action is in this action may be changed in light welds on the shank of the strut where intended to address the identified of the comments received. full weld depth was not achieved during unsafe condition. Submit comments using the following manufacture. The requirements of that DATES: Comments must be received by format: AD are intended to prevent failure of the November 10, 2003. • Organize comments issue-by-issue. engine rear mount struts, which could ADDRESSES: Submit comments in For example, discuss a request to reduce the structural integrity of the triplicate to the Federal Aviation change the compliance time and a nacelle and engine support structure.

VerDate jul<14>2003 16:26 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\09OCP1.SGM 09OCP1 58284 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Proposed Rules

Actions Since Issuance of Previous Rule lieu of the terminating action. In making work hours per strut to accomplish, at Since the issuance of AD 94–04–09, this determination we considered that an average labor rate of $65 per work we have been advised by Transport long-term continued operational safety hour. Required parts would cost Canada Civil Aviation (TCCA), which is in this case will be adequately ensured approximately $800 per strut. Based on the airworthiness authority for Canada, by repetitive inspections to find these figures, the cost impact of the of reports from the manufacturer and cracking before it represents a hazard to optional terminating action is estimated operators of Model DHC–8–100 and the airplane. to be $1,840 per strut, per airplane. DHC–8–300 airplanes indicating that Changes to the Applicability of the Regulatory Impact replacement struts installed per that AD Existing AD have developed cracks. Therefore, the The regulations proposed herein engine rear mount strut has been This proposed AD would expand the would not have a substantial direct redesigned and is pressed fit assembled applicability in the existing AD to effect on the States, on the relationship instead of welded which improves the include Model DHC–8–102, –103, –106, between the national Government and endurance of the strut to prevent failure –201, –202, –301, –311, and –315 the States, or on the distribution of due to cracking and/or fracture. airplanes; serial numbers 003 through power and responsibilities among the 509 inclusive. Model DHC–8–102 and various levels of government. Therefore, Explanation of Relevant Service –103 series airplanes, serial numbers it is determined that this proposal Information 003 through 310 inclusive; and Model would not have federalism implications Bombardier has issued Service DHC–8–301, –311, and –314 series under Executive Order 13132. Bulletin 8–71–24, dated August 21, airplanes, serial numbers 100 through For the reasons discussed above, I 2001, which describes procedures for 311 inclusive, were identified in the certify that this proposed regulation (1) replacing the existing rear mount struts existing AD. is not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ in a nacelle with new, improved struts. Additionally, this proposed AD under Executive Order 12866; (2) is not TCCA previously issued Canadian would remove Model DHC–8–314 a ‘‘significant rule’’ under the DOT airworthiness directive CF–2001–20, airplanes, which were added to the Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 dated May 16, 2001, to ensure the applicability of the existing AD but are FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and (3) if continued airworthiness of these not U.S. type-certificated. promulgated, will not have a significant airplanes in Canada. Cost Impact economic impact, positive or negative, on a substantial number of small entities FAA’s Conclusions There are approximately 192 under the criteria of the Regulatory These airplane models are airplanes of U.S. registry that would be Flexibility Act. A copy of the draft manufactured in Canada and are type affected by this proposed AD. regulatory evaluation prepared for this The actions that are currently certificated for operation in the United action is contained in the Rules Docket. required by AD 94–04–09 take States under the provisions of section A copy of it may be obtained by approximately 16 work hours per 21.29 of the Federal Aviation contacting the Rules Docket at the airplane to accomplish, at an average Regulations (14 CFR 21.29) and the location provided under the caption labor rate of $65 per work hour. applicable bilateral airworthiness ADDRESSES. agreement. Pursuant to this bilateral Required parts are provided by the airworthiness agreement, TCCA has manufacturer at no cost to the operators. List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39 kept us informed of the situation Based on these figures, the cost impact Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation described above. We have examined the of the currently required actions is safety, Safety. findings of TCCA, reviewed all available estimated to be $1,040 per airplane. information, and determined that AD The new detailed inspection that is The Proposed Amendment action is necessary for products of this proposed in this AD action would take Accordingly, pursuant to the type design that are certificated for approximately 1 work hour per airplane authority delegated to me by the operation in the United States. to accomplish, at an average labor rate Administrator, the Federal Aviation of $65 per work hour. Based on these Administration proposes to amend part Explanation of Requirements of figures, the cost impact of the proposed Proposed Rule 39 of the Federal Aviation Regulations inspection on U.S. operators is (14 CFR part 39) as follows: Since an unsafe condition has been estimated to be $12,480, or $65 per identified that is likely to exist or airplane, per inspection cycle. PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS develop on other airplanes of the same The cost impact figures discussed DIRECTIVES type design registered in the United above are based on assumptions that no States, the proposed AD would operator has yet accomplished any of 1. The authority citation for part 39 supersede AD 94–04–09 to require new the proposed requirements of this AD continues to read as follows: repetitive inspections of the strut action, and that no operator would Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701. assemblies for cracking of the struts accomplish those actions in the future if replaced per the existing AD, and this AD were not adopted. The cost § 39.13 [Amended] replacement of any cracked strut with a impact figures discussed in AD 2. Section 39.13 is amended by new, machined strut. This proposed AD rulemaking actions represent only the removing amendment 39–8829 (59 FR also would change the applicability of time necessary to perform the specific 8393, February 22, 1994), and by adding the existing AD by adding certain actions actually required by the AD. a new airworthiness directive (AD), to airplanes and removing certain other These figures typically do not include read as follows: airplanes, and would include an incidental costs, such as the time Bombardier, Inc. (Formerly de Havilland, optional terminating action for the required to gain access and close up, Inc.): Docket 2001–NM–266–AD. repetitive inspections. planning time, or time necessitated by Supersedes AD 94–04–09, amendment Consistent with the findings of TCCA, other administrative actions. 39–8829. this proposed AD would allow The optional terminating action, if Applicability: Model DHC–8–102, –103, repetitive inspections to continue in done, would take approximately 16 –106, –201, –202, –301, –311, and –315

VerDate jul<14>2003 16:26 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\09OCP1.SGM 09OCP1 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Proposed Rules 58285

airplanes; serial numbers 003 through 509 Note 3: The subject of this AD is addressed Internet as attached electronic files must inclusive; certificated in any category. in Canadian airworthiness directive CF– be formatted in Microsoft Word 97 or Compliance: Required as indicated, unless 2001–20, dated May 16, 2001. 2000 or ASCII text. accomplished previously. To prevent failure of the engine rear mount Issued in Renton, Washington, on October The service information referenced in struts on the left and right engine nacelles, 3, 2003. the proposed rule may be obtained from which could result in reduced structural Kalene C. Yanamura, Dassault Falcon Jet, P.O. Box 2000, integrity of the nacelle and engine support Acting Manager, Transport Airplane South Hackensack, New Jersey 07606. structure, accomplish the following: Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. This information may be examined at the FAA, Transport Airplane Repetitive Inspections [FR Doc. 03–25590 Filed 10–8–03; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910–13–P Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., (a) Within 1,000 flight hours since Renton, Washington. installation of any new or reworked rear mount strut per the replacement required by FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tom paragraph (b) of AD 94–04–09, amendment DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Rodriguez, Aerospace Engineer, 39–8829, or within 250 flight hours after the International Branch, ANM–116, FAA, Federal Aviation Administration effective date of this AD, whichever is later; Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 do a detailed inspection for cracking of each Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 14 CFR Part 39 rear mount strut in the left and right engine 98055–4056; telephone (425) 227–1137; nacelles. [Docket No. 2001–NM–283–AD] fax (425) 227–1149. Note 1: Bombardier Service Bulletin 8–71– 24, dated August 21, 2001, does not contain RIN 2120–AA64 Comments Invited inspection procedures for the detailed Interested persons are invited to inspection required by paragraph (a) of this Airworthiness Directives; Dassault AD; however, the definition of a detailed Model Falcon 900EX Series Airplanes participate in the making of the inspection is specified in Note 2 of this AD. proposed rule by submitting such AGENCY: Federal Aviation written data, views, or arguments as Note 2: For the purposes of this AD, a Administration, DOT. they may desire. Communications shall detailed inspection is defined as: ‘‘An ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking identify the Rules Docket number and intensive visual examination of a specific (NPRM). structural area, system, installation, or be submitted in triplicate to the address specified above. All communications assembly to detect damage, failure, or SUMMARY: This document proposes the received on or before the closing date irregularity. Available lighting is normally adoption of a new airworthiness supplemented with a direct source of good for comments, specified above, will be directive (AD) that is applicable to lighting at intensity deemed appropriate by considered before taking action on the certain Dassault Model Falcon 900EX the inspector. Inspection aids such as mirror, proposed rule. The proposals contained series airplanes. This proposal would magnifying lenses, etc., may be used. Surface in this action may be changed in light require modification of the front cleaning and elaborate access procedures of the comments received. may be required.’’ attachment area of the No. 2 engine. Submit comments using the following (1) If no crack is found, repeat the This action is necessary to prevent inspection at intervals not to exceed 250 failure of the fail-safe lugs of the format: • flight hours, until accomplishment of hoisting plate of the forward engine Organize comments issue-by-issue. paragraph (b) of this AD. mount, and subsequent cracking of the For example, discuss a request to (2) If any crack is found, before further pick-up folded sheet of the pylon change the compliance time and a flight, replace the strut with a new, improved forward rib. Such cracking could request to change the service bulletin strut per Bombardier Service Bulletin 8–71– rupture the mast case box, which could reference as two separate issues. 24, dated August 21, 2001. Repeat the • For each issue, state what specific inspection thereafter at intervals not to result in loss of the two forward engine exceed 500 flight hours, for that nacelle only. mounts and consequent separation of change to the proposed AD is being the engine from the airplane. This requested. Optional Terminating Action action is intended to address the • Include justification (e.g., reasons or (b) Replacement of both rear mount struts identified unsafe condition. data) for each request. in a nacelle with new, improved struts, by DATES: Comments must be received by Comments are specifically invited on doing all the actions specified in the Job Set- up, Procedure, and Close-out sections of the November 10, 2003. the overall regulatory, economic, Accomplishment Instructions of Bombardier ADDRESSES: Submit comments in environmental, and energy aspects of Service Bulletin 8–71–24, dated August 21, triplicate to the Federal Aviation the proposed rule. All comments 2001, ends the repetitive inspections Administration (FAA), Transport submitted will be available, both before required by this AD for that nacelle only. Airplane Directorate, ANM–114, and after the closing date for comments, Replacement of both rear mount struts on Attention: Rules Docket No. 2001–NM– in the Rules Docket for examination by both the left and right engine nacelles ends 283–AD, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., interested persons. A report the repetitive inspections required by this Renton, Washington 98055–4056. summarizing each FAA-public contact AD. Comments may be inspected at this concerned with the substance of this Parts Installation location between 9 a.m. and 3 p.m., proposal will be filed in the Rules (c) As of the effective date of this AD, no Monday through Friday, except Federal Docket. person shall install an engine rear mount holidays. Comments may be submitted Commenters wishing the FAA to strut, P/N 87110016–001, –003, –005, –007, via fax to (425) 227–1232. Comments acknowledge receipt of their comments –009, or –011, on any airplane. may also be sent via the Internet using submitted in response to this action Alternative Methods of Compliance the following address: 9-anm- must submit a self-addressed, stamped (d) In accordance with 14 CFR 39.19, the [email protected]. Comments sent postcard on which the following Manager, New York Aircraft Certification via fax or the Internet must contain statement is made: ‘‘Comments to Office, FAA, is authorized to approve ‘‘Docket No. 2001–NM–283–AD’’ in the Docket Number 2001–NM–283–AD.’’ alternative methods of compliance for this subject line and need not be submitted The postcard will be date stamped and AD. in triplicate. Comments sent via the returned to the commenter.

VerDate jul<14>2003 16:26 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\09OCP1.SGM 09OCP1 58286 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Proposed Rules

Availability of NPRMs Explanation of Requirements of the States, or on the distribution of Any person may obtain a copy of this Proposed AD power and responsibilities among the NPRM by submitting a request to the Since an unsafe condition has been various levels of government. Therefore, FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, identified that is likely to exist or it is determined that this proposal ANM–114, Attention: Rules Docket No. develop on other airplanes of the same would not have federalism implications 2001–NM–283–AD, 1601 Lind Avenue, type design registered in the United under Executive Order 13132. For the reasons discussed above, I SW., Renton, Washington 98055–4056. States, the proposed AD would require accomplishment of the actions specified certify that this proposed regulation (1) Discussion in the service bulletin described is not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ The Direction Generale de l’Aviation previously, except as discussed below. under Executive Order 12866; (2) is not Civile (DGAC), which is the a ‘‘significant rule’’ under the DOT Difference Between Proposed AD and Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 airworthiness authority for France, French Airworthiness Directive notified the FAA that an unsafe FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and (3) if condition may exist on certain Dassault The French airworthiness directive promulgated, will not have a significant Model Falcon 900EX series airplanes. specifies a compliance time of ‘‘Before economic impact, positive or negative, The DGAC advises that fatigue tests 3,750 flights since new,’’ for on a substantial number of small entities revealed that the fail-safe lugs of the accomplishment of the modification of under the criteria of the Regulatory forward engine mount may not have the front attachment area of the No. 2 Flexibility Act. A copy of the draft adequate fatigue strength. Failure of the engine. However, this proposed AD regulatory evaluation prepared for this lugs could result in cracking of the pick- would require a compliance time of action is contained in the Rules Docket. up folded sheet of the pylon forward rib, ‘‘Prior to the accumulation of 3,750 A copy of it may be obtained by and consequent rupture of the mast case flight cycles since the date of issuance contacting the Rules Docket at the box. Such conditions, if not corrected, of the original Airworthiness Certificate location provided under the caption could result in loss of the two forward or the date of issuance of the Export ADDRESSES. engine mounts and consequent Certificate of Airworthiness, whichever occurs first.’’ This decision is based on List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39 separation of the engine from the our determination that ‘‘since new’’ may Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation airplane. be interpreted differently by different safety, Safety. Explanation of Relevant Service operators. We find that our proposed The Proposed Amendment Information terminology is generally understood Accordingly, pursuant to the Dassault has issued Service Bulletin within the industry, and records will authority delegated to me by the F900EX–103, dated May 23, 2001, always exist that establish these dates Administrator, the Federal Aviation which describes procedures for with certainty. Administration proposes to amend part modification of the No. 2 engine front Cost Impact 39 of the Federal Aviation Regulations attachment area. The modification We estimate that 36 airplanes of U.S. (14 CFR part 39) as follows: involves replacing the No. 2 engine registry would be affected by this hoisting shield with a reinforced shield proposed AD, that it would take about PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS at the safety device attachments, and 85 work hours per airplane to DIRECTIVES replacing the front attachment pickup accomplish the proposed modification, 1. The authority citation for part 39 doublers with new, thicker doublers. and that the average labor rate is $65 per continues to read as follows: Accomplishment of the actions work hour. Required parts would cost specified in the service bulletin is about $14,479 per airplane. Based on Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701. intended to adequately address the these figures, the cost impact of the § 39.13 [Amended] identified unsafe condition. The DGAC proposed modification on U.S. operators classified this service bulletin as is estimated to be $720,144, or $20,004 2. Section 39.13 is amended by mandatory and issued French per airplane. adding the following new airworthiness airworthiness directive 2001–160– The cost impact figure discussed directive: 027(B), dated May 2, 2001, to ensure the above is based on assumptions that no Dassault Aviation: Docket 2001–NM–283– continued airworthiness of these operator has yet accomplished any of AD. airplanes in France. the proposed requirements of this AD Applicability: Model Falcon 900EX series airplanes, serial numbers 1 through 60 FAA’s Conclusions action, and that no operator would accomplish those actions in the future if inclusive; certificated in any category; except This airplane model is manufactured this AD were not adopted. The cost those on which Dassault Modifications M2754 and M2925, identified in Dassault in France and is type certificated for impact figures discussed in AD operation in the United States under the Service Bulletin F900EX–103, dated May 23, rulemaking actions represent only the 2001, have been accomplished. provisions of section 21.29 of the time necessary to perform the specific Compliance: Required as indicated, unless Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR actions actually required by the AD. accomplished previously. 21.29) and the applicable bilateral These figures typically do not include To prevent failure of the fail-safe lugs of airworthiness agreement. Pursuant to incidental costs, such as the time the forward engine mount, and consequent this bilateral airworthiness agreement, required to gain access and close up, cracking of the pick-up folded sheet of the the DGAC has kept us informed of the planning time, or time necessitated by pylon forward rib, which could rupture the situation described above. We have other administrative actions. mast case box and result in loss of the two examined the findings of the DGAC, forward engine mounts and consequent reviewed all available information, and Regulatory Impact separation of the engine from the airplane, accomplish the following: determined that AD action is necessary The regulations proposed herein for products of this type design that are would not have a substantial direct Modification certificated for operation in the United effect on the States, on the relationship (a) Prior to the accumulation of 3,750 flight States. between the national Government and cycles since the date of issuance of the

VerDate jul<14>2003 16:26 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\09OCP1.SGM 09OCP1 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Proposed Rules 58287

original Airworthiness Certificate or the date 78–AD, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., environmental, and energy aspects of of issuance of the Export Certificate of Renton, Washington 98055–4056. the proposed rule. All comments Airworthiness, whichever occurs first: Comments may be inspected at this submitted will be available, both before Modify the front attachment area of the No. location between 9 a.m. and 3 p.m., and after the closing date for comments, 2 engine by doing all the actions per Paragraphs 2.A. through 2.D. of the Monday through Friday, except Federal in the Rules Docket for examination by Accomplishment Instructions of Dassault holidays. Comments may be submitted interested persons. A report Service Bulletin F900EX–103, dated May 23, via fax to (425) 227–1232. Comments summarizing each FAA-public contact 2001. may also be sent via the Internet using concerned with the substance of this proposal will be filed in the Rules Alternative Methods of Compliance the following address: 9-anm- [email protected]. Comments sent Docket. (b) In accordance with 14 CFR 39.19, the via fax or the Internet must contain Commenters wishing the FAA to Manager, International Branch, ANM–116, ‘‘Docket No. 2002–NM–78–AD’’ in the acknowledge receipt of their comments FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, is submitted in response to this action authorized to approve alternative methods of subject line and need not be submitted compliance for this AD. in triplicate. Comments sent via the must submit a self-addressed, stamped Internet as attached electronic files must postcard on which the following Note 1: The subject of this AD is addressed be formatted in Microsoft Word 97 or statement is made: ‘‘Comments to in French airworthiness directive 2001–160– Docket Number 2002–NM–78–AD.’’ The 027(B), dated May 2, 2001. 2000 or ASCII text. The service information referenced in postcard will be date stamped and Issued in Renton, Washington, on October the proposed rule may be obtained from returned to the commenter. 3, 2003. Bombardier, Inc., Bombardier Regional Availability of NPRMs Kalene C. Yanamura, Aircraft Division, 123 Garratt Boulevard, Downsview, Ontario M3K 1Y5, Canada. Any person may obtain a copy of this Acting Manager, Transport Airplane NPRM by submitting a request to the Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. This information may be examined at the FAA, Transport Airplane FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, [FR Doc. 03–25589 Filed 10–8–03; 8:45 am] ANM–114, Attention: Rules Docket No. BILLING CODE 4910–13–P Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington; or at the FAA, 2002–NM–78–AD, 1601 Lind Avenue, New York Aircraft Certification Office, SW., Renton, Washington 98055–4056. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 10 Fifth Street, Third Floor, Valley Discussion Stream, New York. Transport Canada Civil Aviation Federal Aviation Administration FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: (TCCA), which is the airworthiness Douglas G. Wagner, Aerospace Engineer, authority for Canada, notified the FAA 14 CFR Part 39 Systems and Flight Test Branch, ANE– that an unsafe condition may exist on [Docket No. 2002–NM–78–AD] 172, FAA, New York Aircraft certain Bombardier Model DHC–8–400, Certification Office, 10 Fifth Street, –401, and –402 airplanes. TCCA advises RIN 2120–AA64 Third Floor, Valley Stream, New York that the manufacturer of the forward 11581; telephone (516) 256–7506; fax Airworthiness Directives; Bombardier engine mount assembly has indicated (516) 568–2716. Model DHC–8–400, –401, and –402 that an unapproved pre-production Airplanes SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: engine mount assembly was found installed in place of a production engine Comments Invited AGENCY: Federal Aviation mount assembly. Pre-production engine Administration, DOT. Interested persons are invited to mount assemblies are more susceptible ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking participate in the making of the to fatigue cracking than production (NPRM). proposed rule by submitting such engine mount assemblies. In addition, written data, views, or arguments as there is a possibility that pre-production SUMMARY: This document proposes the they may desire. Communications shall assemblies having part number (P/N) adoption of a new airworthiness identify the Rules Docket number and 96042–07 are incorrectly marked with directive (AD) that is applicable to be submitted in triplicate to the address P/N 96042–09, which is the P/N on the certain Bombardier Model DHC–8–400, specified above. All communications production assemblies. Operation with –401, and –402 airplanes. This proposal received on or before the closing date pre-production engine mount would require a one-time inspection of for comments, specified above, will be assemblies could result in failure of the the forward engine mount assemblies on considered before taking action on the forward engine mount, and consequent the left and right engine nacelles for proposed rule. The proposals contained reduced structural integrity of the installation of pre-production engine in this action may be changed in light nacelle and engine support structure. mount assemblies, and follow-on of the comments received. corrective actions if necessary. This Submit comments using the following Explanation of Relevant Service action is necessary to prevent failure of format: Information the forward engine mount, which could • Organize comments issue-by-issue. Bombardier has issued Alert Service result in reduced structural integrity of For example, discuss a request to Bulletin A84–71–06, Revision ‘‘A,’’ the nacelle and engine support change the compliance time and a dated December 5, 2001, which structure. This action is intended to request to change the service bulletin describes procedures for a visual address the identified unsafe condition. reference as two separate issues. inspection to determine the P/N and DATES: Comments must be received by • For each issue, state what specific configuration of the forward engine November 10, 2003. change to the proposed AD is being mount assemblies on the left and right ADDRESSES: Submit comments in requested. engine nacelles. If the inspection shows triplicate to the Federal Aviation • Include justification (e.g., reasons or that any pre-production engine mount Administration (FAA), Transport data) for each request. assembly is installed, the service Airplane Directorate, ANM–114, Comments are specifically invited on bulletin describes procedures for follow- Attention: Rules Docket No. 2002–NM– the overall regulatory, economic, on corrective actions for that assembly.

VerDate jul<14>2003 16:26 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\09OCP1.SGM 09OCP1 58288 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Proposed Rules

Those actions include repetitive Differences Between Canadian promulgated, will not have a significant detailed visual inspections of each Airworthiness Directive, Service economic impact, positive or negative, assembly for cracking at intervals of 250 Bulletin, and Proposed Rule on a substantial number of small entities flight cycles, and replacement of the The service bulletin and Canadian under the criteria of the Regulatory pre-production engine mount assembly airworthiness directive specify a visual Flexibility Act. A copy of the draft with a production engine mount inspection to determine the P/N and regulatory evaluation prepared for this assembly before further flight if cracking configuration of the forward engine action is contained in the Rules Docket. is found. If no cracking is found, the mount assemblies, but this proposed A copy of it may be obtained by service bulletin specifies that the pre- rule would require a general visual contacting the Rules Docket at the production engine mount assembly may inspection. A note has been added to location provided under the caption remain in service for up to 1,000 flight the proposed rule to define that ADDRESSES. cycles after the initial inspection, and inspection. List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39 The service bulletin and Canadian then reworked or replaced with a Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation airworthiness directive also specify a production engine mount assembly. If safety, Safety. both engine mounts on the same nacelle detailed visual inspection for cracking if have the pre-production configuration, a pre-production engine mount is The Proposed Amendment the service bulletin specifies that one installed, but this proposed rule would Accordingly, pursuant to the pre-production engine mount assembly require a detailed inspection. A note has authority delegated to me by the must be replaced with a production been added to the proposed rule to Administrator, the Federal Aviation engine mount assembly before further define that inspection. Administration proposes to amend part flight. The service bulletin also includes Cost Impact 39 of the Federal Aviation Regulations a repair letter issued by the engine (14 CFR part 39) as follows: We estimate that 11 airplanes of U.S. manufacturer which contains rework registry would be affected by this procedures for the pre-production PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS proposed AD, that it would take DIRECTIVES engine mount assembly. approximately 2 work hours per Accomplishment of the actions airplane to accomplish the proposed 1. The authority citation for part 39 specified in the service bulletin is inspection, and that the average labor continues to read as follows: intended to adequately address the rate is $65 per work hour. Based on Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701. identified unsafe condition. these figures, the cost impact of the TCCA classified this service bulletin proposed AD on U.S. operators is § 39.13 [Amended] as mandatory and issued Canadian estimated to be $1,430, or $130 per 2. Section 39.13 is amended by airworthiness directive CF–2002–07, airplane. adding the following new airworthiness dated January 21, 2002, to ensure the The cost impact figure discussed directive: continued airworthiness of these above is based on assumptions that no Bombardier, Inc. (Formerly de Havilland, airplanes in Canada. operator has yet accomplished any of Inc.): Docket 2002–NM–78–AD. the proposed requirements of this AD Applicability: Model DHC–8–400, –401, FAA’s Conclusions action, and that no operator would and –402 airplanes; serial numbers 4005, accomplish those actions in the future if 4006, 4008 through 4016 inclusive, 4018 These airplane models are this AD were not adopted. The cost through 4051 inclusive, and 4053; manufactured in Canada and are type impact figures discussed in AD certificated in any category. certificated for operation in the United rulemaking actions represent only the Compliance: Required as indicated, unless States under the provisions of section time necessary to perform the specific accomplished previously. To prevent failure of the forward engine 21.29 of the Federal Aviation actions actually required by the AD. Regulations (14 CFR 21.29) and the mount, which could result in reduced These figures typically do not include structural integrity of the nacelle and engine applicable bilateral airworthiness incidental costs, such as the time support structure, accomplish the following: agreement. Pursuant to this bilateral required to gain access and close up, airworthiness agreement, TCCA has planning time, or time necessitated by Inspection kept us informed of the situation other administrative actions. (a) Within 100 flight cycles after the described above. We have examined the effective date of this AD: Do a general visual Regulatory Impact inspection of the forward engine mount findings of TCCA, reviewed all available The regulations proposed herein assemblies on the left and right engine information, and determined that AD nacelles for installation of pre-production action is necessary for products of this would not have a substantial direct assemblies (determine the part number and type design that are certificated for effect on the States, on the relationship configuration for each assembly), per the operation in the United States. between the national Government and Accomplishment Instructions of Bombardier the States, or on the distribution of Alert Service Bulletin A84–71–06, Revision Explanation of Requirements of power and responsibilities among the ‘‘A,’’ dated December 5, 2001. If no pre- Proposed Rule various levels of government. Therefore, production engine mount assembly is it is determined that this proposal installed, no further action is required by this Since an unsafe condition has been would not have federalism implications AD. identified that is likely to exist or under Executive Order 13132. Note 1: For the purposes of this AD, a develop on other airplanes of the same For the reasons discussed above, I general visual inspection is defined as: ‘‘A type design registered in the United certify that this proposed regulation (1) visual examination of an interior or exterior States, the proposed AD would require area, installation, or assembly to detect is not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ obvious damage, failure, or irregularity. This accomplishment of the actions specified under Executive Order 12866; (2) is not level of inspection is made from within in the service bulletin described a ‘‘significant rule’’ under the DOT touching distance unless otherwise specified. previously, except as discussed below. Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 A mirror may be necessary to enhance visual FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and (3) if access to all exposed surfaces in the

VerDate jul<14>2003 16:26 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\09OCP1.SGM 09OCP1 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Proposed Rules 58289

inspection area. This level of inspection is DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION hours are 8 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday made under normally available lighting through Friday, except Federal holidays. conditions such as daylight, hangar lighting, Federal Aviation Administration FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: flashlight, or droplight and may require Kenneth B. Mobley, Aerospace removal or opening of access panels or doors. 14 CFR Part 39 Engineer, FAA, Atlanta Aircraft Stands, ladders, or platforms may be required [Docket No. 2003–CE–32–AD] Certification Office, One Crown Center, to gain proximity to the area being checked.’’ 1895 Phoenix Boulevard, Suite 450, RIN 2120–AA64 Follow-On Corrective Actions Atlanta, Georgia 30349; telephone: (770) 703–6046; facsimile: (770) 703–6097. (b) If any pre-production engine mount Airworthiness Directives; The New SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: assembly is installed, do all the applicable Piper Aircraft, Inc. Model PA–46–500TP follow-on corrective actions (including Airplanes Comments Invited repetitive detailed inspections for cracking, and rework or replacement of the pre- AGENCY: Federal Aviation How Do I Comment on This Proposed production engine mount assembly, if Administration (FAA), DOT. AD? necessary) per all the actions specified in the ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking We invite you to submit any written Accomplishment Instructions of the service (NPRM). relevant data, views, or arguments bulletin, at the applicable times specified in regarding this proposal. Send your Paragraph I., Part D., ‘‘Compliance,’’ of the SUMMARY: The FAA proposes to adopt a comments to an address listed under service bulletin. Any replacement due to new airworthiness directive (AD) for ADDRESSES. Include ‘‘AD Docket No. cracking must be done before further flight. certain The New Piper Aircraft, Inc. 2003–CE–32–AD’’ in the subject line of Note 2: For the purposes of this AD, a (Piper) Model PA–46–500TP airplanes. your comments. If you want us to detailed inspection is defined as: ‘‘An This proposed AD would require you to acknowledge receipt of your mailed intensive visual examination of a specific replace all electronic control modules in comments, send us a self-addressed, structural area, system, installation, or the airplane electrical system with stamped postcard with the docket assembly to detect damage, failure, or newly designed modules. This proposed number written on it. We will date- irregularity. Available lighting is normally AD is the result of reports of smoke in stamp your postcard and mail it back to supplemented with a direct source of good the cockpit and loss of electrical you. lighting at intensity deemed appropriate by systems function. We are issuing this the inspector. Inspection aids such as mirror, proposed AD to prevent short circuit Are There Any Specific Portions of This magnifying lenses, etc., may be used. Surface failure and electrical arcing of the Proposed AD I Should Pay Attention cleaning and elaborate access procedures electronic control modules, which could To? may be required.’’ result in loss of the electrical systems We specifically invite comments on components or burning of wiring the overall regulatory, economic, Optional Terminating Action for Follow-On insulation and cause smoke in the environmental, and energy aspects of Repetitive Inspections cockpit. Such a condition could lead to this proposed AD. If you contact us (c) Installation of production engine mount the inability to properly control the through a nonwritten communication assemblies on all four forward engine mounts airplane. and that contact relates to a substantive ends the repetitive inspection requirements DATES: We must receive any comments part of this proposed AD, we will of paragraph (b) of this AD. on this proposed AD by December 9, summarize the contact and place the Part Installation 2003. summary in the docket. We will consider all comments received by the (d) As of the effective date of this AD, no ADDRESSES: Use one of the following to closing date and may amend this person may install an engine mount assembly submit comments on this proposed AD: proposed AD in light of those comments having a pre-production configuration and/or • By mail: FAA, Central Region, and contacts. part number 96042–07 on any airplane, Office of the Regional Counsel, unless the assembly has been reworked per Attention: Rules Docket No. 2003-CE– Discussion Part B of the Accomplishment Instructions of 32-AD, 901 Locust, Room 506, Kansas What Events Have Caused This Bombardier Alert Service Bulletin A84–71– City, Missouri 64106. Proposed AD? 06, Revision ‘‘A,’’ dated December 5, 2001. • By fax: (816) 329–3771. • Alternative Methods of Compliance By e-mail: [email protected]. We have received several reports that Comments sent electronically must a condition exists in some of the (e) In accordance with 14 CFR 39.19, the contain ‘‘Docket No. 2003–CE–32–AD’’ electrical control modules in the Manager, New York Aircraft Certification in the subject line. If you send airplane electrical system. Office, FAA, is authorized to approve comments electronically as attached FAA analysis indicates that there is alternative methods of compliance for this inadequate clearance and inadequate AD. electronic files, the files must be formatted in Microsoft Word 97 for electrical isolation between the load Note 3: The subject of this AD is addressed Windows or ASCII. terminal and metal case. The modules in Canadian airworthiness directive CF– You may get the service information load terminal is cutting through the 2002–07, dated January 21, 2002. identified in this proposed AD from The rubber insulating grommet and New Piper Aircraft, Inc., Customer contacting the module’s metal case. This Issued in Renton, Washington, on October Services, 2926 Piper Drive, Vero Beach, causes the electrical short circuit and 3, 2003. Florida 32960; telephone: (772) 567– electrical arcing. Vi L. Lipski, 4361; facsimile: (772) 978–6584. The following electrical system Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, You may view the AD docket at FAA, components are potentially affected by Aircraft Certification Service. Central Region, Office of the Regional this condition: [FR Doc. 03–25588 Filed 10–8–03; 8:45 am] Counsel, Attention: Rules Docket No. Engine start BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 2003–CE–32–AD, 901 Locust, Room Strobe light 506, Kansas City, Missouri 64106. Office Left/right taxi light

VerDate jul<14>2003 16:26 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\09OCP1.SGM 09OCP1 58290 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Proposed Rules

Liquid crystal display (LCD) dimming What Are the Provisions of This Service What Would This Proposed AD Require? Dual flasher (recognition light) Information? This proposed AD would require you Left/right pitot heat The service bulletin includes to incorporate the actions in the Avionics dimming (Bezel buttons for procedures for: previously-referenced service bulletin. radios) —Removing the pilot’s circuit breaker Prop heat panel assembly (part-number (P/N) How Does the Revision to 14 CFR Part Left/right fuel pump 102228–002); the co-pilot’s circuit 39 Affect This Proposed AD? breaker panel assembly (P/N 102228– Position light landing light On July 10, 2002, we published a new Instrument panel light dimming 006); the dimmer lighting module assembly (P/N 102226–002); the stall version of 14 CFR part 39 (67 FR 47997, Ice light vane heat module assembly (P/N July 22, 2002), which governs FAA’s AD Vent defog (vent blower) 102227–002); and the propeller heat system. This regulation now includes Hi/low blower module assembly (P/N 102227–006); material that relates to altered products, Stall heat —Returning the panel assemblies and special flight permits, and alternative Dimmer switch lighting (overhead remote module parts to the methods of compliance. This material switch panel switches) manufacture for modification; previously was included in each —Visually inspecting all remaining individual AD. Since this material is What Are the Consequences if the exposed wires and equipment for included in 14 CFR part 39, we will not Condition Is Not Corrected? evidence of heat damage; include it in future AD actions. —Repairing any damage found; and If not corrected, short circuit failure Costs of Compliance and electrical arcing of the electronic —Installing the newly modified panel control modules could result in loss of assemblies and remote module parts. How Many Airplanes Would This the electrical systems components or FAA’s Determination and Requirements Proposed AD Impact? burning of wiring insulation and cause of This Proposed AD smoke in the cockpit. Such a condition We estimate that this proposed AD could lead to the inability to properly What Has FAA Decided? affects 130 airplanes in the U.S. registry. control the airplane. We have evaluated all pertinent What Would Be the Cost Impact of This information and identified an unsafe Is There Service Information That Proposed AD on Owners/Operators of condition that is likely to exist or Applies to This Subject? the Affected Airplanes? develop on other products of this same Piper has issued the Service Bulletin type design. Therefore, we are We estimate the following costs to No. 1132, dated June 4, 2003. proposing AD action. accomplish this proposed modification:

Total cost Total cost on Labor cost Parts cost per airplane U.S. operators

22 × $65 per hour = $1,430...... Parts will be covered under warranty by the $1,430 $1,430 × 130 = $185,900 manufacturer.

Regulatory Findings We prepared a summary of the costs § 39.13 [Amended] 2. The FAA amends § 39.13 by adding Would This Proposed AD Impact to comply with this proposed AD and Various Entities? placed it in the AD Docket. You may get the following new airworthiness a copy of this summary by sending a directive (AD): We have determined that this request to us at the address listed under proposed AD would not have federalism The New Piper Aircraft, Inc.: Docket No. ADDRESSES. Include ‘‘AD Docket No. 2003–CE–32–AD implications under Executive Order 2003–CE–32–AD’’ in your request. 13132. This proposed AD would not When Is the Last Date I Can Submit have a substantial direct effect on the List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39 Comments on This Proposed AD? States, on the relationship between the (a) We must receive comments on this national Government and the States, or Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation proposed airworthiness directive (AD) by on the distribution of power and safety, Safety. December 9, 2003. responsibilities among the various The Proposed Amendment What Other ADs Are Affected by This levels of government. Action? Would This Proposed AD Involve a Accordingly, under the authority (b) None. Significant Rule or Regulatory Action? delegated to me by the Administrator, the Federal Aviation Administration What Airplanes Are Affected by This AD? For the reasons discussed above, I proposes to amend 14 CFR part 39 as (c) This AD affects Model PA–46–500TP certify that this proposed AD: follows: airplanes, serial numbers 4697001 through 1. Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory 4697140 and 4697142 through 4697153, that are certificated in any category. action’’ under Executive Order 12866; PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS 2. Is not a ‘‘significant rule’’ under the DIRECTIVES What Is the Unsafe Condition Presented in DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures This AD? (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and 3. Will not have a significant 1. The authority citation for part 39 (d) This AD is the result of reports of continues to read as follows: smoke in the cockpit and loss of electrical economic impact, positive or negative, system functions. We are issuing this AD to on a substantial number of small entities Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701. prevent short circuit failure of the electronic under the criteria of the Regulatory control modules, which could result in loss Flexibility Act. of the electrical system components or

VerDate jul<14>2003 16:26 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\09OCP1.SGM 09OCP1 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Proposed Rules 58291

burning of wiring insulation and cause lead to the inability to properly control the What Must I Do To Address This Problem? smoke in the cockpit. Such a condition could airplane. (e) To address this problem, you must accomplish the following:

Actions Compliance Procedures

(1) Remove the following parts: Within the next 100 hours time-in-service Per the instructions in Piper Service Bulletin (i) The pilot’s circuit breaker panel assembly (TIS) after the effective date of this AD. No. 1132, dated June 4, 2003. (part-number (P/N) 102228–002); (ii) The co-pilot’s circuit breaker panel assembly (P/N 102228–006); (iii) The dimmer lighting module assembly (P/N 102226–002); (iv) The stall vane heat module assembly (P/N 102227–002); and (v) The propeller heat module assembly (P/N 102227–006) (2) Return the circuit breaker panels and the re- Prior to further flight after doing the actions Per the instructions in Piper Service Bulletin mote modules identified in paragraph (e)(1) required in paragraph (e)(1) of this AD. No. 1132, dated June 4, 2003. of this AD to the manufacturer listed in paragraph (g) of this AD for modification. (3) Visually inspect all remaining exposed wires Prior to further flight after doing the actions Per the instructions in Piper Service Bulletin and equipment for evidence of heat damage required in paragraph (c)(1) of this AD. No. 1132, dated June 4, 2003. and repair any damage found. (4) Install the modified circuit breaker panel as- Prior to further flight after doing the actions Use the instructions in Piper Service Bulletin semblies and the remote modules received required in paragraphs (e)(1), (e)(2), and No. 1132, dated June 4, 2003. from the manufacturer. (e)(3) of this AD. (5) Do not install any part referenced in para- As of the effective date of this AD ...... Not applicable. graph (e)(1) of this AD unless it has been modified per Piper Service Bulletin No. 1132, dated June 4, 2003.

What About Alternative Methods of DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION DATES: We must receive any comments Compliance? on this proposed AD by December 8, (f) You may request a different method of Federal Aviation Administration 2003. compliance or a different compliance time for this AD by following the procedures in 14 14 CFR Part 39 ADDRESSES: Use one of the following CFR 39.13. Send your request to the Manager, addresses to submit comments on this [Docket No. 2003–NE–31–AD] Atlanta Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), proposed AD: FAA. For information on any already RIN 2120–AA64 • By mail: Federal Aviation approved alternative methods of compliance, Administration (FAA), New England contact Kenneth B. Mobley, Aerospace Airworthiness Directives; Rolls-Royce Region, Office of the Regional Counsel, Engineer, FAA, Atlanta Aircraft Certification plc RB211–535 Turbofan Engines Attention: Rules Docket No. 2003–NE– Office, One Crown Center, 1895 Phoenix 31–AD, 12 New England Executive Park, AGENCY: Boulevard, Suite 450, Atlanta, Georgia 30349; Federal Aviation Burlington, MA 01803–5299. telephone: (770) 703–6046; facsimile: (770) Administration (FAA), DOT. • By fax: (781) 238–7055. 703–6097. ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking • By e-mail: 9-ane- How Do I Get Copies of the Documents (NPRM). [email protected]. Referenced in This AD? SUMMARY: The FAA proposes to adopt a You can get the service information (g) You may get copies of the documents new airworthiness directive (AD) for identified in this proposed AD from referenced in this AD from The New Piper Rolls-Royce plc (RR) models RB211– Rolls-Royce plc, P.O. Box 31 Derby, Aircraft, Inc., Customer Services, 2926 Piper 535C–37, RB211–535E4–37, RB211– DE24 8BJ, United Kingdom (UK); Drive, Vero Beach, Florida 32960; telephone: 535E4–B–37, and RB211–535E4–B–75 telephone 011–44–1332–242424; fax (772) 567–4361; facsimile: (772) 978–6584. turbofan engines with radial drive 011–44–1332–249936. You may view these documents at FAA, steady bearing part number (P/N) Central Region, Office of the Regional LK76084 installed. This proposed AD You may examine the AD docket, by Counsel, 901 Locust, Room 506, Kansas City, would require initial and repetitive appointment, at the FAA, New England Missouri 64106. visual inspections of the engine oil Region, Office of the Regional Counsel, Issued in Kansas City, Missouri, on scavenge filter for evidence of radial 12 New England Executive Park, October 3, 2003. drive steady bearing failure, and if Burlington, MA. necessary radial drive steady bearing Michael Gallagher, FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ian inspection for damage and evidence of Manager, Small Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Dargin, Aerospace Engineer, Engine bearing debris. This proposed AD is Certification Service. Certification Office, FAA, Engine and prompted by reports of seven low time [FR Doc. 03–25581 Filed 10–8–03; 8:45 am] Propeller Directorate, 12 New England failures of radial drive steady bearings Executive Park, Burlington, MA 01803– BILLING CODE 4910–13–P within a four-month period. We are 5299; telephone (781) 238–7178; fax proposing this AD to prevent a possible (781) 238–7199. dual-engine in-flight shutdown caused by radial drive steady bearing failure. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

VerDate jul<14>2003 16:26 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\09OCP1.SGM 09OCP1 58292 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Proposed Rules

Comments Invited drive steady bearing inspection for Changes to 14 CFR Part 39—Effect on We invite you to submit any written failure debris. The CAA classified this the Proposed AD relevant data, views, or arguments MSB as mandatory and issued On July 10, 2002, we published a new regarding this proposal. Send your airworthiness directive 005–07–99, version of 14 CFR part 39 (67 FR 47997, comments to an address listed under dated July 30, 1999, in order to ensure July 22, 2002), which governs the FAA’s ADDRESSES. Include ‘‘AD Docket No. the airworthiness of these RR models AD system. This regulation now 2003–NE–31–AD’’ in the subject line of RB211–535C–37, RB211–535E4–37, includes material that relates to altered your comments. If you want us to RB211–535E4–B–37, and RB211– products, special flight permits, and acknowledge receipt of your mailed 535E4–B–75 turbofan engines in the alternative methods of compliance. This comments, send us a self-addressed, U.K. material previously was included in stamped postcard with the docket Differences Between This Proposed AD each individual AD. Since this material number written on it; we will date- is included in 14 CFR part 39, we will and the Manufacturer’s Service stamp your postcard and mail it back to not include it in future AD actions. you. We specifically invite comments Information Costs of Compliance on the overall regulatory, economic, Although RR MSB No. RB.211–72– environmental, and energy aspects of C815, Revision 3, dated October 5, 2000, There are about 1,078 RR model the proposed AD. If a person contacts us Accomplishment Instructions require an RB211–535C–37, RB211–535E4–37, verbally, and that contact relates to a RB211–535E4–B–37, and RB211– substantive part of this proposed AD, engine acceptance inspection, this proposal does not require an engine 535E4–B–75 turbofan engines of the we will summarize the contact and affected design in the worldwide fleet. acceptance inspection because pre- place the summary in the docket. We We estimate that 288 of these model Service Bulletin RB.211–72–C925 new will consider all comments received by engines installed on airplanes of U.S. or low time radial drive steady bearings the closing date and may amend the registry would be affected by this are no longer available. Also, instead of proposed AD in light of those proposed AD. We also estimate that it comments. the MSB requirement that inspections would take about four work hours per We are reviewing the writing style we be triggered when a continuous engine to perform the proposed actions, currently use in regulatory documents. illumination of the filter blockage and that the average labor rate is $65 per We are interested in your comments on warning light occurs, this proposal adds work hour. Required replacement whether the style of this document is a repetitive inspection at 500 engine scavenge filters would cost about $100 clear, and your suggestions to improve operating hour intervals after initial per engine. Based on these figures, we the clarity of our communications that inspection to coincide with every estimate the total cost of one inspection affect you. You may get more airframe ‘‘A’’ check. per year in the proposed AD, to U.S. information about plain language at operators to be $97,920. http://www.faa.gov/language and http:// FAA’s Determination and Requirements www.plainlanguage.gov. of the Proposed AD Regulatory Findings Examining the AD Docket These RR models RB211–535C–37, We have determined that this proposed AD would not have federalism You may examine the AD Docket RB211–535E4–37, RB211–535E4–B–37, implications under Executive Order (including any comments and service and RB211–535E4–B–75 turbofan 13132. This proposed AD would not information), by appointment, between engines, manufactured in the U.K., are have a substantial direct effect on the 8 a.m. and 4:30 p.m., Monday through type-certificated for operation in the Friday, except Federal holidays. See United States under the provisions of States, on the relationship between the national Government and the States, or ADDRESSES for the location. section 21.29 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR 21.29) and the on the distribution of power and Discussion applicable bilateral airworthiness responsibilities among the various levels of government. The Civil Aviation Authority (CAA), agreement. Pursuant to this bilateral For the reasons discussed above, I which is the airworthiness authority for airworthiness agreement, the CAA has certify that the proposed regulation: the U.K., recently notified the FAA that kept us informed of the situation 1. Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory an unsafe condition may exist on RR described above. We have examined the models RB211–535C–37, RB211–535E4– action’’ under Executive Order 12866; CAA’s findings, reviewed all available 2. Is not a ‘‘significant rule’’ under the 37, RB211–535E4–B–37, and RB211– information, and determined that AD 535E4–B–75 turbofan engines with DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures action is necessary for products of this radial drive steady bearing P/N LK76084 (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and type design that are certificated for installed. The CAA received reports of 3. Would not have a significant operation in the United States. seven low time failures of radial drive economic impact, positive or negative, Therefore, we are proposing this AD, steady bearings within a four-month on a substantial number of small entities period. These failures were not detected which would require initial and under the criteria of the Regulatory through routine magnetic chip detector repetitive visual inspections of the Flexibility Act. monitoring because the failed bronze engine oil scavenge filter for evidence of We prepared a summary of the costs bearing cages are nonmagnetic, and the radial drive steady bearing failure, and to comply with this proposal and placed cage failure mode is rapid. if necessary, radial drive steady bearing it in the AD Docket. You may get a copy inspection for damage and evidence of of this summary by sending a request to Relevant Service Information bearing debris. Radial drive steady us at the address listed under We have reviewed and approved the bearings with engine operating hours of ADDRESSES. Include ‘‘AD Docket No. technical contents of RR Mandatory 3,000 or more are not affected by this 2003–NE–31–AD’’ in your request. Service Bulletin (MSB) No. RB.211–72– proposed AD. The proposed AD would C815, Revision 3, dated October 5, 2000, require you to use the service List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39 that describes procedures for scavenge information described previously to Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation filter inspection, and if necessary, radial perform these actions. safety, Safety.

VerDate jul<14>2003 16:26 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\09OCP1.SGM 09OCP1 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Proposed Rules 58293

The Proposed Amendment evidence of radial drive steady bearing remain fixed for a period of not less failure, at intervals not to exceed 500 engine than the first three years of the loan, Accordingly, under the authority operating hours since the previous delegated to me by the Administrator, after which the rate can be adjusted inspection, and replace parts as necessary. annually. To implement section 307 of the Federal Aviation Administration Use paragraph 3.C. of Accomplishment proposes to amend 14 CFR part 39 as Instructions of RR MSB No. RB.211–72– the law, VA proposes to increase the fee follows: C815, Revision 3, dated October 5, 2000, to paid for assuming a VA guaranteed loan do the inspections and parts replacements. from .50 percent to 1.00 percent of the PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS loan amount. The fee increase is already Rejected Bearings DIRECTIVES being carried out under the authority of (h) Send rejected bearings, together with the statute. 1. The authority citation for part 39 the associated scavenge filter, to Rolls-Royce DATES: Comments must be received on continues to read as follows: for analysis. or before November 10, 2003. Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701. Reporting Requirements ADDRESSES: Mail or hand deliver written § 39.13 [Amended] (i) The Office of Management and Budget comments to: Director, Regulations (OMB) has approved the reporting 2. The FAA amends § 39.13 by adding Management (00REG1), Department of requirements specified in paragraph 3. of RR Veterans Affairs, 810 Vermont Avenue, the following new airworthiness MSB No. RB.211–72–C815, Revision 3, dated directive: NW., Room 1068, Washington, DC October 5, 2000, and assigned OMB control 20420; or fax comments to (202) 273– number 2120–0056. Rolls-Royce plc: Docket No. 2003–NE–31– 9026; or e-mail comments to AD. Alternative Methods of Compliance [email protected]. Comments Due Date (j) You must request AMOCs as specified Comments should indicate that they are (a) The FAA must receive comments on in 14 CFR 39.19. All AMOCs must be submitted in response to ‘‘RIN 2900– this airworthiness directive (AD) action by approved by the Manager, Engine AL54.’’ All written comments received December 8, 2003. Certification Office, FAA, 12 New England will be available for public inspection at Executive Park, Burlington, MA 01803–5299. Affected ADs the above address in the Office of Material Incorporated by Reference Regulations Management, Room 1063B, (b) None. (k) You must use Rolls-Royce plc between the hours of 8 a.m. and 4:30 Applicability Mandatory Service Bulletin No. RB.211–72– p.m., Monday through Friday (except (c) This AD applies to Rolls-Royce plc (RR) C815, Revision 3, dated October 5, 2000, to holidays). Please call (202) 273–9515 for models RB211–535C–37, RB211–535E4–37, perform the inspections and parts an appointment. RB211–535E4–B–37, and RB211–535E4–B– replacements required by this AD. Approval FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. 75 turbofan engines with radial drive steady of incorporation by reference from the Office Robert D. Finneran, Assistant Director bearing part number LK76084 installed with of the Federal Register is pending. fewer than 3,000 engine operating hours for Policy and Valuation (262), Loan accumulated on the bearing. Radial drive Related Information Guaranty Service, Veterans Benefits steady bearings with engine operating hours (l) CAA airworthiness directive 005–07–99, Administration, Department of Veterans of 3,000 or more are not affected by this dated July 30, 1999, also addresses the Affairs, Washington, DC 20420, (202) proposed AD. These engines are installed on, subject of this AD. 273–7368. but not limited to Boeing 757 and Tupolev Issued in Burlington, Massachusetts, on SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Tu204 airplanes. October 3, 2003 A. Background Unsafe Condition Jay J. Pardee, (d) This AD was prompted by reports of Manager, Engine and Propeller Directorate, Under 38 U.S.C. chapter 37, VA seven low time failures of radial drive steady Aircraft Certification Service. guarantees loans made by private bearings within a four-month period. We are [FR Doc. 03–25578 Filed 10–8–03; 8:45 am] lenders to veterans for the purchase, issuing this AD to prevent a possible dual- construction, and refinancing of homes BILLING CODE 4910–13–P engine in-flight shutdown caused by radial owned and occupied by veterans. Prior drive steady bearing failure. to fiscal year 1993, VA had authority to guarantee fixed rate mortgages only. Compliance DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS During fiscal years 1993, 1994, and 1995 (e) You are responsible for having the AFFAIRS actions required by this AD performed within VA was authorized to guarantee loans the compliance times specified unless the 38 CFR Part 36 with adjustable interest rates. These actions have already been done. rates were adjusted on an annual basis, RIN 2900–AL54 except that the first adjustment had to Initial Visual Inspection occur no sooner than 12 months nor (f) Perform an initial inspection of the Loan Guaranty: Hybrid Adjustable Rate later than 18 months from the date of engine scavenge filter for evidence of radial Mortgages the borrower’s first mortgage payment. drive steady bearing failure, within 300 engine operating hours or 45 days after the AGENCY: Department of Veterans Affairs. Authority for these loans expired at the effective date of this AD, whichever occurs ACTION: Proposed rule. end of fiscal year 1995. first, and replace parts as necessary. Use Section 303 of Pub. L. 107–330 paragraph 3.B. of Accomplishment SUMMARY: The Department of Veterans authorizes a demonstration project Instructions of RR Mandatory Service Affairs (VA) proposes to amend its loan during fiscal years 2004 and 2005, Bulletin (MSB) No. RB.211–72–C815, guaranty regulations by making two whereby VA will guarantee loans with Revision 3, dated October 5, 2000, to do the changes to conform to the Veterans hybrid adjustable interest rates. inspection and parts replacements. Benefits Act of 2002. To implement Effective October 1, 2003, or as soon Repetitive Visual Inspections section 303 of the law, VA proposes to thereafter as practicable, VA proposes to (g) Thereafter, for radial drive steady incorporate into the regulations a new guarantee loans that have interest rate bearings with less than 3,000 engine authority for hybrid adjustable rate adjustment provisions that (1) specify operating hours, perform repetitive mortgages. This will allow VA to an initial rate that is fixed for a period inspections of the engine scavenge filter for guarantee loans with interest rates that of not less than the first three years of

VerDate jul<14>2003 16:26 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\09OCP1.SGM 09OCP1 58294 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Proposed Rules

the loan; and (2) provide for an initial proposed rule would remove the second program, we believe it is important that adjustment in the interest rate at the end part of the first sentence, which states final regulations be published of the initial fixed rate period. While the that the lender must explain the nature expeditiously. For this reason, we have initial adjustment may not occur until of the obligation ‘‘no later than on the shortened the comment period for this 36 months after the first payment is due, date upon which the lender provides rulemaking action to 30 days. it is not required to occur prior to any the prospective borrower with an set date. application,’’ and in its place add ‘‘at Unfunded Mandates In connection with its previous the time of loan application.’’ This The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act adjustable rate mortgage program VA change is necessary to conform with requires, at 2 U.S.C. 1532, that agencies issued regulations which are currently industry practice whereby lenders make prepare an assessment of anticipated at 38 CFR 36.4311. VA proposes to a copy of the loan application available costs and benefits before developing any amend that section to provide for a to the borrower for review prior to the rule that may result in expenditure by hybrid adjustable rate mortgage with actual beginning of the loan application State, local, or tribal governments, in the adjustment provisions that conform to process. This proposed rule would also aggregate, or by the private sector, of the requirements of section 303 of Pub. remove the language that states a copy $100 million or more in any given year. L. 107–330. of the signed certification shall be This rule would have no such effect on B. Proposed Rule ‘‘included in the loan submission to State, local, or tribal governments, or the VA’’ and in its place add ‘‘furnished to private sector. This proposed rule would make VA upon request.’’ This change is changes to the time at which the initial necessary to conform to current practice Paperwork Reduction Act interest rate must occur and minor whereby paper copies of loan changes to the wording of the application papers are retained by This document contains no provisions regulations. Except for these changes the lenders until such time as they are constituting a collection of information proposed regulations are the same as requested by VA. under the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 those for the previous adjustable rate The VA guaranteed hybrid adjustable U.S.C. 3501–3521). mortgage program. They provide that rate mortgage with the above features Executive Order 12866 the interest rate adjustments: (1) will be similar to the adjustable rate Correspond to changes in the weekly mortgages eligible for Federal Housing This document has been reviewed by average yield on one year Treasury bills Administration (FHA) insurance. This the Office of Management and Budget adjusted to a constant maturity; (2) be should facilitate pooling of these under Executive Order 12866. made by adjusting the monthly payment mortgages together in Government on an annual basis; (3) be limited with National Mortgage Association (GNMA) Regulatory Flexibility Act respect to any single annual interest rate mortgage-backed securities pools. adjustment, to a maximum increase or Because there has been no activity in The Secretary hereby certifies that decrease of 1 percentage point; and (4) the manufactured home loan program this proposed rule will not have a be limited, over the term of the for the past several years, this pilot significant economic impact on a mortgage, to a maximum increase of 5 program for VA hybrid adjustable rate substantial number of small entities as percentage points above the initial mortgages will not be made available for they are defined in the Regulatory contract interest rate. manufactured homes under the Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601–612. The Because the new program is proposed provisions of 38 U.S.C. 3712. However, addition of hybrid adjustable rate to become effective October 1, 2003, VA manufactured housing which qualifies mortgages will benefit lenders by proposes to add the words ‘‘Effective as conventional housing under the providing an additional loan product for October 1, 2003,’’ to the beginning of the provisions of 38 U.S.C. 3710 (a)(9) will use in making VA-guaranteed loans. introductory text of paragraph (d) of be eligible. Therefore, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 605(b) § 36.4311. Section 307 of Pub. L. 107–330 this proposed rule is exempt from the VA proposes to change the time at increases the fee payable to VA by a initial and final regulatory flexibility which the initial interest rate person assuming a VA guaranteed loan analysis requirements of sections 603 adjustment must occur, as required by from .50 percent to 1.00 percent of the and 604. Pub. L. 107–330. Section 36.4311(d)(2) loan amount. VA is making conforming The Catalog of Federal Domestic provides ‘‘that the first adjustment may changes to 38 CFR 36.4312 to reflect the Assistance Program numbers applicable occur no sooner than 12 months nor increase. Under the provisions of Pub. to this rule are 64.114 and 64.119. later than 18 months from the date of L. 107–330, this increase is effective for the borrower’s first mortgage payment.’’ the period beginning December 13, List of Subjects in 38 CFR Part 36 This proposed rule would amend the 2002, and ending September 30, 2003. Condominiums, Flood insurance, first sentence of this paragraph by Administrative Procedure Act Housing, Indians, Individuals with changing ‘‘12 months’’ to ‘‘36 months’’ disabilities, Loan programs—housing and by deleting the words ‘‘nor later Section 6(a)(1) of Executive Order 12866 indicates that, in most cases, a and community development, Loan than 18 months.’’ programs—Indians, Loan programs— Because VA no longer sets maximum comment period should be ‘‘not less veterans, Manufactured homes, interest rates this proposed rule would than 60 days.’’ However, section 303 of Mortgage insurance, Reporting and remove from paragraph (d)(4) of Pub. L. 107–330 only permits a limited, recordkeeping requirements, Veterans. § 36.4311 the second sentence which 2 year test program for Hybrid ARMs reads, ‘‘The rate must be reflective of between October 1, 2003 and September Approved: August 20, 2003. adjustable rate lending.’’ The interest 30, 2005. We believe that this proposed Anthony J. Principi, rate on all VA loans is negotiated rule is essential to the efficient and Secretary of Veterans Affairs. between the borrower and the lender. consistent implementation of the Hybrid VA proposes to change language Adjustable Rate Mortgage demonstration For the reasons set out in the concerning the pre-loan disclosure in program created by that section. In order preamble, 38 CFR part 36 is proposed to paragraph (d)(6) of § 36.4311. This to avoid delays in implementing this be amended as set forth below.

VerDate jul<14>2003 16:26 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\09OCP1.SGM 09OCP1 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Proposed Rules 58295

PART 36—LOAN GUARANTY ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In the AGENCY Final Rules section of this Federal 1. The authority citation for part 36 Register, EPA is approving the State’s continues to read as follows: 40 CFR Part 52 SIP submittal as a direct final rule without prior proposal because the Authority: 38 U.S.C. 501, 3701–3704, 3707, [NM–46–1–7615b; FRL–7571–2] Agency views this as a noncontroversial 3710–3714, 3719, 3720, 3729, 3762, unless submittal and anticipates no adverse otherwise noted. Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; New Mexico; comment. A detailed rationale for the 2. Section 36.4311 is amended by: Revision to Motor Vehicle Emission approval is set forth in the direct final rule. If no adverse comments are a. Revising paragraph (d) introductory Budgets in Bernalillo County, NM received in response to this action, no text; Carbon Monoxide Air Quality Maintenance Plan Using MOBILE6 further activity is contemplated. If EPA b. In paragraph (d)(2), removing ‘‘12 receives adverse comments, the direct months nor later than 18 months’’, and AGENCY: Environmental Protection final rule will be withdrawn and all adding, in it’s place, ‘‘36 months’’; Agency (EPA). public comments received will be ACTION: c. Revising paragraph (d)(4) Proposed rule. addressed in a subsequent final rule introductory text; based on this proposed rule. EPA will SUMMARY: The EPA is proposing to not institute a second comment period. d. In paragraph (d)(5) introductory approve the State Implementation Plan Any parties interested in commenting text, removing ‘‘no later than on the date (SIP) revisions for Bernalillo County, on this action should do so at this time. upon which the lender provides the New Mexico, which is a carbon Please note that if EPA receives adverse prospective borrower with a’’, and monoxide maintenance area. This SIP comment on an amendment, paragraph, adding, in its place, ‘‘at the time of’’; revision was submitted to EPA by the or section of this rule and if that and by removing, ‘‘included in the loan Governor of New Mexico on May 15, provision may be severed from the submission to VA’’, and adding, in its 2003. More specifically, EPA is remainder of the rule, we may adopt as place, ‘‘furnished to VA upon request’’; proposing approval of the county’s final those provisions of the rule that are revised Motor Vehicle Emissions Budget and not the subject of an adverse comment. (MVEB) for carbon monoxide (CO) for For additional information, see the e. Revising the authority citation at 1996, 1999, 2002, 2005 and 2006. This Direct Final rule which is located in the the end of the section. budget was developed using EPA’s Rules and Regulations section of this The revisions read as follows: latest emissions modeling program, Federal Register. MOBILE6. This submittal updates the Dated: September 30, 2003. § 36.4311 Interest rates. maintenance plan by establishing new Richard E. Greene, * * * * * transportation conformity MVEBs for Regional Administrator, Region 6. (d) Effective October 1, 2003, use by the Mid-Region Council of Governments, the area’s Metropolitan [FR Doc. 03–25544 Filed 10–8–03; 8:45 am] adjustable rate mortgage loans which Planning Organization (MPO). These BILLING CODE 6560–50–P comply with the requirements of this budgets will continue to maintain the paragraph (d) are eligible for guaranty. total on-road mobile source emissions * * * * * for the area at or below the attainment ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY (4) Initial rate and magnitude of level for the CO National Ambient Air changes. The initial contract interest Quality Standard (NAAQS). 40 CFR Part 228 rate of an adjustable rate mortgage shall DATES: Written comments must be be agreed upon by the lender and the received on or before November 10, [FRL–7572–2] 2003. veteran. Annual adjustments in the Ocean Disposal; Proposed Rule; interest rate shall correspond to annual ADDRESSES: Comments on this action Proposed Designation of Dredged changes in the interest rate index, may submitted either by mail or Material Disposal Sites in the Central subject to the following conditions and electronically. Written comments and Western Portions of Long Island limitations: should be mailed to Mr. Thomas H. Sound, CT; Extension of Comment * * * * * Diggs, Chief, Air Planning Section Period and Addition of One Public (Authority: 38 U.S.C. 3707A, 3710) (6PD–L),U.S. Environmental Protection Hearing; Correction Agency, 1445 Ross Avenue, Suite 700, 3. In § 36.4312, paragraph (e)(2), in Dallas, Texas 75202–2733. Comments AGENCY: Environmental Protection the first sentence, is amended by may also be submitted electronically via Agency (EPA). removing ‘‘one-half of’’; and by revising email to [email protected] or to ACTION: Proposed rule; extension of the authority citation at the end of the http://www.regulations.gov which is an comment period; correction. paragraph to read as follows: alternative method for submitted SUMMARY: In response to public request, electronic comments to EPA. To submit EPA is extending the comment period § 36.4312 Charges and fees. comments, please follow the detailed for its proposed action to designate * * * * * instructions described in the ‘‘Final dredged material disposal sites in the (Authority: 38 U. S. C 3729(b)) Action’’ section of the direct final rule Central and Western Long Island Sound, which is located in the Rules and [FR Doc. 03–25560 Filed 10–8–03; 8:45 am] Connecticut. EPA is extending the Regulations section of this Federal BILLING CODE 8320–01–P comment period by an additional 21 Register. days, announcing the addition of a FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. public hearing and correcting site Peggy Wade of the EPA Region 6 Air location information in the proposed Planning Section at (214)665–7247 or rulemaking published on September 12, [email protected]. 2003 (68 FR 53687–53696).

VerDate jul<14>2003 16:26 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\09OCP1.SGM 09OCP1 58296 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Proposed Rules

DATES: Comments must be received by 1100 (CWQ), Boston, MA 02114–2023. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 5 p.m. on or before November 17, 2003. For access to the documents, call Peg Public comments on this document are Nelson at (617) 918–1991 between 10 National Oceanic and Atmospheric requested and will be considered before a.m. and 3 p.m. Monday through Administration taking final action on this designation. Thursday, excluding legal holidays, for ADDRESSES: Comments may be mailed to an appointment. B. Mamaroneck Public 50 CFR Part 300 Ms. Ann Rodney, Office of Ecosystem Library Inc., 136 Prospect Ave., [I.D. 091603E] Protection, U.S. Environmental Mamaroneck, NY. C. Port Jefferson Free Protection Agency, EPA—New England, Library, 100 Thompson Street, Port National Marine Fisheries Service, One Congress Street, Suite 1100 (CWQ), Jefferson, NY. D. E. Bridgeport Public Notice of Intent to Prepare an Boston, MA 02114–2023 or Library, 925 Broad Street, Bridgeport, Environmental Assessment electronically to [email protected]. CT. E. Milford City Library, 57 New AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Haven Ave., Milford, CT. F. New Haven Free Public Library, 133 Elm Street, Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Ann Rodney, (617) 918–1538 or e-mail Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), [email protected]. New Haven, CT. G. New London Public Library, 63 Huntington Street, New Commerce. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: ACTION: Notice of intent to prepare an EPA is extending the public comment London, CT. H. Norwalk Public Library, environmental assessment (EA); request period for the Draft Environmental 1 Belden Ave., Norwalk, CT. I. Acton for written comments; notice of public Impact Statement for the proposed Public Library, 60 Old Boston Post scoping meetings. designation of dredged material disposal Road, Old Saybrook, CT. J. Ferguson Library, 752 High Ridge Road, Stamford, sites in the Central and Western Long SUMMARY: NMFS announces its intent to Island Sound, Connecticut, and CT. K. Boston Public Library, 700 Boylston Street, Copley Square, Boston, prepare an EA and to hold scoping announcing the addition of a public meetings to inform interested parties of hearing. MA . L. New York State Library, Cultural Education Center, 6th Floor, the potential impacts on the human Corrections Empire State Center, Albany, NY. M. environment of the implementation of Information Service Division, CT State the regulatory changes resulting from The September 12, 2003 document the recently extended Treaty on (68 FR 53687–53696), is corrected on Library, 231 Capital Ave., Hartford, CT. Electronically. You also may review Fisheries Between the Governments of page 53688, 53689, 53690 and 53695 as Certain Pacific Island States and the follows: and/or obtain electronic copies of these documents and various support Government of the United States of 1. On page 53688 in the preamble, America (Treaty). As part of this first column, following the caption documents from the EPA home page at the Federal Register, http:// process, NMFS intends to conduct two DATES:, the language is corrected to scoping meetings to allow stakeholders read: ‘‘Comments must be received by www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/, or on the EPA New England Region’s home page at the opportunity to express their views 5 p.m. on or before November 17, 2003. regarding information that NMFS The additional public hearing date is http://www.epa.gov/region1/eco/ lisdreg/.’’ should consider in preparing the EA for November 13, 2003 from 4p.m.–8p.m.’’. the implementation of the regulatory On page 53689 the language is corrected 4. On page 53690, Section D. Site changes required under the recently re- to read as follows: ‘‘Comments must be Descriptions, second column is negotiated Treaty. received by 5 p.m. on or before corrected to read as follows: CLIS DATES: The dates for the public scoping November 17, 2003.’’. 41°9.5′ N., 72°54.4′ W.; 41°9.5′ N., meetings are: 2. On page 53688, in the preamble, 72°51.5′ W.; 41°8.4′ N., 72°51.5′ W.; 1. October 24, 2003, in San Diego, first column, following the caption 41°8.4′ N., 72°54.4′ W. The third column California. ADDRESSES:, Public Hearing Locations is corrected to read as follows: WLIS 2. November 13, 2003, in Pago Pago, section, the language is corrected to 41°001′ N., 73°29.8′ W.; 41°00.1′ N., American Samoa. read: ‘‘The Public Hearing locations are: 73°28.0′ W.; 40°58.9′ N., 73°28.1′ W.; 1. September 30, 2003—New York at 40°58.9′ N.,73°29.8′ W. ADDRESSES: The scoping meeting SUNY, Stony Brook, NY 11794–1603— locations are: Charles B. Wang Asian-American Center § 228.15 [Corrected] 1. Embassy Suites Hotel, San Diego Bay, 4 p.m. – 10 p.m. 2. October 1, 2003 and November 13, 5. On page 53695, in amendment 2. 2. Utulei Convention Center, 4 p.m. – 2003—Westin Stamford, One First for § 228.15 paragraph (b)(3)(i) is 7 p.m. Stamford Place, Stamford, CT 06902.’’. corrected to read as follows: (i) Written comments on the issues, 3. On page 53688, in the preamble, Location: Corner Coordinates range of alternatives, impacts that first column, following the caption (NAD1983) 41°9.5′ N., 72°54.4′ W.; should be discussed in the EA, and SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:, the 41°9.5′ N., 72°51.5′ W.; 41°8.4′ N., requests to be included on a mailing list language is corrected to include the 72°51.5′ W.; 41°8.4′ N., 72°54.4′ W. of persons interested in the EA should addition of libraries and is corrected to Paragraph (b)(4)(i) is corrected to read as be sent to Raymond Clarke, read: ‘‘Public Review of Documents: The follows: (i) Location: Corner Coordinates International Affairs Division, Pacific file supporting this proposed (NAD1983) 41°00.1′ N., 73°29.8′ W.; Islands Regional Office, NMFS, 1601 designation is available for inspection at 41°00.1′ N., 73°28.0′ W.; 40°58.9′ N., Kapiolani Blvd., Suite 1110, Honolulu, the following locations: In person. The 73°28.1′ W.; 40°58.9′ N., 73°29.8′ W. Proposed Rule and the Draft HI 96814. Comments may be sent to the Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) Dated: October 3, 2003. Regional Office via facsimile (fax) at which includes the Site Management Ira W. Leighton, 808–973–2941 and must be received by and Monitoring Plans (Appendix J), are Acting Regional Administrator, EPA New December 8, 2003. available for inspection at the following England. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: locations: A. EPA New England Library, [FR Doc. 03–25636 Filed 10–8–03; 8:45 am] Charles Karnella or Raymond Clarke, 11th Floor, One Congress Street, Suite BILLING CODE 6560–50–P telephone (808) 973–2937.

VerDate jul<14>2003 16:26 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\09OCP1.SGM 09OCP1 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Proposed Rules 58297

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Islands. Under the current (re- NMFS does not propose a regulation negotiated) Treaty, the U.S. is now to implement the changes proposed for Background limited to 40 vessels (and up to 5 the Third Extension of the Treaty (No The Treaty entered into force in 1988. additional vessels operating under joint Action Alternative). Under this The Treaty is between the 16 members venture agreements with PICs). alternative, the Treaty would continue of the Pacific Islands Forum, an inter- The changes to the operational in the manner it has since June 15, 2003, governmental body that represents 16 requirements of the Treaty include: pursuant to the Memorandum of sovereign Pacific Island Countries recognition of electronic media as an Understanding (MOU) signed on May 9, (PICs), and the United States of allowed method for meeting reporting 2002. That non-legally binding America. After an initial 5–year requirements and information document represents the political agreement, the Treaty was renewed in transmittal by the purse seine vessels, commitment of the signatories to apply 1993 allowing access for up to 50 U.S. the use of electronic vessel monitoring the amendments to the Treaty and purse seiners (with an option for 5 more systems while vessels operate in the Annexes that were not in force by June if agreed to by all parties) to the Treaty Area, modifications by certain 15, 2003. Exclusive Economic Zones (EEZs) of the PICs to the areas in which fishing is NMFS proposes a regulation to following countries: Australia, Cook permitted by U.S. purse seine vessels implement the changes proposed for the Islands, Federated States of Micronesia, and correcting an unintended Third Extension of the Treaty. Under Fiji, Kiribati, Marshall Islands, New consequence of the drafting of the this alternative, the U.S. would Zealand, Nauru, Niue, Palau, Papua Treaty that prohibited pelagic longlining implement the regulatory changes that New Guinea, Solomon Islands, Tonga, by U.S. vessels on the high seas areas have been agreed upon for the third Tuvalu, Vanuatu, Samoa. The Treaty (areas outside the 200- mile EEZ of any extension of the Treaty. No new Area is approximately 10 million square country) within the Treaty Area. legislation would be required for the miles in the western and central Pacific United States to implement such NEPA Process Ocean. changes. Regulations would, however, The Treaty sets out the terms and The authorization by NMFS to the have to be promulgated to require that conditions associated with certain FFA to provide U.S. purse seine vessels U.S. tuna purse seine vessels licensed to aspects of U.S. purse seine vessel a license to fish in the Treaty Area, fish under the Treaty comply with the operations and obtaining access to the which includes access to the EEZs of prescribed vessel monitoring system PICs= EEZs. Treaty terms and PICs is a Federal action. Under the (VMS) procedures and requirements. conditions include, but are not limited National Environmental Policy Act This action would implement VMS to, various fees, area closures, reporting, (NEPA), Federal agencies must insure requirements that are consistent with and observer coverage requirements. that analysis of the environmental FFA specifications and be applicable to Additionally, the United States impacts of a range of alternative persons and vessels subject to the Treaty Government has certain Treaty proposals is available to public officials and the jurisdiction of the United States. obligations that include, but are not and citizens before Federal decisions are Operators wishing to fish under the limited to, administrative requirements, made and before Federal actions are Treaty would be required to install, economic assistance fees, as well as the taken. The purpose is to promote carry, activate and operate, repair or collection, compilation, and management and policy decisions that replace a VMS unit while in the Treaty summarization of fishery related data. will prevent or eliminate damage to the Area. This alternative also includes Commencing in 2000, the U.S. and environment, stimulate the health and modifications to the regulations that the PICs entered into a series of welfare of the public, and enrich the would allow U.S. longline vessels to negotiations that led to an agreement to understanding of the ecological systems fish on the high seas within the Treaty amend and extend the Treaty for 10 and natural resources important to the Area, as well as modifications to the years or until June 14, 2012. The nation. A key element of the NEPA areas of fishing in the EEZs of the agreement recognizes that all parties process is the identification of the Solomon Islands and Papua New involved in the negotiations were proposed action as well as a set of Guinea. required to obtain the consent of their alternatives to the proposed action. The NMFS recommends that the U.S. various legislative and/or executive NEPA process, involving public review withdraw from the Treaty. In effecting bodies before the Treaty entered into of the alternatives, is designed to withdrawal, the U.S. would first submit law. The parties agreed to abide by the provide the agency with information an instrument signifying withdrawal to negotiated terms and conditions of the that enables identification of issues, the depositary, after which it would extension of the Treaty after June 15, concerns and reasonable alternatives. become effective 1 year later. The 2003 B or when key provisions of the The proposed action now under decision to withdraw from the Treaty previous Treaty expired. This allowed consideration and the subject of this EA could be taken if the U.S. believed it the U.S. purse seine fleet to continue to is the FFA’s authorization of U.S. purse was no longer in the nation=s best operate and allowed the PICs to seine vessels to operate in the EEZs of interest to continue participation. There continue to benefit from the economic certain PICs under the terms and are several scenarios under which such assistance associated with the Treaty. conditions of the Treaty as amended a withdrawal might occur. As of this writing all the parties have and extended until June 2012. The termination of U.S. Purse Seine not ratified the re-negotiated Treaty. NMFS is accepting written comments industry participation in the Treaty. The Under the current agreement, the U.S. on the range of actions, alternatives, and organization of the Treaty provides the is obligated to pay an annual amount of impacts it should consider in the EA. potential that the Treaty could continue $21 million. The U.S. Government These comments will be part of the without the participation of the U.S. annually provides $18 million under a public record. purse seine industry. For instance, the technical assistance agreement, and the United States Government could U.S. purse seine tuna industry, provides Alternatives continue to provide economic assistance the additional $3 million. These funds At present the range of alternatives to to the PICs called for under the Treaty. are paid to the Forum Fisheries Agency be considered in the EA will probably This economic assistance is now the (FFA) located in Honiara, Solomon include, but would not be limited to: only significant source of U.S. economic

VerDate jul<14>2003 16:26 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\09OCP1.SGM 09OCP1 58298 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Proposed Rules

support to the region (outside payments SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and Habitat Conservation Planning, made to the Compact States of the Wildlife Service and National Marine Recovery and State Grants, U.S. Fish Republic of the Marshall Islands, the Fisheries Service, (Services) announce and Wildlife Service, 4401 North Fairfax Federated States of Micronesia and the the reopening of the comment period for Drive, Room 420, Arlington, Virginia Republic of Palau). the proposed joint counterpart 22203. Comments can also be accepted Other alternatives that may be regulations and the availability of the if submitted via e-mail to explored may address non-target, Environmental Assessment for the [email protected]. Comments and associated and dependent species Healthy Forests Initiative Counterpart materials received in conjunction with related to purse seine fishing. Regulations. The Services are evaluating this rulemaking will be available for Comments on these alternatives, as well the environmental effects of establishing inspection, by appointment, during as issues and concerns are invited. counterpart regulations pursuant to normal business hours at the above Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act Additional Information Available address. of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Information on the text of the Treaty, seq.) (ESA). These counterpart Patrick Leonard, Chief, Division of the authorizing legislation or the regulations are being proposed in implementing regulations are available Consultation, Habitat Conservation cooperation with the U.S. Department of Planning, Recovery and State Grants, at from the NOAA Fisheries Pacific Islands Agriculture, Forest Service (FS) and the Regional Office. the above address (Telephone 703/358– Department of the Interior’s Bureau of 2171, Facsimile 703/358–1735) or Phil Special Accommodations Indian Affairs (BIA), Bureau of Land Williams, Chief, Endangered Species Management (BLM), and National Park Division, NMFS, 1315 East-West These meetings are accessible to Service (NPS) (jointly, Action Agencies). people with disabilities. Requests for Highway, Silver Spring, MD 20910 (301/ The proposal supports the President’s 713–1401; facsimile 301/713–0376). sign language interpretation or other Healthy Forests initiative and is SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: auxiliary aids should be directed to intended to streamline ESA section 7 Raymond Clarke, telephone 808–973– consultations on proposed projects that Background 2937, fax 808–973–2941 at least 5 days support the National Fire Plan (NFP). before the scheduled meeting date. In response to several years of We are reopening the comment period catastrophic wildland fires throughout Authority: 973–973r. et seq. to allow all interested parties to the United States culminating in the Dated: October 3, 2003. comment simultaneously on the particularly severe fire season of 2000, proposed rule and the associated Bruce C. Morehead, when over 6.5 million acres of wildland Environmental Assessment. Comments Acting Director, Office of Sustainable areas burned, President Clinton directed previously submitted on the proposed Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service. the Departments of the Interior and rule that was published in the Federal [FR Doc. 03–25640 Filed 10–8–03; 8:45 am] Agriculture to develop a report Register on June 5, 2003 (68 FR 33805), BILLING CODE 3510–22–S outlining a new approach to managing need not be resubmitted as they will be wildland fires and restoring fire-adapted incorporated into the public record as ecosystems. The report, entitled part of this reopened comment period DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Managing the Impact of Wildfires on and will be fully considered in the final Communities and the Environment, was rule. Fish and Wildlife Service issued September 8, 2000. This report DATES: Comments on this environmental set forth ways to reduce the impacts of DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE assessment or the associated proposed fires on rural communities, a short-term rule must be received by November 10, plan for rehabilitation of fire-damaged National Oceanic and Atmospheric 2003 to be considered in the final ecosystems, and ways to limit the Administration decision. introduction of invasive species and ADDRESSES: Electronic copies of this address natural restoration processes. 50 CFR Part 402 Environmental Assessment or the The report, and the accompanying associated proposed rule may be budget requests, strategies, plans, and [ID 092603B] obtained from the USFWS World Wide direction, have become known as the RIN 1018–AJ02; RIN 0648–AR05 Web Consultation Home Page at: NFP. The NFP is intended to reduce risk http://endangered.fws.gov/ to communities and natural resources National Marine Fisheries Service; consultations/forestplan.html. Written from wildland fires through Joint Counterpart Endangered Species copies of this Environmental rehabilitation, restoration and Act Section 7 Consultation Assessment or the associated proposed maintenance of fire-adapted ecosystems, Regulations rule may be obtained from the Chief of and by the reduction of accumulated AGENCIES: U.S. Fish and Wildlife the Division of Consultation, Habitat fuels or highly combustible fuels on Service, Interior; Bureau of Land Conservation Planning, Recovery, and forests, woodlands, grasslands, and Management, Interior; National Park State Grants, United States Fish and rangelands. Service, Interior; Bureau of Indian Wildlife Service, 4401 North Fairfax In August 2002, during another severe Affairs, Interior; Forest Service, Drive, Room 420, Arlington, Virginia wildland fire season in which over 7.1 Agriculture; National Marine Fisheries 22203, or the Chief of the Endangered million acres of wildlands burned, Service, National Oceanic and Species Division, Office of Protected President Bush announced the Healthy Atmospheric Administration, Resources, National Marine Fisheries Forests Initiative. The initiative was Commerce. Service, 1315 East-West Highway, Silver intended to accelerate implementation of the fuels reduction and ecosystem ACTION: Proposed rule; reopening of Spring, Maryland 20910. Comments or materials concerning restoration goals of the NFP in order to comment period and notice of the Environmental Assessment or the minimize the damage caused by availability of Environmental associated proposed rule should be sent catastrophic wildfires by reducing Assessment. to the Chief, Division of Consultation, unnecessary regulatory obstacles that

VerDate jul<14>2003 16:26 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\09OCP1.SGM 09OCP1 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Proposed Rules 58299

have at times delayed and frustrated for completing section 7 consultation for concurrence from the applicable Service active land management activities. As agency projects that authorize, fund, or for those NFP actions that the Action part of the initiative, the agencies were carry out actions that support the NFP. Agency determines are ‘‘not likely to tasked with streamlining the section 7 In the Environmental Assessment, we adversely affect’’ (NLAA) any listed consultation process for projects considered three alternatives that would species or designated critical habitat. implementing the NFP. streamline the consultation process. The Authority: The authority for this action is The Action Agencies published a Memorandum of Understanding/ the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as proposed rule to establish Joint Programmatic consultation alternative amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.). Counterpart Endangered Species Act was eliminated from further Dated: October 3, 2003. section 7 regulations on June 5, 2003 (68 consideration. The no action alternative FR 33805). The proposed counterpart would keep the current section 7 Julie MacDonald, regulations, authorized in general at 50 consultation process in place. The Acting Assistant Secretary for Fish and CFR 402.04, will provide an optional preferred alternative is to finalize the Wildlife and Parks. alternative to the existing section 7 proposed counterpart regulation. The Dated: October 3, 2003. consultation process described in 50 proposed action is to establish an William T. Hogarth, CFR part 402, subparts A and B. The alternative consultation process that Assistant Administrator for Fisheries, counterpart regulations complement the would eliminate the need to conduct National Marine Fisheries Service. general consultation regulations in part informal consultation and eliminate the [FR Doc. 03–25621 Filed 10–8–03; 8:45 am] 402 by providing an alternative process requirement to obtain written BILLING CODE 3510–22–P; 4310–55–P

VerDate jul<14>2003 16:26 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00017 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\09OCP1.SGM 09OCP1 58300

Notices Federal Register Vol. 68, No. 196

Thursday, October 9, 2003

This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER Whitney Rick, Research and These programs carry out projects contains documents other than rules or Promotion Staff, Cotton Program, AMS, relating to research, consumer proposed rules that are applicable to the USDA, Stop 0224, 1400 Independence information, advertising, sales public. Notices of hearings and investigations, Ave., SW., Washington, DC 20250–0224, promotion, producer information, committee meetings, agency decisions and telephone (202) 720–2259, facsimile market development, and product rulings, delegations of authority, filing of petitions and applications and agency (202) 690–1718, or e-mail at research to assist, improve, or promote statements of organization and functions are [email protected]. the marketing, distribution, and examples of documents appearing in this SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: utilization of their respective section. Title: National Research, Promotion, commodities. Approval of the programs and Consumer Information Programs. is required through referendum of those OMB Number: 0581–0093. who would be covered. Industry boards DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Expiration Date of Approval: Current administer the programs. These boards expiration date is 07/31/04. usually composed of producer, handler, Agricultural Marketing Service Type of Request: Extension and processor, and in some cases, importer revision of a currently approved and public members, are appointed by [Doc. No. CN–03–006] information collection. the Secretary of Agriculture to Abstract: National research and administer the programs. The funding Notice of Request for Extension and promotion programs are designed to for such programs is from assessments Revision of a Currently Approved strengthen the position of a commodity on designated industry segments. The Information Collection in the marketplace, maintain and appointed boards are responsible for expand existing domestic and foreign collecting assessments from the affected AGENCY: Agricultural Marketing Service, markets, and develop new uses and persons covered under these programs. USDA. markets for specified agricultural The Secretary also approves the ACTION: Notice and request for commodities. The U.S. Department of boards’ budgets, plans, and projects. comments. Agriculture has the responsibility for These responsibilities have been implementing and overseeing programs delegated to the Agricultural Marketing SUMMARY: In accordance with the for a variety of commodities including Service (AMS). The applicable Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 cotton, dairy, eggs, beef, pork, soybeans, commodity program areas within AMS U.S.C. chapter 35), this notice honey, potatoes, watermelons, have direct oversight of the respective announces the Agricultural Marketing mushrooms, hass avocados, popcorn, programs. Service’s (AMS) intention to request and peanuts. The enabling legislation The information collection approval from the Office of Management includes the Beef Promotion and requirements in this request are and Budget, for an extension for and Research Act of 1985 [7 U.S.C. 2901– essential to carry out the intents of the revision to a currently approved 2911]; Cotton Research and Promotion various Acts authorizing such programs, information collection for the National Act of 1966 [7 U.S.C. 2101–2118]; the thereby providing a means of Research, Promotion, and Consumer Dairy Production Stabilization Act of administering the programs. The Information Programs. 1983 [7 U.S.C. 4501–4514]; the Fluid objective in carrying out this DATES: Comments must be received by Milk Promotion Act of 1990 [7 U.S.C. responsibility includes assuring the December 8, 2003. 6401–6417]; the Egg Research and following: (1) Funds are collected and FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Consumer Information Act [7 U.S.C. properly accounted for; (2) expenditures Interested persons are invited to submit 2701–2718]; the Pork Promotion, of all funds are for the purposes written comments concerning this Research and Consumer Information Act authorized by the enabling legislation; notice to Whitney A. Rick, Research and of 1985 [7 U.S.C. 4801–4819]; the and (3) the board’s administration of the Promotion Staff, Cotton Program, AMS, Soybean Promotion, Research, and programs conforms to USDA policy. The USDA, Stop 0224, 1400 Independence Consumer Information Act [7 U.S.C. applicable commodity programs within Ave., SW., Washington, DC 20250–0224, 6301–6311]; the Honey Research, AMS have direct oversight of these telephone (202) 720–2259 and facsimile Promotion, and Consumer Information freestanding programs. The forms (202) 690–1718. Comments should be Act, as amended [7 U.S.C. 4601–4613]; covered under this collection require submitted in triplicate. Comments may the Potato Research and Promotion Act the minimum information necessary to also be submitted electronically to [7 U.S.C. 2611–2627]; the Watermelon effectively carry out the requirements of [email protected]. All Research and Promotion Act [7 U.S.C. the respective orders, and their use is comments should reference the docket 4901–4916]; the Hass Avocado necessary to fulfill the intents of the number and page number of this issue Promotion, Research, and Information Acts as expressed in the orders. The of the Federal Register. All comments Act [7 U.S.C. 7801–7813]; the information collected is used only by received will be made available for Mushroom Promotion, Research, and authorized employees of the various public inspection at Cotton Program, Consumer Information Act of 1990 [7 boards and authorized employees of AMS, USDA, Room 2641–S, 1400 U.S.C. 6101–6112]; the Popcorn USDA. Independence Ave., SW., Washington, Promotion, Research and Consumer The boards administering the various DC 20250 during regular business hours. Information Act [7 U.S.C. 7481–7491]; programs utilize a variety of forms to A copy of this notice may be found at and the Commodity Promotion, carry out the responsibilities. Such http://www.usda.gov/cotton/ Research, and Information Act of 1996 forms may include reports concerning rulemaking.htm. [7 U.S.C. 7411–7425]. status information such as handler and

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:04 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\09OCN1.SGM 09OCN1 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Notices 58301

importer reports; transaction reports; the efficiency and effectiveness of on April 26, 2002, was appealed and exemption from assessment forms and governmental operations, including then remanded back to the Forest for reimbursement forms; forms and providing the public with the option of further work following appeal; this EIS information concerning referenda submitting information or transacting has been renamed and is intended to including ballots; forms and informaiton business electronically to the extent address many of the same needs. Some concerning board nominations and possible. items in the original EA have been selection and acceptance statements; Dated: October 6, 2003. removed from the proposed actions in certification of industry organizations; this EIS, including pre-commercial A.J. Yates, and recordkeeping requirements. The thinning that is outside of the harvest forms and information covered under Administrator, Agricultural Marketing units to decrease small diameter trees, Service. this information collection require the planting hardwoods, conifer removal minimum information necessary to [FR Doc. 03–25619 Filed 10–8–03; 8:45 am] from hardwood areas and meadows, effectively carry out the requirements of BILLING CODE 3410–02–P cutting hardwoods to stimulate the programs and their use is necessary reproduction, caging shrubs, fencing to to fulfill the intent of the applicable protect hardwoods, and slashing DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE authorities. junipers to create barriers to hardwoods. Estimate of Burden: Public reporting Forest Service These items will be addressed in other burden for this collection of information types of environmental documents is estimated to average .08 hours per Crawford Timber Sale, Malheur under the heading of a categorical response. National Forest, Grant County, Oregon exclusion. In addition, this document Respondents: Producers, processors, plans to keep 5.4 miles of Forest Road handlers, and/or importers of a variety AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA. 1940 open to travel (there had been 4.3 of agricultural commodities. ACTION: Notice of intent to prepare an miles of Road 1940 planned for closure Estimated Number of Respondents: environmental impact statement. in previous NEPA documents). The 321,098. regeneration Salvage Treatment was Estimated Number of Responses: SUMMARY: The USDA Forest Service will dropped for wildlife habitat objectives, 4,469,027. prepare an environmental impact following interdisciplinary team review. Estimated Number of Responses per statement (EIS) on a proposal action to Purpose and Need for Action. The Respondent: 13.9. treat forested stands, using harvest purposes and needs for action in this Estimated Total Annual Burden on methods to decrease tree density, project now are: Move vegetation Respondents: Estimated total annual increase representation of fire-adapted towards a status more closely burden is 350,920 hours. tree species, as well as decrease existing resembling historical conditions while Comments are invited on: (1) Whether and activity fuel levels. The connected protecting soil productivity and the proposed collection of information actions of log hauling will require protecting or enhancing water quality is necessary for the proper performance constructing new road and temporary and reduce fuels to decrease potential of the functions of the agency, including road, and maintaining and fire severity. This project would change whether the information will have reconstructing existing road. This the species composition and structure of practical utility; (2) the accuracy of the proposed action would implement a the vegetation to improve the resiliency agency’s estimate of the burden of the Road Access Travel Management Plan of the forested component of the proposed collection of information, that would close and decommission ecosystem. Existing stand densities are including the validity of the roads. The alternatives will include the higher than historical stand densities, methodology and assumptions used; (3) proposed action, no action, and and retard growth to the large tree stage, ways to enhance the quality, utility, and additional alternatives that respond to thus there is a need to increase the clarity of the information to be issues identified during scoping. The number of large trees across the collected; and (4) ways to minimize the agency will give notice of the full landscape and increase the burden of the collection of information environmental analysis and decision representation of fire tolerate tree on those who are to respond, including making process so interested and species. the use of appropriate automated, affected people may participate and Move toward an efficient, properly electronic, mechanical, or other contribute to the final decision. located road system that provides technological collection techniques or DATES: Comments concerning the scope adequate public and administrative other forms of information technology. of the analysis must be received by access, while reducing the risk of Comments may be sent to Whitney A. November 15, 2003. sediment reaching streams. Maintain Rick, Research and Promotion Staff, ADDRESSES: Send written comments to and/or reconstruct remaining roads to Cotton Program, AMS, USDA, Stop Michelle Putz, District Writer Editor, limit delivery of sediment into streams 0224, Room 2641–S, 1400 Independence Blue Mountain Ranger District, P.O. Box and to facilitate harvest activities while Ave., SW. Washington, DC 20250–0224, 909, John Day, Oregon 97845 or on-line improving water quality. To protect or by e-mail at at comments-pacificnorthwest-malheur- water quality and to decrease movement [email protected]. All [email protected]. of sediment into streams, unneeded comments received will be available for roads causing resource damage need to public inspection during regular FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: be decommissioned or closed. business hours at the same address. Michelle Putz, District Writer Editor, Three previously designated All responses to this notice will be Blue Mountain Ranger District. Phone: Dedicated Old Growth areas have no summarized and included in the request (541) 575–3000. Replacement Old Growth (ROG) areas for OMB approval. All comments will SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The designated; three ROG areas need to be become a matter of public record. alternatives being considered were designated. The Malheur National AMS is committed to implementation proposed in the original Crawford Forest Plan directs the Forest to provide of the Government Paperwork Vegetative Management Environmental Replacement Old Growth and to Elimination Act, which provides for the Assessment (EA). The Decision Notice, complete this process in conjunction use of information resources to improve which selected Alternative 3 was signed with the timber sale planning process.

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:04 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\09OCN1.SGM 09OCN1 58302 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Notices

Capture economic value of material the issues gathered through scoping, the The draft EIS will be filed with and help achieve a stable economy in action alternatives could differ in the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) the local area. silvicultural and post-harvest treatments and available for public review by May Proposed Action. The proposal would prescribed, the amount and location of 2004. The comment period on the draft decrease tree density by harvesting and harvest, or the amount and location of EIS will be 45 days from the date EPA thinning. Stand treatments include the fuels reduction activity. publishes the notice of availability of following harvest methods: shelterwood Scoping Process. The public will have the draft in the Federal Register. The (167 acres); partial cut (1,343 acres); and an opportunity to participate at several final EIS will be released in September commercial thinning (2,568 acres). points during the analysis including the 2004. Treatment would decrease small tree scoping period after publication of the The Forest Service believes, at this density, reducing competition for Notice of Intent, and the draft EIS in the early stage, it is important to give nutrients for remaining trees. Timber Federal Register. Notification of these reviewers notice of several court rulings yarding systems to be utilized are tractor opportunities will also appear in related to public participation in the (3,522 acres) and skyline (556 acres). subsequent issues of the Malheur environmental review process. First, The estimated volume of timber National Forest’s Schedule of Proposed reviewers of a draft EIS must structure harvested is 11.1 million board feet. Fire Activities; letters to agencies, their participation in the environmental and fuel reduction treatments include organizations, and individuals who review of the proposal so that it is the following activities: prescribed have previously indicated their interest meaningful and alerts an agency to the burning (9,498 acres); fuel reduction in such activities; and in the Blue reviewer’s position and contentions. (2,130 acres); and burning within Mountain Eagle. Public meetings may be Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corp. v. harvest units (517 acres). Three new scheduled during the winter of 2003/ NRDC, 435 U.S. 519, 533 (1978). Also, areas for Replacement Old Growth 2004 and the spring of 2004. The environmental objections that could be (ROGs) areas to Dedicated Old Growth scoping process will include identifying raised at the draft EIS stage but that are (DOGs) stands are provided for pileated potential issues, identifying major not raised until after completion of the woodpecker and pine marten. issues to be analyzed in depth, final EIS may be waived or dismissed by The Crawford Roads Analysis eliminating non-significant issues, the courts. City of Angoon v. Hodel, 803 reviewed a portion of the roads within considering additional alternatives F.2d 1016, 1022 (9th Cir. 1986) and the analysis area. Roads needed for the based on themes which will be derived Wisconsin Heritages, Inc. v. Harris, 490 proposal would include the following: from issues recognized during scoping F. Supp. 1334, 1338 (E.D. Wis. 1980). new construction (12.8 miles), activities, and identifying potential Because of these court rulings, it is very temporary construction (4.6 miles), environmental effects of the proposed important that those interested in this reconstructed (0.1 miles), maintained proposed action participate by the close (60.9 miles), closed (15.2 miles) and action and alternatives (i.e. direct, of the 45 day comment period so that decommissioned (24.5 miles). The Road indirect, and cumulative effects). substantive comments and objections Analysis concentrated on roads within Comments. Public comments about Riparian Habitat Conservation Areas this proposal are requested in order to are made available to the Forest Service (RHCAs) and roads that might be assist in properly scoping issues, to at a time when it can meaningfully needed for proposed activities, as haul determine how to best manage the consider them and respond to them in routes. Roads within RHCAs resources, and to fully analyze the final EIS. contributing sediment or which environmental effects. Comments To assist the Forest Service in potentially could contribute sediment received to this notice, including names identifying and considering issues and were considered as candidates for and addresses of those who comment, concerns on the proposed action, decommissioning. No new road will be considered part of the public comments on the draft EIS should be as construction is proposed within RHCAs. record on this proposed action and will specific as possible. It is also helpful if This is permanent, new road be available for public inspection. comments refer to specific pages or construction that remains a part of the Comments submitted anonymously will chapters of the draft EIS. Comments transportation system. be accepted and considered; those who may also address the adequacy of the Proposed activities would occur in submit anonymous comments will not draft EIS or the merits of the alternatives the Crawford Creek, Mill Creek, Phipps have standing to appeal the subsequent formulated and discussed in the Meadow, Dry Fork, Clear Creek, Bridge decision under 36 CFR parts 215 and statement. Reviewers may wish to refer Creek, Squaw Creek, and Idaho/Summit 217. Additionally, pursuant to 7 CFR to the Council on Environmental Creek subwatersheds of the Upper 1.27(d), any person may request the Quality Regulations for implementing Middle Fork John Day watershed. agency to withhold a submission from the procedural provisions of the Issues. Preliminary issues were the public record by showing how the National Environmental Policy Act at 40 identified and include the potential Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) CFR 1503.3 in addressing these points. effects of the proposed action on: permits such confidentiality. Persons In the final EIS, the Forest Service is management indicator species, requesting such confidentiality should required to respond to substantive threatened, endangered, and sensitive be aware that under FOIA, comments received during the comment species, and neotropical migratory birds confidentiality may be granted in only period for the draft ESI. The Forest associated with dense forest habitat; soil very limited circumstances, such as to Service is the lead agency. The compaction; increase sediment protect trade secrets. The Forest Service Responsible Official is the Forest movement into streams; reduce water will inform the requester of the agency’s Supervisor for the Malheur National quality; and continued vehicle access in decision regarding the request for Forest. The Responsible Official will the area. confidentiality and, where the request is decide where and whether or not to Alternatives. A full range of denied, the agency will return the implement the proposed projects and alternatives will be considered submission and notify the requester that will document the Crawford Timber including a ‘‘No Action’’ alternative in the comments may be resubmitted with Sale and Thinning decision and reasons which none of the activities proposed or without name and address within a for the decision in the Record of above would be implemented. Based on specified number of days. Decision. That decision will be subject

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:04 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\09OCN1.SGM 09OCN1 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Notices 58303

to Forest Service Appeal Regulations (36 DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE ACTION: Notice of meeting. CFR Part 215). Forest Service SUMMARY: Pursuant to the authorities in Dated: September 30, 2003. the Federal Advisory Committee Act Roger W. Williams, Glenn/Colusa County Resource (Public Law 92–463) and under the Forest Supervisor. Advisory Committee Secure Rural Schools and Community [FR Doc. 03–25584 Filed 10–8–03; 8:45 am] Self-Determination Act of 2000 (Pub. L. AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA. BILLING CODE 3410–11–M 106–393) the Caribou-Targhee National ACTION: Notice of meeting Forests’ Eastern Idaho Resource Advisory Committee will meet SUMMARY: The Glenn/Colusa County DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Wednesday, November 12, 2003 in Resource Advisory Committee (RAC) Idaho Falls for a business meeting. The Forest Service will meet in Willows, California. meeting is open to the public. Agenda items to be covered include: (1) DATES: The business meeting will be Southwestern Region, Arizona, New Introductions, (2) Approval of Minutes, (3) Public Comment, (4) Brochure for held on November 12, 2003 from 10 Mexico, West Texas, and West a.m. to 1 p.m. Oklahoma Amendment of Land and Glenn/Colusa, (5) Ski-High Project/ ADDRESSES: The meeting location is the Resource Management Plans in the Possible Action, (6) How to Solicit Caribou-Targhee National Forest Southwestern Region Projects, (7) Bear Wallow Trail, (8) Status of Members, (9) General Headquarters Office, 1405 Hollipark Drive, Idaho Falls, Idaho 83402. AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA. Discussion, (10) Next Agenda. DATES: The meeting will be held on FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jerry ACTION: Cancellation notice. October 27, 2003, from 1:30 p.m. and Reese, Caribou-Targhee National Forest end at approximately 4:30 p.m. Supervisor and Designated Federal SUMMARY: On August 7, 2001, a Notice Officer, at (208) 524–7500. of Intent (NOI) to prepare an ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at the Mendocino National Forest SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The environmental impact statement to business meeting on November 12, amend National Forest land and Supervisor’s Office, 825 N. Humboldt Ave., Willows, CA 95988. Individuals 2003, begins at 10 a.m., at the Caribou- resource management plans in the Targhee National Forest Headquarters Southwestern Region to modify wishing to speak or propose agenda items must send their names and Office, 1405 Hollipark Drive, Idaho standards and guidelines for Mexican Falls, Idaho. Agenda topics will include spotted owl and northern goshawk proposals to Jim Giachino, DFO, 825 N. Humboldt Ave., Willows, CA 95988. looking at funding for this upcoming within wildland-urban interface areas year, briefed on project status from last and to emphasize the management of FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: year’s approved projects, and wildland-urban interface areas Bobbin Gaddini, Committee welcoming new members. throughout the southwest was Coordinator, USDA, Mendocino Dated: October 2, 2003. published in the Federal Register (66 National Forest, Grindstone Ranger FR 41198–41200). This 2001 NOI is District, P.O. Box 164, Elk Creek, CA Jerry B. Reese, hereby rescinded. 95939. (530) 968–5329; e-mail Caribou-Targhee Forest Supervisor. [email protected]. [FR Doc. 03–25587 Filed 10–8–03; 8:45 am] FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: BILLING CODE 3410–11–M Peter Gaulke, Regional Environmental SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Coordinator, USDA Forest Service meeting is open to the public. Southwestern Regional Office, 333 Committee discussion is limited to Forest Service staff and Committee APPALACHIAN STATES LOW-LEVEL Broadway Blvd., SE., Albuquerque, NM RADIOACTIVE WASTE COMMISSION 87102–3498, telephone (505) 842–3256. members. However, persons who wish to bring matters to the attention of the Annual Meeting SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The need Committee may file written statements to amend forest plans to modify with the Committee staff before or after TIME AND DATE: 10 a.m.–12 p.m., October standards and guidelines for Mexican the meeting. Public input sessions will 28, 2003. spotted owl and northern goshawk be provided and individuals who made PLACE: Harrisburg Hilton and Towers, within wildland-urban interface areas written requests by October 22, 2003, One North Second Street, Harrisburg, varied throughout the forests and will have the opportunity to address the PA 17101. grasslands of the Southwestern Region. committee at those sessions. As such, a region wide amendment of STATUS: Most of the meeting will be Dated: October 2, 2003. all forest plans was not deemed open to the public. If there is a need for necessary. Those forest that have a need James F. Giachino, an executive session (closed to the to their respective plans may do so on Designated Federal Official. public), it will be held at about 9:30 a.m. [FR Doc. 03–25570 Filed 10–8–03; 8:45 am] a case-by-case basis. As the forests of the Matters To Be Considered Southwestern Region begin the Forest BILLING CODE 3410–11–M Plan revision process in Fiscal Year PORTIONS OPEN TO THE PUBLIC: The 2004, they can address this need in primary purpose of this meeting is to (1) context with other resource and social DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Review the independent auditors’ report issues. of Commission’s financial statements for Forest Service Dated: September 29, 2003. fiscal year 2002–2003; (2) Review the Eastern Idaho Resource Advisory Low-Level Radioactive Waste (LLRW) Lucia M. Turner, generation information for 2002; (3) Deputy Regional Forester. Committee; Caribou-Targhee National Forest, Idaho Falls, ID Consider a proposal budget for fiscal [FR Doc. 03–25565 Filed 10–8–03; 8:45 am] year 2004–2005; (4) Review recent BILLING CODE 3410–11–M AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA. national developments regarding LLRW

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:04 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\09OCN1.SGM 09OCN1 58304 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Notices

management and disposal; (5) Review Zone procedures would exempt DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE and discuss issues concerning waste Chevron from Customs duties and from the Safety Light Site in federal excise taxes on foreign status jet Foreign-Trade Zones Board Pennsylvania and the Aberdeen Proving fuel used for international flights. On Grounds in Maryland; and (6) Elect the domestic sales, the company would be [Order No. 1302] Commission’s Officers. able to defer Customs duty payments PORTIONS CLOSED TO THE PUBLIC: until the products leave the facility. The Approval for Expansion of Subzone 2J, Executive Session, if deemed necessary, application indicates that the savings Murphy Oil USA, Inc. (Oil Refinery), will be held at about 9:30 a.m. from FTZ procedures would help Meraux, Louisiana FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: improve the facility’s international Pursuant to its authority under the Richard R. Janati, Pennsylvania Staff competitiveness. member on the Commission, at 717– Foreign-Trade Zones Act of June 18, 787–2163. No specific manufacturing request is 1934, as amended (19 U.S.C. 81a–81u), being made at this time. Such a request the Foreign-Trade Zones Board (the Richard R. Janati, would be made to the Board on a case- Board) adopts the following Order: PA Staff Member on the Commission. by-case basis. Whereas, the Port of New Orleans, [FR Doc. 03–25601 Filed 10–8–03; 8:45 am] In accordance with the Board’s grantee of FTZ 2, has requested BILLING CODE 0000–00–P regulations, a member of the FTZ Staff authority on behalf of Murphy Oil USA, has been designated examiner to Inc. (Murphy), to expand the scope of investigate the application and report to authority under zone procedures within DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE the Board. the Murphy refinery in Meraux Louisiana (FTZ Docket 4–2003, filed 1/ Foreign-Trade Zones Board Public comment is invited from 17/2003); interested parties. Submissions (original [Docket 51–2003] Whereas, notice inviting public and 3 copies) shall be addressed to the comment has been given in the Federal Board’s Executive Secretary at one of Foreign-Trade Zone 25—Broward Register (68 FR 4757, 1/30/03); County, FL; Proposed Foreign-Trade the following addresses: Whereas, the Board adopts the Subzone, Chevron Products Company 1. Submissions Via Express/Package (Petroleum Product Storage), Port findings and recommendations of the Delivery Services: Foreign-Trade Everglades, FL examiner’s report, and finds that the Zones Board, U.S. Department of requirements of the FTZ Act and An application has been submitted to Commerce, Franklin Court Building— Board’s regulations would be satisfied, the Foreign-Trade Zones Board (the Suite 4100W, 1099 14th St. NW., and that approval of the application Board) by Broward County, Florida, Washington, DC 20005; or would be in the public interest if grantee of FTZ 25, requesting special- 2. Submissions Via the U.S. Postal approval is subject to the conditions purpose subzone status for the Service: Foreign-Trade Zones Board, listed below; petroleum product storage facility of U.S. Department of Commerce, FCB— Now, therefore, the Board hereby Chevron Products Company (Chevron), orders: located in Port Everglades, Florida. The Suite 4100W, 1401 Constitution Ave. The application to expand the scope application was submitted pursuant to NW., Washington, DC 20230. of authority under zone procedures the provisions of the Foreign-Trade The closing period for their receipt is within Subzone 2J, is approved, subject Zones Act, as amended (19 U.S.C. 81a– December 8, 2003. Rebuttal comments to the FTZ Act and the Board’s 81u), and the regulations of the Board in response to material submitted regulations, including § 400.28, and (15 CFR part 400). It was formally filed during the foregoing period may be subject to the following conditions: on October 2, 2003. submitted during the subsequent 15-day 1. Foreign status (19 CFR 146.41, The Chevron terminal facility (21.53 period (to December 23, 2003). acres) consists of a single site of two 146.42) products consumed as fuel for parcels and a pipeline in Port A copy of the application and the petrochemical complex shall be Everglades, Florida, (Broward County): accompanying exhibits will be available subject to the applicable duty rate. Parcel 1, East Tank Farm (15 tanks, for public inspection at the Office of the 2. Privileged foreign status (19 CFR 434,327 barrel capacity, 10.56 acres) Foreign-Trade Zones Board’s Executive 146.41) shall be elected on all foreign located at 1400 S.E. 24th St.; and, Parcel Secretary at address Number 1 listed merchandise admitted to the subzone, 2, West Tank Farm (3 tanks, 137,953 above, and at the U.S. Department of except that non-privileged foreign (NPF) barrel capacity, 9.39 acres) located at Commerce Export Assistance Center, status (19 CFR 146.42) may be elected 900 S.E. 24th St. The Chevron 200 E. las Olas Blvd. (Sun Sentinel on refinery inputs covered under connecting pipeline is used for routing Bldg.), Suite 1600, Ft. Lauderdale, HTSUS Subheadings #2709.00.10, of petroleum products to the storage Florida 33301–2284. #2709.00.20, #2710.11.25, #2710.11.45, terminals from arriving vessels at the #2710.19.05, #2710.19.10, #2710.19.45, Dated: October 2, 2003. docks. #2710.91.00, #2710.99.05, #2710.99.10, The storage facility is primarily used Dennis Puccinelli, #2710.99.16, #2710.99.21 and for the receipt, storage, and distribution Executive Secretary. #2710.99.45 which are used in the of jet fuel by pipeline to the Miami and [FR Doc. 03–25628 Filed 10–8–03; 8:45 am] production of: Fort Lauderdale International Airports. BILLING CODE 3510–DS–U The company also uses the facility to —Petrochemical feedstocks (examiners store and distribute gasoline, diesel fuel, report, Appendix ‘‘C’’); distillate fuels, and blending stocks. —Products for export; Some of the products are or will be —And, products eligible for entry under sourced from abroad or from U.S. HTSUS #9808.00.30 and#9808.00.40 refineries under FTZ procedures. (U.S. Government purchases).

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:04 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\09OCN1.SGM 09OCN1 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Notices 58305

Signed at Washington, DC, this 24th day of DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE Background September 2003. On February 6, 2003, the Department International Trade Administration James J. Jochum, published the initiation of a new Assistant Secretary for Import shipper review of the antidumping duty Administration, Alternate Chairman, Foreign- [A–357–812] order of honey from Argentina. This Trade Zones Board. review involves one exporter, Nutrin [FR Doc. 03–25629 Filed 10–8–03; 8:45 am] Honey From Argentina: Rescission of S.A. of Argentina, and covers the period BILLING CODE 3510–DS–U Antidumping Duty New Shipper of May 11, 2001 through November 30, Review 2002. See New Shipper Initiation. On DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE AGENCY: Import Administration, July 14, 2003, the Department extended International Trade Administration, the time limit for the completion of the Foreign-Trade Zones Board Department of Commerce. preliminary results of this new shipper review until November 28, 2003. See ACTION: Notice of rescission of Honey From Argentina: Extension of [Order No. 1303] antidumping duty new shipper review. Time Limit for Preliminary Results of New Shipper Review 68 FR 41557 (July Approval for Expanded Manufacturing SUMMARY: On February 6, 2003, the Authority (Addition of Medical Imaging 14, 2003). Department published the initiation of a On February 19, 2003, the Department Products, and Expansion of new shipper review of the antidumping Production of Color Negative issued Sections A through C of the duty order of honey from Argentina Department’s antidumping Photographic Film and Paper) Within covering the period of May 11, 2001 to Foreign-Trade Subzone 38C; Fuji questionnaire to Nutrin. Nutrin November 30, 2002. See Honey From responded on March 14, 2003 and April Photo Film, Inc.; Greenwood, South Argentina: Initiation of New Shipper Carolina 7, 2003. Petitioners submitted Antidumping Duty Administrative comments on Nutrin’s questionnaire Pursuant to its authority under the Review, 68 FR 6114 (February 6, 2003) responses on April 4, 2003 and May 2, Foreign-Trade Zones Act of June 18, (New Shipper Initiation). This review 2003. On May 23, 2003, the Department 1934, as amended (19 U.S.C. 81a–81u), covers one exporter, Nutrin S.A. issued its first supplemental the Foreign-Trade Zones Board (the (Nutrin) of Argentina. For the reasons questionnaire, and Nutrin submitted its Board) adopts the following Order: discussed below, we are rescinding this supplemental questionnaire response on new shipper review in its entirety. Whereas, the South Carolina State June 13, 2003. Petitioners again Ports Authority, grantee of Foreign- EFFECTIVE DATE: October 9, 2003. commented on Nutrin’s responses on Trade Zone 38, has applied on behalf of FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: July 1, 2003, and August 4, 2003. Fuji Photo Film, Inc. (Fuji), to expand Angela Strom or Donna Kinsella at (202) Analysis of New Shipper Review the scope of manufacturing authority 482–2704 and (202) 482–0194, On August 15, 2003, the Department under zone procedures within Subzone respectively; AD/CVD Enforcement, issued a memorandum detailing our 38C, at the Fuji plant in Greenwood, Office 8, Group III, Import analysis of the bona fides of Nutrin’s South Carolina, to include additional Administration, International Trade U.S. sale and our intent to rescind this finished products (medical imaging Administration, U.S. Department of review because we preliminarily products, components, and related Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution determined that Nutrin’s U.S. sale was products), and to increase the overall Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230. level of production authorized under not a bona fide transaction based on the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: FTZ procedures of color negative totality of the circumstances of the sale. photographic paper and film (FTZ Doc. Scope of the Review See Memorandum from Angela Strom 63–2002; filed 12–17–2002); through Richard Weible to Barbara E. The merchandise under review is Whereas, notice inviting public Tillman: New Shipper Review of the honey from Argentina. For purposes of comment was given in the Federal Antidumping Duty Order on Honey this review, the products covered are Register (67 FR 79048–79049, 12–27– from Argentina: Intent to Rescind, dated natural honey, artificial honey 2002); and, August 21, 2003 (Nutrin Intent to containing more than 50 percent natural Rescind Memo). In this memorandum, Whereas, the Board adopts the honey by weight, preparations of natural the Department preliminarily findings and recommendations of the honey containing more than 50 percent determined that the single U.S. sale examiner’s report, and finds that the natural honey by weight, and flavored made by Nutrin was not bona fide due requirements of the FTZ Act and honey. The subject merchandise to (1) the conflicting information Board’s regulations are satisfied, and includes all grades and colors of honey contained in different copies of the sales that approval of the application is in the whether in liquid, creamed, comb, cut invoice for Nutrin’s U.S. sale; (2) public interest; comb, or chunk form, and whether Nutrin’s failure to disclose other Now, therefore, the Board hereby packaged for retail or in bulk form. apparent changes in the terms of the approves the request subject to the FTZ The merchandise under review is U.S. sale; (3) conflicting information Act and the Board’s regulations, currently classifiable under subheadings and insufficient documentation including Section 400.28. 0409.00.00, 1702.90.90, and 2106.90.99 regarding the date on which the Signed at Washington, DC, this 24th day of of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of essential terms of sale and final September, 2003. the United States (HTSUS). Although destination of goods were established; James J. Jochum, the HTSUS subheadings are provided (4) inconsistent invoicing practices Assistant Secretary of Commerce for Import for convenience and U.S. Bureau of regarding the U.S. sale and other like Administration, Alternate Chairman, Foreign- Customs and Border Protection sales; (5) atypical payment terms and (6) Trade Zones Board. purposes, the Department’s written highly unusual sales and shipping [FR Doc. 03–25630 Filed 10–8–03; 8:45 am] description of the merchandise under arrangements. The totality of the facts BILLING CODE 3510–DS–U this order is dispositive. on the record lead the Department to

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:04 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\09OCN1.SGM 09OCN1 58306 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Notices

conclude that the sale was neither DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE Ltd.-Yunan (a joint venture owned by commercially reasonable nor bona fide. Groupstars Chemicals, LLC and the International Trade Administration Yunan Jianshui County Chemical Comments [A–570–001] Industry Factory (JCC)), JCC and the The Department provided parties an Jianshui Chemical Plant (also translated opportunity to comment on the Intent to Potassium Permanganate From the as Jianshui Chemical Factory and People’s Republic of China: Jianshui General Chemical Plant). Rescind Memo dated August 21, 2003. On February 27, 2003, and March 25, The initial deadline for comments for all Rescission of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review 2003, the Department published in the parties was August 29, 2003; however, Federal Register notices initiating Nutrin requested a seven day extension AGENCY: Import Administration, administrative reviews of the requested of time to file its comments. The International Trade Administration, companies. See Initiation of Department granted the extension and Department of Commerce. Antidumping and Countervailing Duty set an extended due date of September ACTION: Notice of rescission of the Administrative Reviews, 68 FR 9048 and 5, 2003. On September 5, 2003, Nutrin antidumping duty administrative review Initiation of Antidumping and requested yet another extension of time; of potassium permanganate from the Countervailing Duty Administrative however, the Department denied this People’s Republic of China. Reviews and Requests for Revocation in additional request given its statutory Part, 68 FR 14394 (this notice includes and regulatory time constraints in SUMMARY: In response to requests from companies inadvertently omitted from completing this review. Nutrin did not the petitioner, Carus Chemical Company the February 27, 2003, initiation notice). submit comments regarding the (Carus), and a U.S. importer, Groupstars On March 17, 2003, the Department Department’s Intent to Rescind even Chemicals, LLC, the Department of issued its antidumping questionnaire to though it had two weeks to do so. Commerce (the Department) initiated an the respondents. Groupstars Chemicals Petitioners submitted comments administrative review of the Co., Ltd. (which includes both the Shandong and Yunan operations) supporting the Department’s position to antidumping duty order on potassium (Groupstars) responded to the rescind the new shipper review with permanganate from the People’s Republic of China (PRC) covering the Department’s questionnaire on April 21, respect to Nutrin. period January 1, 2002 through 2003 and May 8, 2003. On May 29, Rescission of New Shipper Reviews December 31, 2002. Because Carus 2003, Groupstars submitted a letter to withdrew its review request, and the Department on behalf of JCC (also We received no comments rebutting Groupstars Chemicals, LLC’s review referred to as Jianshui County Chemical or in disaccord with the Department’s request does not identify the PRC Industry Factory) stating that JCC and findings in its Intent to Rescind Memo exporter to be reviewed, the Department the Jianshui General Chemical Plant are regarding Nutrin. Therefore, for the is rescinding this administrative review. the same company, and this company reasons stated above and pursuant to EFFECTIVE DATE: October 9, 2003. did not have any sales to the United section 751(a)(2)(B) and 19 CFR States during the POR. The Department FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John issued a supplemental questionnaire to 351.214(f), we are rescinding this new Conniff or Drew Jackson, AD/CVD Groupstars on May 15, 2003. In shipper review. Enforcement, Office 4, Group II, Import Groupstars’ June 10, 2003, response to Administration, International Trade Notification the supplemental questionnaire, it Administration, U.S. Department of stated that Groupstars Chemical Co., The Department will notify the U.S. Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Ltd.-Yunan did not have any sales of the Bureau of Customs and Border Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230; subject merchandise to the United telephone (202) 482–1009 and (202) Protection that bonding is no longer States during the POR. See Groupstars’ 482–4406, respectively. permitted to fulfill security June 10, 2003, supplemental response at requirements for shipments of Argentine SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 6. honey by Nutrin entered, or withdrawn Background In a letter dated September 11, 2003, from warehouse, for consumption in the Groupstars notified the Department that United States on or after the publication On January 31, 1984, the Department it will no longer participate in the of this rescission notice in the Federal published in the Federal Register (49 administrative review. On September Register, and that a cash deposit of FR 3897) the antidumping duty order on 16, 2003, Carus withdrew its request for 30.24 percent ad valorem should be potassium permanganate from the PRC an administrative review and urged the collected for any entries exported by (the order). On January 2, 2003, the Department to immediately rescind the Nutrin. Department issued a notice of administrative review. ‘‘Opportunity to Request Administrative The Department is conducting this We are issuing and publishing this Review’’ of the order on a number of administrative review in accordance determination and notice in accordance products including potassium with section 751 of the Tariff Act of with sections 751(a)(2)(B) and 777(i) of permanganate from the PRC. See 1930, as amended (the Act). the Act. Antidumping or Countervailing Duty Rescission of Review Dated: October 2, 2003. Order, Finding, or Suspended James J. Jochum, Investigation; Opportunity to Request On January 28, 2003, Groupstars Administrative Review, 68 FR 80. On Chemicals, LLC submitted a letter to the Assistant Secretary for Import January 28, 2003, Groupstars Chemicals, Department in which it requested ‘‘an Administration. LLC requested that the Department antidumping administrative review in [FR Doc. 03–25627 Filed 10–8–03; 8:45 am] conduct an administrative review of the the above-referenced matter {potassium BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P order. On January 31, 2003, Carus permanganate from the People’s requested an administrative review of Republic of China;} for the review Groupstars Chemicals Co., Ltd.- period covering January 1, 2002 to Shandong, Groupstars Chemical Co., December 31, 2002.’’ On January 31,

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:04 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\09OCN1.SGM 09OCN1 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Notices 58307

2003, Carus requested an administrative stating that an exporter or producer may during this review period. Failure to review of Groupstars Chemicals Co., request an ‘‘administrative review of comply with this requirement could Ltd.-Shandong, Groupstars Chemical only that person;’’ 19 CFR 351(b)(3) result in the Secretary’s presumption Co., Ltd.-Yunan, JCC and the Jianshui stating that an importer of subject that reimbursement of antidumping Chemical Plant. Based on these merchandise may request an duties occurred and the subsequent requests, the Department initiated an administrative review of only an assessment of double antidumping administrative review of Groupstars ‘‘exporter or producer * * * of the duties. Chemicals, LLC, Groupstars Chemicals subject merchandise imported by that This notice also serves as a reminder Co., Ltd.-Shandong, Groupstars importer.’’ Moreover, the courts have to parties subject to administrative Chemical Co., Ltd.-Yunnan, JCC and the held that the party requesting the protective order (APO) of their Jianshui Chemical Plant. review, not the Department, bears the responsibility concerning the The Department is rescinding its burden of naming and selecting the disposition of proprietary information review of the companies named in proper party to be reviewed. See e.g., disclosed under APO in accordance Carus’ request for review because Carus Floral Trade Council v. United States, with 19 CFR 351.305(a)(3). Timely has withdrawn its request. See Carus’ 888 F.2d 1366, 1369 (Fed. Cir. 1989) written notification of the return or September 16, 2003 letter to the (where the Court of Appeals for the destruction of APO materials or Department. Pursuant to 19 CFR Federal Circuit held that a request for an conversion to judicial protective order is 351.213(d)(1), the Department will administrative review must be for hereby requested. Failure to comply rescind an administrative review, in review of ‘‘specified individual * * * with the regulations and terms of an whole or in part, if a party that producers [] or exporters’’). APO is a sanctionable violation. requested a review withdraws the Additionally, in past PRC cases, the This determination and notice are request within 90 days of the date of Department has rescinded issued and published in accordance publication of the notice of initiation of administrative reviews when requesting with 19 CFR 351.213(d)(4) and, sections the requested review. Although Carus parties failed to identify the actual PRC 751(a)(2)(c)) and 777(i)(1) of the Act. withdrew its request after the 90-day exporter of the subject merchandise in Dated: October 2, 2003. period, there were no other requests to their review requests. See Iron James J. Jochum, review any of the companies for which Construction Castings from the People’s Assistant Secretary for Import Carus requested a review, and the Republic of China: Rescission of Administration. review for these companies had not yet Antidumping Duty Administrative [FR Doc. 03–25631 Filed 10–8–03; 8:45 am] progressed beyond a point where it Review, 68 FR 33103–01 (June 3, 2003) would have been unreasonable to allow (in which the Department rescinded the BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P Carus to withdraw its request for a review because the company for which review. This action is consistent with the review was requested and initiated DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE the approach taken in past antidumping was not an exporter of subject proceedings. See Frozen Concentrated merchandise, but a producer of subject International Trade Administration Orange Juice From Brazil; Final Results merchandise); see also Certain Cased and Partial Rescission of Antidumping Pencils From the People’s Republic of North American Free-Trade Duty Administrative Review, 67 FR China; Final Results and Partial Agreement, Article 1904; NAFTA Panel 40913, 40914 (June 14, 2002) where, Rescission of Antidumping Duty Reviews; Request for Panel Review pursuant to a request filed after the 90 Administrative Review, 66 FR 1638–02 AGENCY: NAFTA Secretariat, United day deadline, the Department rescinded (January 9, 2001) (in which a party States Section, International Trade the review. Additionally, 19 CFR requested a review of the producer of 351.213(d)(1) provides that the subject merchandise, rather than the Administration, Department of Secretary may extend the time limit for exporter of subject merchandise); see Commerce. withdrawal requests where it is also Laizhou City Guangming Pencil- ACTION: Notice of First Request for Panel reasonable. Therefore, for the above Making Co. Ltd., Et Al., v. United States, Review. stated reasons, the Department pursuant No. 02–151, Slip Op. 02–151, 01–00047 SUMMARY: On October 3, 2003, the to 19 CFR 351.213(d)(1), has decided (Ct. Int’l Trade December 18, 2002). Canadian Wheat Board filed a First that it is reasonable to accept Carus’ Because Groupstars Chemicals, LLC is Request for Panel Review with the withdrawal of its request for review. not a PRC exporter of the subject United States Section of the NAFTA Furthermore, with respect to the merchandise, and failed to identify any Secretariat pursuant to Article 1904 of remaining review request, we have PRC exporter(s) of the subject the North American Free Trade determined that it is appropriate to merchandise in its review request, and Agreement. Panel review was requested rescind the review of Groupstars with Carus’ withdrawal of its review Chemicals, LLC because this company is of the final determination of Sales at requests, the Department is rescinding Less Than Fair Value made by the a U.S. importer, rather than an exporter this review with respect to Groupstars or producer, of subject merchandise and United States Department of Commerce, Chemicals, LLC. International Trade Administration, it failed to identify the exporter(s) or The Department will issue respecting Certain Durum Wheat and producer(s) to be reviewed. See appropriate assessment instructions to Hard Red Spring Wheat from Canada. Groupstars Chemicals, LLC’s January 28, the U.S. Bureau of Customs and Border This determination was published in 2003 letter to the Department. Section Protection. 351.213(b) of the Department the Federal Register, (68 FR 52741) on regulations requires that reviews be Notification to Interested Parties September 5, 2003. The NAFTA requested for particular exporters or This notice serves as a final reminder Secretariat has assigned Case Number producers. See 19 CFR 351.213(b)(1) to importers of their responsibility USA–CDA–2003–1904–04 to this stating that domestic interested parties under 19 CFR 351.402(f)(2) to file a request. may request an administrative review of certificate regarding the reimbursement FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: ‘‘specified individual exporters or of antidumping duties prior to Caratina L. Alston, United States producers’’; 19 CFR 351.213(b)(2) liquidation of the relevant entries Secretary, NAFTA Secretariat, Suite

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:04 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\09OCN1.SGM 09OCN1 58308 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Notices

2061, 14th and Constitution Avenue, DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE A first Request for Panel Review was Washington, DC 20230, (202) 482–5438. filed with the United States Section of International Trade Administration SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Chapter the NAFTA Secretariat, pursuant to Article 1904 of the Agreement, on 19 of the North American Free-Trade North American Free-Trade Agreement (‘‘Agreement’’) establishes a October 3, 2003, requesting panel Agreement, Article 1904, NAFTA Panel review of the final determination mechanism to replace domestic judicial Reviews; Request for Panel Review review of final determinations in described above. antidumping and countervailing duty AGENCY: NAFTA Secretariat, United The Rules provide that: cases involving imports from a NAFTA States Section, International Trade (a) A Party or interested person may country with review by independent Administration, Department of challenge the final determination in binational panels. When a Request for Commerce. whole or in part by filing a Complaint Panel Review is filed, a panel is ACTION: Notice of First Request for Panel in accordance with Rule 39 within 30 established to act in place of national Review. days after the filing of the first Request courts to review expeditiously the final for Panel Review (the deadline for filing determination to determine whether it SUMMARY: On October 3, 2003, the a Complaint is November 3, 2003); conforms with the antidumping or Government of Canada filed a First (b) a Party, investigating authority or countervailing duty law of the country Request for Panel Review with the interested person that does not file a that made the determination. United States Section of the NAFTA Complaint but that intends to appear in Secretariat pursuant to Article 1904 of Under Article 1904 of the Agreement, support of any reviewable portion of the the North American Free Trade which came into force on January 1, final determination may participate in Agreement. Second requests were filed 1994, the Government of the United the panel review by filing a Notice of on behalf of the Canadian Wheat Board, States, the Government of Canada and Appearance in accordance with Rule 40 the Government of Saskatchewan, and the Government of Mexico established within 45 days after the filing of the first the Government of Alberta, respectively. Rules of Procedure for Article 1904 Request for Panel Review (the deadline Panel review was requested of the final Binational Panel Reviews (‘‘Rules’’). for filing a Notice of Appearance is affirmative Countervailing Duty These Rules were published in the November 18, 2003); and determination made by the United Federal Register on February 23, 1994 (c) the panel review shall be limited States Department of Commerce, (59 FR 8686). to the allegations of error of fact or law, International Trade Administration, A first Request for Panel Review was including the jurisdiction of the respecting Certain Durum Wheat and filed with the United States Section of investigating authority, that are set out Hard Red Spring Wheat from Canada. the NAFTA Secretariat, pursuant to in the Complaints filed in the panel This determination was published in Article 1904 of the Agreement, on review and the procedural and the Federal Register, (68 FR 52747) on October 3, 2003, requesting panel substantive defenses raised in the panel September 5, 2003. The NAFTA review of the final determination review. Secretariat has assigned Case Number described above. Dated: October 6, 2003. USA–CDA–2003–1904–05 to this The Rules provide that: Caratina L. Alston, request. (a) a Party or interested person may United States Secretary, NAFTA Secretariat. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: challenge the final determination in [FR Doc. 03–25633 Filed 10–8–03; 8:45 am] Caratina L. Alston, United States whole or in part by filing a Complaint BILLING CODE 3510–GT–P in accordance with Rule 39 within 30 Secretary, NAFTA Secretariat, Suite days after the filing of the first Request 2061, 14th and Constitution Avenue, for Panel Review (the deadline for filing Washington, DC 20230, (202) 482–5438. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE a Complaint is November 3, 2003); SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Chapter (b) a Party, investigating authority or 19 of the North American Free-Trade National Oceanic and Atmospheric interested person that does not file a Agreement (‘‘Agreement’’) establishes a Administration mechanism to replace domestic judicial Complaint but that intends to appear in [I.D. 090903C] support of any reviewable portion of the review of final determinations in final determination may participate in antidumping and countervailing duty Small Takes of Marine Mammals the panel review by filing a Notice of cases involving imports from a NAFTA Incidental to Specified Activities; Appearance in accordance with Rule 40 country with review by independent Oceanographic Survey in the within 45 days after the filing of the first binational panels. When a Request for Northwest Atlantic Ocean Near Request for Panel Review (the deadline Panel Review is filed, a panel is Bermuda for filing a Notice of Appearance is established to act in place of national November 18, 2003); and courts to review expeditiously the final AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries (c) the panel review shall be limited determination to determine whether it Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and to the allegations of error of fact or law, conforms with the antidumping or Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), including the jurisdiction of the countervailing duty law of the country Commerce. investigating authority, that are set out that made the determination. ACTION: Notice of receipt of application in the Complaints filed in the panel Under Article 1904 of the Agreement, and proposed incidental take review and the procedural and which came into force on January 1, authorization; request for comments. substantive defenses raised in the panel 1994, the Government of the United review. States, the Government of Canada and SUMMARY: NMFS has received an the Government of Mexico established application from the Lamont-Doherty Dated: October 6, 2003. Rules of Procedure for Article 1904 Earth Observatory (LDEO) for an Caratina L. Alston, Binational Panel Reviews (‘‘Rules’’). Incidental Harassment Authorization United States Secretary, NAFTA Secretariat. These Rules were published in the (IHA) to take small numbers of marine [FR Doc. 03–25632 Filed 10–8–03; 8:45 am] Federal Register on February 23, 1994 mammals, by harassment, incidental to BILLING CODE 3510–GT–P (59 FR 8686). conducting an oceanographic survey in

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:04 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\09OCN1.SGM 09OCN1 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Notices 58309

the Northwest Atlantic Ocean near which citizens of the United States can towed hydrophone streamer. The energy Bermuda. Under the Marine Mammal apply for an authorization to to the airgun array is compressed air Protection Act (MMPA), NMFS is incidentally take small numbers of supplied by compressors on board the requesting comments on its proposal to marine mammals by harassment. Under source vessel. As the airgun array is issue an authorization to LDEO to Section 3(18)(A), the MMPA defines towed along the survey lines, the towed incidentally take, by harassment, small ‘‘harassment’’ as: hydrophone streamer or OBH’s will numbers of several species of cetaceans any act of pursuit, torment, or annoyance receive the returning acoustic signals and pinnipeds for a limited period of which (i) has the potential to injure a marine and transfer the data to the on-board time within the next year. mammal or marine mammal stock in the processing system. The OBH’s and wild; or (ii) has the potential to disturb a sonobuoys will be deployed by the R/V DATES: Comments and information must marine mammal or marine mammal stock in be received no later than November 7, the wild by causing disruption of behavioral Maurice Ewing. 2003. patterns, including, but not limited to, All planned geophysical data ADDRESSES: Comments on the migration, breathing, nursing, breeding, acquisition activities will be conducted application should be addressed to the feeding, or sheltering. by LDEO scientists, with on-board Acting Chief, Marine Mammal The term ‘‘Level A harassment’’ assistance from the scientists who have Conservation Division, Office of means harassment described in proposed the study. The survey will be Protected Resources, National Marine subparagraph (A)(i). The term ‘‘Level B conducted in the deep ocean depths Fisheries Service, 1315 East-West harassment’’ means harassment (>1000 m or 3281 ft) of the Bermuda Highway, Silver Spring, MD 20910– described in subparagraph (A)(ii). Rise. The survey program will consist of 3225, or by telephoning the contact Subsection 101(a)(5)(D) establishes a approximately 2400 km (1296 nm) of 45–day time limit for NMFS review of listed here. A copy of the application survey lines. There will be two an application followed by a 30–day containing a list of the references used intersecting seismic reflection and public notice and comment period on in this document may be obtained by refraction lines, each approximately 600 any proposed authorizations for the writing to this address or by telephoning km (324 nm) long. One line will be incidental harassment of marine the contact listed here. Comments oriented north-south along a magnetic mammals. Within 45 days of the close cannot be accepted if submitted via e- isochron, and the other line will be of the comment period, NMFS must oriented east-west along the presumed mail or the Internet. either issue or deny issuance of the track of the hotspot. The point of FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: authorization. intersection of these two lines will be in Sarah C. Hagedorn, Office of Protected Summary of Request close vicinity of Bermuda Island. Each Resources, NMFS, (301) 713–2322, ext of the two lines will be surveyed twice. 117. On July 16, 2003, NMFS received an Along each line, the upper crustal SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: application from LDEO for the taking, structure will be determined by by harassment, of several species of Background acquiring multibeam sonar, marine mammals incidental to multichannel seismic (MCS), and Sections 101(a)(5)(A) and (D) of the conducting a seismic survey by the R/ sonobuoy refraction data. Then, a linear MMPA (16 U.S.C. 1361 et seq.) direct V Maurice Ewing within the Northwest array of OBH’s will be deployed for the Secretary of Commerce to allow, Atlantic Ocean off the coast of Bermuda refraction shooting. The specific upon request, the incidental, but not near the Bermuda Rise area, between configuration of the airgun array will intentional, taking of marine mammals 29° and 35° N and between 61° and 68° differ between the MCS and OBH by U.S. citizens who engage in a W, during November and early surveys (described later in this specified activity (other than December 2003. These operations will document). There will be additional commercial fishing) within a specified take place within the Exclusive operations associated with equipment geographical region if certain findings Economic Zone (EEZ) of Bermuda and testing, startup, line changes, and repeat are made and either regulations are adjacent international waters. Clearance coverage of any areas where initial data issued or, if the taking is limited to to conduct the seismic survey in the quality is sub-standard. harassment, a notice of a proposed foreign EEZ has been requested from The procedures to be used for the authorization is provided to the public Bermuda (U.K.). The purpose of this 2003 seismic survey will be similar to for review. project is to determine what physical those used during previous seismic Permission may be granted if NMFS and chemical changes have been surveys by LDEO, e.g., in the equatorial finds that the taking will have a imparted to the tectonic plate as a result Pacific Ocean (Carbotte et al., 1998, negligible impact on the species or of the eruption of the Bermuda volcano. 2000). The proposed program will use stock(s) and will not have an By understanding what portion of the conventional seismic methodology with unmitigable adverse impact on the uplift of the seafloor is caused by a towed airgun array as the energy availability of the species or stock(s) for thermal (temporary) versus chemical source and a towed streamer containing subsistence uses and that the (permanent) changes to the plate, it will hydrophones as the receiver system. In permissible methods of taking and be possible to predict the rate that addition, sonobuoys and OBH’s will requirements pertaining to the volcanoes in the middle of plates will also be used at times as the receiver monitoring and reporting of such sink beneath the waves. system. In addition, a multi-beam takings are set forth. NMFS has defined bathymetric sonar will be operated from ‘‘negligible impact’’ in 50 CFR 216.103 Description of the Activity the source vessel continuously as ‘‘...an impact resulting from the The seismic survey will involve a throughout the entire cruise, and a specified activity that cannot be single vessel, the R/V Maurice Ewing, lower-energy sub-bottom profiler will reasonably expected to, and is not which will conduct the seismic work. also be operated during most of the reasonably likely to, adversely affect the The Maurice Ewing will deploy an array survey. Seismic surveys will likely species or stock through effects on of 20 airguns as an energy source, and commence on November 6, 2003, and annual rates of recruitment or survival.’’ a receiving system consisting of Ocean continue until the first week of Subsection 101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA Bottom Hydrophones (OBH’s), 96 December, 2003. Exact dates of the established an expedited process by sonobuoys, and/or a 6–km (3.2–nm) activity may vary by a few days due to

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:04 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\09OCN1.SGM 09OCN1 58310 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Notices

weather conditions of the need to repeat 2 multibeam 15.5–kHz bathymetric mid-frequencies, centered at 3.5 kHz. some lines if data quality is sonar, and a 3.5–kHz sub-bottom The beamwidth is approximately 30° substandard. profiler will also be operated along with and is directed downward. Maximum The R/V Maurice Ewing will be used the multi-beam sonar. These mid- source output is 204 dB re 1 µPa, 800 as the source vessel. It will tow the 20– frequency sound sources are commonly watts, while nominal source output is airgun array and a streamer containing operated from the Maurice Ewing 200 dB re 1 µPa, 500 watts. Pulse hydrophones along predetermined lines. simultaneous with the airgun array. duration will be 4, 2, or 1 ms, and the During seismic acquisition, the vessel The Atlas Hydrosweep is mounted in bandwith of pulses will be 1.0 kHz, 0.5 will travel at 4–5 knots (7.4–9.3 km/hr). the hull of the R/V Maurice Ewing, and kHz, or 0.25 kHz, respectively. During the MCS survey, the airgun array it operates in three modes, depending Along the two selected seismic lines, to be used will consist of 20 2000–psi on the water depth. The first is a data will first be acquired using Bolt airguns. The standard 20–gun array shallow-water mode when water depth multibeam sonar, multichannel seismic, will include airguns ranging in chamber is <400 m (1312.3 ft). The source output and sonobuoys. A total of 96 sonobuoys volume from 80 to 850 in3, with a total is 210 dB re 1 µPa-m rms and a single will be available, and the Ewing system volume of 8,575 in3. These airguns will 1–millisec pulse or ‘‘ping’’ per second is allows two sonobuoys to be recorded at be spaced in an approximate rectangle transmitted, with a beamwidth of 2.67 any time. The sonobuoy profiles will be of dimensions of 35 m (115 ft)(across degrees fore-aft and 90 degrees in analyzed during the MCS shooting and track) by 9 m (30 ft)(along track). athwartship. The beamwidth is streamer recovery on each line. The Seismic pulses will be emitted at measured to the 3 dB point, as is usually preliminary results from the sonobuoy intervals of approximately 20 seconds. quoted for sonars. The other two modes refraction will be used to plan the OBH The 20–sec spacing corresponds to a are deep-water modes. The Omni mode deployment pattern on the subsequent shot interval of about 50 m (164 ft). is identical to the shallow-water mode deep refraction survey. Twenty OBH’s After the line has been surveyed using except that the source output is 220 dB will be deployed for each line. MCS, the hydrophone streamer will be rms. The Omni mode is normally used Additional information on the airgun retrieved and OBH’s will be deployed. only during start up. The Rotational arrays, Atlas Hydrosweep, and sub- During the OBH refraction survey, an Directional Transmission (RDT) mode is bottom profiler specifications is augmented 20–gun array will be used normally used during deep-water contained in the application, which is and configured for a total volume of operation and has a 237–dB rms source available upon request (see ADDRESSES). approximately 11,000 in3 by changing output. In the RDT mode, each ‘‘ping’’ Description of Habitat and Marine smaller gun chambers for larger volume consists of five successive Mammals Affected by the Activity chambers (ranging from 145 to 875 in3) transmissions, each ensonifying a beam after the completion of the MCS that extends 2.67 degrees fore-aft and A detailed description of the reflection lines. Seismic pulses will be approximately 30 degrees in the cross- Northwest Atlantic Ocean and its emitted at intervals of 240 seconds track direction. The five successive associated marine mammals can be during OBH acquisition. LDEO believes transmissions (segments) sweep from found in a number of documents that even though the augmented 20–gun port to starboard with minor overlap, referenced in the LDEO application as array will have a total air discharge spanning an overall cross-track angular well as in the LDEO application itself, volume of approximately 2400 in3 more extent of about 140 degrees, with tiny and is not repeated here. Approximately than the standard 20–gun array, this (<1 millisec) gaps between the pulses 32 species of cetaceans may be found will not significantly increase the source for successive 30–degree segments. The within the proposed study area near output since the number of guns has a total duration of the ‘‘ping’’, including Bermuda. These species are the sperm greater effect on source output than all 5 successive segments, varies with whale (Physeter macrocephalus), pygmy discharge volume. water depth but is 1 millisec in water sperm whale (Kogia breviceps), dwarf The dominant frequency components depths <500 m (1640.5 ft) and 10 sperm whale (Kogia sima), Cuvier’s for both airgun arrays is 0 – 188 Hz. The millisec in the deepest water. For each beaked whale (Ziphius cavirostris), standard 20–airgun array (MCS survey) segment, ping duration, is 1/5th of these True’s beaked whale (Mesoplodon will have a peak sound source level of values or 2/5th for a receiver in the mirus), Gervais’ beaked whale 255 dB re 1 µPa or 262 dB peak-to-peak overlap area ensonified by two beam (Mesoplodon europaeus), Sowerby’s (P-P), and will be towed at a depth of segments. The ‘‘ping’’ interval during beaked whale (Mesoplodon bidens), 7.5 m (24.5 ft). The augmented 20– RDT operations depends on water depth Blainville’s beaked whale (Mesoplodon airgun array (OBH survey) will have a and varies from once per second in <500 densirostris), rough-toothed dolphin peak sound source level of 256 dB re 1 m (1640.5 ft) water depth to once per 15 (Steno bredanensis), bottlenose dolphin µPa or 263 dB P-P, and will be towed seconds in the deepest water. (Tursiops truncatus), Pantropical at a depth of 9.0 m (29.5 ft). Because the The sub-bottom profiler is normally spotted dolphin (Stenella attenuata), actual source is a distributed sound operated to provide information about Atlantic spotted dolphin (Stenella source (20 guns) rather than a single the sedimentary features and bottom frontalis), spinner dolphin (Stenella point source, the highest sound levels topography that is simultaneously being longirostris), clymene dolphin (Stenella measurable at any location in the water mapped by the Hydrosweep. The energy clymene), striped dolphin (Stenella will be less than the nominal source from the sub-bottom profiler is directed coeruleoalba), short-beaked common level. Also, because of the directional downward by a 3.5–kHz transducer dolphin (Delphinus delphis), Fraser’s nature of the sound from the airgun mounted in the hull of the Maurice dolphin (Lagenodelphis hosei), Atlantic array, the effective source level for Ewing. The output varies with water white-sided dolphin (Lagenorhynchus sound propagating in near-horizontal depth from 50 watts in shallow water to acutus), Risso’s dolphin (Grampus directions will be substantially lower. 800 watts in deep water. Pulse interval griseus), melon-headed whale Along with the airgun operations, two is 1 second but a common mode of (Peponocephala electra), pygmy killer additional acoustical data acquisition operation is to broadcast five pulses at whale (Feresa attenuata), false killer systems will be operated during most or 1–s intervals followed by a 5–s pause. whale (Pseudorca crassidens), killer all of the cruise. The ocean floor will be Most of the energy in the sound pulses whale (Orcinus orca), long-finned pilot mapped with an Atlas Hydrosweep DS– emitted by this multi-beam sonar is at whale (Globicephala melas), short-

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:04 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\09OCN1.SGM 09OCN1 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Notices 58311

finned pilot whale (Globicephala the white-beaked dolphin Potential Effects on Marine Mammals macrorhynchus), North Atlantic right (Lagenorhynchus albirostris (does not whale (Eubalaena glacialis), humpback normally occur south of Cape Cod)), and The sound pressure fields for the whale (Megaptera novaeangliae), minke Fraser’s dolphin (Lagenodelphis hosei standard and augmented 20–gun arrays whale (Balaenoptera acutorostrata), (usually found further south)). have been modeled by LDEO, in relation Bryde’s whale (Balaenoptera edeni), sei Pinnipeds are unlikely to be seen in the to distance and direction from the whale (Balaenoptera borealis), fin whale study area although vagrants of grey airguns. As determined by the models, (Balaenoptera physalus), and the blue (Halichoerus grypus) and hooded the pressure fields are similar for both whale (Balaenoptera musculus). (Cystophora cristata) seals could occur. the 8575 in3 and the 11,000 in3 arrays. Another three species are known to Additional information on most of these Table 1 in the application (LDEO occur just outside of the study area and species is contained in Caretta et al. Bermuda 2003) shows the maximum are not likely to be seen within the (2001, 2002) which is available at: http:/ distances from both 20–airgun array study area - the northern bottlenose /www.nmfs.noaa.gov/protlres/PR2/ configurations where sound levels of whale (Hyperoodon ampullatus (not StocklAssessmentlProgram/ ≥190, 180, 170, and 160 dB re 1 µPa usually found south of Nova Scotia)), sars.html. (rms) are predicted to be received:

20–Airgun Array Predicted RMS Radii in meters/ft Volume 190 dB 180 dB 170 dB 160 dB

8575 in3 ...... 275/902 900/2953 2600/8531 9000/29,529 11,000 in3 ...... 300/984 925/3035 2900/9515 9200/30,185

An earlier notice of an LDEO The estimates of takes by harassment the applicable 20–airgun arrays to application and proposed IHA was are based on the number of marine estimate the ‘‘best estimate’’ of the published in the Federal Register on mammals that might be exposed to numbers of animals of each species that April 14, 2003 (68 FR 17909). That seismic sounds ≥160 dB re 1 µPa (rms) might be exposed to sound levels ≥160 notice described, in detail, the by operations with the 20–airgun array dB re 1 µPa (rms) during the proposed characteristics of the Ewing’s acoustic planned for the project. Taken from seismic survey program. sources and, in general, the anticipated year-round marine mammal density Based on this method, Table 3 in the effects on marine mammals including aerial survey data that has been LDEO application gives the best masking, disturbance, and potential summarized by geographic location and estimates, as well as maximum hearing impairment and other physical calendar season (CETAP 1982), LDEO estimates, of densities for each species effects. That information is not repeated used densities for the ‘‘Entire Atlantic or species group of marine mammal that here. In addition, details on acoustic Stratum’’ during the autumn period to might be exposed to received levels sources from, and possible effects of, the estimate the numbers of marine ≥160 dB re 1 µPa (rms), and thus sub-bottom profiler, which was not used mammals that are likely to be present in potentially taken by Level B harassment in the project described in the April 14, the proposed survey area near Bermuda. during seismic surveys in the proposed 2003, notice, were described on July 28, These densities are probably study area of the Northwest Atlantic 2003 (68 FR 44294). The subject LDEO overestimates of the numbers that are Ocean near Bermuda. It is assumed that Bermuda application also provides likely to be present, because much of the 20–airgun array would be used for information on what is known about the the proposed seismic survey area is all surveys but that air volume would be effects on marine mammals of the types farther from shore, in greater water 8575 in3 for half of the survey and of seismic operations planned by LDEO. depths, and in generally much less approximately 11,000 in3 for half of the productive waters. Because the CETAP survey. Estimates of Take by Harassment for (1982) surveys were conducted from an Delphinidae would account for 94 the Bermuda Cruise airplane, few beaked whales were seen percent of the overall estimate for As described previously (68 FR or identified, and densities of beaked potential taking by harassment (i.e., 17909, April 14 2003), animals whales were estimated to be zero during 10,292 of 10,910), with short-beaked subjected to sound levels ≥160 dB may the autumn surveys. More than likely common dolphins (3941) and pilot alter their behavior or distribution, and there are small numbers of beaked whales (3345) believed to account for therefore might be considered to be whales in the proposed survey area about 71 percent of all delphinids in the taken by Level B harassment. However, throughout the year, so LDEO used the area of the proposed seismic survey, and the 160–dB criterion is based on studies mean density for the entire year to with smaller numbers of bottlenose of baleen whales. Odontocete hearing at estimate the densities of beaked whales dolphins (1871), Risso’s dolphins (858), low frequencies is relatively insensitive, that might be present. and striped dolphins (277) accounting and dolphins and pilot whales generally Except for beaked whales, LDEO used for most of the remaining 29 percent. appear to be more tolerant of strong its best estimate of density to compute While there is no agreement regarding sounds than are most baleen whales. a best estimate of the number of marine any alternative ‘‘take’’ criterion for Delphinidae have their best hearing in mammals that may be exposed to dolphins exposed to airgun pulses, if the higher frequencies and are unlikely seismic sounds≥160 dB re 1 µPa (rms) only those dolphins exposed to ≥170 dB to be as sensitive as the mysticete (NMFS’ current criterion for onset of re 1 µPa (rms) were to be affected whales to the low frequency of the Level B harassment). The best density sufficiently to be considered taken by airgun array. Therefore, they are less estimates were multiplied by the linear Level B harassment, then the best likely to experience Level B harassment extent of the proposed survey (1200 km estimate for common dolphins would be at 160 dB. A more likely threshold for or 648 n.mi. for each of the 8575 and 1191 rather than 3941 during the onset of Level B harassment in response approximately 11,000 in3 arrays) and by Bermuda Rise cruise, and for pilot to seismic sounds is at about 170 dB. twice the 160–dB safety radius around whales it would be 1011 instead of

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:04 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\09OCN1.SGM 09OCN1 58312 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Notices

3345. These are based on the predicted B harassment are expected to have no ranges (See Mitigation) should further 170–dB radius around the 20–airgun more than a negligible impact on the reduce short-term reactions to arrays (2600 m or 8530 ft for the 8575 affected species or stock. disturbance, and minimize any effects in3 array and 2900 m or 9514 ft for the Larger numbers of odontocetes may be on hearing sensitivity. approximately 11,000 in3 array), and are affected by the proposed activities, but Conclusions-effects on Pinnipeds considered to be more realistic estimates the population sizes of the main species of the number of these species that may also are larger and the numbers Very few if any pinnipeds are be disturbed. Therefore, the total potentially affected are small relative to expected to be encountered during the number of animals likely to be harassed the population sizes. 38 sperm whales proposed seismic survey near Bermuda. is considerably lower than the 10,910 or 0.3 percent of the estimated North However, a few stray hooded and grey animals that LDEO has estimated in Atlantic sperm whale population would seals could be encountered. The best Table 3 (LDEO Bermuda 2003). receive seismic sounds ≥160 dB. estimate of the numbers of each of the Similarly, only 78 beaked whales from Conclusions-Effects on Cetaceans more common (but unlikely) species the 5 beaked whale species may be that might be taken by Level B The proposed airgun array affected by the proposed activities. This harassment is no more than two and is configurations are larger than those used is 2.4 percent of the estimated total of most likely zero. It is estimated that a in many seismic projects; however, shot all 5 species of beaked whales (3196) maximum of 10 pinnipeds (five for each intervals are longer than during many that occur along the northeast coast of species) may be affected by the surveys and so marine mammals will be the U.S. Because the CETAP (1982) proposed seismic surveys. None of the exposed to fewer seismic pulses than surveys were conducted from an pinniped species is considered during many other similar seismic airplane, few beaked whales were seen, endangered or vulnerable. surveys. The pulse interval for the 8575 or at least identified, and densities of No pinnipeds regularly occur in the in3 gun array is 20 seconds and is 240 beaked whales were estimated to be zero proposed survey area and thus none are seconds for the 11,000 in3 array. during the autumn surveys. However, Strong avoidance reactions by several expected to be encountered. If LDEO believes there are probably small pinnipeds are encountered, the species of mysticetes to seismic vessels numbers of beaked whales in the have been observed at ranges up to 6 to proposed seismic activities would have, proposed survey area throughout the at most, a short-term effect on their 8 km (3.2 to 4.3 n.mi.) and occasionally year, so LDEO used the mean density for as far as 20–30 km (10.8–16.2 n.mi.) behavior and no long-term impacts on the entire year to estimate the densities individual seals or their populations. from the source vessel. Some bowhead of beaked whales that might be present Responses of pinnipeds to acoustic whales avoided waters within 30 km during autumn. Most of the proposed disturbance are variable, but usually (16.2 n.mi.) of the seismic operation. seismic survey area is outside of the quite limited. Effects are expected to be However, reactions at such long area for which this 3196 estimate was limited to short-term and localized distances appear to be atypical of other made, and only a very small part of behavioral changes falling within the species of mysticetes, and even for beaked whale habitat in the North MMPA definition of Level B bowheads may only apply during Atlantic was included in the estimate. harassment. Taking these factors into migration. Thus the actual estimate is more than account, impacts are expected to be no Odontocete reactions to seismic likely much larger than 3196, and the more than negligible. pulses, or at least those of dolphins, are percentage of animals that might receive expected to extend to lesser distances seismic sounds ≥160 dB during the Mitigation than are those of mysticetes. Odontocete proposed cruise is believed to be less low-frequency hearing is less sensitive than 1 percent of the 3196 estimated For the proposed seismic operations than that of mysticetes, and dolphins North Atlantic population of the 5 in the Bermuda Rise area in 2003, LDEO are often seen from seismic vessels. In species of beaked whales. will use a 20–airgun array. The airguns fact, there are documented instances of The best estimate of the total number comprising these arrays will be spread dolphins approaching active seismic of common dolphins, pilot whales, out horizontally, so that the energy from vessels. However, dolphins as well as bottlenose dolphins, Risso’s dolphins the arrays will be directed mostly some other types of odontocetes and striped dolphins that might be downward. sometimes show avoidance responses exposed to ≥160 dB re 1 µPa (rms) in the The sound pressure fields have been and/or other changes in behavior when proposed survey area near Bermuda are modeled by LDEO in relation to near operating seismic vessels. 3941, 3345, 1871, 858 and 277, distance and direction from the Taking account of the mitigation respectively. Of these, about 1191, 1011, standard and augmented 20–gun array measures that are planned, effects on 565, 259 and 84, respectively might be as shown in Figures 5 and 6, cetaceans are generally expected to be exposed to ≥170 dB. These figures are respectively (LDEO Bermuda 2003). limited to avoidance of the area around <0.1 to <1.1 percent of the North Since the sound pressure fields around the seismic operation and short-term Atlantic population estimates of these both configurations of the 20–gun array changes in behavior, falling within the species. However, the actual population are similar, the marine mammal safety MMPA definition of ‘‘Level B sizes are much larger than the estimates radii for the augmented 20–gun array harassment.’’ In the cases of mysticetes, so the percentage of the various will be used for the duration of the these reactions are expected to involve populations that might be affected are cruise. The radius around the small numbers of individual cetaceans. considerably lower than the <0.1 to <1.1 augmented 20–gun array where the LDEO’s best estimate is that 501 fin percent mentioned above. The values received level would be 180 dB re 1 µPa whales, or 1.1 percent of the estimated based on the ≥170 dB criterion are (rms) (the level for onset of Level A North Atlantic fin whale population believed to be a more accurate estimate harassment applicable to cetaceans) is (IWC 2003) will be exposed to sound of the number potentially affected. estimated as 925 m (3035 ft). The radius levels ≥160 dB re 1 µPa (rms) and Mitigation measures such as around the augmented 20–gun array potentially affected during the proposed controlled speed, look-outs, non- where the received level would be 190 cruise near Bermuda. In light of all these pursuit, ramp-ups, and power- and shut- dB re 1 µPa (rms), (the level for onset factors, these potential takings by Level down procedures when within defined of Level A harassment applicable to

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:04 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\09OCN1.SGM 09OCN1 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Notices 58313

pinnipeds), is estimated as 300 m (984 Mitigation During Operations modeled safety radii for a single gun ft). The following mitigation measures, as will be maintained. If the standard 20– Vessel-based observers will monitor well as marine mammal monitoring, gun array is used, the single gun that 3 marine mammals in the vicinity of the will be adopted during the proposed will be firing is 80 in , and for the 3 arrays. LDEO proposes to power-down seismic survey program, provided that augmented array, it is 145 in . The 3 the seismic source if marine mammals doing so will not compromise safety radii for the larger 145 in gun are observed within the proposed safety operational safety requirements: (1) will be used for mitigation purposes. radii. Also, LDEO proposes to use a Speed or course alteration; (2) power- Since no calibrations have been done to ramp-up procedure when commencing down procedures; (3) shut-down confirm the modeled safety radii for this operations using the 20–gun array. procedures; and (4) ramp-up single gun, conservative (1.5 times the Ramp-up will begin with the smallest procedures. safety radius) radii will be used: 48 m 3 or 158 ft (the conservative radius is 72 gun in the array (80 in for the standard Course Alteration array and 145 in3 for the augmented m or 236 ft) for cetaceans, and 17 m or array), and guns will be added in a If a marine mammal is detected 56 ft (the conservative radius is 26 m or 85 ft) for pinnipeds. If a marine mammal sequence such that the source level of outside the safety radius and, based on is seen within the appropriate safety the array will increase at a rate no its position and the relative motion, is radius of the array while the guns are greater than 6 dB per 5–minute period likely to enter the safety radius, the powered-down, airgun operations will over a total duration of about 25 vessel’s speed and/or direct course will be shut-down. Airgun operations will minutes. Please refer to LDEO’s be changed in a manner that also not resume until the marine mammal is application for more detailed minimizes the effect to the planned outside the safety radius. information about the mitigation science objectives. The marine mammal measures that are an integral part of the activities and movements relative to the Ramp-up Procedure planned activity. seismic vessel will be closely monitored to ensure that the marine mammal does A ‘‘ramp-up’’ procedure will be Operational Mitigation not approach within the safety radius. If followed when the airgun array begins the mammal appears likely to enter the operating after a specified-duration The directional nature of the airgun safey radius, further mitigative actions period without airgun operations. Under array to be used in this project is an will be taken, i.e., either further course normal operational conditions (vessel important mitigating factor, resulting in alterations or power-down of the speed of about 4 knots or 7.4 km/hr), the lower sound levels at any given airguns. Maurice Ewing would travel 900 m horizontal distance than would be (3117 ft) in about 8 minutes and a ramp- expected at that distance if the source Power-down and Shut-down up would be required after a power- were omnidirectional with the stated Procedures down or shut-down period lasting 8 nominal source level. Because the actual If a marine mammal is detected minutes or longer if the Ewing tows a seismic source is a distributed sound outside the safety radius but is likely to 20–airgun array. Based on the same source rather than a single point source, enter the safety radius, and if the calculation, a ramp-up procedure would the highest sound levels measurable at vessel’s course and/or speed cannot be be required after a 6 minute period if the any location in the water will be less changed to avoid having the marine speed of the source vessel was 5 knots. than the nominal source level. mammal enter the safety radius, the During the ramp-up procedures, the airguns will be powered-down before safety zone for the full-gun array will be Proposed Safety Radii the mammal is within the safety radius. maintained. Received sound levels have been Likewise, if a mammal is already within If the airguns are started up at night, modeled for the 20–gun array. Based on the safety zone when first detected, the two marine mammal observers will the modeling, estimates of the 190-, 180- airguns will be powered-down monitor for marine mammals near the , 170-, and 160–dB re 1 µPa (rms) immediately. A power-down involves source vessel for 30 minutes prior to distances (safety radii) for these arrays decreasing the number of airguns in use start up of airgun operations and during have been provided previously in this such that the radius of the 180–dB zone the subsequent ramp-up procedures. If document. is decreased to the extent that marine the safety radius has not been visible for mammals are not in the safety radii. A that 30 minute period (e.g., during Airgun operations will be suspended power-down may also occur when the darkness or fog), ramp-up will not immediately when cetaceans are seen vessel is moving from one seismic line commence unless at least one airgun within or about to enter the appropriate to another. was operating during the interruption of 180–dB (rms) radius, or if pinnipeds are For the power-down procedure, one seismic survey operations. seen within or about to enter the 190– airgun (either 80 or 145 in3) will be dB (rms) radius. These 180- and 190–dB operated during the interruption of Monitoring and Reporting criteria are consistent with guidelines seismic survey. Airgun activity (after LDEO proposes to conduct marine listed for cetaceans and pinnipeds by both power-down and shut-down mammal monitoring of its 2003 seismic NMFS (2000) and other guidance by procedures) will not resume until the program near Bermuda in order to NMFS. A calibration study was marine mammal has cleared the safety satisfy the anticipated requirements of conducted prior to these surveys to radii. The animal has cleared the safety the IHA. determine the actual radii radii if it is visually observed to have Vessel-based Visual Monitoring corresponding to each sound level. left the safety radii, or if it has not been At least two vessel-based observers These actual radii will be implemented seen within the radii for 15 min (small dedicated to marine mammal for this study. Until then, or if those odontocetes and pinnipeds) or 30 min observations will be stationed aboard measurements appear defective, LDEO (mysticetes and large odontocetes, LDEO’s seismic survey vessel for the will use a precautionary 1.5 times the including sperm, pygmy sperm, dwarf seismic survey near Bermuda. At least modeled 180–dB (cetaceans) and 190– sperm, and beaked whales). one experienced marine mammal dB (pinnipeds) radii predicted by the If a cetacean is detected close to the observer will be on duty aboard the model as the safety radii. airgun array during a power-down, seismic vessel, and observers will be

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:04 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\09OCN1.SGM 09OCN1 58314 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Notices

appointed by LDEO with NMFS (ITT F500 Series Generation 3 binocular Results from the vessel-based concurrence. Observers will be on duty image intensifier or equivalent). Laser observations will provide (1) the basis in shifts of duration no longer than 4 rangefinding binoculars (Leica LRF 1200 for real-time mitigation (airgun power- hours. Use of two simultaneous laser rangefinder or equivalent) will be down); (2) information needed to observers will increase the proportion of available to assist with distance estimate the number of marine the marine mammals present near the estimation. If a marine mammal is seen mammals potentially taken by source vessel that are detected. well outside the safety radius, the vessel harassment, which must be reported to It is proposed that one or two marine may be maneuvered to avoid having the NMFS; (3) data on the occurrence, mammal observers aboard the seismic mammal come within the safety radius distribution, and activities of marine vessel will search for and observe (see Mitigation). When mammals are mammals in the area where the seismic marine mammals whenever seismic detected within or about to enter the study is conducted; (4) information to operations are in progress during designated safety radii, the airguns will compare the distance and distribution of daylight hours, and if feasible, be powered-down immediately. The marine mammals relative to the source observations will also be made during observer(s) will continue to maintain vessel at times with and without seismic periods without seismic activity. Two watch to determine when the animal is activity; and (5) data on the behavior observers will monitor for marine outside the safety radius. Airgun and movement patterns of marine mammals near the seismic source vessel operations will not resume until the mammals seen at times with and for at least 30 minutes prior to and animal is outside the safety radius or without seismic activity. during all daylight airgun operations until the specified intervals (15 or 30 A report will be submitted to NMFS including ramp-ups, after an extended min) have passed without a re-sighting. within 90 days after the end of the shut-down, and during any nighttime seismic program in the Bermuda Rise Reporting startups of the airguns. Airgun area. The end of the seismic program is operations will be suspended when The vessel-based monitoring will predicted to occur on or about marine mammals are observed within, provide data required to estimate the December 9, 2003. The report will or about to enter, designated safety numbers of marine mammals exposed to describe the operations that were radii, where there is a possibility of various received sound levels, to conducted and the marine mammals Level A harassment. Observers will not document any apparent disturbance that were detected near the operations, be on duty during ongoing seismic reactions, and thus to estimate the and will be submitted to NMFS, operations at night; bridge personnel numbers of mammals potentially taken providing full documentation of will watch for marine mammals during by Level B harassment. It will also methods, results, and interpretation this period and will call for the airguns provide the information needed in order pertaining to all monitoring tasks. The to be powered-down if marine mammals to shut down the airguns at times when 90–day report will summarize the dates are observed in or about to enter the mammals are present in or near the and locations of seismic operations, safety radii. At least one marine safety zone. When a mammal sighting is sound measurement data, marine mammal observer will be on ‘‘standby’’ made, the following information about mammal sightings (dates, times, at night, in case bridge personnel see a the sighting will be recorded: (1) locations, activities, associated seismic marine mammal. An image-intensifier Species, group size, age/size/sex survey activities), and estimates of the night-vision device (NVD) will be categories (if determinable), behavior amount and nature of potential ‘‘take’’ available for use at night. Ramp-up will when first sighted and after initial of marine mammals by harassment or in not occur if the safety radius has not sighting, heading (if consistent), bearing other ways. The draft report will be been visible for at least 30 min prior to and distance from seismic vessel, considered the final report unless the start of operations in either daylight sighting cue, apparent reaction to comments and suggestions are provided or nighttime. The 30–minute seismic vessel (e.g., none, avoidance, by NMFS within 60 days of its receipt observation period is only required approach, paralleling, etc.), and of the draft report. prior to commencing seismic operations behavioral pace; and (2) time, location, following a shut-down of the 20–gun heading, speed, activity of the vessel Endangered Species Act (ESA) array for more than 1 hour. After 30 (shooting or not), sea state, visibility, Under section 7 of the ESA, NMFS minutes of observation, the ramp-up cloud cover, and sun glare. The data has begun consultation on the proposed procedure will be followed. listed under (2) will also be recorded at issuance of an IHA under section The R/V Maurice Ewing is a suitable the start and end of each observation 101(a)(5)(D) of the MMPA for this platform for marine mammal watch and during a watch, whenever activity. Consultation will be concluded observations. Observers will watch for there is a change in one or more of the prior to the issuance of an IHA. marine mammals from the highest variables. practical vantagepoint on the vessel, All mammal observations and airgun National Environmental Policy Act which is either the bridge or the flying shutdowns will be recorded in a (NEPA) bridge. The observer’s eye level will be standardized format. Data will be The National Science Foundation has approximately 11 m (36 ft) above sea entered into a custom database using a prepared an EA for the Bermuda Rise level when stationed on the bridge, laptop computer when observers are off- survey. NMFS is reviewing this EA and allowing for good visibility within a duty. The accuracy of the data entry will will either adopt it or prepare its own 210° arc for each observer. If observers be verified by computerized validity NEPA document before making a are stationed on the flying bridge, the data checks as the data are entered and determination on the issuance of an eye level will be 14.4 m (47.2 ft) above by subsequent manual checking of the IHA. A copy of the NSF EA for this sea level. The proposed monitoring plan database. These procedures will allow activity is available upon request (see is summarized later in this document. initial summaries of data to be prepared ADDRESSES). The observer(s) will systematically scan during and shortly after the field the area around the vessel with 7 X 50 program, and will facilitate transfer of Preliminary Conclusions Fujinon reticle binoculars or with the the data to statistical, graphical or other NMFS has preliminarily determined naked eye during the daytime. At night, programs for further processing and that the impact of conducting a seismic night vision equipment will be available archiving. survey program in the Bermuda Rise

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:04 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\09OCN1.SGM 09OCN1 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Notices 58315

portion of the Northwest Atlantic Ocean SUMMARY: The Scallop Plan Team will DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE will result, at worst, in a temporary meet October 29–30, 2003, at the NMFS modification in behavior by certain Sustainable Fisheries Conference Room National Oceanic and Atmospheric species of marine mammals. This in Juneau, AK. You may call in on the Administration activity is expected to result in no more conference line at 907–586–7977. [I.D. 100303A] than a negligible impact on the affected DATES: species. The meeting will meet on South Atlantic Fishery Management While the number of potential October 29–30, 2003, 9 a.m. to 5 p.m. Council; Public Meetings incidental harassment takes will depend ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at on the distribution and abundance of AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries the NMFS, 709 W 9th Avenue, Juneau, Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and marine mammals in the vicinity of the AK 99801. survey activity, the number of potential Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), harassment takings is estimated to be Council address: North Pacific Commerce. small. In addition, no take by injury Fishery Management Council, 605 W. ACTION: Joint meeting of the South and/or death is anticipated, and the 4th Ave., Suite 306, Anchorage, AK Atlantic Council’s Habitat Advisory potential for temporary or permanent 99501–2252. Panel and Coral Advisory Panel (AP). hearing impairment is low and will be FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: avoided through the incorporation of SUMMARY: The South Atlantic Fishery Diana Stram, Council staff, Phone: 907– Management Council (Council) will the mitigation measures mentioned in 271–2809. this document. In addition, the hold a joint meeting of its Habitat AP proposed seismic program will not take SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Agenda – and Coral AP to further the Council’s place in or near subsistence hunting (1) Membership and Officers (2) Draft integrated process to update Essential areas. Terms of Reference for Scallop Plan Fish Habitat information and consider ecosystem-based management through Proposed Authorization Team (3) Review Status of Stocks and the development of a Fishery Ecosystem NMFS proposes to issue an IHA to Stock Assessment and Fishery Plan for the South Atlantic Region. LDEO for conducting a seismic survey Evaluation report (4) Discuss updating program in the Bermuda Rise portion of the Scallop Fishery Management Plan DATES: The joint meeting will take place the Northwest Atlantic Ocean, provided (5) Update on Alaska Board of Fisheries October 22 and 23, 2003. the proposed mitigation, monitoring, regulation changes from the 2003 ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at and reporting requirements are meeting (6) New Business. the Town and Country Inn, 2008 incorporated. NMFS has preliminarily Savannah Highway, Charleston, SC, determined that the proposed activity Although other non-emergency issue 29407; phone: 800–334–6660 or 843– would result in the harassment of small not on the agenda may come before the 571–1000. Council for discussion, in accordance numbers of marine mammals; would FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kim have no more than a negligible impact with the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Iverson, Public Information Officer, on the affected marine mammal stocks; Conservation and Management Act South Atlantic Fishery Management and would not have an unmitigable (Magnuson-Stevens Act), those issues Council, One Southpark Circle, Suite adverse impact on the availability of may not be the subject of formal action 306, Charleston, S.C., 29407; phone stocks for subsistence uses. during this meeting. Actions of the 843–571–4366 or 866–SAFMC–10; FAX Information Solicited Council will be restricted to those issues 843–769–4520. specifically identified in the agenda and NMFS requests interested persons to SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Meeting any issues arising after publication of participants will meet from 1 until 5 submit comments and information this notice that require emergency concerning this request (see ADDRESSES). p.m. on October 22, 2003, and again action under Section 305(c) of the from 8:30 a.m. until 5 p.m. on October Dated: October 3, 2003. Magnuson-Stevens Act, provided the 23, 2003. Items for discussion at the Laurie K. Allen, public has been informed of the joint meeting include: (1) a summary of Acting Director, Office of Protected Resources, Council’s intent to take action to the workshop process to facilitate National Marine Fisheries Service. address the emergency. revision of Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) [FR Doc. 03–25639 Filed 10–08–03; 8:45 am] and EFH Habitat Areas of Particular Special Accommodations BILLING CODE 3510–22–S Concern (EFH-HAPC) designations and These meetings are physically development of a South Atlantic Fishery Ecosystem Plan; (2) deepwater coral DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE accessible to people with disabilities. Requests for sign language habitat research and protection; (3) habitat policy statement review and National Oceanic and Atmospheric interpretation or other auxiliary aids development; (4) review of regulations Administration should be directed to Gail Bendixen at protecting EFH and any remaining 907–271–2809 at least 7 working days [I.D. 100603A] fishing and non-fishing activities prior to the meeting date. impacting habitat; and (5) research and North Pacific Fishery Management Dated: October 06, 2003. monitoring needs to refine the Council; Notice of Public Meeting Richard W. Surdi, designation and protection of EFH and AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Acting Director, Office of Sustainable EFH-HAPCs and to support ecosystem- Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service. based management. Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), [FR Doc. 03–25642 Filed 10–8–03; 8:45 am] Although non-emergency issues not contained in this notice may come Commerce. BILLING CODE 3510–22–S before this group for discussion, those ACTION: Meeting of the North Pacific issues may not be the subject of formal Fishery Management Council’s Scallop action during this meeting. Action will Plan Team. be restricted to those issues specifically

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:04 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\09OCN1.SGM 09OCN1 58316 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Notices

listed in this notice and any issues DATES: Written or telefaxed comments narwhals (Monodon monoceros), walrus arising after publication of this notice must be received on or before November (Odobenus rosmarus) and ringed seals that require emergency action under 10, 2003. (Phoca hispida). Tissues to be imported section 305(c) of the Magnuson-Stevens ADDRESSES: The application requests include blood, lymph nodes, lungs and Fishery Conservation and Management and related documents are available for reproductive organs. These samples will Act, provided the public has been review upon written request or by be utilized in brucellosis research notified of the Council’s intent to take appointment in the following office(s): investigating the presence of Brucella in final actions to address such see SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION. subsistence harvested marine mammals. emergencies. Written comments or requests for a The applicant is requesting a five year public hearing on these requests should permit. Special Accommodations be submitted to the Chief, Permits, Sea World, Inc. (File No. 116–1691/ These meetings are physically Conservation and Education Division, PRT–062475) requests authorization to accessible to people with disabilities. F/PR1, Office of Protected Resources, collect, receive, import, and export an Requests for sign language NMFS, 1315 East-West Highway, Room unlimited number of pinniped and interpretation or other auxiliary aids 13705, Silver Spring, MD 20910. Those cetacean specimens including but not should be directed to the Council office individuals requesting a hearing should limited to reproductive cells and organs, (see ADDRESSES) by October 21,2003. set forth the specific reasons why a urine, feces, saliva, ocular secretions, Dated: October 03, 2003. hearing on this particular amendment and whole blood taken from dead or captive individuals to study Richard W. Surdi, request would be appropriate. Comments may also be submitted by reproductive physiology, including Acting Director, Office of Sustainable endocrinology, gamete biology, and Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service. facsimile at (301)713–0376, provided cryophysiology. Specimens may be [FR Doc. 03–25557 Filed 10–8–03; 8:45 am] the facsimile is confirmed by hard copy submitted by mail and postmarked no collected under the following BILLING CODE 3510–22–S later than the closing date of the circumstances for dead animals: directly comment period. Please note that taken in fisheries for such animals, in countries or situations where such DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE comments will not be accepted by e- mail or other electronic media. activity is permitted; killed incidental to National Oceanic and Atmospheric FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: fishing or other operations; found dead Administration Jennifer Skidmore, Amy Sloan, or Ruth at sea or beached; or that died of natural Johnson (301)713–2289 or email: causes. For captive animals, specimens DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR [email protected] or may be collected from animals that are [email protected], being housed in countries or situations U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service [email protected]. where such activity is legal and from [I.D. 082803] animals that have been behaviorally SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The conditioned for specimen donation as subject permits are requested under the Marine Mammals and Endangered part of routine husbandry procedures. authority of the Marine Mammal Species; National Marine Fisheries Specimens may be taken at anytime of Protection Act of 1972, as amended Service File Nos. 764–1703, 1038–1693, the year and in all areas worldwide (MMPA; 16 U.S.C. 1361 et seq.), the and 116–1691; U.S. Fish and Wildlife where pinnipeds and cetaceans are Regulations Governing the Taking and Service File Nos. PRT–068532, PRT– found. The requested duration of the Importing of Marine Mammals (50 CFR 064776, and PRT–062475 permit is five years. parts 18 and 216), the Fur Seal Act of In compliance with the National AGENCIES: National Marine Fisheries 1966, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1151 et Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and seq.), the Endangered Species Act of U.S.C. 4321 et seq.), an initial Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), 1973, as amended (ESA; 16 U.S.C. 1531 determination has been made that the Commerce; U.S. Fish and Wildlife et seq.), and the regulations governing activities proposed is categorically Service (FWS), Interior. the taking, importing, and exporting of excluded from the requirement to ACTION: Receipt of applications for endangered and threatened species (50 prepare an environmental assessment or permits from NMFS and FWS. CFR parts 17 and 222–226). environmental impact statement. The National Museum of Natural Concurrent with the publication of SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that History (File No. 764–1703/PRT– this notice in the Federal Register, the following applicants have applied in 068532) requests a permit to salvage, NMFS is forwarding copies of this due form for permits from NMFS and collect, import/export, analyze samples, application to the Marine Mammal FWS to take parts from species of carcasses, hard and soft parts taken from Commission and its Committee of marine mammals for purposes of pinnipeds, sirenians, sea and marine Scientific Advisors. scientific research: (1) The National otters, and cetaceans to obtain Documents may be reviewed in the Museum of Natural History, Department information about the biology and life following locations: of Systematic Biology, MRC 108, P.O. history of marine mammals and the role Permits, Conservation and Education Box 37012, Washington, D.C. 20013– they play in the environment. Division, Office of Protected Resources, 7012 (File No. 764–1703/PRT–068532, Additionally, samples will be archived NMFS, 1315 East-West Highway, Room Charles Potter, Principal Investigator and curated at the Natural History 13705, Silver Spring, MD 20910; phone (PI)); (2) Darla Rae Ewalt, USDA, APHIS, Museum. No live animal takes are (301)713–2289; fax (301)713–0376; National Veterinary Services requested. A permit is requested for a Northwest Region, NMFS, 7600 Sand Laboratories, 1800 Dayton Road, Ames, period of five years. Point Way NE, BIN C15700, Bldg. 1, Iowa 50010 (File No. 1038–1693/PRT– Darla Ewalt (File No. 1038–1693/ Seattle, WA 98115–0700; phone 064776); and (3) Sea World, Inc., 7007 PRT–064776) requests authorization to (206)526–6150; fax (206)526–6426; Sea World Drive, Orlando, Florida receive from Canada tissue samples Alaska Region, NMFS, P.O. Box 32821 (File No. 116–1691/PRT–062475, taken from legally harvested beluga 21668, Juneau, AK 99802–1668; phone Dr. Todd Robeck, PI). whales (Delphinapterus leucas), (907)586–7221; fax (907)586–7249;

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:04 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00017 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\09OCN1.SGM 09OCN1 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Notices 58317

Southwest Region, NMFS, 501 West Dated in Washington, DC, September 29, Georgetown Submission deadlines Ocean Blvd., Suite 4200, Long Beach, 2003. meetings CA 90802–4213; phone (562)980–4001; Charles H. Atherton, fax (562)980–4018; Secretary. September 2 ...... August 12. October 7 ...... September 16. Protected Species Coordinator, Pacific Commission meet- November 4 ...... October 14. Area Office, NMFS, 1601 Kapiolani ings Submission deadlines December 2 ...... November 11. Blvd., Rm, 1110, Honolulu, HI 96814– *The 5 January Old Georgetown Board 4700; phone (808)973–2935; fax January 15 ...... December 31, 2003*. meeting has been changed from the regular (808)973–2941; February 19 ...... February 5. Thursday date because of proximity to the March 18 ...... March 4. holiday. Northeast Region, NMFS, One April 15 ...... April 1. Blackburn Drive, Gloucester, MA May 20 ...... May 6. [FR Doc. 03–25625 Filed 10–8–03; 8:45 am] 01930–2298; phone (978)281–9200; fax June 17 ...... June 3. BILLING CODE 6330–01–M July 15 ...... July 1. (978)281–9371; September 21* ..... September 2. Southeast Region, NMFS, 9721 October 21 ...... October 7. COMMISSION OF FINE ARTS Executive Center Drive North, St. November 18 ...... November 4. Petersburg, FL 33702–2432; phone December 16 ...... December 2. Notice of Meeting (727)570–5301; fax (727)570–5320; and *The 31 December 2003 Commission deadline and the 21 September Commission meet- The next meeting of the Commission U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, ing have been changed from the regular of Fine Arts is scheduled for October 16, Division of Management Authority, Thursday dates because of proximity to 2003 at 10 a.m. in the Commission’s 4401 North Fairfax Drive, Arlington, VA holidays. offices at the National Building 22203 (1–800–358–2104). [FR Doc. 03–25624 Filed 10–8–03; 8:45 am] Museum, Suite 312, Judiciary Square, Dated: October 2, 2003. BILLING CODE 6330–01–M 401 F Street, NW., Washington, DC 20001–2728. Items of discussion Stephen L. Leathery, Chief, Permits, affecting the appearance of Washington, Conservation and Education Division, Office COMMISSION OF FINE ARTS DC, may include buildings, parks and of Protected Resources, National Marine Fisheries Service. memorials. Notice of Schedule of Meetings Draft agendas and additional Dated: October 2, 2003. Listed below are the schedule of information regarding the Commission Charlie R. Chandler, Chief, Branch of Permits, are available on our Web site: http:// Division of Management Authority, U.S. Fish meetings of the Old Georgetown Board for 2004. The Commission’s office is www.cfa.gov. Inquiries regarding the and Wildlife Service. agenda and requests to submit written [FR Doc. 03–25558 Filed 10–8–03; 8:45 am] located at the National Building Museum, Suite 312, Judiciary Square, or oral statements should be addressed BILLING CODE 3510–22–S 401 F Street, NW., Washington, DC to Charles H. Atherton, Secretary, 20001–2728. The Old Georgetown Board Commission of Fine Arts, at the above meetings are held on the 1st Thursday address or call (202) 504–2200. of each month, excluding August. Items Individuals requiring sign language COMMISSION OF FINE ARTS of discussion affecting the appearance of interpretation for the hearing impaired should contact the Secretary at least 10 Notice of Schedule of Meetings Georgetown in Washington, DC, may include buildings, parks and memorials. days before the meeting date. Draft agendas and additional Listed below are the schedule of Dated in Washington, DC, 29 September information regarding the Commission 2003. meetings of the Commission of Fine are available on our web site: Arts for 2004. The Commission’s office Charles H. Atherton, www.cfa.gov. Inquiries regarding the Secretary. is located at the National Building agenda and requests to submit written Museum, Suite 312, Judiciary Square, [FR Doc. 03–25626 Filed 10–18–03; 8:45 am] or oral statements should be addressed BILLING CODE 6330–01–M 401 F Street, NW., Washington, DC in Charles H. Atherton, Secretary, 20001–2728. The meetings are held on Commission of Fine Arts, at the above the 3rd Thursday of each month, address or call 202–504–2200. excluding August. Items of discussion Individuals requiring sign language DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE affecting the appearance of Washington, interpretation for the hearing impaired DC, may include buildings, parks and should contact the Secretary at least 10 Department of the Army; Corps of memorials. days before the meeting date. Engineers Draft agendas and additional Dated in Washington, DC, September 29, Coastal Engineering Research Board information regarding the Commission 2003. are available on our Web site: Charles H. Atherton, AGENCY: Department of the Army, DoD. www.cfa.gov. Inquiries regarding the Secretary. ACTION: Notice of open meeting. agenda and requests to submit written or oral statements should be addressed Georgetown SUMMARY: In accordance with Section meetings Submission deadlines to Charles H. Atherton, Secretary, 10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92–463), Commission of Fine Arts, at the above January 5* ...... December 11, 2003. announcement is made of the following address or call 202–504–2200. February 5 ...... January 15. March 4 ...... February 12. committee meeting: Individuals requiring sign language Name of Committee: Coastal interpretation for the hearing impaired April 1 ...... March 11. May 6 ...... April 15. Engineering Research Board (CERB). should contact the Secretary at least 10 June 3 ...... May 13. Dates of Meeting: October 28–30, days before the meeting date. July 1 ...... June 10. 2003.

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:04 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00018 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\09OCN1.SGM 09OCN1 58318 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Notices

Place: The Hilton Portland, Portland, be submitted prior to the meeting or up DELAWARE RIVER BASIN Oregon. to 30 days after the meeting. COMMISSION Time: 4:45 p.m. to 8 p.m. (October 28, Thomas W. Richardson, Notice of Commission Meeting and 2003). 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. (October 29, Director, Coastal and Hydraulics Laboratory, Public Hearing 2003). 7:30 a.m. to 6:15 p.m. (October Acting Executive Secretary. 30, 2003). [FR Doc. 03–25622 Filed 10–8–03; 8:45 am] Notice is hereby given that the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: BILLING CODE 3710–61–M Delaware River Basin Commission will Inquiries and notice of intent to attend hold an informal conference followed the meeting may be addressed to by a public hearing on Wednesday, October 15. The hearing will be part of Thomas W. Richardson, Acting DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE the Commission’s regular business Executive Secretary, Coastal and Department of the Navy meeting. Both the conference session Hydraulics Laboratory, U.S. Army and business meeting are open to the Engineer Research and Development Notice of Availability of Government- public and will be held at the Center, Waterways Experiment Station, Owned Invention; Available for Commission’s offices at 25 State Police 3909 Halls Ferry Road, Vicksburg, Licensing Drive, West Trenton, New Jersey. Mississippi 39180–6199. The conference among the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Proposed AGENCY: Department of the Navy, DoD. commissioners and staff will begin at Agenda: The theme of the meeting is ACTION: Notice. 9:30 a.m. Topics of discussion will ‘‘Navigation and Regional Sediment include: an update on development of the Water Resources Plan for the Management in the Northwest.’’ On SUMMARY: The invention listed below is Delaware River Basin, including a Tuesday evening, October 28, there will assigned to the United States proposed resolution authorizing the be a joint icebreaker boat trip with Government as represented by the executive director to solicit public PIANC. On Wednesday, October 29, Secretary of the Navy and is available comment on the draft plan; an update presentations will include: ‘‘Functional for licensing by the Department of the on establishment of the TMDLs for PCBs Performance of Navigation Projects;’’ Navy. in the Delaware Estuary; an update on ‘‘Northwest Harbor Operational Issues;’’ Patent application 10/601,893: TWO activities concerning the TMDL ‘‘IOOS Regional Coastal Program for the BAND IMAGING SYSTEM. A two band Implementation Advisory Committee Northwest;’’ ‘‘Northwest Regional imaging system with two infrared focal (IAC), including a summary of a meeting Sediment Management (RSM) Issues;’’ plane array detectors, two filters of among the regulatory agency ‘‘Mouth of the Columbia (MCR) RSM known band-pass, a dichroic beam participants, IAC membership status, Project;’’ ‘‘Environmental Challenges at splitter and an image processor. Each fundraising and plans for an initial two- the MCR;’’ ‘‘Environmental Data filter is placed in front of a day meeting on October 21–22; a Collection Challenges at the MCR;’’ corresponding infrared focal plane array discussion on the status of the Lake ‘‘RSM in the Columbia River Basin;’’ detector, and the dichroic beam splitter Wallenpaupack drought operating plan ‘‘Wave Data Needs and Analysis in the is disposed within the system at a 45- approved by Resolution No. 2002–33 on North Pacific;’’ ‘‘Climatic Variability degree angle to the optical axis such that November 25, 2002, including a and Trends in the Columbia River Basin light entering the system is split and is proposal to extend beyond December 3, from 1750–2003 and Projections of simultaneously directed to each of the 2003 the credit granted PPL to satisfy its Climate Change Impacts for the 21st two infrared focal plane array detectors. consumptive use compensation Century;’’ ‘‘Columbia River Littoral Cell The image processor simultaneously requirement; and a presentation by a (Geological Framework);’’‘‘Developing converts the light entering the two representative from PSEG, updating Analytical Tools to Support RSM, Grays infrared focal plane array detectors into their Estuary Enhancement Program. Harbor, and Willapa Bay;’’ and a real time absolute image. The subjects of the public hearing to ‘‘Applying Technology for Project RSM ADDRESSES: Requests for copies of the be held during the 1:30 p.m. business Grays Harbor and Willapa Bay.’’ On invention cited should be directed to meeting include the dockets listed Thursday morning, October 30, of the the Naval Surface Warfare Center, Crane below: Board will tour the Mouth of the Div., Code OCF, Bldg. 64, 300 Highway 1. Borough of Jim Thorpe D–81–71 CP Columbia River Basin via helicopter and 361, Crane, IN 47522–5001. RENEWAL 3. An application for the will meet in an Executive Session renewal of a ground water withdrawal Thursday afternoon. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. project to continue withdrawal of 14.1 Darrell Boggess, Naval Surface Warfare million gallons per 30 days (mg/30 These meetings are open to the Center, Crane Div., Code OCF, Bldg. 64, days) to supply the applicant’s public public; participation by the public is 300 Highway 361, Crane, IN 47522– distribution system from existing Wells scheduled for 4 p.m. on October 29. 5001, telephone (812) 854–1130. To Nos. 1 and 4 in the Maunch Chunk The entire meeting is open to the download an application for license, Formation in the Silkmill Run public, but since seating capacity of the see: http://www.crane.navy.mil/foia_pa/ Watershed. The project is located in Jim meeting room is limited, advance notice CranePatents.asp. Thorpe Borough, Carbon County, of intent to attend, although not (Authority: 35 U.S.C. 207, 37 CFR part 404) Pennsylvania. required, is requested in order to assure 2. Borough of Alpha D–87–62 CP Dated: September 29, 2003. adequate arrangements. Oral RENEWAL 2. An application to renew a participation by public attendees is E.F. McDonnell, ground water withdrawal of 13.0 mg/30 encouraged during the time scheduled Major, U.S. Marine Corps, Federal Register days to supply the applicant’s public on the agenda; written statements may Liaison Officer. distribution system from existing Wells [FR Doc. 03–25566 Filed 10–8–03; 8:45 am] Nos. 1, 2, and 3 in the Lopatcong Creek BILLING CODE 3810–FF–P and Pohatcong Creek watersheds. The

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:04 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00019 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\09OCN1.SGM 09OCN1 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Notices 58319

project is located in Alpha Borough, with its project set forth in Docket D– ADDRESSES: Written comments should Warren County, New Jersey. 98–11 CP (‘‘the Cornog Quarry Project’’), be addressed to the Office of 3. City of Bridgeton D–98–50 CP. An at the applicant’s request, pending a Information and Regulatory Affairs, application to replace Wells Nos. 3, 6, further decision of the Commission; a Attention: Lauren Wittenberg, Desk 7, 8, and 9 in the applicant’s public resolution authorizing the executive Officer, Office of Management and water distribution system, which have director to solicit public comment on Budget, 725 17th Street, NW., Room become unreliable, with replacement the draft Water Resources Plan for the 10235, New Executive Office Building, Wells Nos. 18, 19, 20, and 21; and to Delaware River Basin; a resolution Washington, DC 20503 or should be add new Wells Nos. 22, 23, and 24. The authorizing the executive director to electronically mailed to the Internet applicant requests that the combined enter into a contract for the address allocation for the new wells be limited development of public outreach [email protected]. to 60 mg/30 days of water, and that the materials for the Basin Plan; and a SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Section total withdrawal from all wells be resolution for the minutes amending the 3506 of the Paperwork Reduction Act of limited to 170 mg/30 days. The project Administrative Manual: By-Laws, 1995 (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35) requires is located in the Cohansey River Management and Personnel by that the Office of Management and Watershed in the City of Bridgeton, increasing the limit on employee Cumberland County, New Jersey. Budget (OMB) provide interested contributions to Unreimbursed Medical Federal agencies and the public an early 4. Saville Rustin Water Company D– Spending Accounts (UMSAs), in 2003–19 CP. An application for opportunity to comment on information accordance with Section 125 of the collection requests. OMB may amend or approval of a ground water withdrawal Federal Internal Revenue Code. project to supply up to 1.296 mg/30 waive the requirement for public Draft dockets scheduled for public consultation to the extent that public days of water to the applicant’s public hearing on October 15, 2003 are posted water distribution system from new participation in the approval process on the Commission’s Web site, http:// would defeat the purpose of the Well No. 6, and to retain the existing www.drbc.net, where they can be withdrawal from all wells of 7.5 mg/30 information collection, violate State or accessed through the Notice of Federal law, or substantially interfere days. The project well is located in the Commission Meeting and Public Little Bushkill Watershed in Lehman with any agency’s ability to perform its Hearing. Additional documents relating statutory obligations. The Leader, Township, Pike County, Pennsylvania. to the dockets and other items may be 5. East Penn Manufacturing D–2003– Regulatory Information Management examined at the Commission’s offices. 23. An application for approval of a Group, Office of the Chief Information Please contact Thomas L. Brand at 609– ground water withdrawal project to Officer, publishes that notice containing 883–9500 ext. 221 with any docket- supply up to 15 mg/30 days of water to proposed information collection related questions. the applicant’s industrial facility from requests prior to submission of these Persons wishing to testify at this new Wells Nos. 2, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, and 9 requests to OMB. Each proposed hearing are requested to register in in the Leithsville and Hardyston information collection, grouped by Formations, and to establish the advance with the Commission secretary office, contains the following: (1) Type withdrawal from all wells at 15 mg/30 at 609–883–9500 ext. 203. Individuals of review requested, e.g. new, revision, days. The project wells are located in in need of an accommodation as extension, existing or reinstatement; (2) the Moselem Creek Watershed in provided for in the Americans with Title; (3) Summary of the collection; (4) Richmond Township, Berks County, Disabilities Act who wish to attend the Description of the need for, and Pennsylvania. hearing should contact the Commission proposed use of, the information; (5) 6. Great Lakes Companies, Inc. D– secretary directly at 609–883–9500 ext. Respondents and frequency of 2003–25. An application to construct a 203 or through the Telecommunications collection; and (6) Reporting and/or 0.09 mgd STP to provide tertiary Relay Services (TRS) at 711, to discuss recordkeeping burden. OMB invites treatment of wastewater from the how the Commission may accommodate public comment. your needs. proposed Great Wolf Lodge, a 400-unit Dated: October 6, 2003. hotel with an indoor water park. The Dated: October 1, 2003. Angela C. Arrington, project is located on the northwest Pamela M. Bush, corner of the intersection of State Route Leader, Regulatory Information Management Commission Secretary. Group, Office of the Chief Information Officer. 611 and Interstate Route 80 in Pocono [FR Doc. 03–25571 Filed 10–8–03; 8:45 am] Township, Monroe County, Office of Postsecondary Education BILLING CODE 6360–01–P Pennsylvania. Following tertiary Type of Review: New. treatment, a portion of the effluent will Title: Annual Performance Report for be spray applied to on-site areas. The the Gaining Early Awareness for remaining effluent will be discharged to DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION Undergraduate Programs (GEAR UP) Scot Run, a tributary of Pocono Creek in Program. the Brodhead Creek Watershed, Submission for OMB Review; Frequency: Annually. approximately 18 river miles upstream Comment Request Affected Public: Not-for-profit from DRBC Special Protection Waters. AGENCY: Department of Education. institutions; State, local or Tribal Gov’t, In addition to the public hearing SEAs or LEAs. items, the Commission will address the SUMMARY: The Leader, Regulatory Reporting and Recordkeeping Hour following at its 1:30 p.m. business Information Management Group, Office Burden: meeting: Minutes of the September 3, of the Chief Information Officer invites Responses: 316. 2003 business meeting; announcements; comments on the submission for OMB Burden Hours: 11,060. a report on Basin hydrologic conditions; review as required by the Paperwork Abstract: The purpose of this a report by the executive director; a Reduction Act of 1995. information collection is accountability report by the Commission’s general DATES: Interested persons are invited to for program implementation and counsel; a resolution suspending the submit comments on or before student outcomes for the Gaining Early authority of the applicant to proceed November 10, 2003. Awareness and Readiness for

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:04 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00020 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\09OCN1.SGM 09OCN1 58320 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Notices

Undergraduate Programs (GEAR UP). that the Office of Management and be electronically mailed to the Internet The information collected enables the Budget (OMB) provide interested address [email protected] or faxed to U.S. Department of Education to Federal agencies and the public an early 202–708–9346. Please specify the demonstrate its progress in meeting the opportunity to comment on information complete title of the information GEAR UP performance objectives as collection requests. OMB may amend or collection when making your request. reflected in the indicators. waive the requirement for public Comments regarding burden and/or Requests for copies of the submission consultation to the extent that public the collection activity requirements for OMB review; comment request may participation in the approval process should be directed to Joe Schubart at his be accessed from http:// would defeat the purpose of the e-mail address [email protected]. edicsweb.ed.gov, by selecting the information collection, violate State or Individuals who use a ‘‘Browse Pending Collections’’ link and Federal law, or substantially interfere telecommunications device for the deaf by clicking on link number 2294. When with any agency’s ability to perform its (TDD) may call the Federal Information you access the information collection, statutory obligations. The Leader, Relay Service (FIRS) at 1–800–877– click on ‘‘Download Attachments ’’ to Regulatory Information Management 8339. view. Written requests for information Group, Office of the Chief Information [FR Doc. 03–25608 Filed 10–8–03; 8:45 am] should be addressed to Vivian Reese, Officer, publishes that notice containing BILLING CODE 4000–01–P Department of Education, 400 Maryland proposed information collection Avenue, SW., Room 4050, Regional requests prior to submission of these Office Building 3, Washington, DC requests to OMB. Each proposed DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 20202–4651 or to the e-mail address information collection, grouped by [email protected]. Requests may also office, contains the following: (1) Type [Docket Nos. PP–66–2 and PP–82–3] be electronically mailed to the internet of review requested, e.g., new, revision, address [email protected] or faxed to extension, existing or reinstatement; (2) Application To Amend Presidential 202–708–9346. Please specify the Title; (3) Summary of the collection; (4) Permits; Vermont Electric Power complete title of the information Description of the need for, and Company, Inc. collection when making your request. proposed use of, the information; (5) AGENCY: Office of Fossil Energy, DOE. Comments regarding burden and/or Respondents and frequency of ACTION: the collection activity requirements collection; and (6) Reporting and/or Notice of application. should be directed to Joseph Schubart at Recordkeeping burden. OMB invites SUMMARY: Vermont Electric Power his e-mail address [email protected]. public comment. Company, Inc. (VELCO) has applied to Individuals who use a Dated: October 6, 2003. amend Presidential Permit PP–66 to telecommunications device for the deaf Angela C. Arrington, change way the subject facilities are (TDD) may call the Federal Information authorized to operate. VELCO also has Relay Service (FIRS) at 1–800–877– Leader, Regulatory Information Management Group, Office of the Chief Information Officer. applied to amend Presidential Permit 8339. PP–82 to change the names of the [FR Doc. 03–25607 Filed 10–8–03; 8:45 am] Office of Postsecondary Education owners of the interconnection facilities BILLING CODE 4000–01–P Type of Review: Reinstatement. and to increase the amount of power Title: European Community-United imports allowed over these facilities. States Cooperation Program. DATES: Comments, protests or requests DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION Frequency: Annually. to intervene must be submitted on or Affected Public: Not-for-profit before November 10, 2003. Submission for OMB Review; institutions; State, Local, or Tribal Comment Request ADDRESSES: Comments, protests or Gov’t, SEAs or LEAs. requests to intervene should be AGENCY: Department of Education. Reporting and Recordkeeping Hour addressed as follows: Office of Coal & SUMMARY: The Leader, Regulatory Burden: Power Import/Export (FE–27), Office of Information Management Group, Office Responses: 60. Fossil Energy, U.S. Department of of the Chief Information Officer invites Burden Hours: 1,800. Energy, 1000 Independence Avenue, comments on the submission for OMB Abstract: The European Community- SW., Washington, DC 20585–0350 (FAX review as required by the Paperwork United States Programs will support 202–318–7761). Reduction Act of 1995. new types of cooperation in curriculum development and student exchange FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. DATES: Interested persons are invited to between the U.S. and the European Jerry Pell (Program Office) 202–586– submit comments on or before union. 3362, [email protected], or Michael November 10, 2003. Requests for copies of the submission Skinker (Program Attorney) 202–586– ADDRESSES: Written comments should for OMB review; comment request may 2793. be addressed to the Office of be accessed from http:// SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Information and Regulatory Affairs, edicsweb.ed.gov, by selecting the construction, operation, maintenance, Attention: Lauren Wittenberg, Desk ‘‘Browse Pending Collections’’ link and and connection of facilities at the Officer, Office of Management and by clicking on link number 2349. When international border of the United States Budget, 725 17th Street, NW., Room you access the information collection, for the transmission of electric energy 10235, New Executive Office Building, click on ‘‘Download Attachments’’ to between the United States and a foreign Washington, DC 20503 or should be view. Written requests for information country is prohibited in the absence of electronically mailed to the Internet should be addressed to Vivian Reese, a Presidential permit issued pursuant to address _ Department of Education, 400 Maryland Executive Order (EO) 10485, as Lauren [email protected]. Avenue, SW., Room 4050, Regional amended by EO 12038. Upon issuance SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Section Office Building 3, Washington, DC of such a Presidential permit, no 3506 of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 20202–4651 or to the e-mail address material change may be made in the 1995 (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35) requires [email protected]. Requests may also way the facilities are operated unless

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:04 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00021 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\09OCN1.SGM 09OCN1 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Notices 58321

such change has been approved by the • Replacement of the existing 48- the environmental impacts of the Department of Energy (DOE). kilovolt (kV) transmission line between proposed action (i.e., granting the On June 21, 1979, DOE issued VELCO’s Irasburg Substation and the so- Presidential permit with any conditions Presidential Permit PP–66 to Citizens called ‘‘Mosher’s Tap’’ with a new, and limitations, or denying it) pursuant Utilities Company (now Citizens double-circuit 115 kV/48 kV line; to the National Environmental Policy Communications Company; ‘‘Citizens’’) • Connection of this line’s 115-kV Act of 1969. DOE also must obtain the for one 120,000-volt (120-kV) electric circuit to one circuit of the existing concurrence of the Secretary of State transmission line that crosses the Mosher’s Tap-Highgate Substation line, and the Secretary of Defense before United States border with Canada near now operated at 120 kV but to be taking final action on a Presidential Derby Line, Vermont, and interconnects operated thereafter at 115 kV; permit application. with similar transmission facilities in • Connection of this 115-kV circuit at Copies of these applications will be Canada owned by Hydro Quebec. On Highgate Substation to VELCO’s existing made available, upon request, for public August 21, 2003, Citizens and VELCO 115-kV line from Georgia to Highgate inspection and copying at the address (collectively, the ‘‘Applicants’’) jointly via a new bus constructed at the provided above or by accessing the filed an application with DOE to Highgate Substation; Electricity Regulation home page at transfer Presidential Permit PP–66 from • Consolidation of VELCO’s and http://www.fe.doe.gov/programs/ Citizens to VELCO. VELCO is a Vermont Citizens’ now-separate substations in electricityregulation/. Select ‘‘Pending corporation comprised of several Highgate, a project that may also Proceedings’’ from the options menu. electric utilities operating in Vermont connect the Highgate Interconnection Issued in Washington, DC, on October 3, (as further described in the application). Facilities (north of the converter 2003. VELCO currently owns and operates terminal) to the 120-kV bus in Highgate Anthony J. Como, most of the bulk transmission facilities Substation (the ‘‘Highgate Tap’’); and, • Deputy Director, Electric Power Regulation, in Vermont, other than those currently Related improvements to VELCO’s Office of Coal & Power Import/Export, Office owned by Citizens. St. Johnsbury, Irasburg and St. Albans of Coal & Power Systems, Office of Fossil VELCO has proposed to purchase Substations. Energy. from Citizens transmission facilities in Procedural Matters [FR Doc. 03–25620 Filed 10–8–03; 8:45 am] northern Vermont, including the BILLING CODE 6450–01–P international transmission facilities Any person desiring to become a authorized by Presidential Permit PP– party to this proceeding or to be heard 66. Notice of the VELCO and Citizens’ by filing comments or protests to this DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY application to transfer PP–66 appeared application should file a petition to in the Federal Register on September 2, intervene, comment or protest at the Federal Energy Regulatory 2003, (68 FR 52187) and that matter is address provided above in accordance Commission with §§ 385.211 or 385.214 of the still pending. [Docket No. RP99–301–085] On September 3, 2003, VELCO Federal Energy Regulatory applied to amend Presidential Permit Commission’s (FERC) Rules of Practice ANR Pipeline Company; Notice of PP–66 to authorize a change in the and Procedures (18 CFR 385.211, Service Agreement Filing operation of the facilities (‘‘Derby 385.214). Fifteen copies of each petition Interconnection Facilities’’) as part of and protest should be filed with DOE on October 2, 2003. VELCO’s Northern Loop Project. VELCO or before the date listed above. Take notice that on September 24, claims that the ‘‘Northern Loop Project’’ Comments on VELCO’s application to 2003 subject to Section 4 of the Natural would improve the reliability of amend the Presidential Permit PP–66 for Gas Act (NGA) and Part 154 of the VELCO’s bulk transmission system in the Derby Interconnection Facilities Regulations of the Federal Energy northern Vermont and that the should be clearly marked with Docket Regulatory Commission (Commission), requested change will reduce peak PP–66–2. Comments on VELCO’s ANR Pipeline Company (ANR), 9 E imports over the Derby Interconnection application to amend Presidential Greenway Plaza, Houston, Texas 77046, Facilities from TransEnergie in the Permit PP–82 should be clearly marked tendered for filing and approval, ten Canadian Province of Quebec. In that with Docket PP–82–3. Additional copies service agreements (Agreements) same application, VELCO also requested are to be filed directly with L. Russell between ANR and Kaztex Energy that Presidential Permit PP–82 be Mitten, Esq., V.P., General Counsel, Management Inc., pursuant to ANR’s amended to change the names of the Citizens Communications Company, 3 Rate Schedule FTS–1. ANR requests the companies that comprise the Joint High Ridge Park, Stamford, CT 06905; Commission find that the Agreements Owners of the Highgate Project (the Mr. Gary Parker, V.P., Director of contain acceptable material deviations permit holder) and to increase the Planning, Engineering, Construction and from ANR’s Form of Service Agreement allowable level of imports over the PP– Transmission, Vermont Electric Power and accept the attached tariff sheet 82 facilities to 250 MW. Company, Inc., 366 Pinnacle Ridge which references the Agreements as In its application, VELCO states that Road, Rutland, VT 05701; AND Kenneth non-conforming agreements. the effect of the Northern Loop Project G. Hurwitz, Esq., Haynes and Boone, Any person desiring to protest said would be to shift load supplied in LLP, 550 11th Street, NW., Suite 650, filing should file a protest with the Northwestern Vermont from the PP–66 Washington, DC 20004–1314; and John Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, facilities to the PP–82 facilities. This H. Marshall, Esq., Downs Rachlin 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC would result in a decrease in electricity Martin PLLC, 90 Prospect Street, P.O. 20426, in accordance with section imports from Canada over the PP–66 Box 99, St. Johnsbury, VT 05819–0099. 385.211 of the Commission’s Rules and facilities and an increase in imports Before a Presidential permit may be Regulations. All such protests must be over the PP–82 facilities. issued or amended, DOE must filed in accordance with section 154.210 In its application, VELCO states that determine that the proposed action will of the Commission’s Regulations. implementation of the Northern Loop not adversely impact on the reliability Protests will be considered by the Project may require the following of the U.S. electric power supply Commission in determining the physical modifications: system. In addition, DOE must consider appropriate action to be taken, but will

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:04 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00022 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\09OCN1.SGM 09OCN1 58322 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Notices

not serve to make protestants parties to For further information, contact 3. In accordance with the statutory the proceedings. This filing is available Heather Campbell at (202) 502–6182. procedure,4 Bonneville seeks interim for review at the Commission in the approval of this adjustment effective Magalie R. Salas, Public Reference Room or may be October 1, 2003, and final approval Secretary. viewed on the Commission’s Web site at effective October 1, 2003 through http://www.ferc.gov using the eLibrary [FR Doc. E3–00011 Filed 10–8–03; 8:45 am] September 30, 2006. BILLING CODE 6717–01–P link. Enter the docket number excluding Notice of Filing and Interventions the last three digits in the docket 4. Notice of Bonneville’s filing was number field to access the document. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY For assistance, please contact FERC published in the Federal Register, 68 FR 47561 (2003), with comments, protests, Online Support at Federal Energy Regulatory or motions to intervene due on or before [email protected] or toll- Commission September 3, 2003. free at (866) 208–3676, or TTY, contact 5. Avista Corporation, Generating (202) 502–8659. The Commission [Docket No. EF03–2011–000] Public Utilities, Eugene Water & Electric strongly encourages electronic filings. Board, Golden Northwest Aluminum, See, 18 CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the United States Department of Energy, Bonneville Power Administration; Inc., PacifiCorp, Portland General instructions on the Commission’s web Electric, Puget Sound Energy, Inc., and site under the eFiling link. Order Approving Rates on an Interim Basis and Providing Opportunity for the City of Tacoma, Department of Protest Date: October 6, 2003. Additional Comments Public Utilities, Light Division, d/b/a Tacoma Power filed timely motions to Magalie R. Salas, Issued: October 1, 2003. intervene raising no issues. Northwest Secretary. Before Commissioners: Pat Wood III, Requirements Utilities (NRU) filed a [FR Doc. E3–00032 Filed 10–8–03; 8:45 am] Chairman; William L. Massey, and Nora motion to intervene out of time. BILLING CODE 6717–01–P Mead Brownell. 6. In addition, Alcoa, Inc., Generating 1. In this order we approve on an Public Utilities, Industrial Customers of interim basis, pending our full review Northwest Utilities, Golden Northwest DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY for final approval, the Bonneville Power Aluminum, Inc., Pacific Northwest Administration’s (Bonneville) proposed Generating Cooperative, Public Power Federal Energy Regulatory modification to the Safety-Net and Council, and the Columbia River Inter- Commission Financial-Based Cost Recovery Tribal Fish Commission, Confederated Adjustment Clauses (CRACs), and to the Tribes of the Umatilla Reservation, and [Project 2210–090] Dividend Distribution Clause, under the the Yakama Nation (collectively, 2002 Wholesale Power Rate Schedule Protesters) filed timely motions to Appalachian Power Company; Notice General Rate Schedule Provisions intervene and protests. of Extension of Comment Period (GRSPs). We also provide an additional Discussion period of time for the parties to file October 2, 2003. comments. The proposed rates will Procedural Matters This notice applies to the Smith allow Bonneville to recover its costs and 7. Under Rule 214 of the Mountain Pumped Storage Project, repay the U.S. Treasury for the Federal Commission’s Rules of Practice and FERC No. 2210. The project is licensed investment. Procedure, 18 CFR 385.214 (2003), the to Appalachian Power Company, a part Background notices of intervention and timely, of American Electric Power and is unopposed motions to intervene make located on the Roanoke River, in 2. On July 29, 2003, Bonneville filed the entities that filed them parties to Bedford, Pittsylvania, Franklin, and a request for interim and final approval this proceeding. We will grant NRU’s Roanoke Counties, Virginia. to modify its CRACs and the Dividend untimely, unopposed motion to Distribution Clause under the 2002 On September 10, 2003, a Notice of intervene because: NRU’s interests Wholesale Power Rate Schedule General cannot be adequately represented by Application for Amendment of License Rate Schedule Provisions (GRSPs), in andSoliciting Comments, Motions to other parties; NRU intervened at an accordance with the Pacific Northwest early stage of the proceeding; and no Intervene, and Protests was issued for Electric Power Planning and the amendment of license to approve a prejudice or additional burden upon Conservation Act (Northwest Power existing parties will result from shoreline management plan filed on 1 Act) and subpart B of part 300 of the permitting the intervention. September 3, 2003. The comment period Commission’s regulations.2 The ends October 10, 2003. This notice Commission previously granted final Standard of Review extends the comment period for 90 days approval of the 2002 GRSPs for a five- 8. Under the Northwest Power Act, until January 10, 2004. year period ending September 30, the Commission’s review of 3 The Commission staff will prepare a 2006. Bonneville contends that the Bonneville’s regional power and Draft Environmental Assessment (DEA) CRACs allowed BPA to keep rates low transmission rates is limited to of the application. Once this DEA is while still addressing any financial determining whether Bonneville’s completed, it will be noticed to provide shortfalls, rather than instituting higher proposed rates meet the three specific an opportunity for Federal, state, and base rates for the entire rate period. requirements of section 7(a)(2): local agencies, as well as the public, to 1 They must be sufficient to assure provide comments. All comments will Sections 7(a) and 7(i)(6) of the Northwest Power repayment of the Federal investment in the be used in preparing the Final Act, 16 U.S.C. 839e(a)(2) and 839e(i)(6) (2000). 2 Federal Columbia River Power System over Environmental Assessment to be 18 CFR part 300 (2003). 3 United States Department of Energy— considered by the Commission when Bonneville Power Administration, 104 FERC 4 Sections 7(a) and 7(i)(6) of the Northwest Power acting on this application. ¶ 61,093 (2003). Act, 16 U.S.C. 839e(a)(2) and 839e(i)(6) (2000).

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:04 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00023 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\09OCN1.SGM 09OCN1 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Notices 58323

a reasonable number of years after first approved on an interim basis and the refund with interest as set forth in meeting the Administrator’s other costs; parties are afforded an additional section 300.20(c) of the Commission’s They must be based upon the opportunity to raise issues.9 regulations, 18 CFR 300.20(c) (2003), Administrator’s total system costs; and pending final action on either its Insofar as transmission rates are concerned, Interim Approval approval or disapproval. they must equitably allocate the costs of the 12. Protesters contend that Bonneville Federal transmission system between Federal (C) Within thirty (30) days of the date and non-Federal power.5 has not shown the need for the rate of this order, all parties who wish to do increase. They argue that the proposed so may file additional comments 9. Commission review of Bonneville’s GRSPs will operate to preclude the regarding final confirmation and non-regional, non-firm rates also is Commission’s statutorily mandated approval of Bonneville’s proposed rates. limited. Review is restricted to review of future SN CRAC rate All parties who wish to do so may file determining whether such rates meet adjustments, as required under the reply comments within twenty (20) days the requirements of section 7(k) of the Northwest Power Act. They contend 6 thereafter. Northwest Act, which requires that that Bonneville has not based the rates (D) The Secretary shall promptly they comply with the Bonneville Project on its total system costs, as required by publish this order in the Federal Act, the Flood Control Act of 1944, and the Northwest Power Act. Protesters Register. the Federal Columbia River also argue, among other things, that (1) By the Commission. Transmission System Act (Transmission Bonneville’s application is deficient and System Act). Taken together, those fails to comply with the Northwest Magalie R. Salas, statutes require Bonneville to design its Power Act, (2) Bonneville failed to file Secretary. non-regional, non-firm rates: a complete evidentiary record, (3) [FR Doc. 03–25573 Filed 10–8–03; 8:45 am] (1) To recover the cost of generation and Bonneville relied on data and BILLING CODE 6717–01–P transmission of such electric energy, information that was not included in the including the amortization of investments in evidentiary record, (4) Bonneville the power projects within a reasonable denied the parties in this proceeding DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY period; due process, and (5) Bonneville (2) To encourage the most widespread use Federal Energy Regulatory submitted materials and a Notice of Commission of Bonneville power; and Filing that do not comply with the (3) To provide the lowest possible rates to [Docket No. RP03–621–000] consumers consistent with sound business Commission’s regulations. principles. 13. The Commission’s preliminary review indicates that Bonneville’s filing CenterPoint Energy-Mississippi River 10. Unlike the Commission’s statutory appears to meet the minimum threshold Transmission Corporation; Notice of authority under the Federal Power Act, filing requirements of part 300 of the Proposed Changes in FERC Gas Tariff the Commission’s authority under Commission’s regulations and the sections 7(a) and 7(k) of the Northwest October 2, 2003. statutory standards. Because the Take notice that on September 29, Power Act does not include the power Commission’s preliminary review of to modify the rates. The responsibility 2003, CenterPoint Energy Mississippi Bonneville’s submittal indicates that River Transmission Corporation (MRT) for developing rates in the first instance they do not contain any patent is vested with Bonneville’s tendered for filing as part of its FERC deficiencies, the proposed modifications Gas Tariff, Third Revised Volume No. 1, Administrator. The rates are then will be approved on an interim basis submitted to the Commission for the following revised tariff sheet to be pending our full review for final effective October 1, 2003: approval or disapproval. In this regard, approval. We note, as well, that no one the Commission’s role can be viewed as will be harmed by this decision because Seventh Revised Sheet No. 11 an appellate one: To affirm or remand interim approval allows Bonneville’s Third Revised Sheet No. 249A the rates submitted to it for review.7 rates to go into effect subject to refunds MRT states that the purpose of this 11. Moreover, review at this interim with interest if the Commission later filing is to revise the provisions of the stage is further limited. In view of the determines in its final decision not to General Terms and Conditions of MRT’s volume and complexity of a Bonneville approve the rates.10 tariff in order to clarify that it possesses rate application, such as the one now 14. In addition, we will provide an the authority to bill taxes, levies, and before the Commission in this filing, additional period of time for the parties other charges imposed on Customers by and the limited period in advance of the to file comments and reply comments regulatory agencies or taxing authorities requested effective date in which to on all issues related to final where MRT is required by law to collect review the application,8 the confirmation and approval of such amounts from Customer(s) and Commission generally defers resolution Bonneville’s proposed rates. This will remit these amounts to the respective of issues on the merits of Bonneville’s ensure that the record in this proceeding agencies or authorities. application until the order on final is complete. MRT states that copies of the revised confirmation. Thus, the proposed rates, tariff sheet are being mailed to all if not patently deficient, generally are The Commission Orders parties on MRT’s official service list, to (A) Protesters’ requests to reject MRT’s jurisdictional customers, and to 5 16 U.S.C. 839e(a)(2) (2000). Bonneville also Bonneville’s filing are hereby denied. interested state commissions. must comply with the financial, accounting, and (B) Interim approval of Bonneville’s Any person desiring to be heard or to ratemaking requirements in Department of Energy Order No. RA 6120.2. filing is hereby granted, to become protest said filing should file a motion 6 16 U.S.C. 839e(k) (2000). effective on October 1, 2003, subject to to intervene or a protest with the 7 E.g., United States Department of Energy— Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Bonneville Power Administration, 67 FERC ¶ 61351 9 See, e.g., United States Department of Energy— 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC at 62216–17 (1994); see also, e.g., Aluminum Bonneville Power Administration, 64 FERC ¶ 61375 20426, in accordance with Sections Company of America v. Bonneville Power at 63606 (1993); United States Department of Administration, 903 F.2d 585, 592–93 (9th Cir. Energy—Bonneville Power Administration, 40 385.214 or 385.211 of the Commission’s 1989) and cases cited therein. FERC ¶ 61351 at 62059–60 (1987). Rules and Regulations. All such motions 8 18 CFR 300.10(a)(3)(ii) (2003). 10 18 CFR 300.20(c) (2003). or protests must be filed in accordance

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:04 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00024 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\09OCN1.SGM 09OCN1 58324 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Notices

with Section 154.210 of the taken, but will not serve to make appropriate action to be taken, but will Commission’s Regulations. Protests will protestants parties to the proceedings. not serve to make protestants parties to be considered by the Commission in This filing is available for review at the the proceedings. Any person wishing to determining the appropriate action to be Commission in the Public Reference become a party must file a motion to taken, but will not serve to make Room or may be viewed on the intervene. This filing is available for protestants parties to the proceedings. Commission’s Web site at http:// review at the Commission in the Public Any person wishing to become a party www.ferc.gov using the eLibrary link. Reference Room or may be viewed on must file a motion to intervene. This Enter the docket number excluding the the Commission’s Web site at http:// filing is available for review at the last three digits in the docket number www.ferc.gov using the ‘‘eLibrary’’. Commission in the Public Reference field to access the document. For Enter the docket number excluding the Room or may be viewed on the assistance, please contact FERC Online last three digits in the docket number Commission’s Web site at http:// Support at field to access the document. For www.ferc.gov using the ‘‘eLibrary’’. [email protected] or toll- assistance, please contact FERC Online Enter the docket number excluding the free at (866) 208–3676, or TTY, contact Support at last three digits in the docket number (202) 502–8659. The Commission [email protected] or toll- field to access the document. For strongly encourages electronic filings. free at (866) 208–3676, or TTY, contact assistance, please contact FERC Online See 18 CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the (202) 502–8659. The Commission Support at instructions on the Commission’s Web strongly encourages electronic filings. [email protected] or toll- site under the eFiling link. See, 18 CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the free at (866) 208–3676, or TTY, contact Protest Date: October 6, 2003. instructions on the Commission’s web (202) 502–8659. The Commission site under the ‘‘e-Filing’’ link. Magalie R. Salas, strongly encourages electronic filings. Comment Date: October 8, 2003. Secretary. See, 18 CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the Magalie R. Salas, instructions on the Commission’s Web [FR Doc. E3–00013 Filed 10–8–03; 8:45 am] Secretary. site under the ‘‘e-Filing’’ link. BILLING CODE 6717–01–P Comment Date: October 14, 2003. [FR Doc. E3–00020 Filed 10–8–03; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717–01–P Magalie R. Salas, DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Secretary. [FR Doc. E3–00024 Filed 10–8–03; 8:45 am] Federal Energy Regulatory DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Commission BILLING CODE 6717–01–P Federal Energy Regulatory [Docket No. RP03–617–000] Commission DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Colorado Interstate Gas Company; [Docket No. RP03–619–000] Notice of Proposed Changes in FERC Federal Energy Regulatory Gas Tariff Columbia Gas Transmission Commission Corporation; Notice of Proposed October 2, 2003. Changes in FERC Gas Tariff [Docket No. RP03–407–002] Take notice that on September 26, 2003 Colorado Interstate Gas Company October 2, 2003. CenterPoint Energy Gas Transmission (CIG) tendered for filing three Firm Take notice that on September 26, Company; Notice of Proposed Transportation Service Agreements 2003, Columbia Gas Transmission Changes in FERC Gas Tariff (FTSAs), a Letter Agreement and Ninth Corporation (Columbia) tendered for October 2, 2003. Revised Sheet No. 1 to its FERC Gas filing as part of its FERC Gas Tariff, Take notice that on September 24, Tariff, First Revised Volume No. 1. Second Revised Volume No. 1, the 2003, CenterPoint Energy Gas CIG states that the FTSAs and Letter following tariff sheets to, bearing a Transmission Company (CEGT) Agreement are being submitted for proposed effective date of October 26, tendered for filing as part of its FERC Commission review under the 2003: Gas Tariff, Sixth Revised Volume No. 1, Commission’s material deviation Seventh Revised Sheet No. 501 the following revised tariff sheet: policies and have been listed on the Second Revised Sheet No. 501A tendered tariff sheet as non-conforming Seventh Revised Sheet No. 503 Second Substitute Original Sheet No. 556C agreements. GIG states that two of the Second Revised Sheet No. 503.01 This tariff sheet has a July 1, 2003 FTSAs are being submitted for review Columbia states it is filing to revise its effective date. CEGT states that the under the Commission’s negotiated rate Tariff to insert a footnote, along with purpose of this filing is to comply with policies. CIG request that the tariff sheet associated ADQ and DDQ columns in the Commission’s Letter Order issued is proposed to become effective October Appendix A to its Rate Schedule FTS, September 9, 2003 in the above- 27, 2003. NTS and OPT pro forma service referenced docket. Any person desiring to be heard or to agreements. Columbia further states the Any person desiring to protest said protest said filing should file a motion inclusion of the proposed language will filing should file a protest with the to intervene or a protest with the help make the pro forma service Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, agreements for all of Columbia’s firm 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC transportation services consistent in this 20426, in accordance with § 385.211 of 20426, in accordance with § 385.214 or regard. the Commission’s Rules and 385.211 of the Commission’s Rules and Columbia states that copies of its Regulations. All such protests must be Regulations. All such motions or filing have been mailed to all firm filed in accordance with § 154.210 of the protests must be filed in accordance customers, interruptible customers and Commission’s Regulations. Protests will with § 154.210 of the Commission’s affected state commissions. be considered by the Commission in Regulations. Protests will be considered Any person desiring to be heard or to determining the appropriate action to be by the Commission in determining the protest said filing should file a motion

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:04 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00025 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\09OCN1.SGM 09OCN1 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Notices 58325

to intervene or a protest with the Columbia is required to true-up its DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, collections from the Settlement 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC Component for twelve-month periods Federal Energy Regulatory 20426, in accordance with § 385.214 or commencing November 1, 1996. In Commission 385.211 of the Commission’s Rules and accordance with the Settlement, the [Docket No. RP03–623–000] Regulations. All such motions or true-up component of the Settlement protests must be filed in accordance Component is to be removed effective Dominion Transmission, Inc.; Notice of with § 154.210 of the Commission’s November 1 of each year. Columbia Annual TCRA Filing Regulations. Protests will be considered states that the instant filing is being by the Commission in determining the October 2, 2003. made to remove such true-up appropriate action to be taken, but will Take notice that on September 29, component from the currently effective not serve to make protestants parties to 2003, Dominion Transmission Inc. (DTI) the proceedings. Any person wishing to Settlement Component effective tendered for filing as part of its FERC become a party must file a motion to November 1, 2003. Gas Tariff, Third Revised Volume No. 1, intervene. This filing is available for Columbia states that copies of its the following tariff sheets, with an review at the Commission in the Public filing have been mailed to all firm effective date of November 1, 2003: Reference Room or may be viewed on customers, interruptible customers, and Eighteenth Revised Sheet No. 31 the Commission’s Web site at http:// affected state commissions. Twenty-Second Revised Sheet No. 32 Twelfth Revised Sheet No. 34 www.ferc.gov using the ‘‘eLibrary’’. Any person desiring to be heard or to Enter the docket number excluding the Fifteenth Revised Sheet No. 35 protest said filing should file a motion Eighth Revised Sheet No. 39 last three digits in the docket number to intervene or a protest with the field to access the document. For DTI states that the purpose of this Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, assistance, please contact FERC Online filing is to update DTI’s effective 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC Support at Transportation Cost Rate Adjustment [email protected] or toll- 20426, in accordance with § 385.214 or through the mechanism described in free at (866) 208–3676, or TTY, contact 385.211 of the Commission’s Rules and Section 15 of the General Terms and (202) 502–8659. The Commission Regulations. All such motions or Conditions of DTI’s tariff. strongly encourages electronic filings. protests must be filed in accordance DTI states that copies of the filing See, 18 CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the with § 154.210 of the Commission’s have been sent to DTI’s customers and instructions on the Commission’s Web Regulations. Protests will be considered interested stated commissions. site under the ‘‘e-Filing’’ link. by the Commission in determining the Any person desiring to be heard or to Comment Date: October 8, 2003. appropriate action to be taken, but will protest said filing should file a motion not serve to make protestants parties to to intervene or a protest with the Magalie R. Salas, the proceedings. Any person wishing to Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Secretary. become a party must file a motion to 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC [FR Doc. E3–00022 Filed 10–8–03; 8:45 am] intervene. This filing is available for 20426, in accordance with § 385.214 or BILLING CODE 6717–01–P review at the Commission in the Public 385.211 of the Commission’s Rules and Reference Room or may be viewed on Regulations. All such motions or protests must be filed in accordance the Commission’s Web site at http:// DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY with § 154.210 of the Commission’s www.ferc.gov using the ‘‘eLibrary’’. Regulations. Protests will be considered Enter the docket number excluding the Federal Energy Regulatory by the Commission in determining the Commission last three digits in the docket number appropriate action to be taken, but will [Docket No. RP03–627–000] field to access the document. For not serve to make protestants parties to assistance, please contact FERC Online the proceedings. Any person wishing to Columbia Gas Transmission Support at become a party must file a motion to Corporation; Notice of Proposed [email protected] or toll- intervene. This filing is available for Changes in FERC Gas Tariff free at (866) 208–3676, or TTY, contact review at the Commission in the Public (202) 502–8659. The Commission Reference Room or may be viewed on October 2, 2003. strongly encourages electronic filings. Take notice that on September 30, the Commission’s Web site at http:// See 18 CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the 2003, Columbia Gas Transmission www.ferc.gov using the ‘‘eLibrary’’. instructions on the Commission’s web Corporation (Columbia) tendered for Enter the docket number excluding the filing as part of its FERC Gas Tariff, site under the ‘‘e-Filing’’ link. last three digits in the docket number Second Revised the following revised Comment Date: October 14, 2003. field to access the document. For tariff sheets Second Revised Volume No. assistance, please contact FERC Online Magalie R. Salas, 1, the following revised tariff sheets Support at bearing a proposed effective date of Secretary. [email protected] or toll- November 1, 2003: [FR Doc. E3–00028 Filed 10–8–03; 8:45 am] free at (866) 208–3676, or TTY, contact BILLING CODE 6717–01–P (202) 502–8659. The Commission Sixty-fifth Revised Sheet No. 25 strongly encourages electronic filings. Sixty-fifth Revised Sheet No. 26 See, 18 CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the Sixty-fifth Revised Sheet No. 27 Twenty-ninth Revised Sheet No. 30A instructions on the Commission’s Web site under the ‘‘e-Filing’’ link. Columbia states that this filing is Comment Date: October 14, 2003. being submitted pursuant to Stipulation I, Article I, Section E, True-up Magalie R. Salas, Mechanism, of the Settlement Secretary. (Settlement) in Docket No. RP95–408, et [FR Doc. E3–00025 Filed 10–8–03; 8:45 am] al. Pursuant to the true-up mechanism, BILLING CODE 6717–01–P

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:04 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00026 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\09OCN1.SGM 09OCN1 58326 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Notices

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY (202) 502–8659. The Commission strongly encourages electronic filings. Federal Energy Regulatory Federal Energy Regulatory See, 18 CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the Commission Commission instructions on the Commission’s web [Docket No. RP97–13–008] site under the eFiling link. [Docket No. RP03–624–000] Protest Date: October 6, 2003. Dominion Transmission, Inc.; Notice of East Tennessee Natural Gas Company; Magalie R. Salas, Notice of Negotiated Rate Filing Annual EPCA Filing Secretary. October 2, 2003. October 2, 2003. [FR Doc. E3–00030 Filed 10–8–03; 8:45 am] Take notice that on September 29, Take notice that on September 24, BILLING CODE 6717–01–P 2003, Dominion Transmission Inc. (DTI) 2003, East Tennessee Natural Gas Company (East Tennessee) tendered for tendered for filing as part of its FERC DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Gas Tariff, Third Revised Volume No. 1, filing as part of its FERC Gas Tariff, Second Revised Volume No. 1, Fourth the following revised tariff sheets, with Revised Sheet No. 177, included in Federal Energy Regulatory an effective date of November 1, 2003: Appendix A thereto, proposed to be Commission Seventeenth Revised Sheet No. 31 effective on November 1, 2003, or such [Docket No. CP03–357–000] Twenty First Revised Sheet No. 32 later date as the facilities constructed for Eleventh Revised Sheet No. 34 the Patriot Project are placed into Eastern Shore Natural Gas Company; Fourteenth Revised Sheet No. 35 Seventh Revised Sheet No. 39 service. Notice of Application East Tennessee states that the purpose DTI states that the purpose of its filing of this filing is to implement four October 2, 2003. is comply with the Electric Power Cost negotiated rate agreements and one Take notice that on September 26, Adjustment provision of Section 17 of discounted rate agreement for firm 2003, Eastern Shore Natural Gas its the General Terms and Conditions of service to be rendered to four customers Company (Eastern Shore), 417 Bank its FERC Gas Tariff. on East Tennessee’s Patriot Project Lane, Dover, Delaware 19904, filed an DTI states that copies of the filing (Docket No. CP01–415), and to update application with the Commission in have been sent to DTI’s customers and the list of non-conforming agreements Docket No. CP03–357–000 under interested stated commissions. contained in Section 45 of the General Section 7 of the Natural Gas Act, as Any person desiring to be heard or to Terms and Conditions. amended, seeking authority to construct protest said filing should file a motion East Tennessee requests that the and operate a metering and regulating to intervene or a protest with the Commission accept this filing by station in Seaford, Sussex County, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, October 15, 2003. In addition, East Delaware, to serve an existing customer, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC Tennessee requests that the Commission all as more fully stated in the 20426, in accordance with § 385.214 or grant any authorizations and waivers of application. 385.211 of the Commission’s Rules and the Commission’s regulations to the Any questions regarding the Regulations. All such motions or extent necessary to permit the tariff application should be directed to Elaine protests must be filed in accordance sheet and the agreements to be made B. Bittner, Director of Eastern Shore with § 154.210 of the Commission’s effective as proposed. Natural Gas Company, Eastern Natural Regulations. Protests will be considered East Tennessee states that copies of Gas Company, 417 Bank Lane, Dover by the Commission in determining the the filing were mailed to all affected Delaware 19904, or at (302) 734–6710. appropriate action to be taken, but will customers of East Tennessee and Any person desiring to be heard or to not serve to make protestants parties to interested state commissions. protest said filing should file a motion the proceedings. Any person wishing to Any person desiring to protest said to intervene or a protest with the become a party must file a motion to filing should file a protest with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, intervene. This filing is available for Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC review at the Commission in the Public 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426, in accordance with Sections Reference Room or may be viewed on 20426, in accordance with section 385.214 or 385.211 of the Commission’s the Commission’s Web site at http:// 385.211 of the Commission’s Rules and Rules and Regulations. All such motions www.ferc.gov using the ‘‘eLibrary’’. Regulations. All such protests must be or protests must be filed on or before the Enter the docket number excluding the filed in accordance with section 154.210 date as indicated below. Protests will be last three digits in the docket number of the Commission’s Regulations. considered by the Commission in field to access the document. For Protests will be considered by the determining the appropriate action to be assistance, please contact FERC Online Commission in determining the taken, but will not serve to make Support at appropriate action to be taken, but will protestants parties to the proceedings. [email protected] or toll- not serve to make protestants parties to Any person wishing to become a party free at (866) 208–3676, or TTY, contact the proceedings. This filing is available must file a motion to intervene. This (202) 502–8659. The Commission for review at the Commission in the filing is available for review at the strongly encourages electronic filings. Public Reference Room or may be Commission in the Public Reference See 18 CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the viewed on the Commission’s Web site at Room or may be viewed on the instructions on the Commission’s Web http://www.ferc.gov using the eLibrary Commission’s Web site at http:// site under the ‘‘e-Filing’’ link. link. Enter the docket number excluding www.ferc.gov using the ‘‘eLibrary’’. Comment Date: October 14, 2003. the last three digits in the docket Enter the docket number excluding the number field to access the document. last three digits in the docket number Magalie R. Salas, For assistance, please contact FERC field to access the document. For Secretary. OnlineSupport at assistance, please contact FERC Online [FR Doc. E3–00026 Filed 10–8–03; 8:45 am] [email protected] or toll- Support at BILLING CODE 6717–01–P free at (866) 208–3676, or TTY, contact [email protected] or toll-

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:04 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00027 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\09OCN1.SGM 09OCN1 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Notices 58327

free at (866) 208–3676, or TTY, contact free at (866) 208–3676, or TTY, contact www.ferc.gov using the ‘‘eLibrary’’. (202) 502–8659. The Commission (202) 502–8659. The Commission Enter the docket number excluding the strongly encourages electronic filings. strongly encourages electronic filings. last three digits in the docket number See, 18CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the See 18 CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the field to access the document. For instructions on the Commission’s Web instructions on the Commission’s Web assistance, please contact FERC Online site under the ‘‘e-Filing’’ link. site under the eFiling link. Support at Comment Date: October 23, 2003. Protest Date: October 6, 2003. [email protected] or toll- free at (866) 208–3676, or TTY, contact Magalie R. Salas, Magalie R. Salas, (202) 502–8659. The Commission Secretary. Secretary. strongly encourages electronic filings. [FR Doc. E3–00034 Filed 10–8–03; 8:45 am] [FR Doc. E3–00014 Filed 10–8–03; 8:45 am] See 18 CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the BILLING CODE 6717–01–P BILLING CODE 6717–01–P instructions on the Commission’s Web site under the ‘‘e-Filing’’ link. Comment Date: October 14, 2003. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Magalie R. Salas, Federal Energy Regulatory Federal Energy Regulatory Secretary. Commission Commission [FR Doc. E3–00027 Filed 10–8–03; 8:45 am] [Docket No. RP03–485–002] [Docket No. RP03–626–000] BILLING CODE 6717–01–P

Honeoye Storage Corporation; Notice Iroquois Gas Transmission System, of Proposed Change in FERC Gas L.P.; Notice Filing DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Tariff October 2, 2003. Federal Energy Regulatory October 2, 2003. Take notice that on September 30, Commission Take notice that on September 24, 2003, Iroquois Gas Transmission [Docket No. PR03–18–000] 2003, Honeoye Storage Corporation System, L.P. (Iroquois) tendered for (Honeoye) tendered for filing as part of filing its report relating to its Deferred its FERC Gas Tariff, First Revised Katy Storage and Transportation, L.P.; Asset Surcharge. Iroquois states that Notice of Petition for Rate Approval Volume 1A, one revised tariff sheet to there is no change in the Deferred Asset be effective July 1, 2003. The revised Surcharge, no tariff sheet is being October 2, 2003. tariff sheet is designated as: submitted. Take notice that on September 23, Substitute Third Revised Sheet No. 105 Iroquois states that it is filing the 2003, Katy Storage and Transportation, Superceding Third Revised Sheet No. 105 supporting workpapers as part of its L.P. (KST) filed a petition for rate Honeoye states that the purpose of annual update of its Deferred Asset approval of market-based rates for this filing is to comply with the Surcharge to reflect the annual revenue storage services pursuant to § Commission’s September 12, 2003 requirement associated with the 284.123(b)(2) of the Commission’s Letter Order which directed Honeoye to Deferred Asset for the amortization Regulations. KST requests approval of remove the reference to certain WGQ period commencing November 1, 2003. its proposed rates as being fair and Standards incorporated by reference in Iroquois further states as shown in those equitable as it will lack the requisite section 11.12 of its tariff. workpapers, there is no change in the market power to charge rates in excess Honeoye states that copies of the rate for the Deferred Asset Surcharge for of amounts that interstate pipelines and filing are being mailed to Honeoye’s the period commencing November 1, storage providers could charge for jurisdictional customers and interested 2003; accordingly, no revised tariff sheet similar services. state regulatory agencies. is necessary. KST affirms that it is an intrastate Any person desiring to protest said Iroquois states that copies of its filing pipeline within the meaning of section filing should file a protest with the were served on all jurisdictional 2(16) of the Natural Gas Policy Act Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, customers and interested state (NGPA). Consistent with the 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC commissions. Commission’s approval of its Section 20426, in accordance with § 385.211 of Any person desiring to be heard or to 311 rates in Docket No. PR03–18–000, the Commission’s Rules and protest said filing should file a motion KST proposes to make its section 311 Regulations. All such protests must be to intervene or a protest with the rates effective as of September 23, 2003. filed in accordance with § 154.210 of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Pursuant to section 284.123(b)(2)(ii), Commission’s Regulations. Protests will 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC if the Commission does not act within be considered by the Commission in 20426, in accordance with § 385.214 or 150 days of the date of this filing, the determining the appropriate action to be 385.211 of the Commission’s Rules and rates will be deemed to be fair and taken, but will not serve to make Regulations. All such motions or equitable and not in excess of an protestants parties to the proceedings. protests must be filed on or before the amount which interstate pipelines This filing is available for review at the date as indicated below. Protests will be would be permitted to charge for similar Commission in the Public Reference considered by the Commission in transportation service. The Commission Room or may be viewed on the determining the appropriate action to be may, prior to the expiration of the 150 Commission’s Web site at http:// taken, but will not serve to make day period, extend the time for action or www.ferc.gov using the eLibrary link. protestants parties to the proceedings. institute a proceeding to afford parties Enter the docket number excluding the Any person wishing to become a party an opportunity for written comments last three digits in the docket number must file a motion to intervene. This and for the oral presentation of views, field to access the document. For filing is available for review at the data, and arguments. assistance, please contact FERC Online Commission in the Public Reference Any person desiring to participate in Support at Room or may be viewed on the this rate proceeding must file a motion [email protected] or toll- Commission’s Web site at http:// to intervene or protest with the Federal

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:04 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00028 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\09OCN1.SGM 09OCN1 58328 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Notices

Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 Third Revised Sheet No. 266B DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY First Street, NE., Washington DC 20426, First Revised Sheet No. 266C in accordance with § 385.214 or 385.211 Federal Energy Regulatory of the Commission’s Rules and Midwestern states that the purpose it Commission Regulations. All such motions or its filing is to: (1) Eliminate the OBA PAL Scheduling Penalty in Rate protests must be filed with the Secretary [Docket No. RP03–615–000] of the Commission on or before the date Schedule LMS–MA, (2) provide further as indicated below. Protests will be clarification regarding the applicability MIGC, Inc.; Notice of Filing considered by the Commission in of its Daily Imbalance Charge, and (3) determining the appropriate action to be clarify the procedures to be utilized to October 2, 2003. taken, but will not serve to make avoid penalty charges. Take notice that on September 24, protestants parties to the proceedings. Midwestern states that it is not 2003, MIGC, Inc. (MIGC) tendered for Any person wishing to become a party proposing any substantive changes to its filing as part of its FERC Gas Tariff, First must file a motion to intervene. This remaining penalty provisions under Revised Volume No.1, the following petition for rate approval is available for Rate Schedules LMS–MA and LMS–PA, tariff sheets, to become effective review at the Commission in the Public it is only seeking minor clarifications to November 1, 2003: Reference Room or may be viewed on more clearly articulate the applicability Sixth Revised Sheet No. 90A the Commission’s Web site at http:// of the penalty provisions thereby www.ferc.gov using the ‘‘eLibrary’’ link. Second Revised Sheet No. 90B minimizing any confusion and reducing Enter the docket number excluding the the potential imposition of a penalty MIGC states that the purpose of this last three digits I the docket number filing is to update MIGC’s tariff to field to access the document. For charge. combine revisions which were Assistance, call (866) 208–3676 or for Midwestern states that copies of this TTY, (202) 502–8659. Comments, filing have been sent to all of previously approved in separate protests and interventions may be filed Midwestern’s shippers and interested proceedings. MIGC further states that electronically via the Internet in lieu of state regulatory commissions. these proposed revisions are necessary paper. The Commission strongly to finalize MIGC’s compliance with Any person desiring to be heard or to FERC Order’s No. 587–O and 587–R. encourages electronic filings. See, 18 protest said filing should file a motion CFR 385.2001(1)(iii) and the to intervene or a protest with the Any person desiring to be heard or to instructions on the Commission’s Web Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, protest said filing should file a motion site under the ‘‘e-Filing’’ link. to intervene or a protest with the Comment Date: October 23, 2003. 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426, in accordance with Sections Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC Magalie R. Salas, 385.214 or 385.211 of the Commission’s 20426, in accordance with § 385.214 or Secretary. Rules and Regulations. All such motions 385.211 of the Commission’s Rules and [FR Doc. E3–00012 Filed 10–8–03; 8:45 am] or protests must be filed in accordance Regulations. All such motions or BILLING CODE 6717–01–P with Section 154.210 of the protests must be filed in accordance Commission’s Regulations. Protests will with § 154.210 of the Commission’s be considered by the Commission in Regulations. Protests will be considered DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY determining the appropriate action to be by the Commission in determining the taken, but will not serve to make Federal Energy Regulatory appropriate action to be taken, but will protestants parties to the proceedings. Commission not serve to make protestants parties to Any person wishing to become a party the proceedings. Any person wishing to [Docket No. RP03–618–000] must file a motion to intervene. This become a party must file a motion to filing is available for review at the Midwestern Gas Transmission intervene. This filing is available for Commission in the Public Reference Company ; Notice of Proposed review at the Commission in the Public Changes in FERC Gas Tariff Room or may be viewed on the Reference Room or may be viewed on Commission’s Web site at http:// the Commission’s Web site at http:// October 2, 2003. www.ferc.gov using the ‘‘eLibrary’’. www.ferc.gov using the ‘‘eLibrary’’. Take notice that on September 26, Enter the docket number excluding the Enter the docket number excluding the 2003, Midwestern Gas Transmission last three digits in the docket number last three digits in the docket number Company (Midwestern) tendered for field to access the document. For field to access the document. For filing to become part of Midwestern’s assistance, please contact FERC Online assistance, please contact FERC Online FERC Gas Tariff, Third Revised Volume Support at Support at No. 1, the following tariff sheets to [email protected] or toll- become effective November 1, 2003: [email protected] or toll- free at (866) 208–3676, or TTY, contact free at (866) 208–3676, or TTY, contact Second Revised Sheet No. 90 (202) 502–8659. The Commission (202) 502–8659. The Commission Original Sheet No. 100B strongly encourages electronic filings. strongly encourages electronic filings. First Revised Sheet No. 90A See, 18 CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the Second Revised Sheet No. 91 See 18 CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the Original Sheet No. 100C instructions on the Commission’s Web instructions on the Commission’s Web First Revised Sheet No. 91A site under the ‘‘e-Filing’’ link. site under the ‘‘eFiling’’ link. Original Sheet No. 91A.01 Comment Date: October 8, 2003. Comment Date: October 6, 2003. Second Revised Sheet No. 101 Second Revised Sheet No. 92 Magalie R. Salas, Magalie R. Salas, Third Revised Sheet No. 100 Secretary. Secretary. Second Revised Sheet No. 102 [FR Doc. E3–00021 Filed 10–8–03; 8:45 am] First Revised Sheet No. 100A [FR Doc. E3–00018 Filed 10–8–03; 8:45 am] Fourth Revised Sheet No. 230B BILLING CODE 6717–01–P BILLING CODE 6717–01–P

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:04 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00029 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\09OCN1.SGM 09OCN1 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Notices 58329

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY to intervene or a protest with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Federal Energy Regulatory Federal Energy Regulatory 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC Commission Commission 20426, in accordance with Sections [Docket No. RP03–620–000] 385.214 or 385.211 of the Commission’s [Docket No. RP99–518–050] Rules and Regulations. All such motions Portland Natural Gas Transmission or protests must be filed in accordance PG&E Gas Transmission, Northwest System; Notice of Proposed Changes with Section 154.210 of the Corporation; Notice of Tariff Filing in FERC Gas Tariff Commission’s Regulations. Protests will be considered by the Commission in October 2, 2003. October 2, 2003. determining the appropriate action to be Take notice that on September 26, taken, but will not serve to make Take notice that on September 30, 2003, Portland Natural Gas 2003, PG&E Gas Transmission, protestants parties to the proceedings. Transmission System (PNGTS) tendered Any person wishing to become a party Northwest Corporation (GTN) tendered for filing as part of its FERC Gas Tariff, must file a motion to intervene. This for filing to be part of its FERC Gas Original Volume No. 1, with an effective filing is available for review at the Tariff, Second Revised Volume No. 1– date of November 1, 2003: Commission in the Public Reference A., Eighteenth Revised Sheet No. 15, Seventh Revised Sheet No. 100 Room or may be viewed on the First Revised Sheet No. 17, Fourth Commission’s Web site at http:// Revised Sheet No. 18, and Third PNGTS states that it is also tendered for filing two alternate tariff sheets: www.ferc.gov using the ‘‘eLibrary’’. Revised Sheet No. 21B, with an effective Enter the docket number excluding the date of October 1, 2003. Alternate Fifth Revised Sheet No. 100, to be last three digits in the docket number effectiveNovember 12, 2002; and field to access the document. For GTN states that these sheets are being Alternate Sixth Revised Sheet No. 100, to be filed to update GTN’s reporting of effectiveJune 1, 2003. assistance, please contact FERC Online Support at negotiated rate transactions that it has PNGTS states that its filing proposes entered into. [email protected] or toll- to reduce the Firm Transportation (FT) free at (866) 208–3676, or TTY, contact GTN further states that a copy of this Seasonal Recourse Reservation Rate so (202) 502–8659. The Commission filing has been served on GTN’s that it is equal to 1.9 times the FT strongly encourages electronic filings. jurisdictional customers and interested Recourse Reservation Rate. PNGTS See, 18 CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the state regulatory agencies. states that the purpose of this change is instructions on the Commission’s Web Any person desiring to protest said to ensure that PNGTS offers seasonal site under the ‘‘e-Filing’’ link. service on a nondiscriminatory basis as filing should file a protest with the Comment Date: October 8, 2003. directed by the Commission and to Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, ensure that no existing or future Magalie R. Salas, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC seasonal contracts inadvertently raise Secretary. 20426, in accordance with § 385.211 of issues regarding a trigger of the discount [FR Doc. E3–00023 Filed 10–8–03; 8:45 am] the Commission’s Rules and clause (referred to as Most Favored BILLING CODE 6717–01–P Regulations. All such protests must be Nations or MFN clause) in PNGTS’s FT filed in accordance with § 154.210 of the contracts. PNGTS states that the primary Commission’s Regulations. Protests will tariff sheet reduces the seasonal DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY be considered by the Commission in recourse rate to equal 1.9 times the FT determining the appropriate action to be recourse rate effective November 1, Federal Energy Regulatory taken, but will not serve to make 2003. PNGTS further states that, along Commission protestants parties to the proceedings. with the primary tariff sheet, PNGTS is [Docket No. RP03–612–000] This filing is available for review at the requesting that the Commission Commission in the Public Reference reconsider and vacate its June 9, 2003 Questar Southern Trails Pipeline Room or may be viewed on the Order in Docket No. RP02–13–010, Company; Notice of Tariff Filing Commission’s Web site at http:// which accepted the current seasonal October 2, 2003. www.ferc.gov using the eLibrary link. recourse rate. PNGTS’s alternate tariff Take notice that on September 24, Enter the docket number excluding the sheets would reduce the seasonal 2003, Questar Southern Trails Pipeline last three digits in the docket number recourse rate to equal 1.9 times the FT Company (Southern Trails) pursuant to field to access the document. For recourse rate effective as of November 18 CFR 154.7 of the Commission’s assistance, please contact FERC Online 12, 2002. PNGTS states that finally, in Regulations, submitted for filing the Support at the event that the Commission declines following tariff sheets to Original [email protected] or toll- to adopt the primary or alternate Volume No. 1 of its FERC Gas Tariff to free at (866) 208–3676, or TTY, contact proposals, PNGTS requests that the be effective October 24, 2003. (202) 502–8659. The Commission Commission ‘‘grandfather’’ the two existing negotiated seasonal contracts, Original Volume No. 1 strongly encourages electronic filings. First Revised Sheet Nos. 72 through 78 See 18 CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the and continue to recognize those contracts as negotiated relative to the FT Southern Trails is proposing to instructions on the Commission’s Web recourse rate. update the Measurement section of its site under the e-Filing link. PNGTS states that copies of this filing tariff to comport with current industry Protest Date: October 14, 2003. are being served on all jurisdictional measurement standards and practices. customers and interested state Southern Trails states that a copy of Magalie R. Salas, commissions, as well as all parties in this filing has been served upon its Secretary. Docket No. RP02–13–000. customers and the Public Service [FR Doc. E3–00008 Filed 10–8–03; 8:45 am] Any person desiring to be heard or to Commissions of Utah, New Mexico, BILLING CODE 6717–01–P protest said filing should file a motion Arizona, and California.

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:04 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00030 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\09OCN1.SGM 09OCN1 58330 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Notices

Any person desiring to be heard or to TransColorado stated that a copy of 21, 1996, provided for annual protest said filing should file a motion this filing has been served upon all adjustments to the Settlement Base to intervene or a protest with the parties to this proceeding, Rates (SBRs) beginning November 1, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, TransColorado’s customers, the 1998. 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC Colorado Public Utilities Commission Transwestern states that the purpose 20426, in accordance with § 385.214 or and the New Mexico Public Utilities of the instant filing is to set forth the 385.211 of the Commission’s Rules and Commission. factors and calculations used in Regulations. All such motions or Any person desiring to protest said determining the adjustments to the protests must be filed in accordance filing should file a protest with the SBRs and to revise the SBRs to be with § 154.210 of the Commission’s Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, effective November 1, 2003. Regulations. Protests will be considered 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC Any person desiring to be heard or to by the Commission in determining the 20426, in accordance with section protest said filing should file a motion appropriate action to be taken, but will 385.211 of the Commission’s Rules and to intervene or a protest with the not serve to make protestants parties to Regulations. All such protests must be Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, the proceedings. Any person wishing to filed in accordance with section 154.210 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC become a party must file a motion to of the Commission’s Regulations. 20426, in accordance with § 385.214 or intervene. This filing is available for Protests will be considered by the 385.211 of the Commission’s Rules and review at the Commission in the Public Commission in determining the Regulations. All such motions or Reference Room or may be viewed on appropriate action to be taken, but will protests must be filed in accordance the Commission’s Web site at http:// not serve to make protestants parties to with § 154.210 of the Commission’s www.ferc.gov using the ‘‘eLibrary’’. the proceedings. This filing is available Regulations. Protests will be considered Enter the docket number excluding the for review at the Commission in the by the Commission in determining the last three digits in the docket number Public Reference Room or may be appropriate action to be taken, but will field to access the document. For viewed on the Commission’s Web site at not serve to make protestants parties to assistance, please contact FERC Online http://www.ferc.gov using the eLibrary the proceedings. Any person wishing to Support at (FERRIS) link. Enter the docket number become a party must file a motion to [email protected] or toll- excluding the last three digits in the intervene. This filing is available for free at (866) 208–3676, or TTY, contact docket number field to access the review at the Commission in the Public (202) 502–8659. The Commission document. For assistance, please contact Reference Room or may be viewed on strongly encourages electronic filings. FERC Online Support at the Commission’s Web site at http:// See 18 CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the [email protected] or toll- www.ferc.gov using the ‘‘eLibrary’’ Enter instructions on the Commission’s Web free at (866) 208–3676, or TTY, contact the docket number excluding the last site under the ‘‘eFiling’’ link. (202) 502–8659. The Commission three digits in the docket number field Comment Date: October 6, 2003. strongly encourages electronic filings. to access the document. For assistance, See, 18 CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the please contact FERC Online Support at Magalie R. Salas, instructions on the Commission’s web [email protected] or toll- Secretary. site under the e-Filing link. free at (866) 208–3676, or TTY, contact [FR Doc. E3–00015 Filed 10–8–03; 8:45 am] Protest Date: October 14, 2003. (202) 502–8659. The Commission BILLING CODE 6717–01–P Magalie R. Salas, strongly encourages electronic filings. Secretary. See 18 CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the [FR Doc. E3–00031 Filed 10–8–03; 8:45 am] instructions on the Commission’s Web DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY site under the ‘‘eFiling’’ link. BILLING CODE 6717–01–P Comment Date: October 6, 2003. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Magalie R. Salas, DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Secretary. [Docket No. RP97–255–060] Federal Energy Regulatory [FR Doc. E3–00016 Filed 10–8–03; 8:45 am] TransColorado Gas Transmission Commission BILLING CODE 6717–01–P Company; Notice of Compliance Filing [Docket No. RP03–613–000] October 2, 2003. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Take notice that on September 30, Transwestern Pipeline Company; 2003, TransColorado Gas Transmission Notice of Tariff Filing Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Company (TransColorado) tendered for October 2, 2003. filing as part of its FERC Gas Tariff, Take notice that on September 24, [Docket No. RP03–614–000] Fourth First Revised Volume No. 1, 2003, Transwestern Pipeline Company Fourth Revised Sheet Nos. 21 and (Transwestern) tendered for filing as Transwestern Pipeline Company; Fourth Revised Sheet No. 22A to Tariff part of its FERC Gas Tariff, Second Notice of Tariff Filing to be effective October 1, 2003. Revised Volume No. 1 (Tariff), the TransColorado states that the filing is October 2, 2003. following tariff sheet to become effective being made in compliance with the Take notice that on September 24, November 1, 2003: Commission’s Letter Order issued 2003, Transwestern Pipeline Company March 20, 1997, in Docket No. RP97– Second Revised Volume No. 1 (Transwestern) tendered for filing as 255–000. Fifteenth Revised Sheet No. 5B.02 part of its FERC Gas Tariff, Second TransColorado states that the Transwestern’s states that its Revised Volume No. 1 (Tariff), the tendered tariff sheets propose to revise Stipulation and Agreement filed on May following tariff sheet to become effective TransColorado’s Tariff to reflect a 2, 1995, in Docket Nos. RP95–271, et al., November 1, 2003: negotiated-rate contract with Chevron as amended by Transwestern’s Second Revised Volume No. 1 USA, Inc. Stipulation and Agreement filed on May Thirteenth Revised Sheet No. 5B.03

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:04 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00031 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\09OCN1.SGM 09OCN1 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Notices 58331

Pursuant to section 25 of the General imbalance of less than 1000 Dekatherms between ANR and Aquila, Inc., which Terms and Conditions of Transwestern’s to be cashed out at the 0–5 ‘‘no penalty’’ terminate the negotiated rate agreements FERC Gas Tariff, Transwestern states percentage level regardless of the actual between the parties. that it is filing a tariff sheet, which sets monthly imbalance percentage. Viking Any person desiring to protest said forth the new TCR II Reservation states that it does not desire to penalize filing should file a protest with the Surcharges that Transwestern proposes parties whose monthly imbalances are Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, to put into effect on November 1, 2003. less than 1000 Dekatherms because such 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC Any person desiring to be heard or to imbalance is insignificant in nature and 20426, in accordance with section protest said filing should file a motion not a source of major harm to its 385.211 of the Commission’s Rules and to intervene or a protest with the pipeline system. Regulations. All such protests must be Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Viking states that copies of this filing filed in accordance with section 154.210 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC have been sent to all of Viking’s of the Commission’s Regulations. 20426, in accordance with § 385.214 or contracted shippers and interested state Protests will be considered by the 385.211 of the Commission’s Rules and regulatory commissions. Commission in determining the Regulations. All such motions or Any person desiring to be heard or to appropriate action to be taken, but will protests must be filed in accordance protest said filing should file a motion not serve to make protestants parties to with § 154.210 of the Commission’s to intervene or a protest with the the proceedings. This filing is available Regulations. Protests will be considered Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, for review at the Commission in the by the Commission in determining the 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC Public Reference Room or may be appropriate action to be taken, but will 20426, in accordance with § 385.214 or viewed on the Commission’s Web site at not serve to make protestants parties to 385.211 of the Commission’s Rules and http://www.ferc.gov using the eLibrary the proceedings. Any person wishing to Regulations. All such motions or link. Enter the docket number excluding become a party must file a motion to protests must be filed in accordance the last three digits in the docket intervene. This filing is available for with § 154.210 of the Commission’s number field to access the document. review at the Commission in the Public Regulations. Protests will be considered For assistance, please contact FERC Reference Room or may be viewed on by the Commission in determining the Online Support at the Commission’s Web site at http:// appropriate action to be taken, but will [email protected] or toll- www.ferc.gov using the ‘‘eLibrary’’. not serve to make protestants parties to free at (866) 208–3676, or TTY, contact Enter the docket number excluding the the proceedings. Any person wishing to (202) 502–8659. The Commission last three digits in the docket number become a party must file a motion to strongly encourages electronic filings. field to access the document. For intervene. This filing is available for See, 18 CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the assistance, please contact FERC Online review at the Commission in the Public instructions on the Commission’s web Support at Reference Room or may be viewed on site under the eFiling link. [email protected] or toll- the Commission’s Web site at http:// Protest Date: October 7, 2003. free at (866) 208–3676, or TTY, contact www.ferc.gov using the ‘‘eLibrary’’ Magalie R. Salas, (202) 502–8659. The Commission (FERRIS). Enter the docket number strongly encourages electronic filings. excluding the last three digits in the Secretary. See 18 CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the docket number field to access the [FR Doc. E3–00033 Filed 10–8–03; 8:45 am] instructions on the Commission’s Web document. For assistance, please contact BILLING CODE 6717–01–P site under the ‘‘eFiling’’ link. FERC Online Support at Comment Date: October 6, 2003. [email protected] or toll- free at (866) 208–3676, or TTY, contact DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Magalie R. Salas, (202) 502–8659. The Commission Secretary. Federal Energy Regulatory strongly encourages electronic filings. Commission [FR Doc. E3–00017 Filed 10–8–03; 8:45 am] See 18 CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the BILLING CODE 6717–01–P instructions on the Commission’s Web [Docket No. RP97–13–009] site under the ‘‘e-Filing’’ link. Comment Date: October 7, 2003. East Tennessee Natural Gas Company; DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Notice of Negotiated Rates Magalie R. Salas, Federal Energy Regulatory Secretary. October 2, 2003. Commission [FR Doc. E3–00019 Filed 10–8–03; 8:45 am] Take notice that on September 30, 2003, East Tennessee Natural Gas [Docket No. RP03–616–000] BILLING CODE 6717–01–P Company (East Tennessee) tendered for Viking Gas Transmission Company; filing a corrected Exhibit A for Carolina Notice of Tariff Filing DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Power & Light Company Contract No. 410103. October 2, 2003. Federal Energy Regulatory East Tennessee states the various Take notice that on September 25, Commission contracts and negotiated rate agreements 2003, Viking Gas Transmission were filed with the Commission on [Docket No. RP99–301–086] Company (Viking) tendered for filing to September 24, 2003 in Docket No. become part of Viking’s FERC Gas ANR Pipeline Company; Notice of RP97–13–008. Footnote 16 to the Tariff, First Revised Volume No. 1, Negotiated Rate Filing transmittal letter for such filing noted Third Revised Sheet No. 34, to become that there was a typographical error on effective November 1, 2003. October 2, 2003. Exhibit A to the service agreement with Viking states that the purpose of this Take notice that on September 25, Carolina Power & Light (Contract No. filing is to add language to Rate 2003, ANR Pipeline Company (ANR) 410103), and that the parties were in the Schedule LMS which would tendered for filing and approval process of correcting the error. The automatically cause a monthly amendments to two Service Agreements parties have now corrected the error,

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:04 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00032 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\09OCN1.SGM 09OCN1 58332 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Notices

and East Tennessee hereby files the e. Name of Project: Baker River and issuances related to this or other corrected Exhibit A. Hydroelectric Project. pending projects. For assistance, contact East Tennessee states that copies of f. Location: On the Baker River, near FERC Online Support. the filing were mailed to all affected the Town of Concrete, in Whatcom and Puget Sound Energy, Inc. has mailed customers of East Tennessee and Skagit Counties, Washington. The copies of the PDEA and Draft License interested state commissions, and all project occupies about 5,168.5 acres of Application to interested entities and parties on the service lists. lands within the Mt. Baker-Snoqualmie parties. Additional copies may be Any person desiring to be heard or to National Forest managed by the U.S. obtained from the contact person listed protest said filing should file a motion Forest Service. in item (h) above. to intervene or a protest with the g. Filed Pursuant to: Federal Power m. With this notice, we are initiating Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Act 16 U.S.C. 791(a)–825(r). consultation with the Washington State 888 First Street, NE., Washington, D.C. h. Applicant Contact: Connie Historic Preservation Officer as required 20426, in accordance with Sections Freeland, Puget Sound Energy, Inc. P.O. by Section 106 of National Historic 385.214 or 385.211 of the Commission’s Box 97034 PSE–09S Bellevue, WA Preservation Act and the regulations of Rules and Regulations. All such motions 98009–9734; (425) 462–3556 or the Advisory Council on Historic or protests must be filed in accordance [email protected]. Preservation, 36 CFR 800.4. with Section 154.210 of the i. FERC Contact: Steve Hocking, Commission’s Regulations. Protests will Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Magalie R. Salas, be considered by the Commission in 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC Secretary. determining the appropriate action to be 20426; (202) 502–8753 or [FR Doc. E3–00009 Filed 10–8–03; 8:45 am] taken, but will not serve to make [email protected]. BILLING CODE 6717–01–P protestants parties to the proceedings. j. Status of Project: With this notice Any person wishing to become a party the Commission is soliciting (1) must file a motion to intervene. This preliminary terms, conditions, and DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY filing is available for review at the recommendations on the Preliminary Draft Environmental Assessment Federal Energy Regulatory Commission in the Public Reference Commission Room or may be viewed on the (PDEA), and (2) comments on the Draft License Application. Commission’s Web site at http:// Notice of Draft License Application and www.ferc.gov using the ‘‘eLibrary’’. k. Deadline for filing: January 2, 2004. All comments on the PDEA and Draft Draft Preliminary Draft Environmental Enter the docket number excluding the Impact Statement (DPDEIS) and last three digits in the docket number License Application should be sent to the addresses noted above in Item (h), Request for Preliminary Terms and field to access the document. For Conditions assistance, please contact FERC Online with one copy filed with FERC at the Support at following address: Magalie R. Salas, October 2, 2003. [email protected] or toll- Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Take notice that the following draft free at (866) 208–3676, or TTY, contact Commission, 888 First Street, NE., hydroelectric application has been filed (202) 502–8659. The Commission Washington, DC 20426. All comments with the Commission and is available strongly encourages electronic filings. must include the project name and for public inspection: See, 18 CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the number and bear the heading a. Type of Application: New Major instructions on the Commission’s Web Preliminary Comments, Preliminary License. site under the ‘‘e-Filing’’ link. Recommendations, Preliminary Terms b. Project No.: 2195. Comment Date: October 14, 2003. and Conditions, or Preliminary c. Applicant: Portland General Prescriptions. Electric Company. Magalie R. Salas, Comments and preliminary d. Name of Project: Clackamas River Secretary. recommendations, terms and Hydroelectric Project P–2195 (formerly [FR Doc. E3–00029 Filed 10–8–03; 8:45 am] conditions, and prescriptions may be Oak Grove, P–135 and North Fork P– BILLING CODE 6717–01–P filed electronically via the Internet in 2195 projects). lieu of paper. The Commission strongly e. Location: On the Oak Grove Fork of encourages electronic filings. See 18 the Clackamas River on the Mount Hood DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the National Forest, and on the Clackamas instructions on the Commission’s Web River, in Clackamas County, Oregon, Federal Energy Regulatory site (http://www.ferc.gov) under the ‘‘e- near Estacada, Oregon. Commission Filing’’ link. f. Applicant Contact: Julie Keil, l. A copy of the application is Portland General Electric, 121 SW Notice of Draft License Application and available for review at the Commission Salmon Street, 3WTC–BRHL, Portland, Preliminary Draft Environmental in the Public Reference Room or may be Oregon, 97204, Phone: 503–464–8864. Assessment and Request for viewed on the Commission’s Web site at g. FERC Contact: John Blair at (202) Preliminary Terms and Conditions http://www.ferc.gov using the 502–6092; e-mail [email protected]. October 2, 2003. ‘‘eLibrary’’ link. Enter the docket h. PGE mailed a copy of the Take notice that the following number excluding the last three digits in Clackamas River Hydroelectric Project hydroelectric application has been filed the docket number field to access the draft Preliminary Draft Environmental with the Commission and is available document. For assistance, contact FERC Impact Statement (dPDEIS) and Draft for public inspection. Online Support at Application to interested parties on a. Type of Application: New Major [email protected] or toll- September 30, 2003. A copy of the License. free at 1–866–208–3676, or for TTY, dPDEIS and Draft application was filed b. Project No.: P–2150–026. (202) 502–8659. with Commission on September 29, c. Date Filed: October 1, 2003. You may also register online at 2003. d. Applicant: Puget Sound Energy, http://www.ferc.gov/esubscribenow.htm i. With this notice we are soliciting Inc. to be notified via email of new filings preliminary terms, conditions,

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:04 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00033 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\09OCN1.SGM 09OCN1 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Notices 58333

prescriptions and recommendations on to watershed protection and restoration Web site at http://www.epa.gov/owow/ the dPDEIS and draft license to determine if those approaches watershed/initiative. application. All comments on the produce short-term environmental SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: dPDEIS and draft license application results and have the potential for long should be sent to Portland General term maintenance in a watershed. The I. Introduction Electric at the address above in item (f), President’s fiscal year (FY) 2004 budget, A. The Watershed Initiative with one copy filed with the which is now before Congress, The Watershed Initiative is predicated Commission at the following address: incorporates a request for $21 million on the fundamental concept of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, for the Watershed Initiative. Subject to Agency’s holistic watershed approach to Magalie R. Salas, Secretary, 888 First St. the availability of appropriations for this water resources management. Both the NE, Washington, DC 20426. All purpose, EPA plans to select through a watershed approach and the Watershed comments must include the project competitive process up to 20 watersheds Initiative focus on multi-faceted plans name and number, and bear the heading throughout the country for grants to for protecting and restoring water ‘‘Preliminary Comments,’’ Preliminary support the study of promising resources. Isolated efforts do not Recommendations,’’ ‘‘Preliminary watershed-based approaches to provide comprehensive and effective Terms and Conditions,’’ or ‘‘Preliminary improving water quality. This notice protection and restoration of the Prescriptions.’’ Any party interested in sets forth the process that will be used resources. Rather, the nominations commenting must do so by December for selecting the watersheds and serves selected to receive Watershed Initiative 31, 2003. as the call for nominations from funding will be for studies of j. With this notice, we are initiating Governors and Tribal Leaders. For the approaches that go beyond consultation with the State Historic most part, this process is similar to that implementing separate, detached Preservation Officer (SHPO), as required of the FY 2003 solicitation. This year, activities and will, instead, focus on the by Section 106, National Historic however, EPA will place a somewhat effectiveness of an integrated ecosystem- Preservation Act, and the regulations of larger emphasis on studies of (1) market- based approach to conservation and the Advisory Council on Historic based approaches to water quality restoration throughout a watershed. The Preservation, 36 CFR 800.4. protection and restoration, and (2) k. Locations of the application: A selected nominations will include water specific approaches to decreasing quality and ecosystem monitoring and copy of the application is available for hypoxia in the Gulf of Mexico. review at the Commission’s Public evaluation to provide quantitative data DATES: The deadline for EPA receipt of Reference Room, located at 888 First to determine the effectiveness of nominations, both in hard copy and in Street, N.E., Room 2A, Washington, D.C. addressing water quality issues at the electronic form, is January 15, 2004. 20426, or may be viewed on the watershed level. Nominations and supporting materials Last year the Agency conducted a Commission’s Web site at http:// received after this deadline will not be national competition and in May 2003 www.ferc.gov using the ‘‘e-library link— considered. selected 20 watersheds to award $15 Dockets’’ Enter the project number P– million in grants appropriated for the 2195. For assistance, contact FERC ADDRESSES: Two hard copies of the new Watershed Initiative. The selected Online Support at nomination packages must be submitted nominations were those that were most [email protected] or toll- in their entirety by express mail or ready to go and likely to achieve free at (866) 208–3676 or for TTY, (202) courier service. Deliver the original to environmental results in a relatively 502–8659. The application also can be Carol Peterson, Office of Wetlands, short time period. Those grants will provided by Portland General Electric Oceans, and Watersheds, USEPA, Room fund watershed partnerships that are from the contact name and telephone 7136, 1301 Constitution Avenue, NW., undertaking studies of a variety of number in item (f) above. Washington, DC 20004; telephone 202– 566–1304. The other copy of the promising activities to support Magalie R. Salas, nomination package is to be delivered to comprehensive watershed-based Secretary. the appropriate EPA Regional office (see approaches to protecting and restoring [FR Doc. E3–00010 Filed 10–8–03; 8:45 am] section IV.C for names and addresses for water resources. For example, over BILLING CODE 6717–01–P the regions). Please mark all seventy percent of the selected projects submissions ATTN: Watershed address agricultural pollution; fifty Initiative. percent address urban and industrial runoff; fifty percent address the ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION In addition to the hard copies, a relationship between water quality and AGENCY portion of the nomination package must habitat restoration for wildlife and also be submitted electronically to the e- [FRL–7569–3] endangered and/or threatened species; mail address provided. Please follow the and thirty percent have projects aimed Watershed Initiative: Call for detailed instructions provided in at the homeowner. Moreover, several Nominations section IV of the SUPPLEMENTARY projects will study a more innovative, INFORMATION section below. AGENCY: Environmental Protection market-based approach to attaining Agency (EPA). FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: water quality. These latter watershed ACTION: Notice. Carol Peterson, USEPA, 1200 partnerships will test possibilities such Pennsylvania Ave., NW (4501T), as pollutant trading and crop insurance. SUMMARY: Following the completion of Washington, DC, 20460; telephone: 202– More information on these projects can its inaugural year, EPA is announcing 566–1304; e-mail: be found on the Watershed Initiative’s the continuation of the Watershed [email protected] or one of Web site listed above. Initiative by issuing the second call for the regional contacts listed in section nominations of watershed proposals. IV.C of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION B. Goals for 2004 The Watershed Initiative is a section below. Additional information The 2004 Watershed Initiative will competitive grant program designed to and any updated guidance will be continue to build upon the Agency’s support studies of a series of approaches posted on EPA’s Watershed Initiative watershed approach to water resources

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:04 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00034 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\09OCN1.SGM 09OCN1 58334 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Notices

management. The Initiative will support Water quality trading is one important Some market-based programs already studies of coalition-based strategies for approach that offers flexibility and in progress blend regulatory activities, such as attaining water efficiency in achieving water quality components and nonregulatory quality standards, protecting and goals on a watershed basis. Trading components to achieve environmental restoring the natural and beneficial uses allows a source with relatively higher improvements. Market-based of floodplains, and, in general, pollution control costs to meet a water approaches can include incentive improving water resources on a quality goal or requirement by using programs to encourage conservation watershed level. Water quality pollution reduction credits created by land use or management practices. For standards establish water quality goals another source with lower costs. This example, King County, Washington for specific water bodies and play an approach enables sources in the same provides rebates and other tax breaks as important role in watershed watershed to work together to meet a an incentive for property owners to management. Coalition-based strategies common goal. EPA considers trading to reduce impervious surfaces within the that focus on addressing designated uses be an important component of the County. The money raised through this in watershed initiatives can help build Watershed Initiative. Properly designed levy on impervious surfaces is used to support for control actions at the trading programs can improve water provide myriad surface water watershed level. quality at substantially lower costs and management services for the County. The goal of the Watershed Initiative is provide incentives for voluntary Other examples of market-based to study practical and efficient models reductions from all sources, especially approaches include flood insurance that can be adapted to local sources that are not regulated under the programs that insure against loss circumstances across the country. The Clean Water Act (CWA). through investment in the creation or cornerstone of the Initiative is to One example is a nonpoint source restoration of wetlands and floodplains, provide study results that will help selenium load trading program in the or programs that insure against advance the successes of partnerships Grassland’s Drainage Area in agricultural crop loss where and coalitions that have completed the California’s San Joaquin Valley. The management practices to reduce necessary watershed assessments and selenium load trading program is a cap- pollution have been implemented. Still have a technically sound watershed and-trade environmental program. A other examples of market-based plan ready to carry out. EPA believes regulatory agency sets the cap on the approaches involve state-private the Watershed Initiative will help selenium that the Grassland Area partnership programs to reduce document the kind of pro-active, Farmers, a group of irrigation and regulatory compliance costs, implement incentive-based protection and drainage districts, administer through pollution controls, or institute restoration measures that will ultimately an internal selenium load trading operational changes that benefit water yield cleaner water. program. Pursuant to the trading quality. Market-based approaches have program, the total allowable selenium In 2004, the Agency plans to continue tremendous potential to instigate load is allocated among the member its focus on studies of approaches aimed change. Trading programs and other irrigation and drainage districts. The to provide quick, measurable results; market-based approaches can be districts can either meet their load partnerships; innovation; and powerful tools to encourage innovative allocation or buy selenium load integration (formerly called program pollution control technologies and land compatibility). More emphasis, allocations from other districts. The management practices. EPA wants to however, will be placed on studies of (1) tradeable loads program has assisted fund Watershed Initiative projects that market-based approaches and other Grassland Area Farmers in meeting utilize market-based approaches and socio-economic strategies, and (2) the environmental goals in a cost-effective other socio-economic strategies to serious and growing hypoxia problem manner. determine if they produce real, facing the Gulf of Mexico. A portion of To promote the concept of trading in measurable environmental results. the appropriation will be devoted to relation to fostering environmental study projects in the Mississippi River progress, EPA has developed a new 2. Studies of Hypoxia in the Gulf of basin that address nutrient loadings Water Quality Trading Policy, published Mexico related to hypoxia. EPA hopes that this in the Federal Register on January 13, By far, the largest watershed within targeted approach to the problem of 2003 (68 FR 1608) and posted on the the United States is the Mississippi hypoxia will help promote needed Web site http://www.epa.gov/owow/ River Basin. Draining all or parts of 31 changes that are essential to attaining watershed/trading/. The purpose of this States, it covers 1.2 million square miles and maintaining clean water and that policy is to encourage States, interstate (40% of the US) and travels over 2,300 can be adapted to other areas agencies, and Tribes to develop and miles before discharging 612,000 cubic throughout the country. implement water quality trading feet of water per second into the Gulf of programs for nutrients, sediments, and Mexico. On the Gulf’s Texas-Louisiana 1. Studies of Market-Based Approaches other pollutants where opportunities continental shelf, an area of hypoxia Finding solutions to complex water exist to achieve water quality forms during the summer months. This quality problems requires innovative improvements at reduced costs. More ‘‘dead zone,’’ characterized by approaches that can be aligned with specifically, the policy is intended to diminished sunlight and low oxygen core water programs. Market-based encourage voluntary trading programs levels, is an area virtually devoid of approaches create social and economic that facilitate the implementation of marine life. The hypoxic area has been incentives for the implementation of Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDL), growing significantly over the years and, creative pollution reduction strategies, reduce the costs of compliance with at 7,000 square miles, it is double the emerging technologies, and watershed CWA regulations, establish incentives size it was in 1993. While there are protection measures. Properly designed for voluntary reductions and promote many factors contributing to the Gulf programs can improve water quality at watershed-based initiatives. Any trading hypoxia, scientific evidence indicates substantially lower costs and provide nominations submitted in response to that excess nutrients, particularly incentives for voluntary reductions from this solicitation must conform to this nitrogen and to a lesser extent all sources, point and nonpoint. policy. phosphorus, from the Mississippi River

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:04 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00035 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\09OCN1.SGM 09OCN1 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Notices 58335

drainage basin drive its onset and C. Funding Availability B. Eligible Activities duration. Studies show that a significant The Administration has requested $21 Section 104(b)(3) of the Clean Water portion (90%) of the nitrates entering million for FY 2004 which is subject to Act authorizes the Agency to award the Gulf comes from a variety of human the availability of Federal grants to ‘‘conduct and promote the activities, including discharges from appropriations. EPA will announce coordination and acceleration of, sewage treatment plants, and when funds become available on its research, investigations, experiments, stormwater runoff from city streets and Web site (http://www.epa.gov/owow/ training, demonstrations, surveys, and agricultural farms. Much of the nutrient watershed/initiative/), and provide, to studies relating to the causes, effects, load comes from wastewater discharges the extent possible, information extent, prevention, reduction, and and agricultural lands in Iowa, Illinois, regarding the appropriation request as it elimination of [water] pollution.’’ Grant Indiana, Minnesota and Ohio. goes through the Congressional budget funds awarded as part of this Initiative Reducing hypoxia in the Gulf of process. may only be used for these activities Mexico has been an Agency priority EPA expects to use most of the money and all grant-funded activities must since the 1998 passage of the Harmful to support competitive grants for up to support the watershed workplan Algal Bloom and Hypoxia Research and 20 selected watersheds—a portion of submitted. Control Act. The Act called for the those watersheds being within the These activities seek to advance the creation of the Mississippi River/Gulf of Mississippi River Basin. EPA anticipates state of knowledge, gather information, Mexico Watershed Nutrient Task Force, that typical grant awards for the selected or transfer information. Demonstrations which was then charged with watersheds will range from $300,000 to are projects that exhibit new or developing an Action Plan to reduce $1,300,000, depending on the amount experimental technologies, methods, or hypoxia in the Gulf. The Action Plan requested and the overall size and need approaches and disseminate the results was completed and delivered to of the project. The total number and so that others can benefit from the amount of the awards will depend on Congress in January 2001. The Action knowledge gained. Research projects the amount of funds Congress Plan can be found at http:// may include the application of appropriates. www.epa.gov/msbasin/actionplan.htm. established practices when they Also, as in 2003, about five percent of contribute to learning about an EPA sees the Watershed Initiative as the total appropriation will go toward environmental concept or problem. an opportunity to invoke watershed (1) a national conference for the 1. The Watershed Initiative under approaches in the Mississippi drainage watershed organizations selected to 104(b)(3). The Watershed Initiative is basin to ascertain if they result in real, receive grants, and (2) assistance designed to award grants to support measurable reductions in excessive agreements to organizations offering studies of a series of possible nutrient levels. As part of this year’s capacity building programs for all approaches to watershed restoration to Initiative, the Agency is seeking watershed organizations. This latter determine if those approaches produce proposals that look at holistic strategies effort will entail enhancing national short-term measurable environmental consistent with the Action Plan to tools, training, and technical assistance results in a watershed, or to support reduce the amount of nutrients, that will help local partnerships be demonstration projects to test new and particularly nitrogen and phosphorus, more effective at improving watershed innovative approaches to water quality. entering the Gulf with the goal of testing health, so that all watershed For example, if a watershed approaches to stay the further growth of organizations, from fledgling groups to organization identifies particular the hypoxic area. Such field studies may sophisticated coalitions, will benefit environmental threats or impairments to include, for example, determining the from the Initiative. its waters, and proposes to look at a measurable results of: improving group or series of interrelated projects to nutrient management programs on II. Statutory Authority and Eligibility Requirements address those impairments and includes farms, restoring or constructing measurement tools to achieve and judge wetlands and vegetated riparian areas, A. Authority their success, the proposal could be floodplain management and restoration, EPA expects to award the Watershed considered a study under section and enhancing denitrification and Initiative grants under the authority of 104(b)(3). Activities involving the nitrogen retention opportunities section 104(b)(3) of the Clean Water Act. implementation of pollution control throughout the river basin and along the Regulations pertaining to EPA grants measures are eligible for funding only to coastal plain of Louisiana. and other assistance agreements are in the extent they are necessary to carry From a national perspective, the Title 40 of the Code of Federal out the study or demonstration nutrient enrichment and resultant Regulations (CFR) parts, 30, 31, and 40. project(s). Activities involving wildlife hypoxic condition in the Gulf of Mexico All costs incurred under this program are eligible only to the extent they are is significant in terms of its sheer size, must be allowable under the applicable conducted as part of a study or persistence, and location. However, the OMB Cost Circulars: A–87 (States and demonstration relating to the causes, concern about coastal eutrophication is local governments), A–122 (nonprofit effects, extent, prevention, reduction or not limited to the inner shelf off organizations), or A–21 (universities). elimination of water pollution. Louisiana. In 1990, it was estimated that Copies of these circulars can be found 2. Exceptions. While certain projects nearly half of the nation’s estuaries were at http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/ may fall within the scope of section susceptible to eutrophication. EPA circulars/. In accordance with EPA 104(b)(3), the Agency has decided that envisions that results from the selected policy and the OMB circulars, as particular activities do not fit the goals watersheds within the Mississippi River appropriate, any recipient of funding or intentions of the Watershed Initiative. basin will enhance knowledge and must agree not to use assistance funds These include any proposals to directly understanding of hypoxia and that for lobbying, fund-raising, or political support regulatory activities required successful nutrient reduction activities (e.g., lobbying members of under the CWA. Primarily this entails approaches related to the causes of Congress or lobbying for other Federal funds for the development of TMDLs, hypoxia can be adapted to other bays grants, cooperative agreements or Phase II Stormwater projects, and other and estuaries along our coasts. contracts). Office of Water regulatory programs.

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:04 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00036 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\09OCN1.SGM 09OCN1 58336 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Notices

Proposals to study the effectiveness of Funding decisions will be made based Upon receipt of the Regional implementing TMDLs, however, are on the evaluation criteria outlined in recommendations, the Office of Water eligible. The construction of buildings section III.C of this notice. EPA will will convene a Technical Advisory or other major structures also will not be invite only nominees whose initial Panel at the national level consisting of funded under this Initiative. Proposals proposals are selected under this representatives from the Agency’s containing subgrant programs (also Initiative to submit detailed final Program and Regional Offices to review called pass-through grants) are allowed, proposals (see section V.A). and rank the watershed nominations. but the subgrant portion must account Other Federal agencies may be invited A. Nomination and Selection Process for no more than 20% of the requested to participate in this review. Again, funding amount. Watersheds must be nominated by hypoxia proposals will be evaluated and C. Eligible Applicants Governors or Tribal Leaders. (For the scored separately. In addition to the purposes of this notice, a tribal evaluation criteria listed below, factors Under section 104(b)(3) of the CWA, nomination may be submitted by a such as geographic diversity, project the following entities are eligible to Tribal Official.) Each Governor or Tribal diversity, watershed size, urban/rural receive grants: State and Tribal water Leader may prepare or solicit watershed mix, and cost will be considered in pollution control agencies, interstate or proposals from eligible entities in a ranking nominations for consideration inter-tribal agencies, other public or manner most appropriate to their State by the Administrator. The non-profit private agencies, institutions, or Tribe, and nominate the most Administrator will select the watersheds organizations, and individuals. The meritorious to EPA. to be funded. term ‘‘State’’ is defined to include the Governors or Tribal Leaders are EPA expects to announce the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, U.S. invited to nominate a maximum of two watershed nominations selected under Virgin Islands, Guam, American Samoa, State or Tribal watersheds each. There this Initiative early in calendar year and the Northern Mariana Islands. All is, however, no limit on the number of 2004 and to complete the grant award non-profit watershed organizations are inter-state or joint State and Tribal process, including final grant workplan eligible, including those in the Agency’s watersheds that can be nominated. For negotiations through the appropriate National Estuary Program. Watershed inter-state or joint State and Tribal EPA Regional Office, by spring 2004. In organizations that were selected for watersheds, any of the involved general, grants awarded will be one-time funding in 2003 can not apply until Governors/Tribal Leaders may submit awards and grant recipients should use their previous Watershed Initiative the nomination. Such watershed the funds within 2–3 years. Subsequent funding is exhausted. nominations must include the funding would involve a new call for III. Competing for a Watershed endorsement of all partnering State watershed nominations and is Initiative Grant Governors or Tribal Leaders or Officials predicated on continued appropriations. EPA will select watersheds and the in their nomination package. Therefore, any proposal for work watershed grantees through a national Governors and Tribal Leaders are to beyond the initial funding period would competition. Activities proposed for submit their watershed nominations to need to be submitted through the funding via the Watershed Initiative are EPA (see section IV for details). All competitive process and will not receive not necessarily expected to address the nominations will be screened by EPA preferential consideration based on the entire watershed, but they are expected staff prior to review to determine if they applicant’s previous award. to have been developed based on are eligible, complete, and in B. Required Components of the comprehensive assessments and plans accordance with the instructions Nomination Package for the watershed. Interjurisdictional provided in this notice. If any of the watershed partnerships, that is, those required elements of the nomination In preparing nomination materials, that involve adjacent authorities, or that package are not submitted, EPA may nominees are to keep in mind the transcend international boundaries, are choose to contact the nominee. evaluation criteria by which their encouraged. Watershed nominations Once received by EPA, the overall nomination, i.e, interrelated that encompass more than governmental nominations will undergo two levels of individual projects, will be judged. authority will be considered review—one at the regional level and Within these required components, interjurisdictional provided that the one at the national level. Each of the nominees should address completely appropriate water agency in the adjacent Agency’s Regional Offices will convene and to the best of their ability the jurisdiction is a partner or otherwise a Review and Evaluation Panel that will criteria the Agency will be using in its supports the project(s). assess how well the nominations meet evaluation as outlined in section III.C For practical purposes, in this the evaluation criteria described below. below. context, the term ‘‘nomination’’ is meant Regions 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8 will convene Each nomination package must to include the proposed workplan along a separate panel session to review and contain the components listed in this with the required supporting materials. evaluate hypoxia plans. Hypoxia section. Failure to include any of this The ‘‘nominee’’ in this case is the proposals not ranked sufficiently high to information could result in watershed organization that is vying for merit recommendation for the hypoxia disqualification and removal from the the grant. Watershed nominations may funds will be placed in competition selection process. Conversely, include a single project or multiple with the other nominations received for additional, unsolicited material is projects within the watershed. general Watershed Initiative funds. strongly discouraged and any such Nominations will be selected based on Based on the panel review and material submitted will not be the quality of the written materials recommendation, each Regional considered. received, and adherence to the selection Administrator will then forward the 1. Nomination Letter. A letter signed criteria and goals of the Initiative. Region’s top four candidates to EPA’s by the Governor or Tribal Leader Emphasis will be placed on those Office of Water at Headquarters. Regions formally nominating the watershed for proposed projects with clear, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8 will seek to include consideration for funding under the measurable environmental indicators a minimum of one hypoxia nomination Watershed Initiative must accompany and an executable monitoring plan. in their transmittal. each nomination package.

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:04 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00037 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\09OCN1.SGM 09OCN1 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Notices 58337

2. Title Page. The title page must These should be described in terms of experience. Identify the entity that will indicate: (1) The name of the watershed applied field studies or demonstrations be the grantee and thus responsible for along with the designated 8-digit HUC to yield potentially positive the administration of the grant workplan code(s), (2) nominee contact environmental results. The following and for being the fiscal agent receiving information, i.e., name, affiliation, information must be included: the funds. Include academic experience address, telephone, and e-mail of the (1) An explanation of how the project only if relevant to the proposal. Do not person with whom the Agency should or aggregation of the individual projects send resumes. correspond, and (3) whether the is expected to affect watershed health. nomination is devoted to hypoxia in the (2) A detailed description of each (d) Description of Outreach Activities (1 Gulf of Mexico. project (if more than one) including: (i) page maximum) 3. Abstract. A 150-word or less a description of the components and summary of the nomination. goals of the project(s), (ii) a schedule for Describe the information and outreach 4. Workplan Description. The implementing the project(s); (iii) a plan that will be used to enhance public narrative description of the workplan summary of the costs of the project(s) understanding of the watershed and components is limited to a total of ten, with reference to the appended itemized encourage participation in the local double-spaced pages in which the budget for details; and (iv) milestones project or projects, and future activities following components described below for determining whether or not the regarding implementing the goals of the are addressed. Note that the page limits intended goals of the watershed study watershed plan. Because the selected for each component below add up to project(s) are being realized. watersheds are intended to serve as greater than 10 pages and that nominees (3) A monitoring and evaluation models for other communities, this should adjust their nomination packages component along with identified outreach plan must include activities for in a manner that best fits their needs. environmental indicators. Attention transferring the knowledge gained from (See section IV.A for complete should be given to baseline data this effort to other areas. formatting instructions.) requirements. This component should 5. Budget. Provide a detailed (a) Introduction (2 pages maximum) include performance measures and breakdown of cost by category for each progress goals, as well as a description Characterize the watershed and project. of how the ultimate success of the overall watershed planning efforts. projects will be measured. Performance (a) Standard Budget Form. To Describe what efforts have been measures must be environmental (e.g., facilitate the compilation and review of undertaken to improve watershed chemical or microbial levels attained). financial information, the Agency is health, next steps, and future plans. An Other measures to be monitored should providing a standard form for potential assessment of the natural resource and be infrastructural (e.g., additional applicants to use when submitting environmental conditions, and an partnerships formed) and project budgets. This form (Table 1) may identification of problem sources and implementational (e.g., best be reconstructed or downloaded from areas for treatment are required. These the Watershed Initiative Web site at include: management practices instituted). The (1) A description of the watershed’s progress and performance of the projects http://www.epa.gov/owow/watershed/ biological, physical, and, if relevant, must be measurable by technically initiative/budget.form. All budget social and/or cultural characteristics. sound practices. information, including matching funds (2) An identification of the threats and (4) A description of how the projects and other leveraged services, and travel impairments facing the watershed, complement or are consistent with other cost to the annual conference, must be focusing on those that will be addressed EPA, Federal, and/or State programs or provided on this form. (Information on by the proposal. mandates. Other Federal contributors or matching funds and the annual (3) An overall description of the supporting partners should also be conference is described in sections watershed plan including short- and identified. III.B(b) and (c) below). Nominees should long-term watershed goals. (c) Description of Project Management include cost estimates for each of the (4) An identification of the (2 pages maximum) proposed project activities to be assessments and plans that have been conducted under the grant. completed to date. Provide a biography on the project leader(s) (not to exceed one-half page Explanations of the costs associated (b) Description of the Proposed Study each) describing qualifications for with each entry should be included in Projects (7 pages maximum) managing the project(s) and focusing on the narrative description portion of the Describe the projects to be funded grant management and watershed nomination package. under the Watershed Initiative grant. management capabilities and

TABLE 1. BUDGET INFORMATION—EPA WATERSHED INITIATIVE GRANT PROGRAM 1

SECTION A—BUDGET SUMMARY

Watershed Project, Activity or Work Plan Element Federal Non-Federal Total

1. $$$

2. $$$

3. $$$

4. $$$

Totals $$$

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:04 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00038 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\09OCN1.SGM 09OCN1 58338 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Notices

TABLE 1. BUDGET INFORMATION—EPA WATERSHED INITIATIVE GRANT PROGRAM 1—Continued SECTION B—BUDGET CATEGORIES

Watershed Project, Activity or Work Plan Element Total

Budget Categories (1) (2) (3) (4)

a. Personal $$$$$ b. Fringe Benefits

c. Travel

d. Equipment

e. Supplies

f. Contractual

g. Construction

h. Other

i. Total Direct Charges (sum line a–h)

j. Indirect Charges

Totals (sum line i–j) $$$$$ 1 Excerpted from Standard Form 424A, OMB Circular A–102.

(b) Matching Requirement. EPA is contact listed in section IV.C 45 days and Conditions of the grant. The grantee requiring applicants to demonstrate a prior to the nomination deadline. If will be allowed to use the grant funds minimum non-Federal match of 25% of approved, the nomination will be scored to pay for travel and lodging. The cost the total cost of the project or projects as if it met the minimum 25% match. of holding the conference will be paid (i.e., EPA will fund a maximum of 75% (c) Annual Conference. Watershed for by EPA. If the recipient wishes to of the total cost, including matching organizations selected for grant funding use the award money for travel funds). The Agency considers this will be required to attend an annual expenses, these costs must be included matching contribution as evidence of two-day National Watershed Initiative in the submitted proposed budget. The community support and commitment, Conference. The purpose of this Agency will make every effort to hold and an opportunity to increase the conference is to provide these the two-day conference in a central overall scope of the proposed project. watershed organizations with training location to minimize travel costs. EPA encourages applicants to leverage and support to better restore, protect, (d) Information Technology. Also as a as much investment as possible. In and manage their watersheds, and to Term and Condition of the grant, addition to cash, matching funds can help position them to teach other recipients will be required to institute come from in-kind goods and services watershed groups by their example. The standardized reporting requirements such as the use of volunteers and their goals of this conference are to: into their workplans and include such donated time, equipment, expertise, (1) Transfer information about costs in their budgets. All etc., consistent with the regulation innovative technical tools available for environmental data will be required to governing matching fund requirements watershed restoration, protection and be entered into the Agency’s Storage (40 CFR 31.24 or 40 CFR 30.23). Other management. Provide assistance on how and Retrieval (STORET) data system. Federal funds may not be used to meet and where to get more information at STORET is a repository for water the match requirement for this grant the Federal, State, Tribal and local quality, biological, and other physical program unless authorized by the levels. data used by State environmental (2) Provide training to conference statute governing the use of the other agencies, EPA and other Federal attendees on how to maximize the use Federal funds. agencies, universities, private citizens, of Federal programs in implementing and many other organizations. Training Tribes and Tribal watershed groups their Watershed Initiative projects, for on how to use STORET will be provided may be exempt from this match example, integration and use of other at the annual conference. Watershed requirement if they are constrained to resources available under the CWA and organizations may also want to contact such an extent that fulfilling the match Safe Drinking Water Act. requirement would impose undue (3) Plan for translating individual their State agency responsible for hardship. EPA acknowledges the project successes into models to be entering data into the system. More limited means of many Tribes and the replicated by other local watershed information about STORET can be difficulty they may have in obtaining organizations across the country. found at http://www.epa.gov/STORET. non-Federal matching contributions. (4) Provide grant recipients with 6. Appendices. To substantiate the Tribes wishing to be exempt from the opportunities to share successful information contained in the narrative minimum 25% match requirement must approaches with each other and other portion of the submission, submit a one-page written request with peer-to-peer learning opportunities. documentation to verify partnerships justification. Exemption requests should Attendance at the conference will be and matching funds is required. Items be sent directly to the EPA Headquarters mandatory and will be one of the Terms that must accompany the narrative

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:04 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00039 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\09OCN1.SGM 09OCN1 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Notices 58339

description and may be submitted as implemented quickly will receive more and substantiating a strong collaborative appendices include the following. points. Nominations will be evaluated effort. (a) Signed letter(s) from active on the technical merit and adequacy of (a) Partnerships (5 points). Watershed partners indicating their commitment to each project. Reviewers will favor nominations that incorporate a wide implementing the workplan or for nominations that describe projects that variety of public, private, and non-profit specific proposed projects. are part of larger comprehensive participation will be favored. The score (b) A minimum of one signed letter watershed assessments and plans, and for this criterion will be based on the from an entity committing to provide reflect an ecosystem-based approach to level to which a nominee can matching funds, either in cash or in- conservation and restoration. Points will demonstrate strong and diverse kind goods and services, including the be awarded based on the overall stakeholder stewardship and support. total value of the commitment toward soundness of the nomination from both Reviewers will look for documented, the projects. an ecological and design perspective. In effective working relationships among (c) For interjurisdictional summary, higher scores will be given to State and local entities, along with nominations, a signed letter(s) from the those nominees that have demonstrated evidence of broad-based community appropriate organization in the adjacent an understanding of priority water involvement. State, Tribe, or country expressing their resource problems within the (b) Interjurisdictionality (5 points). support and participation in the watershed, have substantially Points will be awarded to nominations proposed project(s). For example, a completed the assessment and planning that actively involve more than one letter from another governor, Tribal phase, and are prepared to begin work. governmental entity, be it municipal, leader, State water commissioner, State (b) Experience (5 points). county, State, Tribe, Federal or country. water quality director, environmental Nominations will be scored based on Reviewers will look at the depth and director, or similar positions in Canada the qualifications of the nominee breadth of jurisdictional participation or Mexico is acceptable. focusing on management and technical and will also take into consideration (d) Maps (optional). capabilities. Reviewers will assess the any significant parties that are (e) Supplementary Technical past experience of project leader(s) and/ noticeably absent in lending their Information (optional). If the proposal or partners in designing, implementing, support of the nomination. includes a new or otherwise not widely and effectively managing and 4. Outreach (5 points). Proposals will known technology or methodology, a coordinating activities. Communities or be judged on the design and breadth of one-page description may be appended. organizations that have no prior their outreach program. Those proposals experience and have developed their C. Evaluation Criteria that demonstrate a clear strategy for preliminary workplan will be evaluated transferring the knowledge and Watershed nominations will be on the basis of their proposal and their experience garnered over the next few reviewed, evaluated, and scored based potential to effectively manage and years to other watersheds with similar on the following criteria with a possible oversee all phases of the proposed environmental conditions will score total score of 60 points. In addition to workplan and demonstrated working higher. Points will also be awarded for the points awarded for the criteria, up relationship with their partners. training and educational approaches to to 5 additional points will be awarded (c) Tangible Measures (10 points). A disseminating watershed information. to nominations that are nomination will be scored based on how 5. Financial Integrity (5 points). interjurisdictional and have been well it is supported by a clearly Points will be awarded based on the submitted with the proper supporting articulated set of performance and adequacy of the budget information letter(s). Rather than having a bonus progress measures, and identified provided, and whether the budget is category, these points will be a environmental indicators. A more reasonable and clearly presented. subsection of the Broad Support detailed monitoring and data collection Proposals that exceed the minimum category described below. strategy will be preferred. Reviewers match requirement or can certify a 1. Innovation (10 points). Reviewers will evaluate the workplan in relation to broad range of leveraging capacity will will be looking for progressive and its likelihood to achieve predicted be scored higher. forward-thinking projects when measurable, defensible environmental evaluating the nominations, and as results in a relatively short time period, IV. Call for Nominations such, watershed nominations that including potentially attaining EPA invites each Governor and Tribal undertake unique, innovative, or novel performance expectations, reaching Leader to submit nominations for grants approaches to environmental problem- project goals, and producing on-the- under the 2004 Watershed Initiative. solving will be scored higher. While the ground, quantifiable environmental A. Format of Nomination Package Agency recognizes that there can be change using sound science. innovative approaches that are not (d) Integration (5 points). Reviewers Each nomination package must market-based, maximum points will be will evaluate the extent to which the contain: (1) A one-page cover letter awarded to nominations that workplan and proposed project(s) are signed by the Governor or Tribal Leader, incorporate market-based approaches to linked to other existing State or Federal (2) a title page with appropriate water quality. programs. Points will be awarded to information, (3) an abstract, (4) a 2. Measurement of Environmental those watershed nominations that workplan description, (5) the budget Results (total of 30 points). Successful integrate the common goals and form, and (6) letter(s) and certification(s) nominees must demonstrate an in-depth complement the ongoing efforts of support. Maps and supplementary knowledge of the watershed ecology and occurring at the Federal, State, or local technical information are optional. The present a sound approach for potentially level. workplan description of the nomination combating threats or impairments to the 3. Broad Support (total of 10 points). must be no more than ten double-spaced water system. For this criteria, reviewers Acknowledging and responding to pages long, using a 12-point will focus on the following components: representative interests from a broad conventional font and one inch margins. (a) Feasibility (10 points). Reviewers and varied perspective is quintessential This section must include all of the will look at the readiness of the to any successful watershed enterprise. required components listed in section nomination. Those projects that can be This criteria can be met by illustrating III.B. To ensure a fair and equitable

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:04 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00040 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\09OCN1.SGM 09OCN1 58340 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Notices

evaluation of the nominations, please do Regions Region VII—Iowa, Kansas, Missouri, not exceed the above limits. A Region I—Connecticut, Maine, Nebraska nomination that contains a workplan Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Vermont, Submissions must be delivered to: narrative that exceeds ten double- New Hampshire Julie Elfving; U.S. EPA Region 7; spaced pages will not be considered. WWPD/GPCB; 901 North 5th Street; The title page and 150-word or less Submissions must be delivered to: Kansas City, KS 66101. abstract will not count toward the 10- William Walsh-Rogalski; U.S. EPA Contact: Julie Elfving, telephone 913– page limit. The entire nomination Region 1; 1 Congress Street, Suite 1100- 551–7475; e-mail [email protected]. package should be printed on one side Mail Code RAA; Boston, MA 02114– Region VIII—Colorado, Montana, North only of 81⁄2″x11″ paper and unbound. 2023. Contacts: William Walsh-Rogalski Appended project budget form, maps, or Lynne Hamjian, telephones 617–918– Dakota, South Dakota, Utah letters of support, and match 1035 and 617–918–1601; e-mails Submissions must be delivered to: certifications will not count toward the [email protected] and Ayn Schmit; U.S. EPA Region 8; Mail 10-page limit. [email protected], respectively. code 999; 18th Street, Suite 300; Denver, CO 80202–2466. B. Submission of Nominations Region II—New Jersey, New York, Puerto Rico, U.S. Virgin Islands Contact: Ayn Schmit, telephone 303– 1. Electronic. EPA is requiring that a 312–6220; e-mail [email protected]. Submissions must be delivered to: portion of the nomination be submitted Paul Molinari; U.S. EPA Region 2; 290 Region IX—Arizona, California, Hawaii, electronically. Please send an electronic Broadway; 24th Floor; New York, NY Nevada, American Samoa, Mariana copy of only the title page, abstract, 10007–1866; telephone 212–637–3886. Islands, Guam workplan description, and budget form Contacts: Theresa Faber or Cyndy Submissions must be delivered to: to the electronic mailbox at Sam Ziegler; U.S. EPA Region 9; Mail [email protected]. Electronic Belz, telephones 212–637–3844 and 212–637–3832; e-mails Code WTR–3; 75 Hawthorne Street; San submissions are limited to 120 KB in Francisco, CA 94105. size and one submission per [email protected] and [email protected], respectively. Contact: Sam Ziegler, telephone 415– nomination. Please do not send maps, 972–3399; e-mail [email protected]. letters of support, match certifications, Region III—Delaware, Maryland, or pictures of any kind via the electronic Pennsylvania, Virginia, West Virginia, Region X—Alaska, Idaho, Oregon, mailbox. The subject line must be in the Washington, DC Washington format ‘‘STATE—Watershed Name’’ Submissions must be delivered to: (e.g., MD—Rock Creek). No confidential Submissions must be delivered to: Marion White; U.S. EPA Region 3; Mail Bevin Reid; U.S. EPA Region 10; Mail business information should be sent via code ECO–086; 1200 Sixth Avenue; e-mail. The deadline for all electronic Code 3WP12; 1650 Arch Street; Philadelphia, PA 19103–2029. Seattle, WA 98101. submissions is 12:00 pm Eastern time Contact: Bevin Reid, telephone 206– on January 15, 2004. If unusual or Contact: Marion White, telephone 553–1566; e-mail [email protected]. extraordinary circumstances prevent 315–814–5714; e-mail electronic submission of the [email protected]. V. Post-Selection Regulatory Requirements nomination, please contact the Region IV—Alabama, Florida, Georgia, appropriate Regional contact person Mississippi, North Carolina, South A. Applying for a Grant listed below to discuss alternate Carolina, Kentucky, Tennessee EPA will invite only nominees whose arrangements. Submissions must be delivered to: initial nominations are selected under 2. Paper. Two hard copies of the William L. Cox; U.S. EPA Region 4; Sam this Initiative to submit detailed final complete nomination package Nunn Atlanta Federal Center; 15th proposals. Once selected to submit a (including all nominating and support Floor; 61 Forsyth Street, SW; Atlanta, grant application, the nominees will letters) are required to be delivered—the GA 30303–3104. have 60 days to complete the formal original package to EPA Headquarters grant application process (i.e., Contact: William L. Cox, telephone and a copy to the appropriate Regional Application for Federal Assistance, 404–562–9351; e-mail Office. All names and addresses are Standard Form 424 et al). The standard [email protected]. listed below. Mark all submissions: EPA grants application package must be ATTN: EPA Watershed Initiative. Region V—Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, filed according to Agency guidelines. All paper nominations must be Minnesota, Ohio, Wisconsin Detailed information and assistance, received by EPA by January 15, 2004. including an application kit, required Submissions must be delivered to: forms, and a check list, can be found at C. Addresses and EPA Contacts Paul Thomas; U.S. EPA Region 5; Mail http://www.epa.gov/ogd/AppKit/. In code WW–16J; 77 W. Jackson Blvd; anticipation of this process, all potential Please direct questions to your Chicago, IL 60604. nominees may want to explore the Regional contact person listed below. Contact: Paul Thomas, telephone 312– above Web site for useful and pertinent 886–7742; e-mail [email protected]. Headquarters information prior to preparing and Region VI—Louisiana, Texas, submitting their nomination materials. Submissions must be delivered to: Oklahoma, Arkansas, New Mexico The Catalog of Federal Domestic Carol Peterson, Office of Wetlands, Assistance number for this program is Oceans, and Watersheds; U.S. EPA; Rm. Submissions must be delivered to: 66.439 Targeted Watershed Initiative. 7136; 1301 Constitution Avenue; NW, Brad Lamb; U.S. EPA Region 6; Mail Any disputes regarding proposals or Washington, DC 20004. Headquarters Code 6WQ–EW; 1445 Ross Avenue; applications submitted in response to Contact: Carol Peterson, telephone 202– Dallas, TX 75202. these guidelines will be resolved in 566–1034; e-mail Contact: Brad Lamb, telephone 214– accordance with 40 CFR 30.63 and part [email protected]. 665–6683; e-mail [email protected]. 31, subpart F. Applicants should clearly

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:04 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00041 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\09OCN1.SGM 09OCN1 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Notices 58341

mark information they consider sources such as data bases or published Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460– confidential. EPA will make final literature. 0001; telephone number: (202) 554– confidentiality determinations in Regulations pertaining to QA/QC 1404; e-mail address: TSCA- accordance with regulations in 40 CFR requirements can be found in 40 CFR [email protected]. part 2, subpart B. 30.54 and 31.45. Additional guidance SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Although the selections will be can be found at http://www.epa.gov/ announced at the national level, quality/qa_docs.html#noeparqt. I. General Information Watershed Initiative grants will be Dated: September 29, 2003. A. Does this Action Apply to Me? awarded and managed by the respective EPA Regional Offices. Selected G. Tracy Mehan, This action is directed to the public nominees may be asked to modify Assistant Administrator for Water. in general. As such, the Agency has not objectives, workplans, or budgets prior [FR Doc. 03–25401 Filed 10–8–03; 8:45 am] attempted to describe the specific to final approval of the grant award. The BILLING CODE 6560–50–P entities that this action may apply to. exact amount of funds to be awarded, Although others may be affected, this the final scope of activities, the duration action applies directly to the submitter of the projects, and specific role of the ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION of the premanufacture notices addressed EPA Regional project coordinator will AGENCY in the action. If you have any questions regarding the applicability of this action be determined in the pre-award [OPPT–2003–0057; FRL–7330–5] negotiations between the selected to a particular entity, consult the person nominee and EPA. The designated EPA Certain New Chemicals; Receipt and listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION Regional Contact listed in section IV.C Status Information CONTACT. will be available to provide additional B. How Can I Get Copies of This guidance in completing the grant AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Document and Other Related application, and other necessary forms, Information? and answering any questions. EPA will ACTION: Notice. also work with the applicant to comply 1. Docket. EPA has established an with the Intergovernmental review SUMMARY: Section 5 of the Toxic official public docket for this action requirements of Executive Order 12372 Substances Control Act (TSCA) requires under docket identification (ID) number and 40 CFR part 29. EPA reserves the any person who intends to manufacture OPPT–2003–0057. The official public right reject all proposals and make no (defined by statute to include import) a docket consists of the documents awards. new chemical (i.e., a chemical not on specifically referenced in this action, the TSCA Inventory) to notify EPA and any public comments received, and B. Project Implementation and comply with the statutory provisions other information related to this action. Management pertaining to the manufacture of new Although a part of the official docket, Project monitoring and reporting chemicals. Under sections 5(d)(2) and the public docket does not include requirements can be found in 40 CFR 5(d)(3) of TSCA, EPA is required to Confidential Business Information (CBI) 30.50–30.54, 40 CFR 31.40–31.45 and 40 publish a notice of receipt of a or other information whose disclosure is CFR 40.160. In general, grantees are premanufacture notice (PMN) or an restricted by statute. The official public responsible for managing the day-to-day application for a test marketing docket is the collection of materials that operations and activities supported by exemption (TME), and to publish is available for public viewing at the the grant to assure compliance with periodic status reports on the chemicals EPA Docket Center, Rm. B102-Reading applicable Federal requirements, and for under review and the receipt of notices Room, EPA West, 1301 Constitution ensuring that established milestones of commencement to manufacture those Ave., NW., Washington, DC. The EPA and performance goals are being chemicals. This status report, which Docket Center is open from 8:30 a.m. to achieved. Performance reports and covers the period from August 18, 2003 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, financial reports must be submitted to September 5, 2003, consists of the excluding legal holidays. The EPA quarterly and are due 30 days after the PMNs pending or expired, and the Docket Center Reading Room telephone reporting period. The final report is due notices of commencement to number is (202) 566–1744 and the 90 days after the grant has expired. manufacture a new chemical that the telephone number for the OPPT Docket, Grant managers should consult, and Agency has received under TSCA which is located in EPA Docket Center, work closely with, their Regional section 5 during this time period. is (202) 566–0280. contact person throughout the award DATES: Comments identified by the 2. Electronic access. You may access period. docket ID number OPPT–2003–0057 this Federal Register document Certain quality assurance and/or and the specific PMN number or TME electronically through the EPA Internet quality control (QA/QC) and peer number, must be received on or before under the ‘‘Federal Register’’ listings at review requirements are applicable to November 10, 2003. http://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/. the collection of environmental data. An electronic version of the public Applicants should allow sufficient time ADDRESSES: Comments may be docket is available through EPA’s and resources for this process in their submitted electronically, by mail, or electronic public docket and comment proposed projects. Environmental data through hand delivery/courier. Follow system, EPA Dockets. You may use EPA are any measurements or information the detailed instructions as provided in Dockets at http://www.epa.gov/edocket/ that describe environmental processes, Unit I. of the SUPPLEMENTARY to submit or view public comments, location, or condition; ecological or INFORMATION. access the index listing of the contents health effects and consequences; or the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: of the official public docket, and to performance of environmental Barbara Cunningham, Acting Director, access those documents in the public technology. Environmental data also Environmental Assistance Division, docket that are available electronically. include information collected directly Office of Pollution Prevention and Although not all docket materials may from measurements, produced from Toxics (7408M), Environmental be available electronically, you may still models, and obtained from other Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania access any of the publicly available

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:04 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00042 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\09OCN1.SGM 09OCN1 58342 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Notices

docket materials through the docket C. How and To Whom Do I Submit docket, EPA’s e-mail system is not an facility identified in Unit I.B.1. Once in Comments? ‘‘anonymous access’’ system. If you the system, select ‘‘search,’’ then key in You may submit comments send an e-mail comment directly to the the appropriate docket ID number. electronically, by mail, or through hand docket without going through EPA’s electronic public docket, EPA’s e-mail Certain types of information will not delivery/courier. To ensure proper system automatically captures your e- be placed in the EPA Dockets. receipt by EPA, identify the appropriate mail address. E-mail addresses that are Information claimed as CBI and other docket ID number and specific PMN number or TME number in the subject automatically captured by EPA’s e-mail information whose disclosure is system are included as part of the restricted by statute, which is not line on the first page of your comment. Please ensure that your comments are comment that is placed in the official included in the official public docket, public docket, and made available in submitted within the specified comment will not be available for public viewing EPA’s electronic public docket. period. Comments received after the in EPA’s electronic public docket. EPA’s iii. Disk or CD ROM. You may submit policy is that copyrighted material will close of the comment period will be comments on a disk or CD ROM that not be placed in EPA’s electronic public marked ‘‘late.’’ EPA is not required to you mail to the mailing address consider these late comments. If you docket but will be available only in identified in Unit I.C.2. These electronic wish to submit CBI or information that printed, paper form in the official public submissions will be accepted in is otherwise protected by statute, please docket. To the extent feasible, publicly WordPerfect or ASCII file format. Avoid follow the instructions in Unit I.D. Do the use of special characters and any available docket materials will be made not use EPA Dockets or e-mail to submit available in EPA’s electronic public form of encryption. CBI or information protected by statute. 2. By mail. Send your comments to: docket. When a document is selected 1. Electronically. If you submit an from the index list in EPA Dockets, the Document Control Office (7407M), electronic comment as prescribed in this Office of Pollution Prevention and system will identify whether the unit, EPA recommends that you include Toxics (OPPT), Environmental document is available for viewing in your name, mailing address, and an e- Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania EPA’s electronic public docket. mail address or other contact Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460– Although not all docket materials may information in the body of your 0001. be available electronically, you may still comment. Also include this contact 3. By hand delivery or courier. Deliver access any of the publicly available information on the outside of any disk your comments to: OPPT Document docket materials through the docket or CD ROM you submit, and in any Control Office (DCO) in EPA East facility identified in Unit I.B.1. EPA cover letter accompanying the disk or Building Rm. 6428, 1201 Constitution intends to work towards providing CD ROM. This ensures that you can be Ave., NW., Washington, DC. Attention: electronic access to all of the publicly identified as the submitter of the Docket ID Number OPPT–2003–0057 available docket materials through comment and allows EPA to contact you and PMN Number or TME Number. The EPA’s electronic public docket. in case EPA cannot read your comment DCO is open from 8 a.m. to 4 p.m., due to technical difficulties or needs Monday through Friday, excluding legal For public commenters, it is further information on the substance of important to note that EPA’s policy is holidays. The telephone number for the your comment. EPA’s policy is that EPA DCO is (202) 564–8930. that public comments, whether will not edit your comment, and any submitted electronically or in paper, identifying or contact information D. How Should I Submit CBI To the will be made available for public provided in the body of a comment will Agency? viewing in EPA’s electronic public be included as part of the comment that Do not submit information that you docket as EPA receives them and is placed in the official public docket, consider to be CBI electronically without change, unless the comment and made available in EPA’s electronic through EPA’s electronic public docket contains copyrighted material, CBI, or public docket. If EPA cannot read your or by e-mail. You may claim other information whose disclosure is comment due to technical difficulties information that you submit to EPA as restricted by statute. When EPA and cannot contact you for clarification, CBI by marking any part or all of that identifies a comment containing EPA may not be able to consider your information as CBI (if you submit CBI copyrighted material, EPA will provide comment. on disk or CD ROM, mark the outside a reference to that material in the i. EPA Dockets. Your use of EPA’s of the disk or CD ROM as CBI and then version of the comment that is placed in electronic public docket to submit identify electronically within the disk or EPA’s electronic public docket. The comments to EPA electronically is CD ROM the specific information that is entire printed comment, including the EPA’s preferred method for receiving CBI). Information so marked will not be copyrighted material, will be available comments. Go directly to EPA Dockets disclosed except in accordance with in the public docket. at http://www.epa.gov/edocket, and procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2. follow the online instructions for In addition to one complete version of Public comments submitted on submitting comments. Once in the the comment that includes any computer disks that are mailed or system, select ‘‘search,’’ and then key in information claimed as CBI, a copy of delivered to the docket will be docket ID number OPPT–2003–0057. the comment that does not contain the transferred to EPA’s electronic public The system is an ‘‘anonymous access’’ information claimed as CBI must be docket. Public comments that are system, which means EPA will not submitted for inclusion in the public mailed or delivered to the docket will be know your identity, e-mail address, or docket and EPA’s electronic public scanned and placed in EPA’s electronic other contact information unless you docket. If you submit the copy that does public docket. Where practical, physical provide it in the body of your comment. not contain CBI on disk or CD ROM, objects will be photographed, and the ii. E-mail. Comments may be sent by mark the outside of the disk or CD ROM photograph will be placed in EPA’s e-mail to [email protected], Attention: clearly that it does not contain CBI. electronic public docket along with a Docket ID Number OPPT–2003–0057 Information not marked as CBI will be brief description written by the docket and PMN Number or TME Number. In included in the public docket and EPA’s staff. contrast to EPA’s electronic public electronic public docket without prior

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:04 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00043 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\09OCN1.SGM 09OCN1 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Notices 58343

notice. If you have any questions about 8. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, notices of commencement to CBI or the procedures for claiming CBI, be sure to identify the docket ID number manufacture a new chemical that the please consult the technical person assigned to this action and the specific Agency has received under TSCA listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION PMN number you are commenting on in section 5 during this time period. CONTACT. the subject line on the first page of your III. Receipt and Status Report for PMNs response. You may also provide the E. What Should I Consider as I Prepare name, date, and Federal Register This status report identifies the PMNs My Comments for EPA? citation. pending or expired, and the notices of You may find the following commencement to manufacture a new suggestions helpful for preparing your II. Why is EPA Taking this Action? chemical that the Agency has received comments: Section 5 of TSCA requires any under TSCA section 5 during this time 1. Explain your views as clearly as person who intends to manufacture period. If you are interested in possible. (defined by statute to include import) a information that is not included in the 2. Describe any assumptions that you new chemical (i.e., a chemical not on following tables, you may contact EPA used. the TSCA Inventory to notify EPA and as described in Unit II. to access 3. Provide copies of any technical comply with the statutory provisions additional non-CBI information that information and/or data you used that pertaining to the manufacture of new may be available. support your views. chemicals. Under sections 5(d)(2) and In Table I of this unit, EPA provides 4. If you estimate potential burden or 5(d)(3) of TSCA, EPA is required to the following information (to the extent costs, explain how you arrived at the publish a notice of receipt of a PMN or that such information is not claimed as estimate that you provide. an application for a TME and to publish CBI) on the PMNs received by EPA 5. Provide specific examples to periodic status reports on the chemicals during this period: the EPA case number illustrate your concerns. under review and the receipt of notices assigned to the PMN; the date the PMN 6. Offer alternative ways to improve of commencement to manufacture those was received by EPA; the projected end the notice or collection activity. chemicals. This status report, which date for EPA’s review of the PMN; the 7. Make sure to submit your covers the period from August 18, 2003 submitting manufacturer; the potential comments by the deadline in this to September 5, 2003, consists of the uses identified by the manufacturer in document. PMNs pending or expired, and the the PMN; and the chemical identity.

I. 28 PREMANUFACTURE NOTICES RECEIVED FROM: 08/18/03 TO 09/05/03

Projected Case No. Received Notice Manufacturer/Importer Use Chemical Date End Date

P–03–0773 08/18/03 11/15/03 CBI (G) Industrial intermediate which is (G) Zincated resin system compounded with pigments and binders before being coated onto paper for carbonless copy paper applications. P–03–0774 08/19/03 11/16/03 PPG Industries, Inc. (G) Coating with open use (G) Cationic acrylic copolymer P–03–0775 08/19/03 11/16/03 PPG Industries, Inc. (G) Coating with open use (G) Cationic acrylic copolymer P–03–0776 08/19/03 11/16/03 PPG Industries, Inc. (G) Coating with open use (G) Cationic acrylic copolymer P–03–0777 08/19/03 11/16/03 CBI (G) Emulsifier (G) Polyalkyl carboxylic acid polyol esters P–03–0778 08/20/03 11/17/03 The Dow Chemical (G) Additive for plastics (G) Phenol, polymer with formalde- Company hyde and phenol derivative P–03–0779 08/20/03 11/17/03 CBI (G) Intermediate used in closed proc- (S) 3-oxatricyclo[4.1.1.02,4]octane, esses 2,7,7-trimethyl-, (1r,2r,4s,6r)- P–03–0780 08/20/03 11/17/03 CBI (G) Dehydration agent (G) Polyester P–03–0781 08/22/03 11/19/03 Petroferm Inc. (S) Slip and leveling additive to uv- (G) Allyl ethoxylate methacrylate and eb-cured inks, paints and coatings; oligomer in the manufacture of polymeric materials P–03–0782 08/22/03 11/19/03 Petroferm Inc. (S) Slip and leveling additive to uv- (G) Combed silicone acrylate and eb-cured inks, paints and coatings; oligomer in the manufacture of polymeric materials P–03–0783 08/22/03 11/19/03 Petroferm Inc. (S) Slip and leveling additive to uv- (G) Combed silicone methacrylate and eb-cured inks, paints and coatings; oligomer in the manufacture of polymeric materials P–03–0784 08/22/03 11/19/03 Petroferm Inc. (S) Slip and leveling additive to uv- (G) Linear silicone methacrylate and eb-cured inks, paints and coatings; oligomer in the manufacture of polymeric materials P–03–0785 08/22/03 11/19/03 CBI (G) Defoamer (G) Propoxylated fatty alcohol esters P–03–0786 08/22/03 11/19/03 Ashland Inc., Environ- (G) Lamination adhesive (G) Polyurethane dispersion - lamina- mental Health and tion adhesive Safety P–03–0787 08/22/03 11/19/03 Crompton Corporation (S) By-product of erucamide produc- (S) 13-docosenoic acid, potassium tion to be recycled salt, (13z)-

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:04 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00044 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\09OCN1.SGM 09OCN1 58344 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Notices

I. 28 PREMANUFACTURE NOTICES RECEIVED FROM: 08/18/03 TO 09/05/03—Continued

Projected Case No. Received Notice Manufacturer/Importer Use Chemical Date End Date

P–03–0788 08/22/03 11/19/03 Crompton Corporation (S) By-product of amide production to (S) Docosanoic acid, potassium salt be recycled P–03–0789 08/22/03 11/19/03 CBI (S) Polymerisable photoinitiator for (G) Derivatized butyl ester uv-curable coatings photoinitiator P–03–0790 08/25/03 11/22/03 CBI (G) Component of foam (G) Polyester polyol P–03–0791 08/25/03 11/22/03 E.I. Du Pont De Ne- (G) Molding resin (G) Ethylene interpolymer mours and Com- pany, Inc. (dupont) P–03–0792 08/25/03 11/22/03 Dupont Textiles and (S) Emulsifier, corrosion inhibitor, and (S) Cyclododecane, oxidized, by- Interiors lubricant for metalworking fluid products from, acidified, oil phase P–03–0793 08/26/03 11/23/03 UBE America Inc. (S) External donor for olefin polym- (S) Silanamine, 1,1,1-triethoxy-n,n- erization diethyl- P–03–0794 08/29/03 11/26/03 BASF Corporation (G) Oxidation catalyst (S) Alanine, n,n-bis (carboxymethyl)-, Perfomance Chemi- iron sodium complexes cals P–03–0795 08/29/03 11/26/03 CIBA Specialty Chemi- (S) Photo-cure for imaging / elec- (G) Organo-titanium complex cals Corporation tronics industry P–03–0796 08/29/03 11/26/03 CBI (G) Raw material (G) Halogenated heteropolycycle P–03–0797 08/29/03 11/26/03 CBI (G) Raw material (G) Halogenated heteropolycycle P–03–0798 08/29/03 11/26/03 CBI (G) Synthetic industrial lubricant for (G) Pentaerythritol, mixed esters with contained use. straight and branched fatty acids P–03–0799 08/29/03 11/26/03 CBI (G) Synthetic industrial lubricant for (G) Dipentaerythritol, mixed esters contained use. with straight and branched fatty acids P–03–0800 08/29/03 11/26/03 CBI (G) Synthetic industrial lubricant for (G) Pentaerythritol, mixed esters with contained use straight chain and branched fatty acids P–03–0801 08/29/03 11/26/03 CBI (G) Synthetic industrial lubricant for (G) Dipentaerythritol, mixed esters contained use with straight chain and branched fatty acids

In Table II of this unit, EPA provides CBI) on the Notices of Commencement the following information (to the extent to manufacture received: that such information is not claimed as

II. 17 NOTICES OF COMMENCEMENT FROM: 08/18/03 TO 09/05/03

Commencement/ Case No. Received Date Import Date Chemical

P–00–0552 08/25/03 07/26/03 (G) Salicylic acid, zirconium salt P–01–0443 08/26/03 08/07/03 (G) Copolymer of polyoxyethylene allyl methyl ether P–01–0813 08/22/03 07/29/03 (G) Cerium-based organic compound P–02–0574 08/22/03 08/16/03 (G) Amine functional epoxy based resin salted with an organic acid P–02–0638 08/25/03 07/13/03 (G) Hexanedioic acid, polymer with 2,2-dimethyl-1,3-propanediol, 1,6- hexanediol, hexanedioic acid amide derivative, 3-hydroxy-2-(hydroxymethyl)- 2-methylpropanoic acid and 1,1′-methylenebis[4-isocyanatocyclohexane], compound with nu, nu-diethylethaneamine P–02–0946 08/19/03 07/22/03 (G) Substituted benzoic acid, alkali salt P–02–0992 08/26/03 07/25/03 (G) Ethylene oxide-propylene oxide copolymer allyl alkyl ether P–03–0067 08/25/03 07/31/03 (G) Fluoroalkene substitutedalkene polymer P–03–0078 08/20/03 07/27/03 (G) Sulphonated azo dye P–03–0291 08/25/03 08/11/03 (G) Corn by product P–03–0292 08/25/03 08/13/03 (G) ThermoChemical mechanical processed maize fiber P–03–0325 08/20/03 08/07/03 (S) Oxazolidine, 3,3′-methylenebis[5-methyl- P–03–0398 08/27/03 06/09/03 (G) Modified hydrocarbylpolysilicate P–03–0410 08/25/03 08/15/03 (G) Styrene acrylic copolymer P–03–0462 08/21/03 08/01/03 (G) Bisphenol a type epoxy resin, salt P–03–0474 08/20/03 08/11/03 (G) Hydrophobically modified acetylenic glycol P–99–1225 08/26/03 07/22/03 (G) Acrylic copolymer resin

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:04 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00045 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\09OCN1.SGM 09OCN1 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Notices 58345

List of Subjects Hudson River in the area north of the 1983 Richmond Terrace, Staten Environmental protection, Chemicals, Battery in Manhattan, New York and Island, NY 10302 Premanufacture notices south of Federal Dam in Troy, New York 9. Robert J. Hughes, Jr., Hughes Marine in accordance with Section 312(f)(3) of Firms, Raritan Plaza I, Raritan Center, Dated: October 2, 2003. the Clean Water Act and 40 CFR Edison, NJ 08837 Sandra Wilkins, 140.4(a). For vessels that are greater 10. John C. Tobin, New York State Acting Director, Information Management than 225 feet in overall length or are Waterways Association, Inc., 174 Division, Office of Pollution Prevention and greater than 20 feet in draft, the Washington Avenue, Albany, NY Toxics. prohibition will be applicable one year 12210 [FR Doc. 03–25638 Filed 10–8–03; 8:45 am] from the date of publication in the 11. Kevin A. Nugent, Vice President, BILLING CODE 6560–50–S Federal Register. Bouchard Transportation Co., Inc., 77 Previously, EPA established on Newbridge Road, Hicksville, NY December 13, 1995 two No Discharge 11801 ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION Areas (NDAs) to protect drinking water 12. Richard M. Larrabee, Director, Port AGENCY intake zones. Zone 1 is bounded by the Commerce Dept., The Port Authority [FRL–7572–1] northern confluence of the Mohawk of New York & New Jersey, One River on the south and Lock 2 on the World Trade Center, 34S, New York, New York State Prohibition on Marine north. It is approximately 8 miles long. NY 10048–0682 Discharges of Vessel Sewage; Final Zone 2 is bounded on the south by the 13. Linda O’Leary, Vice President— Affirmative Determination Village of Roseton on the western shore Atlantic Coast Region, American Notice is hereby given that EPA has and bounded on the north by the Waterways Operators, 241 Water made a final affirmative determination southern end of Houghtaling Island. Street, New York, NY 10038 regarding the petition received from the Zone 2 is approximately 60 miles long. One commenter expressed confusion The southern boundary of the State of New York on April 29, 1999 over the boundaries of the Hudson River proposed NDA in this application requesting a determination by the NDA. His confusion was caused by the would begin at the Battery in Regional Administrator, Environmental statement that some vessel operators Manhattan, New York and the northern Protection Agency (EPA), pursuant to while docked at the Brooklyn Naval boundary would be the Federal Dam in Section 312(f)(3) of Public Law 92–500, Yard have their holding tanks pumped Troy, New York. This area includes as amended by Public Law 95–217 and out by waste haulers. Since the waters up to the New Jersey-New York Public Law 100–4 (the Clean Water Act), Brooklyn Naval Yard is on the East boundary and does not include waters that adequate facilities for the safe and River, he asked whether the prohibition in New Jersey. The area proposed by the sanitary removal and treatment of included the East River. It does not State of New York is 153 miles long and sewage from all vessels are reasonably include the East River, but boaters may encompasses approximately 81,000 available for the waters of the Hudson choose to use pumpout facilities located acres of tidal waters and wetlands. River and its tributaries including, but On October 24, 2000, EPA published outside of the NDA because the facilities not limited to, Rondout Creek, Esopus a Receipt of Petition and Tentative are more convenient for them. For Creek and Catskill Creek. This petition Determination and accepted comments example, a boater who keeps his boat in was made by the New York State from the public for a thirty (30) day a Staten Island marina may choose to Department of State, in conjunction period. The comment period was use the pumpout at his home marina with the New York State Department of extended until December 22, 2000 at the because it is convenient. The southern Environmental Conservation. New York request of one of the commenters. EPA boundary of the proposed No Discharge State certified in the petition a need for received letters from the following Area (NDA) in this application would greater protection and enhancement. individuals: begin at the Battery in Manhattan, New The certification states that the York and the northern boundary would discharge of vessel waste often contain 1. Harold Gorman, 2332 Fort Lyon be the Federal Dam in Troy, New York. chemical additives such as Drive, Stanton, VA This area includes waters up to the New 2. Edward V. Weber, 60 Round Hill formaldehyde, phenols and chlorine. Jersey-New York boundary and does not Road, Poughkeepsie, NY 12603–5125 These wastes increase loadings of 3. Ned Sullivan, Executive Director, include waters in New Jersey. It does nutrients, pathogens and chemical Scenic Hudson, Inc., 9 Vassar Street, not include the East River, the Harlem loading particularly in shallow, poorly Poughkeepsie, NY 12601 River, the Long Island Sound nor the flushed waterbodies, and may adversely 4. Andrew J. Spano, County Executive, Raritan Bay. No change to the affect water quality, sensitive and Westchester County, Michaelian determination is necessary based on this important resources, and uses of these Office Building, White Plains, NY comment. waters. The Hudson River provides 10601 Three commenters expressed their habitat for fish and wildlife species. 5. Manna Jo Greene, Environmental support for the complete prohibition of Congress has designated the Hudson Director, Clearwater, Inc., 112 Little the discharge of sewage from vessels. River as a National Heritage Area under Market Street, Poughkeepsie, NY They believe that this determination is the purview of the National Park 12601 an important step in maintaining the Service, and in 1998, the Hudson River 6. Joseph P. Gehegan, Jr., Vice President, vitality of the Hudson River. No change was designated an American Heritage Spentonbush/Red Star Companies, to the determination is necessary based River. Upon receipt of this final P.O. Box 392, Brooklyn, NY 11231 on these comments. affirmative determination, the State of 7. Joseph Tesoriero, Safety Director, One commenter compared the New York will completely prohibit the McAllister Towing and prohibition to a ‘‘chamber pot’’ discharge of sewage, whether treated or Transportation Company, Inc., 17 approach and questioned whether not, from any vessel, with the exception Battery Place, New York, NY 10004– making waste disposal more difficult for of commercial vessels that are greater 1260 boaters effectively eliminates sewage. than 225 feet in overall length or are 8. Kenneth L. Peterson, Jr., Port Captain, The commenter stated that marine greater than 20 feet in draft, on the Reinauer Transportation Companies, sanitation devices (MSDs) must be

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:04 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00046 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\09OCN1.SGM 09OCN1 58346 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Notices

allowed to operate and discharge. In that adequate facilities for the safe and FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS response, EPA notes that the pumpout sanitary removal and treatment of COMMISSION and subsequent treatment of wastes at a sewage from all vessels are reasonably sewage treatment plant generally results available. One commenter stated that Notice of Public Information in a higher level of treatment than an 50% of the petroleum transported by Collection(s) Being Reviewed by the MSD can provide. A holding tank is a tug/barge units was delivered to Albany, Federal Communications Commission total retention/no discharge alternative. 29% of the petroleum was delivered to for Extension Under Delegated A flow through device (Type I or Type Newburgh and 21% of the petroleum Authority II) treats the waste to some degree and was delivered to various terminals along September 29, 2003. then discharges into the water. This the Hudson River. This commenter SUMMARY: discharge contains pathogens, nutrients The Federal Communications contended that the imposition of the Commission, as part of its continuing and various chemicals. This commenter NDA on all vessels will cause a also expressed concern about the effort to reduce paperwork burden disruption in the petroleum delivery capacity of a holding tank capacity (2 invites the general public and other system, unduly harm the tug and barge days of waste), the distance between Federal agencies to take this pumpouts (15.5 miles) and the speed at industry, result in hardship to the opportunity to comment on the which most vessels travel (5 knots per residents of New York State and serve following information collection(s), as hour). The capacity of a holding tank is no useful purpose in terms of improving required by the Paperwork Reduction determined by several factors, volume, water quality or protecting Act (PRA) of 1995, Public Law 104–13. size of the crew, and the use of shore environmental resources. Based on this An agency may not conduct or sponsor bathroom facilities when available. The information, EPA has decided that the a collection of information unless it greatest distance between pumpout complete prohibition of discharge of displays a currently valid control facilities, based on the charts submitted vessel sewage will not apply for one number. No person shall be subject to in the application, is 12 miles. The year from the date of Federal Register any penalty for failing to comply with speed at which vessels travel is publication of this notice to commercial a collection of information subject to the determined by whether the vessel is a vessels which are greater than 225 feet Paperwork Reduction Act that does not sailing or power vessel. These are all in length or are greater than 20 feet in display a valid control number. Comments are requested concerning (a) factors, including fuel, weather, draft. The prohibition of discharge of whether the proposed collection of supplies and charts, which the operator vessel sewage will apply to all other of the vessel needs to consider when information is necessary for the proper vessels upon publication of this performance of the functions of the planning his trip. No changes to the determination in the Federal Register. determination are necessary based on Commission, including whether the The EPA hereby makes a final these comments. information shall have practical utility; affirmative determination that adequate (b) the accuracy of the Commission’s Several commenters expressed facilities for the safe and sanitary burden estimate; (c) ways to enhance concerns regarding the ability of large removal and treatment of sewage from the quality, utility, and clarity of the commercial vessels to dispose of sewage all vessels are reasonably available for information collected; and (d) ways to due to the lack of facilities and the draft the Hudson River, New York. A final minimize the burden of the collection of restriction at pumpout facilities. These determination on this matter will result information on the respondents, vessels may exceed 200 feet in length including the use of automated and have drafts in excess of 20 feet. The in a New York State prohibition of any sewage discharges from vessels, with collection techniques or other forms of commenters also stated that many, if not information technology. all, of these commercial vessels have the exception of commercial vessels that DATES: Persons wishing to comment on been equipped with Type II marine are greater than 225 feet in length or are this information collection should sanitation devices, which are a flow- greater than 20 feet in draft, on the submit comments December 8, 2003. If through type treatment devices as Hudson River from the Battery in you anticipate that you will be opposed to a Type III MSD which are a Manhattan, New York to the Federal submitting comments, but find it holding tank. They stated that to retrofit Dam at Troy, New York. For vessels that difficult to do so within the period of tugs and barges with holding tanks are greater than 225 feet in overall time allowed by this notice, you should would cost several thousand dollars and length or are greater than 20 feet in advise the contact listed below as soon the time in dry dock would cost several draft, the prohibition will be applicable as possible. thousand dollars in lost revenue. Some on October 8, 2004. commenters requested that commercial ADDRESSES: Direct all Paperwork Any questions regarding this notice Reduction Act (PRA) comments to vessels be exempted from the should be addressed to Walter E. prohibition since no pumpout facilities Judith B. Herman, Federal Andrews, U.S. Environmental Communications Commission, Room 1– were available for their vessels due to Protection Agency, Region 2, Water size and draft requirements. The same C804, 445 12th Street, SW., Washington, Programs Branch, 290 Broadway, 24th commenters requested that the NDA DC 20554 or via the Internet to Judith- Floor, New York, New York, 10007– apply only to recreational boaters. [email protected]. While many of the commercial vessels 1866. Telephone: (212) 637–3880. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For are equipped with Type II MSDs, there Dated: September 3, 2003. additional information or copies of the are several commercial operators that Jane M. Kenny, information collection(s), contact Judith utilize Type III MSDs and have their Regional Administrator, Region 2. B. Herman at (202) 418–0214 or via the Internet at [email protected]. holding tanks pumped out at facilities [FR Doc. 03–25637 Filed 10–8–03; 8:45 am] that are available in their home ports or SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: that make arrangements with waste BILLING CODE 6560–50–P OMB Control No.: 3060–0711. haulers to pumpout their holding tanks Title: Implementation of Section when they dock to load, unload or take 34(a)(1) of the Public Utility Holding on supplies and fuels. EPA concludes Company Act of 1935, as amended by

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:04 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00047 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\09OCN1.SGM 09OCN1 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Notices 58347

the Telecommunications Act of 1996, Estimated Time Per Response: 1.5 Administrative Matters. (47 CFR Sections 1.5001–1.5007). hours. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Form No.: N/A. Frequency of Response: Third Party Ron Harris, Press Officer, Telephone: Type of Review: Extension of Disclosure and annual reporting (202) 694–1220. currently approved collection. requirements. Respondents: Business or other for Total Annual Burden: 41 hours. Mary W. Dove, profit. Total Annual Cost: N/A. Secretary of the Commission. Number of Respondents: 15. Needs and Uses: Section 54.809 of the [FR Doc. 03–25832 Filed 10–7–03; 2:39 pm] Commission’s rules requires each price Estimated Time Per Response: 10 BILLING CODE 6715–01–M hours. cap or competitve LEC that wishes to Frequency of Response: Third party receive universal support to file an disclosure and on occasion reporting annual certification with the Universal requirements. Service Administrative Company and FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM Total Annual Burden: 150 hours. the Commission. The certification must Total Annual Cost: $48,000. state that the carrier will use its Formations of, Acquisitions by, and Needs and Uses: 47 CFR Sections interstate access universal service Mergers of Bank Holding Companies 1.5001–1.5007 implement Sction 34(a) support only for the provision, of the Public Utility Holding Company maintenance, and upgrading of facilities The companies listed in this notice Act. The rules provide filing and service for which the support is have applied to the Board for approval, requirements and procedures to intended. pursuant to the Bank Holding Company expedite public utility holding company Federal Communications Commission. Act of 1956 (12 U.S.C. 1841 et seq.) (BHC Act), Regulation Y (12 CFR Part entry into the telecommunications Marlene H. Dortch, industry. Persons seekings a 225), and all other applicable statutes Secretary. determination of ETC status must file in and regulations to become a bank good faith for determination by the [FR Doc. 03–25598 Filed 10–8–03; 8:45 am] holding company and/or to acquire the Commission. The information will be BILLING CODE 6712–01–P assets or the ownership of, control of, or used by the Commission to determine the power to vote shares of a bank or whether persons satisfy the statutory bank holding company and all of the criteria for exempt telecommunications FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION banks and nonbanking companies company status. owned by the bank holding company, Sunshine Act Meeting OMB Control No.: 3060–0745. including the companies listed below. Title: Implementation of the Local Previously Announced Date & Time: The applications listed below, as well Exchange Carrier Tariff Streamlining Wednesday, October 8, 2003 Meeting as other related filings required by the Provisions in the Telecommunications Closed to the Public. This Meeting Was Board, are available for immediate Act of 1996, CC Docket No. 96–187. Rescheduled for Thursday, October 9, inspection at the Federal Reserve Bank Form No.: N/A. 2003, Following the Open Meeting indicated. The application also will be Type of Review: Extension of DATE AND TIME: Wednesday, October 15, available for inspection at the offices of currently approved collection. 2003 at 10:00 a.m. the Board of Governors. Interested Respondents: Business or other for PLACE: 999 E Street, NW., Washington, persons may express their views in profit. DC. writing on the standards enumerated in Number of Respondents: 1,520. the BHC Act (12 U.S.C. 1842(c)). If the Estimated Time Per Response: 0.33– STATUS: This meeting will be closed to the public. proposal also involves the acquisition of 9.0 hours. a nonbanking company, the review also Frequency of Response: ITEMS TO BE DISCUSSED: Compliance matters pursuant to 2 includes whether the acquisition of the Recordkeeping, third party disclosure nonbanking company complies with the and on occasion reporting requirements. U.S.C. 437g. Audits conducted pursuant to 2 standards in section 4 of the BHC Act Total Annual Burden: 1,150 hours. (12 U.S.C. 1843). Unless otherwise Total Annual Cost: $5,100,000. U.S.C. 437g, § 438(b), and Title 26, U.S.C. noted, nonbanking activities will be Needs and Uses: In CC Docket No. conducted throughout the United States. 96–187, the Commission adopted Matters concerning participation in civil actions or proceedings or Additional information on all bank measures to streamline tariff filing holding companies may be obtained requirements for local exchange carriers arbitration. Internal personnel rules and from the National Information Center (LECs) of the Telecommunications Act website at www.ffiec.gov/nic/. of 1996. In order to achieve a procedures or matters affecting a Unless otherwise noted, comments streamlined and deregulatory particular employee. regarding each of these applications environment for local exchanged carrier DATE AND TIME: Thursday, October 16, must be received at the Reserve Bank tariff filings, local exchange carriers are 2003 at 10:00 a.m. indicated or the offices of the Board of required to file tariffs electronically. PLACE: 999 E Street, NW., Washington, Governors not later than November 3, Other carriers are permitted to file their DC (ninth floor). 2003. tariffs electronically. STATUS: This meeting will be open to the OMB Control No.: 3060–0943. public. A. Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis Title: 47 CFR Section 54.809, Carrier ITEMS TO BE DISCUSSED: (Randall C. Sumner, Vice President) 411 Certification. Correction and Approval of Minutes. Locust Street, St. Louis, Missouri 63166- Form No.: N/A. Draft Advisory Opinion 2003–25: 2034: Type of Review: Extension of Weinzapfel for Mayor Committee by 1. Partners Financial Holdings, Inc., currently approved collection. counsel, Neil P. Reiff. Glen Carbon, Illinois; to become a bank Respondents: Business or other for Notice of Availability—Petition for holding company by acquiring 100 profit. Rulemaking Filed by America’s percent of the voting shares of Partners Number of Respondents: 27. Community Bankers. Bank, Alton, Illinois.

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:04 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00048 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\09OCN1.SGM 09OCN1 58348 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Notices

Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve 63102, telephone (314) 241–7400, fax (314) Dated: October 2, 2003. System, October 3, 2003. 241–0889. Alvin Hall, Status: Open to the public, limited only by Margaret M. Shanks, Director, Management Analysis and Services the space available. The meeting room Assistant Secretary of the Board. Office, Centers for Disease Control and accommodates approximately 120 people. Prevention. [FR Doc. 03–25575 Filed 10–8–03; 8:45 am] Background: The Advisory Board on BILLING CODE 6210–01–S Radiation and Worker Health (‘‘the Board’’) [FR Doc. 03–25582 Filed 10–8–03; 8:45 am] was established under the Energy Employees BILLING CODE 4163–19–P Occupational Illness Compensation Program FEDERAL RETIREMENT THRIFT Act (EEOICPA) of 2000 to advise the President, through the Secretary of Health DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND INVESTMENT BOARD and Human Services (HHS), on a variety of HUMAN SERVICES policy and technical functions required to Sunshine Act Meeting implement and effectively manage the new Centers for Disease Control and compensation program. Key functions of the Prevention TIME AND DATE: 9:30 a.m. (CDT), October Board include providing advice on the 20, 2003. development of probability of causation Final Recommendations for Protecting PLACE: National Finance Center, guidelines which have been promulgated by Human Health From Potential Adverse HHS as a final rule, advice on methods of Building 350, Conference Room 6, Effects of Exposure to Agents GA 13800 Old Gentilly Road, New Orleans, dose reconstruction which have also been promulgated by HHS as a final rule, (Tabun), GB (Sarin), and VX Louisiana. evaluation of the scientific validity and The National Center for STATUS: Parts will be open to the public quality of dose reconstructions conducted by and parts closed to the public. the National Institute for Occupational Safety Environmental Health published a document in the September 17, 2003, MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED: and Health (NIOSH) for qualified cancer claimants, and advice on the addition of edition (Volume 68, Number 180, Pages Parts Open to the Public classes of workers to the Special Exposure 54460–54462) of the Federal Register Cohort. entitled ‘‘Final Recommendations for 9:30 a.m. (CDT) Convene meeting In December 2000, the President delegated 1. Approval of minutes of the Protecting Human Health from Potential responsibility for funding, staffing, and Adverse Effects of Exposure to Agents September 15, 2003, Board meeting. operating the Board to HHS, which 2. Thrift Savings Plan report by the GA (Tabun), GB (Sarin), and VX.’’ A subsequently delegated this authority to the printing error altered a value in Table 1. Executive Director. CDC. NIOSH implements this responsibility for CDC. The charter was renewed on August The error has since been corrected. The Parts Closed to the Public 3, 2003 and the President has completed the document is being republished in its 3. Discussion of draft selection criteria appointment of members to the Board to entirety for the convenience of the for call center services. ensure a balanced representation on the reader. Board. AGENCY: Centers for Disease Control and FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Purpose: This board is charged with (a) Prevention (CDC), Public Health Thomas J. Trabucco, Director, Office of providing advice to the Secretary, HHS on Service, Department of Health and External Affairs, (202) 942–1640. the development of guidelines under Human Services. Dated: October 6, 2003. Executive Order 13179; (b) providing advice to the Secretary, HHS on the scientific ACTION: Notice of final Elizabeth S. Woodruff, validity and quality of dose reconstruction recommendations for protecting human Secretary to the Board, Federal Retirement efforts performed for this Program; and (c) health from potential adverse effects of Thrift Investment Board. upon request by the Secretary, HHS, advise exposure to agents GA, GB, and VX. [FR Doc. 03–25684 Filed 10–6–03; 4:46 pm] the Secretary on whether there is a class of SUMMARY: Agents GA, GB, and VX are BILLING CODE 6760–01–M employees at any Department of Energy facility who were exposed to radiation but for stored and are in the process of being whom it is not feasible to estimate their destroyed by the Department of Defense radiation dose, and on whether there is (DoD). Public Law 99–145 (50 U.S.C. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND reasonable likelihood that such radiation 1521) mandates that all unitary (self- HUMAN SERVICES doses may have endangered the health of contained) lethal chemical munitions be members of this class. destroyed. Public Law 91–121 and Centers for Disease Control and Matters to be Discussed: Agenda for this Prevention meeting will focus on Program Status Reports Public Law 91–441 (50 U.S.C 1512) from NIOSH, Department of Labor, and mandate that the Department of Health Advisory Board on Radiation and Department of Energy; Research Issues; Dose and Human Services (DHHS) review Worker Health, National Institute for Reconstruction Workgroup Report; Scientific DoD plans for disposing of these Occupational Safety and Health Issues Workgroup Report; and a closed munitions and make recommendations session to discuss Independent Government to protect public health. In accordance with section 10(a)(2) of Cost Estimates. EFFECTIVE DATE: January 1, 2005. An the Federal Advisory Committee Act Agenda items are subject to change as implementation period is necessary to (Pub. L. 92–463), the Centers for Disease priorities dictate. For Further Information Contact: Larry allow the DoD to make program Control and Prevention (CDC) adjustments and allow time for changes announces the following committee Elliott, Executive Secretary, ABRWH, NIOSH, CDC, 4676 Columbia Parkway, Cincinnati, to environmental permits as required. meeting: Ohio 45226, telephone (513) 533–6825, fax FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. Name: Advisory Board on Radiation and (513) 533–6826. Paul Joe, Acting Chief, Chemical Worker Health (ABRWH), National Institute The Director, Management Analysis and Demilitarization Branch, National for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH). Services Office, has been delegated the Center for Environmental Health, CDC, Times and Dates: 8:30 a.m.–5 p.m., authority to sign Federal Register notices 4770 Buford Highway, M/S F–16, October 28, 2003. 8:30 a.m.–4:30 p.m., pertaining to announcements of meetings and October 29, 2003. other committee management activities for Atlanta, Georgia 30341. Place: Adams Mark St. Louis, 315 Chestnut both CDC, the Agency for Toxic Substances SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On Street (at 4th Street), St. Louis, Missouri and Disease Registry. January 8, 2002, DHHS, CDC published

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:04 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00049 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\09OCN1.SGM 09OCN1 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Notices 58349

proposed ‘‘Airborne Exposure Limits for In the derivation of the VX exposure limits, new risk assessment evaluation Chemical Warfare Agents GA (tabun), limits by using relative potency, the methods are demonstrated superior to GB (sarin) and VX’’ in the Federal Army questioned the use of a relative methods used herein, or substantive Register (Vol. 67, No. 5, Pages 894–901, potency of 12 with the application of a technological advances in air Tuesday, January 8, 2002), seeking modification factor of three for the monitoring methods are made. public comment. This notice discusses incomplete VX data set. The application Army contractors and CDC/NIOSH major comments received, describes of a relative potency of 12 with a experts expressed concerns about the decisions regarding the public modifying factor of three effectively technical feasibility of meeting the new comments, and states the final resulted in a relative potency of 36 exposure limits. On the basis of these recommendations. CDC received between the calculated exposure limits comments, CDC has adjusted the VX comments from the U.S. Army, the for GB and VX. As discussed in the short-term exposure limit (STEL) to 1 × Agency for Toxic Substances and January 8, 2002, Federal Register 10¥5 mg/m3 but added the provision Disease Registry (ATSDR), the CDC’s proposal, the relative potency factor of that excursions to this special VX STEL National Institute for Occupational 12 was based on a 1971 British study should not occur more than once per Safety and Health (NIOSH), state of that measured the ability of VX to cause day (in the typical STEL, four Utah, U.S. Army contractors, and two 90 percent pupil constriction in rabbits. excursions per day are allowed). A individuals. Because the critical effect in the study lower STEL value would have required The comments fell into the following used to derive the GB exposure limit a longer response time for near real-time general categories: assumptions used in was miosis, CDC believes that miosis instruments; the recommended STEL is the risk assessment, selection of was appropriate to use as the health a result of balancing the detection uncertainty factors, determination of the effect in determining the relative capabilities and response time. A relative potency factor for the VX potency of VX. CDC/NIOSH experts and shorter instrument response time exposure limits, and technical the state of Utah supported the associated with the recommended STEL feasibility of air monitoring at the lower proposed relative potency of 12 with a will minimize exposures. This exposure limits. The key comments modifying factor of three. Therefore, adjustment to the VX STEL should not potentially impacting CDC’s CDC is retaining its relative potency affect worker health. recommendations are discussed below. assumptions for deriving the VX To account for other technical The U.S. Army recommended that exposure limits. feasibility concerns, CDC recommends adjustment in the risk assessment As discussed in the January 8, 2002, that the GB and VX STEL be evaluated algorithm for breathing rate be Federal Register proposal, CDC adjusted with near-real-time instrumentation, eliminated because the critical endpoint the VX GPL because available air- whereas the GB and VX WPLs and GPLs in deriving the exposure limits is monitoring methods do not reliably may be evaluated with longer-term miosis, a clinical sign that is recognized detect VX at the calculated value of 3 × historical air monitoring methods. CDC as a local effect on the muscles of the 10¥8 mg/m3. In the adjustment, CDC further recommends that, in iris of the eye. This biologic endpoint is assumed that potential exposure would implementing the WPLs, STELs and widely considered to be a direct effect be identified and corrected within three GPLs, specific reduction factors for of the nerve agent vapor on the surface days, precluding chronic exposure. statistical assurance of action at the of the eye (not related to breathing rate). Several people who provided comments exposure limits are not needed because Scientists from CDC/NIOSH however, pointed out that a similar adjustment of safety factors already built into the indicated that the data do not also could have been made for the GB derivation of the exposure limit. This completely rule out the potential GPL. CDC recognizes that the recommendation assumes that the contribution of inhaled agent to the assumptions used to derive the GPLs for sampling and analytical methods are miosis effect. The weight of the GB and VX differ. Indeed, this measuring within ±25% of the true scientific data appears to support the adjustment could be applied to the GB concentration 95% of the time. If this Army’s recommendation on this matter, exposure limits; however, the air- criterion is not met, an alarm level or and CDC has decided to eliminate the monitoring technology is currently action level below the exposure limit breathing rate adjustment. Eliminating functioning near the recommended may be required. the breathing rate adjustment increases level. CDC recommends no upward The Army recently indicated to CDC the worker population limit (WPL) by a adjustment of the GB exposure limits; that the exposure limits as listed and factor of slightly more than two. No this recommendation is consistent with implemented in this announcement are significant change in the general the accepted industrial hygiene practice technically feasible to detect with the population limit (GPL) would occur by of keeping exposure to the minimum instrumentation and methods currently eliminating the breathing rate practicable level. in use. However, whether the agent adjustment. The derivation of the VX exposure destruction sites can monitor at these In the derivation of the WPL for GB, limits may be biased low because of the exposure limits and still meet current CDC/NIOSH experts recommended that inadequate VX toxicity database. CDC quality control standards has not been an additional uncertainty factor of three believes that reliable air monitoring is a determined. To allow the Army to be added to account for individual crucial aspect for implementing the implement program changes, regulatory worker variability. Although workers exposure limits. Although CDC would adjustments, and to evaluate quality are medically screened, the have preferred a better toxicity database control issues, the final recommended recommendation is a reasonable public for VX, as well as improved air- exposure limits will become effective health decision. CDC therefore has monitoring methods for VX, these items January 1, 2005. incorporated the additional uncertainty are not currently available. Final Recommendations: CDC factor of three into the risk assessment Consequently, CDC is not further presents final recommendations for algorithm. Making this adjustment adjusting the final recommendation to airborne exposure limits (AELs) for the lowers the exposure limits by a factor of the GPL for VX. However, CDC will chemical warfare agents GA (tabun or three. This adjustment and elimination reevaluate the VX exposure limits in the ethyl N,N-dimethyl- of the breathing rate factor suggested future if significant new VX toxicity phosphoramidocyanidate, CAS 77–81– above essentially cancel each other. data are available for setting exposure 6); GB (sarin or O-isopropyl-

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:04 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00050 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\09OCN1.SGM 09OCN1 58350 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Notices

methylphosphonofluoridate, CAS 107– a refined understanding of, m3. The WPLs and GPLs values are 44–8); and VX (O-ethyl-S–(2- demonstrated human toxicity of these approximately threefold lower than diisopropylaminoethyl)- substances but rather the changes levels previously recommended by CDC methylphosphonothiolate, CAS 50782– resulted from updated and minimally in 1988. An immediately-dangerous-to- 69–9). CDC based its recommendations modified risk assessment assumptions. life-or-health (IDLH) value of 0.1 mg/m3 on comments by scientific experts at a Overt adverse health effects have not is recommended for GB. public meeting convened by CDC on been noted in association with the Recommended AELs for GA: Although August 23–24, 2000, in Atlanta, Georgia; previously recommended exposure not as well-studied as GB, GA is the latest available technical reviews; limits. This may be due to rigorous believed to be approximately equal in and the risk assessment approach exposure prevention efforts in recent potency to GB. Therefore, CDC frequently used by regulatory agencies years as well as the conservative recommends the same exposure limits and other organizations. Additionally, implementation of the existing limits for GA as for GB. CDC reviewed the substantial (i.e., 8-hour time-weighted average Recommended AELs for VX: CDC background information provided in the exposure limits have been implemented recommends that the VX WPL, recent U.S. Army evaluations of the as short-duration ceiling values). expressed as an 8-hour TWA, be × ¥6 3 airborne exposure criteria for chemical Recommended AELs for GB: CDC decreased to 1 10 mg/m . warfare agents. AELs for chemical recommends a WPL value of 3 × 10¥5 Additionally, CDC recommends a VX × ¥5 3 warfare agents GA, GB, and VX were mg/m3, expressed as an 8-hour time- STEL of 1 10 mg/m . An excursion reevaluated by using the conventional weighted average (TWA). Additionally, to the STEL should not occur more than reference concentration risk assessment CDC recommends a STEL of 1 × 10¥4 one time per day (compared to four methodology for developing AELs mg/m3 to be used in conjunction with times per day for a typical STEL). The described by the U.S. Environmental the WPL. Exposures at the STEL should recommended WPL is a factor of 10 Protection Agency. This methodology is not be longer than 15 minutes and lower than the CDC’s 1988 considered conservative; however, the should not occur more than four times recommendation. CDC recommends that × ¥7 calculated exposure limits are neither per day, and at least 60 minutes should the GPL for VX be decreased to 6 10 3 numerically precise values that elapse between successive exposures in mg/m (a factor of five lower than CDC’s differentiate between nonharmful and this range. The STEL should not be 1988 recommendation). An IDLH value 3 dangerous conditions, nor are they exceeded during the work day, even if of 0.003 mg/m is recommended for VX. precise thresholds of potential human the cumulative exposure over the 8-hour CDC’s final recommendations are toxicity. The recommended changes to TWA is not exceeded. CDC recommends summarized in Table 1 below. ¥ the AELs do not reflect change in, nor a decrease in the GPL to 1 × 10 6 mg/ BILLING CODE 4310–55–M

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:04 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00051 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\09OCN1.SGM 09OCN1 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Notices 58351

BILLING CODE 4163–18–C This announcement does not address The Director, Management Analysis CDC does not specifically recommend the allowable stack concentration (ASC). and Services Office, has been delegated the use of these AELs for uses other than The ASC is a ceiling value that serves the authority to sign Federal Register transportation, worker protection during as a destruction process source emission notices pertaining to announcements of the destruction process, or general population protection. For example, the limit and not as a health standard. It meetings and other committee 8-hour WPL historically has been used typically is used for monitoring the management activities for both CDC and for the Army-designated 3X furnace ducts and final exhaust stack, ATSDR. decontamination, surveillance activities providing an early indication of an Dated: October 3, 2003. upset condition. Modeling of worst-case of leaking containers in storage, and Alvin Hall, charcoal unit mid-beds. CDC did not credible events and conditions at each installation should confirm that the Director, Management Analysis and Services evaluate the applicability of the WPLs Office, Centers for Disease Control and for these activities; the specific WPL is not exceeded on-site or that the Prevention. GPL is not exceeded at the installation technical and safety requirements for [FR Doc. 03–25583 Filed 10–8–03; 8:45 am] each activity need to be considered boundary as a consequence of a release individually. at or below the ASC. BILLING CODE 4163–18–P

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:32 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00052 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\09OCN1.SGM 09OCN1 EN09OC03.000 58352 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Notices

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND proposals that impact the quality of life 321(dd))). The debarment was based on HUMAN SERVICES that is experienced by citizens with FDA’s finding that Mr. Islam was intellectual disabilities and their convicted of a felony under Federal law Administration for Children and families. for conduct relating to the development Families Dated: September 25, 2003. or approval of any drug product, or Sally Atwater, otherwise relating to the regulation of a President’s Committee for People With drug product (21 U.S.C. 335a(a)(2)). On Intellectual Disabilities (PCPID): Notice Executive Director, President’s Committee for People with Intellectual Disabilities. December 12, 1997, Mr. Islam applied of Meeting for special termination of debarment [FR Doc. 03–25559 Filed 10–8–03; 8:45 am] under section 306(d)(4)(a) of the act, as AGENCY: President’s Committee for BILLING CODE 4184–01–M People With Intellectual Disabilities amended by the Generic Drug (PCPID), HHS. Enforcement Act (GDEA). Under section 306(d)(4)(C) and (D) of ACTION: Notice of meeting. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES the act, FDA may limit the period of debarment of a permanently debarred DATES: Thursday, October 16, from 8:30 Food and Drug Administration individual if the agency finds that: (1) a.m. to 1:30 p.m. The full Committee The debarred individual has provided meeting of the President’s Committee [Docket No. 1995N–0071] substantial assistance in the for People with Intellectual Disabilities investigation or prosecution of offenses Amirul Islam; Grant of Special will be open to the public on Thursday, described in section 306(a) or (b) of the Termination; Final Order Terminating October 16, from 8:30 a.m. to 1:30 p.m. act or relating to a matter under FDA’s Debarment ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at jurisdiction, (2) termination of the the Aerospace Center Building, AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, debarment serves the interest of justice, Aerospace Auditorium, 6th Floor East, HHS. and (3) termination of the debarment 370 L’Enfant Promenade, SW., ACTION: Notice. does not threaten the integrity of the Washington, DC 20447. Individuals drug approval process. Special with disabilities who need special SUMMARY: The Food and Drug termination of debarment is accommodations in order to attend and Administration (FDA) is issuing an discretionary with FDA. participate in the meeting (i.e., order under the Federal Food, Drug, and FDA considers a determination by the interpreting services, assistive listening Cosmetic Act (the act) granting special Department of Justice concerning the devices, materials in alternative format) termination of the debarment of Amirul substantial assistance of a debarred should notify Executive Director, Sally Islam. FDA bases this order on a finding individual conclusive in most cases. Mr. Atwater, at 202–619–0634 no later than that Mr. Islam provided substantial Islam cooperated with the Department October 1, 2003. Effort will be made to assistance in the investigations or of Justice investigations and meet special requests received after that prosecutions of offenses relating to a prosecutions of others, as substantiated date, but availability of special needs matter under FDA’s jurisdiction and by the letters submitted to the agency by accommodations to respond to these that special termination of Mr. Islam’s the Assistant U.S. Attorney who requests cannot be guaranteed. All debarment serves the interest of justice prosecuted Mr. Islam’s case. meeting sites are barrier free. and does not threaten the integrity of Accordingly, FDA finds that Mr. Islam Agenda: The Committee plans to the drug approval process. provided substantial assistance as discuss critical issues relating to DATES: This order is effective October 9, required by section 306(d)(4)(C) of the individuals with intellectual disabilities 2003. act. concerning education and transition, ADDRESSES: Comments should reference The additional requisite showings family services and support, public Docket No. 1995N–0071 and be sent to that termination of debarment serves the awareness, employment, and assistive the Division of Dockets Management interest of justice and poses no threat to technology and information. (HFA–305), Food and Drug the integrity of the drug approval process are difficult standards to satisfy. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, rm. In determining whether these have been Sally Atwater, Executive Director, 1061, Rockville, MD 20852. met, the agency weighs the significance President’s Committee for People with FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: of all favorable and unfavorable factors Intellectual Disabilities, Aerospace Nicole K. Mueller, Center for Drug in light of the remedial, public health- Center Building, Suite 701, 370 L’Enfant Evaluation and Research (HFD–7), Food related purposes underlying debarment. Promenade, SW., Washington, DC and Drug Administration, 5600 Fishers Termination of debarment will not be 20447, Telephone—(202) 619–0634, Lane, Rockville, MD 20857, 301–594– granted unless, weighing all favorable Fax—(202) 205–9519, E-mail— 2041. and unfavorable information, there is a [email protected]. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In a high level of assurance that the conduct SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Federal Register notice dated August that formed the basis for the debarment PCPID acts in an advisory capacity to 27, 1997 (62 FR 45423), Amirul Islam, has not recurred and will not recur, and the President and the Secretary of the the former vice president of technical that the individual will not otherwise U.S. Department of Health and Human services for Halsey Drug Co. Inc. pose a threat to the integrity of the drug Services on a broad range of topics (Halsey), and supervisor of Halsey’s approval process. relating to programs, services, and Quality Control Laboratory, was The evidence presented to FDA in supports for persons with intellectual permanently debarred from providing support of termination shows that Mr. disabilities. The Committee, by services in any capacity to a person with Islam was convicted for a first offense, Executive Order, is responsible for an approved or pending drug product that he has no prior or subsequent evaluating the adequacy of current application under sections 306(c)(1)(B) convictions for conduct described under practices in programs, services and and (c)(2)(A)(ii) of the act (21 U.S.C. the GDEA and has committed no other supports for persons with intellectual 335a(c)(1)(B) and (c)(2)(A)(ii) and wrongful acts affecting the drug disabilities, and for reviewing legislative section 201(dd) of the act (21 U.S.C. approval process, and that his character

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:04 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00053 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\09OCN1.SGM 09OCN1 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Notices 58353

and scientific ability are highly regarded Collection Request (ICR) abstracted the proper performance of the functions by his professional peers. The evidence below to the Office of Management and of the agency, including whether the presented supports the conclusion that Budget (OMB) for review and clearance information will have practical utility; the conduct upon which Mr. Islam’s under the Paperwork Reduction Act. (2) Evaluate the accuracy of the debarment was based is unlikely to The ICR describes the nature of the agency’s estimate of the burden; recur. For these reasons, the agency information collection and its expected (3) Enhance the quality, utility, and finds that termination of Mr. Islam’s burden. TSA published a Federal clarity of the information to be debarment serves the interest of justice Register notice, with a 60-day comment collected; and and will not pose a threat to the period soliciting comments, of the (4) Minimize the burden of the integrity of the drug approval process. following collection of information on collection of information on those who FDA’s analysis in reaching this June 24, 2003, 68 FR 37510. are to respond, including through the conclusion is contained in the docket. DATES: Send your comments by use of appropriate automated, Under section 306(d)(4)(D)(ii) of the November 10, 2003. A comment to OMB electronic, mechanical, or other act, the period of debarment of an is most effective if OMB receives it technological collection techniques or individual who qualifies for special within 30 days of publication. other forms of information technology. termination may be limited to less than ADDRESSES: Comments may be faxed to Issued in Arlington, Virginia, on October 3, permanent but to no less than 1 year. the Office of Information and Regulatory 2003. Mr. Islam’s period of debarment has Affairs, Office of Management and Susan T. Tracey, lasted more than 1 year. Accordingly, Budget, Attention: DHS–TSA Desk Deputy Chief Administrative Officer. the Associate Commissioner for Officer, at (202) 395–5806. [FR Doc. 03–25562 Filed 10–8–03; 8:45 am] Regulatory Affairs, under section FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: BILLING CODE 4910–62–P 306(d)(4) of the act and under authority Conrad Huygen, Office of Information delegated to him (21 CFR 5.20), finds Management Programs, TSA HQ, West that Amirul Islam’s application for Tower, Floor 4, TSA–17, 601 South 12th special termination of debarment should Street, Arlington, VA 22202–4220; DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND be granted, and that the period of telephone (571) 227–1954; facsimile URBAN DEVELOPMENT debarment should terminate (571) 227–2912. [Docket No. FR–4820–N–40] immediately, thereby allowing him to SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: provide services in any capacity to a person with an approved or pending Transportation Security Administration Notice of Proposed Information drug product application. The Associate (TSA) Collection: Comment Request; Rental Commissioner for Regulatory Affairs Title: Transportation Worker Schedule—Low Rent Housing further finds that because Mr. Islam has Identification Credential; Satisfaction AGENCY: Office of the Assistant waived his right to a hearing, and the and Effectiveness Measurement Data Secretary for Housing-Federal Housing agency is granting Mr. Islam’s Collection Instruments. Commissioner, HUD. application, an informal hearing under Type of Request: New collection. section 306(d)(4)(C) of the act is OMB Control Number: Not yet ACTION: Notice. unnecessary. assigned. SUMMARY: The proposed information As a result of the foregoing findings, Forms(s): Transportation Worker collection requirement described below Survey; Port Security Interview Guide. Amirul Islam’s debarment is terminated will be submitted to the Office of Affected Public: Transportation effective October 9, 2003 (21 U.S.C. Management and Budget (OMB) for 335a(d)(4)(C) and (d)(4)(D)). Workers; Lead Stakeholders. Abstract: TSA intends to evaluate and review, as required by the Paperwork Dated: October 1, 2003. test certain technologies and business Reduction Act. The Department is John Marzilli, processes in the Technology Evaluation soliciting public comments on the Acting Associate Commissioner for and Prototype Phases of the pilot project subject proposal. Regulatory Affairs. to fully develop the Transportation DATES: Comments Due Date: December [FR Doc. 03–25594 Filed 10–8–03; 8:45 am] Worker Identification Credential 8, 2003. BILLING CODE 4160–01–S (TWIC). TSA will gather demographic ADDRESSES: Interested persons are information required to issue invited to submit comments regarding credentials to a select group of this proposal. Comments should refer to DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND transportation workers and then the proposal by name and/or OMB SECURITY administer two instruments to collect Control Number and should be sent to: data on the effectiveness of the TWIC Wayne Eddins, Reports Management Transportation Security Administration credential. The first instrument will be Officer, Department of Housing and Reports, Forms, and Recordkeeping a survey of a small representative Urban Development, 451 7th Street, Requirements: Agency Information percent of the TWIC users and the SW., L’Enfant Plaza Building, Room Collection Activity Under OMB Review; second instrument will be interviews 8003, Washington, DC 20410, or _ Transportation Worker Identification conducted with the lead stakeholder at Wayne [email protected]. Credential (TWIC); Satisfaction and each site participating in the Technology Evaluation and Prototype FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Effectiveness Measurement Data Beverly J. Miller, Director, Office of Collection Instruments Phases. Surveys and interviews will be voluntary and anonymous. Multifamily Asset Management, AGENCY: Transportation Security Number of Respondents: 30,780. Department of Housing and Urban Administration (TSA), DHS. Estimated Annual Burden Hours: Development, 451 7th Street, SW., ACTION: Notice. 5,195. Washington, DC 20410, telephone (202) TSA is soliciting comments to— 708–3730 (this is not a toll free number) SUMMARY: This notice announces that (1) Evaluate whether the proposed for copies of the proposed forms and TSA has forwarded the Information information requirement is necessary for other available information.

VerDate jul<14>2003 22:14 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00054 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\09OCN1.SGM 09OCN1 58354 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Notices

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Permit No. TE–076322 Department is submitting the proposed Applicant: Kimberly Toal, La Crescenta, Fish and Wildlife Service information collection to OMB for California. review, as required by the Paperwork The applicant requests a permit to Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. Endangered Species Recovery Permit Applications take (capture, handle, and release) the chapter 35, as amended). Stephen’s kangaroo rat (Dipodomys This notice is soliciting comments AGENCY: stephensii) in conjunction with surveys from members of the public and affected Fish and Wildlife Service, in Riverside, San Bernardino, and San agencies concerning the proposed Interior. Diego Counties, California, for the collection of information to: (1) Evaluate ACTION: Notice of receipt of permit purpose of enhancing its survival. whether the proposed collection is applications. necessary for the proper performance of Permit No. TE–076257 the functions of the agency, including SUMMARY: The following applicants have Applicant: San Luis Obispo Public whether the information will have applied for a scientific research permit Works Department, San Luis Obispo, practical utility; (2) Evaluate the to conduct certain activities with California. accuracy of the agency’s estimate of the endangered species pursuant to section The applicant requests a permit to burden of the proposed collection of 10(a)(1)(A) of the Endangered Species take (harass by survey) the Morro information; (3) Enhance the quality, Act (16 USC 1531 et seq.). The U.S. Fish shoulderband snail (Helminthoglypta utility, and clarity of the information to and Wildlife Service (‘‘we’’) solicits walkeriana) in conjunction with surveys be collected; and (4) Minimize the review and comment from local, State, throughout the range of the species in burden of the collection of information and Federal agencies, and the public on California for the purpose of enhancing on those who are to respond; including the following permit requests. its survival. the use of appropriate automated DATES: Comments on these permit collection techniques or other forms of applications must be received on or Permit No. TE–076768 information technology, e.g., permitting before November 10, 2003 to receive our Applicant: Lisa Schicker, Los Osos, electronic submission of responses. consideration. California. This Notice also lists the following The applicant requests a permit to information: ADDRESSES: Written data or comments take (harass by survey) the Morro Title of Proposal: Rental Schedule— should be submitted to the U.S. Fish shoulderband snail (Helminthoglypta Low Rent Housing. and Wildlife Service, Chief, Endangered OMB Control Number, if applicable: Species, Ecological Services, 911 NE. walkeriana) in conjunction with surveys 2502–0012. 11th Avenue, Portland, Oregon 97232– throughout the range of the species in Description of the need for the 4181 (fax: 503–231–6243). Please refer California for the purpose of enhancing information and proposed use: This to the respective permit number for each its survival. information is necessary for HUD to application when submitting comments. Permit No. TE–003483 ensure that tenant rents are approved in All comments received, including Applicant: U.S. Geological Survey, accordance with HUD administrative names and addresses, will become part Biological Resources Division, Hawaii procedures. Project owners utilize form of the official administrative record and National Park, Hawaii. HUD–92458 when requesting an may be made available to the public. adjustment to project rents due to The permittee requests an amendment FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: anticipated or unavoidable increases in to take (translocate) the Laysan duck Documents and other information (Anas laysanensis) in conjunction with operating costs. submitted with these applications are Agency form numbers, if applicable: translocation activities and scientific available for review, subject to the HUD–92458. research from Laysan to Midway Atoll, requirements of the Privacy Act and Estimation of the total numbers of Hawaiian Islands, for the purpose of Freedom of Information Act, by any hours needed to prepare the information enhancing its survival. party who submits a written request for collection including number of a copy of such documents within 30 Permit No. TE–006333 respondents, frequency of response, and days of the date of publication of this hours of response: The estimated Applicant: Oregon State University, notice to the address above (telephone: number of respondents is 16,000 Department of Fish and Wildlife, 503–231–2063). Please refer to the generating approximately 16,000 annual Corvallis, Oregon. respective permit number for each responses; the frequency of response is The permittee requests an amendment application when requesting copies of on occasion; the estimated time needed to take (collect larvae) the Borax Lake documents. to prepare the response is 20 minutes; chub (Gila boraxobius) in conjunction with research in Harney County, and the estimated total number of SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: annual burden hours is 5,280. Oregon, for the purpose of enhancing its Status of the proposed information Permit No. TE–075898 survival. collection: Extension of a currently Applicant: Sue Orloff, San Rafael, Permit No. TE–077053 approved collection. California. Applicant: Jeffrey Manning, Fallbrook, Authority: The Paperwork Reduction Act The applicant requests a permit to California. of 1995, 44 U.S.C., chapter 35, as amended. take (harass by survey, capture, handle, The applicant requests a permit to Dated: October 1, 2003. and release) the Sonoma County distinct take (harass by survey) the southwestern Sean G. Cassidy, population segment of the California willow flycatcher (Empidonax trailii General Deputy Assistant Secretary for tiger salamander (Ambystoma extimus) in conjunction with surveys in Housing-Deputy Federal Housing californiense) in conjunction with Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside, San Commissioner. surveys in Sonoma County, California, Diego, San Bernardino, and Imperial [FR Doc. 03–25561 Filed 10–8–03; 8:45 am] for the purpose of enhancing its Counties, California, for the purpose of BILLING CODE 4210–27–M survival. enhancing its survival.

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:04 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00055 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\09OCN1.SGM 09OCN1 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Notices 58355

Permit No. TE–050450 DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR public review of this draft recovery plan. Applicant: Lisa Allen, Dana Point, Fish and Wildlife Service Recovery of endangered or threatened California. animals and plants is a primary goal of The permittee requests an amendment Re-Opening of the Comment Period for our endangered species program and the to take (harass by survey and collect and the Draft Recovery Plan for the Sierra Endangered Species Act (Act) (16 U.S.C. sacrifice) the Conservancy fairy shrimp Nevada Bighorn Sheep 1531 et seq.). Recovery means (Branchinecta conservatio), the AGENCY: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, improvement of the status of listed longhorn fairy shrimp (Branchinecta Interior. species to the point at which listing is longiantenna), the Riverside fairy no longer appropriate under the criteria ACTION: Notice of re-opening of public shrimp (Streptocephalus wootoni), the set out in section 4(a)(1) of the Act. comment period. San Diego fairy shrimp (Branchinecta Recovery plans describe actions sandiegonensis), and the vernal pool SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and considered necessary for the tadpole shrimp (Lepidurus packardi) in Wildlife Service, announce a re-opening conservation of the species, establish conjunction with surveys throughout of the comment period for public review criteria for downlisting or delisting the range of each species in California of the Draft Recovery Plan for the Sierra listed species, and estimate time and for the purpose of enhancing their Nevada Bighorn Sheep (Ovis canadensis cost for implementing the measures survival. californiana) for an additional 60 days. needed for recovery. The Act requires the development of Permit No. TE–074658 The original comment period closed on September 29, 2003. We are re-opening recovery plans for listed species unless Applicant: Cecilia Meyer Lovell, San the comment period in response to such a plan would not promote the Diego, California. specific requests from the Natural conservation of a particular species. The applicant requests a permit to Resources Defense Council and the Section 4(f) of the Act requires that take (harass by survey and collect and Sierra Nevada Bighorn Sheep public notice and an opportunity for sacrifice) the Conservancy fairy shrimp Foundation to allow additional time for public review and comment be provided (Branchinecta conservatio), the public review of this draft recovery during recovery plan development. We longhorn fairy shrimp (Branchinecta plan. This draft recovery plan includes will consider all information presented longiantenna), the Riverside fairy recovery criteria and measures for the during the public comment period prior shrimp (Streptocephalus wootoni), the Sierra Nevada bighorn sheep. to approval of each new or revised recovery plan. Substantive technical San Diego fairy shrimp (Branchinecta DATES: Comments on the draft recovery comments may result in changes to the sandiegonensis), and the vernal pool plan must be received on or before plan. Substantive comments regarding tadpole shrimp (Lepidurus packardi) in December 8, 2003. recovery plan implementation may not conjunction with surveys throughout ADDRESSES: Copies of the draft recovery necessarily result in changes to the the range of each species in California plan are available for inspection, by recovery plan, but will be forwarded to for the purpose of enhancing their appointment, during normal business appropriate Federal or other entities so survival. hours at the following location: U.S. that they can take these comments into Permit No. TE–077388 Fish and Wildlife Service, Ventura Fish account during the course of and Wildlife Office, 2493 Portola Road, implementing recovery actions. Applicant: Oregon Zoo, Portland, Suite B, Ventura, California 93003 This draft recovery plan was Oregon. (telephone 805–644–1766). Requests for developed by the Sierra Nevada Bighorn The applicant requests a permit to copies of the draft recovery plan and Sheep Recovery Team. We coordinated take (captive breed) the California written comments and materials with the California Department of Fish condor (Gymnogyps californianus) in regarding the plan should be addressed and Game, and a team of stakeholders, conjunction with a recovery program for to the Field Supervisor at the above which included ranchers, landowners the species in Multnomah County, address. An electronic copy of this draft and managers, agency representatives, Oregon, for the purpose of enhancing its recovery plan is also available at http:/ and non-government organizations. survival. /www.r1.fws.gov/ecoservices/ The population of bighorn sheep in endangered/recovery/default.htm. the Sierra Nevada of California was Permit No. TE–077392 FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Carl listed as an endangered species on Applicant: Peter Waldburger, Los Osos, Benz, Fish and Wildlife Biologist, at the January 3, 2000, (65 FR 20) following California. above address. emergency listing on April 20, 1999, (64 The applicant requests a permit to SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: FR 19300). At the time of listing, the bighorn sheep population was very take (harass by survey) the Morro Background shoulderband snail (Helminthoglypta small, with only about 125 adults walkeriana) in conjunction with surveys On July 30, 2003, we published a known to exist among 5 geographic throughout the range of the species in Notice of Availability of the Draft areas, with little probability of California for the purpose of enhancing Recovery Plan for the Sierra Nevada interchange among those areas. The its survival. Bighorn Sheep, opening a 60-day public bighorn sheep is threatened primarily We solicit public review and comment period that is scheduled to by transmission of disease from comment on each of these recovery end on September 29, 2003. We have domestic sheep and goats, and permit applications. received requests from the Natural predation by mountain lions. Key Resources Defense Council, the elements for immediate action are: (1) Dated: October 2, 2003. Wilderness Society, and the Sierra Predator management; (2) augmentation David J. Wesley, Nevada Bighorn Sheep Foundation to of small herds with sheep from larger Deputy Regional Director, Region 1, U.S. Fish extend the comment period so that they ones; and (3) elimination of the threat of and Wildlife Service. might more thoroughly review the plan. a pneumonia epizootic resulting from [FR Doc. 03–25580 Filed 10–8–03; 8:45 am] Based on these requests, we determined contact with domestic sheep or goats. BILLING CODE 4310–55–P to re-open the comment period for Actions needed to recover the bighorn

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:04 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00056 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\09OCN1.SGM 09OCN1 58356 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Notices

sheep include: (1) Protection of bighorn Topics to be covered during the ANS Areas, and coal leasing suitability were sheep habitat; (2) increase population Task Force meeting include: an update addressed only for lands administered growth by enhancing survivorship and of activities from each of the Task by the Farmington Field Office. The reproductive output of bighorn sheep; Force’s regional panels; status and USFS and BOR were cooperating (3) increase the numbers of herds, and updates from several other Task Force agencies in preparation of the RMP. The thereby the number of bighorn sheep; committees and working groups Final EIS and Proposed RMP were (4) develop and implement a genetic including the Prevention Committee, available for protest from April 4, 2003, management plan to maintain genetic the Asian Carp working group, and the to May 5, 2003. All protests and diversity; (5) monitor status and trends New Zealand mud snail working group, comments were considered during the of bighorn sheep herds and their habitat; review of State ANS Management Plans preparation of the ROD. (6) research; and (7) providing from Hawaii, Indiana and Wisconsin; an information to the public. update on ballast water management ADDRESSES: Copies of the ROD have activities; an update on the activities of Public Comments Solicited been sent to affected Federal, State, and the National Invasive Species Council; a local Government agencies and to We solicit written comments on the discussion on the National Aquatic interested parties. The document will be draft recovery plan described. All Invasive Species Act; and other topics. available electronically on the following comments received by the date specified Minutes of the meeting will be Web site: http://www.nm.blm.gov/. above will be considered in developing maintained by the Executive Secretary, Copies of the ROD are available for a final recovery plan. Aquatic Nuisance Species Task Force, public inspection at the following BLM Suite 810, 4401 North Fairfax Drive, Authority: The authority for this action is office locations: Farmington Field Arlington, Virginia 22203–1622, and section 4(f) of the Endangered Species Act, Office, 1235 La Plata Highway, 16 U.S.C. 1533(f). will be available for public inspection Farmington, NM 87401; and Dated: September 24, 2003. during regular business hours, Monday through Friday. Albuquerque Field Office, 435 Montano Steve Thompson, Rd. NE, Albuquerque, NM 87107. Manager, California/Nevada Operations Dated: October 2, 2003. Office, Region 1, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Mamie Parker, FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Service. Co-chair, Aquatic Nuisance Species Task James Ramakka, RMP Project Manager, [FR Doc. 03–25576 Filed 10–8–03; 8:45 am] Force, Assistant Director—Fisheries and Bureau of Land Management, BILLING CODE 4310–55–P Habitat Conservation. Farmington Field Office, 1235 La Plata [FR Doc. 03–25647 Filed 10–8–03; 8:45 am] Highway, Farmington, NM 87401 (505– BILLING CODE 4310–55–M 599–6307). DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This ROD Fish and Wildlife Service DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR approves the proposed revision to the Farmington RMP. The RMP provides Aquatic Nuisance Species Task Force Bureau of Land Management guidance for managing approximately Meeting [NM–070–03–1610–DR] 1,415,300 acres of public land and AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, 3,020,693 acres of Federal minerals in Interior. Notice of Availability of the Record of San Juan, McKinley, Rio Arriba and ACTION: Notice of meeting. Decision for Proposed Farmington Sandoval Counties. The overall Resource Management Plan Revision planning area encompasses 8,274,100 SUMMARY: This notice announces a and Environmental Impact Statement acres. meeting of the Aquatic Nuisance Species (ANS) Task Force. The meeting AGENCY: Bureau of Land Management, The ROD approves new decisions topics are identified in the New Mexico State Office, Interior. concerning oil and gas leasing and SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section. ACTION: Notice of availability. development, Off-Highway Vehicle DATES: The Aquatic Nuisance Species (OHV) designations, landownership SUMMARY: In accordance with the Task Force will meet from 8 a.m. to 5:30 adjustments, management of Specially Federal Land Policy and Management Designated Areas, and coal leasing p.m. on Tuesday, November 4, and from Act and the National Environmental 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. on Wednesday, suitability. These decisions are intended Policy Act, the Bureau of Land to replace goals, objectives, management November 5, 2003. Management (BLM) announces the ADDRESSES: The ANS Task Force actions and conditions of use described availability of the Record of Decision in the 1988 Farmington RMP and meeting will be held at the Holiday Inn, (ROD) for the Proposed Farmington subsequent amendments related to these 4610 North Fairfax Drive, Arlington, Resource Management Plan (RMP) matters. No other decisions of the 1988 Virginia 22203. Phone 703–243–9800. revision and Final Environmental FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Impact Statement (EIS). The revised Farmington RMP or amendments are Sharon Gross, Executive Secretary, plan addressed the oil and gas estate affected. Aquatic Nuisance Species Task Force, at administered by BLM in the Farmington Dated: August 14, 2003. 703–358–2308, or by e-mail, at Field Office and the Albuquerque Field Linda S.C. Rundell, [email protected] Office; the U.S. Forest Service (USFS), New Mexico State Director. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Jicarilla District of the Carson National Pursuant [FR Doc. 03–25616 Filed 10–8–03; 8:45 am] to section 10(a)(2) of the Federal Forest; portions of the Coyote and Cuba Advisory Committee Act (5 U.S.C. App. Districts of the Santa Fe National Forest, BILLING CODE 4310–FB–P I), this notice announces a meeting of and the Bureau of Reclamation (BOR) the Aquatic Nuisance Species Task for lands surrounding Navajo Reservoir. Force. The Task Force was established Other issues relating to landownership by the Nonindigenous Aquatic Nuisance adjustments, Off-Highway Vehicle Prevention and Control Act of 1990. management, Specially Designated

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:04 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00057 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\09OCN1.SGM 09OCN1 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Notices 58357

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Fourth Principal Meridian Township 62 North, Range 17 West, Tract 37 Bureau of Land Management Bureau of Land Management The above lands aggregate 0.18 acre more or less. [CO–200–0777–XM–241A] [CO–530–1430–ES; COC–63839] The permit will be issued for 3 years. Notice of Amendment of Meeting Date, Notice of Realty Action: Proposed The permit may be renewed, in Front Range Resource Advisory Classification of Public Lands for accordance with 43 CFR 2920.1–1(b) Council (Colorado) Recreation and Public Purposes Lease with the right of renewal through the in Rio Grande County, CO remainder of Mr. Stanton’s life. Upon AGENCY: Bureau of Land Management, expiration of the permitted use, all Interior. AGENCY: Bureau of Land Management, Interior. improvements will be removed from the ACTION: Notice of public meeting. public lands and the site rehabilitated. ACTION: Correction. This action is consistent with the SUMMARY: In accordance with the SUMMARY: This action corrects Notice of Minnesota Management Framework Federal Land Policy and Management Realty Action: Proposed Classification Plan and would serve important public Act (FLPMA) and the Federal Advisory of Public Lands for Recreation and objectives, which could not be achieved Committee Act of 1972 (FACA), the U.S. Public Purposes lease in Rio Grande by other means. The planning document Department of the Interior, Bureau of County, Colorado, 68 FR 35691, and environmental assessment covering Land Management (BLM) Front Range published June 16, 2003. the proposed permit are available for Resource Advisory Council (RAC), will On page 35691, third column, top of review at the Bureau of Land meet as indicated below. the page, should be corrected from sec. Management, Milwaukee Field Office, DATES: The meeting will be held on 27, metes and bounds tract in lot 9 and Milwaukee, Wisconsin. November 13, 2003, at the Holy Cross the NE1/44NE1/4 to sec. 27, metes and For a period until November 24, 2003, Abbey Community Center, 2951 E. bounds tract in lot 9 and the NE1/4SE1/ interested parties may submit comments Highway 50, Canon City, Colorado 4. to the Field Manager, Milwaukee Field beginning at 9:15 a.m. The public Dated: September 15, 2003. Office, Bureau of Land Management, comment period will begin at 626 E. Wisconsin Avenue, Suite 200, Dean H. Erhard, approximately 9:30 a.m. and the Milwaukee, Wisconsin 53202–4617. meeting will adjourn at approximately 4 Del Norte Field Manager. Any adverse comments will be p.m. [FR Doc. 03–25617 Filed 10–8–03; 8:45 am] evaluated by the State Director, Eastern BILLING CODE 4310–JB–P SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The 15 States Office, who may sustain, vacate, member Council advises the Secretary or modify this realty action. In the absence of any objections, this proposed of the Interior, through the Bureau of DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Land Management, on a variety of realty action will become final. planning and management issues Bureau of Land Management This notice is being published in associated with public land accordance with the regulations management in the Front Range Center, [ES–032–03–1430–EQ; MNES–050222] contained in 43 CFR 2920.4. Colorado. Planned agenda topics Notice of Realty Action; Dated: September 17, 2003. include Manager updates on current Noncompetitive Permit of Public James W. Dryden, land management issues and an update Lands, Minnesota Milwaukee Field Manager. on the Gold Belt Travel Management [FR Doc. 03–25615 Filed 10–8–03; 8:45 am] Plan. AGENCY: Bureau of Land Management, BILLING CODE 4310–PN–P All meetings are open to the public. Interior. The public is encouraged to make oral ACTION: Notice of realty action. comments to the Council at 9:30 a.m. or DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR written statements may be submitted for SUMMARY: The surface estate of land the Council’s consideration. Depending located in St. Louis County, Minnesota Bureau of Land Management on the number of persons wishing to is being considered for a [NV–050–1430–ES; N–74355] comment and time available, the time noncompetitive permit pursuant to for individual oral comments may be section 302 of the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976, as Notice of Realty Action: Conveyance limited. Summary minutes for the for Recreation and Public Purposes Council Meeting will be maintained in amended (43 U.S.C. 1732). the Front Range Center Office and will FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Paul AGENCY: Bureau of Land Management. be available for public inspection and J. Salvatore, Realty Specialist, Bureau of ACTION: Notice of realty action. reproduction during regular business Land Management, Milwaukee Field hours within thirty (30) days following Office, 310 W. Wisconsin Ave., Suite SUMMARY: The following described the meeting. 450, Milwaukee, Wisconsin 53203, (414) public land in the Las Vegas Valley, 297–4413. Clark County, Nevada, has been FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The examined and found suitable for Bureau of Land Management (BLM), conveyance for recreational or public Attn: Ken Smith, 3170 East Main Street, Bureau of Land Management proposes to offer the use of the surface estate of purposes under the provisions of the Canon City, Colorado 81212. Phone Recreation and Public Purposes Act, as (719) 269–8500. the following described lands to Mr. David M. Stanton, by noncompetitive amended (43 U.S.C. 869 et. seq.). Dated: October 2, 2003. permit, at fair market value. The permit FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John L. Carochi, will allow for continued habitation on Anna Wharton, Supervisory Realty Acting Front Range Center Manager. the site by Mr. Stanton and will resolve Specialist, (702) 515–5095. [FR Doc. 03–25586 Filed 10–8–03; 8:45 am] an inadvertent unauthorized use of SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The BILLING CODE 4310–JB–M public land. following described public land in the

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:04 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00058 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\09OCN1.SGM 09OCN1 58358 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Notices

Las Vegas Valley, Clark County, Nevada, Office, 4701 N. Torrey Pines Drive, Las Exceptions to this Order are Granted has been examined and found suitable Vegas, Nevada 89130–2301. to the Following: Law enforcement for conveyance for recreational or public Classification Comments: Interested patrol, emergency services, and purposes under the provisions of the parties may submit comments involving administratively approved access for Recreation and Public Purposes Act, as the suitability of the land for a bus yard/ actions such as monitoring, research amended (43 U.S.C. 869 et. seq.). communications center. Comments on studies, and access to private lands. The Clark County School District the classification are restricted to Other actions would be considered on proposes to use the land for the whether the land is physically suited for a case-by-case basis by the authorized maintenance, parking, cleaning, and the proposal, whether the use will officer. fueling of school busses and as a radio maximize the future use or uses of the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: communications center. land, whether the use is consistent with Philip Damon, (208) 467–6340, the BLM local planning and zoning, or if the use Pocatello Filed Office, 1111 North 8th Mount Diablo Meridian, Nevada is consistent with State and Federal Ave., Pocatello, ID 83201. programs. T. 23 S., R. 61 E., MDM SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This 1 1 1 1 Application Comments: Interested Sec. 08: S ⁄2NW ⁄4NW ⁄4SE ⁄4, closure is a direct result of the SW1⁄4NW1⁄4SE1⁄4, SW1⁄4SE1⁄4, parties may submit comments regarding Blackrook Fire, which burned this area NW1⁄4NW1⁄4SE1⁄4SE1⁄4 the specific use proposed in the 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 in July, 2003 and of the subsequent N ⁄2SW ⁄4SE ⁄4SE ⁄4, N ⁄2SE ⁄4SE ⁄4SE ⁄4 application and plan of development, (that portion west of centerline of US whether the BLM followed proper rehabilitation efforts of the BLM. The 91). administrative procedures in reaching closure will promote the Containing approximately 65.44 acres. the decision, or any other factor not reestablishment of vegetation, improve the potential for recovery of wildlife The land is not required for any directly related to the suitability of the habitat, and reduce the potential for Federal purpose. The conveyance is lands for a bus yard/communications erosion and noxious weed invasion. consistent with current Bureau planning center. Any adverse comments will be reviewed by the State Director who may The closure is in accordance with 43 for this area and would be in the public CFR 9268.3(d)(1). Violation of this order interest. The patent, when issued, will sustain, vacate, or modify this realty action. In the absence of any adverse is punishable by a fine not to exceed be subject to the provisions of the $1,000.00 and/or imprisonment not to Recreation and Public Purposes Act and comments, these realty actions will become the final determination of the exceed 12 months. applicable regulations of the Secretary The area of closure and impoundment of the Interior and will contain the Department of the Interior. The classification of the land described in affected by this notice is the burned following reservations to the United portion of public lands administered by States: this Notice will become effective December 8, 2003. The lands will not be the BLM, specially described wholly or 1. A right-of-way thereon for ditches partially: and canals constructed by the authority offered for conveyance until after the of the United States, Act of August 30, classification becomes effective. Boise Meridian: 1890 (43 U.S.C. 945). Dated: August 22, 2003. T. 7 S., R. 35 E., Sec. 11, 12, 13, 14, and 2. All minerals shall be reserved to Sharon DiPinto, T. 7 S., R 36 E., Sec. 7, 8, 17, 18, 19, 20. the United States, together with the Acting Assistant Field Manager, Division of Detailed maps of the area closed to right to prospect for, mine and remove Lands, Las Vegas, NV. OHV and recreational use are available such deposits from the same under [FR Doc. 03–25612 Filed 10–8–03; 8:45 am] at the Pocatello Field Office at the applicable law and such regulations as BILLING CODE 4310–HC–P address above. the Secretary of the Interior may prescribe. and will be subject to: Dated: August 26, 2003. 1. All valid and existing rights. The DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Philip Damon, lands have been segregated from all Pocatello Field Manager. forms of appropriation under the Bureau of Land Management [FR Doc. 03–25614 Filed 10–8–03; 8:45 am] Southern Nevada Public Lands [ID–075–2822–JL–F9947] BILLING CODE 4310–GG–P Management Act (Pub. L. 105–263). Detailed information concerning this Notice of Closure; Bannock County, ID DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR action is available for review at the AGENCY: Bureau of Land Management, office of the Bureau of Land Interior Management, Las Vegas Field Office, Bureau of Land Management ACTION: Notice of Closure to Off- 4701 N. Torrey Pines Drive, Las Vegas, [MT–926–04–1420–BJ] Highway Vehicle and recreation Use on NV, or by calling (702) 515–5000. public lands in Bannock County, Idaho. On October 9, 2003, the above Montana: Filing of Plats of Amended described land will be segregated from SUMMARY: With the publication of this Protraction Diagrams all other forms of appropriation under notice, all public lands administered by AGENCY: Bureau of Land Management, the public land laws, including the the Bureau of Land Management within Montana State Office, Interior. general mining laws, except for the 2,234 acres of the Blackrock Fire ACTION: Notice of Filing of Plats of conveyance under the Recreation and (F947), including designated roads and Amended Protraction Diagrams. Public Purposes Act, leasing under the trails are closed to all motorized mineral leasing laws and disposal under vehicles, mountain biking, camping, SUMMARY: The Bureau of Land the mineral material disposal laws. horseback riding and other recreational Management (BLM) will file the plats of For a period until November 24, 2003, activities. The closure will remain in the amended protraction diagrams of the interested parties may submit comments effect until July 15, 2006 or until such lands described below in the BLM regarding the proposed conveyance for time as the authorized officer of the Montana State Office, Billings, Montana, classification of the lands to the Las Pocatello Field Office determines the (30) days from the date of publication in Vegas Field Manager, Las Vegas Field closure may be lifted. the Federal Register.

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:04 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00059 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\09OCN1.SGM 09OCN1 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Notices 58359

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: T. 1 N., R. 12 W. T. 4 N., R. 15 W. Robert L. Brockie, Cadastral Surveyor, The plat, representing Amended The plat, representing Amended Branch of Cadastral Survey, Bureau of Protraction Diagram 13 of Protraction Diagram 14 of Land Management, 5001 Southgate unsurveyedTownship 1 North, Range 12 unsurveyedTownship 4 North, Range 15 Drive, P.O. Box 36800, Billings, West, Principal Meridian, Montana, was West, Principal Meridian, Montana, was Montana 59107–6800, telephone (406) acceptedSeptember 10, 2003. acceptedSeptember 10, 2003. 896–5125 or (406) 896–5009. T. 2 N., R. 9 W. Tps. 21, 22, 23, and 24 N., Rs. 12, 13, SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The The plat, representing Amended 14, 15, and 16 W. amended protraction diagrams were Protraction Diagram 13 of The plat, representing the Amended prepared at the request of the U.S. unsurveyedTownship 2 North, Range 9 Protraction Diagram 34 Index of Forest Service and are necessary to West, Principal Meridian, Montana, was unsurveyedTownships 21, 22, 23, and accommodate Revision of Primary Base acceptedSeptember 10, 2003. 24 North, Ranges 12, 13, 14, 15, and 16 Quadrangle Maps for the Geometronics T. 2 N., R. 10 W. West,Principal Meridian, Montana, was Service Center. The lands for the The plat, representing Amended accepted September 12, 2003. prepared amended protraction diagrams Protraction Diagram 13 of T. 21 N., R. 12 W. are: unsurveyedTownship 2 North, Range 10 The plat, representing Amended Protraction Diagram 34 of Principal Meridian, Montana West, Principal Meridian, Montana, was acceptedSeptember 10, 2003. unsurveyedTownship 21 North, Range 12 West, Principal Meridian, Montana, Tps. 11, 12, 13, 14, and 15 S., Rs. 5 E. Tps. 1, 2, 3, and 4 N., Rs. 14 and 15 W. The plat, representing the Amended The plat, representing the Amended was acceptedSeptember 12, 2003. Protraction Diagram 3 Index of Protraction Diagram 14 Index of T. 21 N., R. 13 W. unsurveyedTownships 11, 12, 13, 14, unsurveyedTownships 1, 2, 3, and 4 The plat, representing Amended and 15 South, Ranges 5 East, Principal North, Ranges 14 and 15 West, Principal Protraction Diagram 34 of Meridian, Montana, was accepted Meridian,Montana, was accepted unsurveyedTownship 21 North, Range September 10, 2003. September 10, 2003. 13 West, Principal Meridian, Montana, T. 11 S., R. 5 E. was acceptedSeptember 12, 2003. The plat, representing Amended T. 1 N., R. 14 W. The plat, representing Amended T. 21 N., R. 14 W. Protraction Diagram 3 of The plat, representing Amended Protraction Diagram 14 of unsurveyedTownship 11 South, Range 5 Protraction Diagram 34 of unsurveyedTownship 1 North, Range 14 East, Principal Meridian, Montana, was unsurveyedTownship 21 North, Range West, Principal Meridian, Montana, was acceptedSeptember 10, 2003. 14 West, Principal Meridian, Montana, acceptedSeptember 10, 2003. T. 12 S., R. 5 E. was acceptedSeptember 12, 2003. T. 2 N., R. 14 W. The plat, representing Amended T. 22 N., R. 12 W. Protraction Diagram 3 of The plat, representing Amended The plat, representing Amended unsurveyedTownship 12 South, Range 5 Protraction Diagram 14 of Protraction Diagram 34 of East, Principal Meridian, Montana, was unsurveyedTownship 2 North, Range 14 unsurveyedTownship 22 North, Range acceptedSeptember 10, 2003. West, Principal Meridian, Montana, was 12 West, Principal Meridian, Montana, acceptedSeptember 10, 2003. T. 13 S., R. 5 E. was acceptedSeptember 12, 2003. The plat, representing Amended T. 3 N., R. 14 W. T. 22 N., R. 13 W. Protraction Diagram 3 of The plat, representing Amended The plat, representing Amended unsurveyedTownship 13 South, Range 5 Protraction Diagram 14 of Protraction Diagram 34 of East, Principal Meridian, Montana, was unsurveyedTownship 3 North, Range 14 unsurveyedTownship 22 North, Range acceptedSeptember 10, 2003. West, Principal Meridian, Montana, was 13 West, Principal Meridian, Montana, T. 14 S., R. 5 E. acceptedSeptember 10, 2003. was acceptedSeptember 12, 2003. The plat, representing Amended T. 4 N., R. 14 W. T. 22 N., R. 14 W. Protraction Diagram 3 of The plat, representing Amended The plat, representing Amended unsurveyedTownship 14 South, Range 5 Protraction Diagram 14 of Protraction Diagram 34 of East, Principal Meridian, Montana, was unsurveyedTownship 4 North, Range 14 unsurveyedTownship 22 North, Range acceptedSeptember 10, 2003. West, Principal Meridian, Montana, was 14 West, Principal Meridian, Montana, T. 15 S., R. 5 E. acceptedSeptember 10, 2003. was acceptedSeptember 12, 2003. The plat, representing Amended T. 1 N., R. 15 W. T. 22 N., R. 15 W. Protraction Diagram 3 of The plat, representing Amended The plat, representing Amended unsurveyedTownship 15 South, Range 5 Protraction Diagram 14 of Protraction Diagram 34 of East, Principal Meridian, Montana, was unsurveyedTownship 1 North, Range 15 unsurveyedTownship 22 North, Range acceptedSeptember 10, 2003. West, Principal Meridian, Montana, was 15 West, Principal Meridian, Montana, Tps. 1 and 2 N., Rs. 9, 10, and 12 W. acceptedSeptember 10, 2003. was acceptedSeptember 12, 2003. The plat, representing the Amended T. 2 N., R. 15 W. T. 23 N., R. 12 W. Protraction Diagram 13 Index of The plat, representing Amended The plat, representing Amended unsurveyedTownships 1 and 2 North, Protraction Diagram 14 of Protraction Diagram 34 of Ranges 9, 10, and 12 West, Principal unsurveyedTownship 2 North, Range 15 unsurveyedTownship 23 North, Range Meridian,Montana, was accepted West, Principal Meridian, Montana, was 12 West, Principal Meridian, Montana, September 10, 2003. acceptedSeptember 10, 2003. was acceptedSeptember 12, 2003. T. 1 N., R. 10 W. T. 3 N., R. 15 W. T. 23 N., R. 13 W. The plat, representing Amended The plat, representing Amended The plat, representing Amended Protraction Diagram 13 of Protraction Diagram 14 of Protraction Diagram 34 of unsurveyedTownship 1 North, Range 10 unsurveyedTownship 3 North, Range 15 unsurveyedTownship 23 North, Range West, Principal Meridian, Montana, was West, Principal Meridian, Montana, was 13 West, Principal Meridian, Montana, acceptedSeptember 10, 2003. acceptedSeptember 10, 2003. was acceptedSeptember 12, 2003.

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:04 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00060 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\09OCN1.SGM 09OCN1 58360 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Notices

T. 23 N., R. 14 W. T. 25 N., R. 15 W. The plat, representing Amended The plat, representing Amended The plat, representing Amended Protraction Diagram 37 of Protraction Diagram 34 of Protraction Diagram 37 of unsurveyedTownship 28 North, Range unsurveyedTownship 23 North, Range unsurveyedTownship 25 North, Range 14 West, Principal Meridian, Montana, 14 West, Principal Meridian, Montana, 15 West, Principal Meridian, Montana, was acceptedSeptember 12, 2003. was acceptedSeptember 12, 2003. was acceptedSeptember 12, 2003. T. 28 N., R. 15 W. T. 23 N., R. 15 W. T. 25 N., R. 16 W. The plat, representing Amended The plat, representing Amended The plat, representing Amended Protraction Diagram 37 of Protraction Diagram 34 of Protraction Diagram 37 of unsurveyedTownship 28 North, Range unsurveyedTownship 23 North, Range unsurveyedTownship 25 North, Range 15 West, Principal Meridian, Montana, 15 West, Principal Meridian, Montana, 16 West, Principal Meridian, Montana, was acceptedSeptember 12, 2003. was acceptedSeptember 12, 2003. was acceptedSeptember 12, 2003. T. 28 N., R. 16 W. T. 23 N., R. 16 W. T. 26 N., R. 13 W. The plat, representing Amended The plat, representing Amended The plat, representing Amended Protraction Diagram 37 of Protraction Diagram 34 of Protraction Diagram 37 of unsurveyedTownship 28 North, Range unsurveyedTownship 23 North, Range unsurveyedTownship 26 North, Range 16 West, Principal Meridian, Montana, 16 West, Principal Meridian, Montana, 13 West, Principal Meridian, Montana, was acceptedSeptember 12, 2003. was acceptedSeptember 12, 2003. was acceptedSeptember 12, 2003. Tps. 3 and 4 S., Rs. 17 and 18 W. T. 24 N., R. 12 W. T. 26 N., R. 14 W. The plat, representing the Amended The plat, representing Amended The plat, representing Amended Protraction Diagram 53 Index of Protraction Diagram 34 of Protraction Diagram 37 of unsurveyed Townships 3 and 4 South, unsurveyedTownship 24 North, Range unsurveyedTownship 26 North, Range Ranges 17 and 18 West, Principal 12 West, Principal Meridian, Montana, 14 West, Principal Meridian, Montana, Meridian, Montana, was accepted was acceptedSeptember 12, 2003. was acceptedSeptember 12, 2003. September 10, 2003. T. 24 N., R. 13 W. T. 26 N., R. 15 W. T. 3 S., R. 18 W. The plat, representing Amended The plat, representing Amended The plat, representing Amended Protraction Diagram 34 of Protraction Diagram 37 of Protraction Diagram 53 of unsurveyedTownship 24 North, Range unsurveyedTownship 26 North, Range unsurveyedTownship 3 South, Range 18 13 West, Principal Meridian, Montana, 15 West, Principal Meridian, Montana, West, Principal Meridian, Montana, was was acceptedSeptember 12, 2003. was acceptedSeptember 12, 2003. acceptedSeptember 10, 2003. T. 24 N., R. 14 W. T. 26 N., R. 16 W. T. 4 S., R. 17 W. The plat, representing Amended The plat, representing Amended The plat, representing Amended Protraction Diagram 53 of Protraction Diagram 34 of Protraction Diagram 37 of unsurveyedTownship 4 South, Range 17 unsurveyedTownship 24 North, Range unsurveyedTownship 26 North, Range West, Principal Meridian, Montana, was 14 West, Principal Meridian, Montana, 16 West, Principal Meridian, Montana, acceptedSeptember 10, 2003. was acceptedSeptember 12, 2003. was acceptedSeptember 12, 2003. T. 24 N., R. 15 W. T. 4 S., R. 18 W. The plat, representing Amended T. 27 N., R. 13 W. The plat, representing Amended The plat, representing Amended Protraction Diagram 34 of Protraction Diagram 53 of Protraction Diagram 37 of unsurveyedTownship 24 North, Range unsurveyedTownship 4 South, Range 18 unsurveyedTownship 27 North, Range 15 West, Principal Meridian, Montana, West, Principal Meridian, Montana, was 13 West, Principal Meridian, Montana, was acceptedSeptember 12, 2003. acceptedSeptember 10, 2003. was acceptedSeptember 12, 2003. T. 24 N., R. 16 W. Tps. 5, 6, 7, and 8 S., Rs. 16, 17, and The plat, representing Amended T. 27 N., R. 14 W. 18 W. Protraction Diagram 34 of The plat, representing Amended The plat, representing the Amended unsurveyedTownship 24 North, Range Protraction Diagram 37 of Protraction Diagram 54 Index of 16 West, Principal Meridian, Montana, unsurveyedTownship 27 North, Range unsurveyedTownships 5, 6, 7, and 8 was acceptedSeptember 12, 2003. 14 West, Principal Meridian, Montana, South, Ranges 16, 17, and 18 West, was acceptedSeptember 12, 2003. Tps. 25, 26, 27, and 28 N., Rs. 13, 14, PrincipalMeridian, Montana, was 15, and 16 W. T. 27 N., R. 15 W. accepted September 10, 2003. The plat, representing the Amended The plat, representing Amended T. 5 S., R. 16 W. Protraction Diagram 37 Index of Protraction Diagram 37 of The plat, representing Amended unsurveyedTownships 25, 26, 27, and unsurveyedTownship 27 North, Range Protraction Diagram 54 of 28 North, Ranges 13, 14, 15, and 16 15 West, Principal Meridian, Montana, unsurveyedTownship 5 South, Range 16 West, PrincipalMeridian, Montana, was was acceptedSeptember 12, 2003. West, Principal Meridian, Montana, was accepted September 12, 2003. T. 27 N., R. 16 W. acceptedSeptember 10, 2003. T. 25 N., R. 13 W. The plat, representing Amended T. 5 S., R. 17 W. The plat, representing Amended Protraction Diagram 37 of The plat, representing Amended Protraction Diagram 37 of unsurveyedTownship 27 North, Range Protraction Diagram 54 of unsurveyedTownship 25 North, Range 16 West, Principal Meridian, Montana, unsurveyedTownship 5 South, Range 17 13 West, Principal Meridian, Montana, was acceptedSeptember 12, 2003. West, Principal Meridian, Montana, was was acceptedSeptember 12, 2003. T. 28 N., R. 13 W. acceptedSeptember 10, 2003. T. 25 N., R. 14 W. The plat, representing Amended T. 5 S., R. 18 W. The plat, representing Amended Protraction Diagram 37 of The plat, representing Amended Protraction Diagram 37 of unsurveyedTownship 28 North, Range Protraction Diagram 54 of unsurveyedTownship 25 North, Range 13 West, Principal Meridian, Montana, unsurveyedTownship 5 South, Range 18 14 West, Principal Meridian, Montana, was acceptedSeptember 12, 2003. West, Principal Meridian, Montana, was was acceptedSeptember 12, 2003. T. 28 N., R. 14 W. acceptedSeptember 10, 2003.

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:04 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00061 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\09OCN1.SGM 09OCN1 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Notices 58361

T. 6 S., R. 17 W. segregation is in response to an ACTION: Notice of opening of materials. The plat, representing Amended application for mineral conveyance Protraction Diagram 54 of under section 209 of the Federal Land SUMMARY: This notice announces the unsurveyedTownship 6 South, Range 17 Policy and Management Act of October opening of additional Nixon West, Principal Meridian, Montana, was 21, 1976 (43 U.S.C. 1719). presidential historical materials. Notice is hereby given that, in accordance with acceptedSeptember 10, 2003. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: section 104 of Title I of the Presidential T. 7 S., R. 16 W. Vivian Titus, Land Law Examiner, Recordings and Materials Preservation The plat, representing Amended Arizona State Office, 222 N. Central Act (PRMPA, 44 U.S.C. 2111 note) and Protraction Diagram 54 of Ave., Phoenix, Arizona 85004, (602) 1275.42(b) of the PRMPA Regulations unsurveyedTownship 7 South, Range 16 417–9598. implementing the Act (36 CFR part West, Principal Meridian, Montana, was SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION : 1275), the agency has identified, acceptedSeptember 10, 2003. Gila and Salt River Base and Meridian, inventoried, and prepared for public T. 7 S., R. 17 W. Yavapai County, Arizona access approximately 240 hours of The plat, representing Amended T. 4 N., R. 5 W., Nixon White House tape recordings Protraction Diagram 54 of sec. 3, SW1⁄4; among the Nixon Presidential historical unsurveyedTownship 7 South, Range 17 sec. 5, SE1⁄4, SW1⁄4; materials. West, Principal Meridian, Montana, was sec. 8, W1⁄2; DATES: The National Archives and acceptedSeptember 10, 2003. sec. 9, All. 1 Records Administration (NARA) intends T. 8 S., R. 16 W. sec. 10, SE ⁄4; sec. 11, SE1⁄4; to make the materials described in this The plat, representing Amended sec. 13, NW1⁄4; notice available to the public beginning Protraction Diagram 54 of sec. 14, E1⁄2, SW1⁄4; December 10, 2003. In accordance with unsurveyedTownship 8 South, Range 16 sec. 15, W1⁄2, NE1⁄4; 36 CFR 1275.44, any person who West, Principal Meridian, Montana, was sec. 17, E1⁄2; believes it necessary to file a claim of 1 1 acceptedSeptember 10, 2003. sec. 22, NE ⁄4, SE ⁄4; legal right or privilege concerning sec. 23, W1⁄2, NE1⁄4. We will place copies of the plats of access to these materials should notify the amended protraction diagrams we The reserved Federal mineral interests the Archivist of the United States in described in the open files. They will be will be conveyed in whole or in part writing of the claimed right, privilege, available to the public as a matter of upon completion of a mineral or defense on or before November 10, information. examination. The purpose is to allow 2003. If BLM receives a protest against these consolidation of surface and subsurface ADDRESSES: amended protraction diagrams, as minerals ownership where there are no The materials will be made shown on these plats, prior to the date known mineral values or in those available to the public at the National of the official filings, we will stay the instances where the Federal mineral Archives at College Park research room, filings pending our consideration of the interest reservation interferes with or located at 8601 Adelphi Road, College protest. precludes appropriate nonmineral Park, Maryland, beginning at 8:45 a.m. Petitions asserting a legal or We will not officially file these plats development and such development is a constitutional right or privilege which of the amended protraction diagrams more beneficial use of the land than the would prevent or limit access must be until the day after we have accepted or mineral development. Upon publication dismissed all protests and they have of this Notice of Segregation in the sent to the Archivist of the United become final, including decisions or Federal Register as provided in 43 CFR States, National Archives at College appeals. 2720.1–1(b), the mineral interests Park, 8601 Adelphi Road, College Park, Maryland 20740–6001. Dated: October 1, 2003. owned by the United States in the lands FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Karl Thomas M. Deiling, covered by the mineral conveyance application are segregated to the extent Weissenbach, Director, Nixon Chief Cadastral Surveyor, Division of Presidential Materials Staff, 301–837– Resources. that they will not be subject to appropriation under the public land 3117. [FR Doc. 03–25579 Filed 10–8–03; 8:45 am] laws, including the mining and mineral SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: NARA is BILLING CODE 4310–$$–P leasing laws. The segregative effect shall proposing to open approximately 3073 terminate upon: issuance of a patent or conversations which were recorded at DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR deed of such mineral interest; upon the Nixon White House from July 1972 final rejection of the mineral to October 1972. These tape segments Bureau of Land Management conveyance application; or October 11, total approximately 240 hours of 2005, whichever occurs first. listening time. [AZ–933–03, 5410–10–A500; AZA–32409] Dated: September 17, 2003. This is the tenth opening of Nixon Notice of Receipt of Conveyance of Carl Rountree, White House tapes since 1980. Previous Mineral Interest Application Associate State Director. releases included conversations constituting ‘‘abuses of governmental [FR Doc. 03–25613 Filed 10–8–03; 8:45 am] AGENCY: Bureau of Land Management, power’’ and conversations recorded in Interior. BILLING CODE 4310–32–P the Cabinet Room of the Nixon White ACTION: Notice of minerals segregation. House. NARA is processing the remaining tapes, which cover the period SUMMARY: The reserved Federally- NATIONAL ARCHIVES AND RECORDS February 1971 to July 1973. The tapes owned mineral interest, in the private ADMINISTRATION now being proposed for opening consist lands described in this notice, Nixon Presidential Historical Materials; of the fourth of five segments. aggregating approximately 4,000 acres, Opening of Materials There are no transcripts for these are segregated and made unavailable for tapes. Tape logs, prepared by NARA, are filings under the general mining laws AGENCY: National Archives and Records offered for public access as a finding aid and the mineral leasing laws. The Administration. to the tape segments and a guide for the

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:04 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00062 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\09OCN1.SGM 09OCN1 58362 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Notices

listener. There is a separate tape log Matters To Be Considered • Status Report on Workshop entry for each segment of conversation • Wednesday, October 15, 2003 Terms of Reference released. Each tape log entry includes • Date the names of participants; date, time, Open • Invitees and location of the conversation; and an Committee on Audit and Oversight (8 • Agenda outline of the content of the a.m.–9:40 a.m.) Room 1235: • White Paper conversation. • Minutes The tape recordings will be made • CFP Update Closed • available to the general public in the Advisory Committee on GPRA Audit & Oversight (9:40 a.m.–10 a.m.) research room at 8601 Adelphi Road, Performance Assessment • Room 1235: College Park, Maryland, Monday Business Analysis Update • through Friday between 8:45 a.m. and • National Academy of Public Briefing on an Active Investigation 4:30 p.m. Researchers must have a Administration’s Review of NSF— Committee on Strategy & Budget (10 NARA researcher card, which they may Update a.m.–10:20 a.m.) Room 1235: • obtain when they arrive at the facility. Federal Manager’s Financial • Budget Update Listening stations will be available for Integrity Act Reporting for FY 2003 Executive Committee (12:30 p.m.–1 public use on a first come, first served • Cost Sharing • p.m.) Room 1295: basis. NARA reserves the right to limit Presentation of the OIG FY 2004 listening time in response to heavy Audit Plan • Director’s Items demand. Copies of the tape log will be Subcommittee on S&E Indicators (9 • Specific Personnel Matters available for a fee in accordance with 36 a.m.–10 a.m.) Room 1295: • Future Budgets CFR 1258.12. • Approval of Minutes • Thursday, October 16, 2003 Dated: October 1, 2003. Results of Agency Review • S&E Indicators 2004 Cover Open John W. Carlin, • S&E Indicators 2004 Companion Archivist of the United States. Piece Committee on Programs and Plans (9:15 a.m.–10:30 a.m.) Room 1235: [FR Doc. 03–25563 Filed 10–8–03; 8:45 am] Committee on Strategy and Budget • BILLING CODE 7515–01–P (10:20 a.m.–12 noon) Room 1235: Minutes/Announcements • • Approval of Minutes Long-lived Data Collections: Status • Review of Draft Report (required by Report Section 22 of the NSF • Status of the Science & Technology NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION Authorization Act) Centers: Integrative Partnership Executive Committee (12 noon–12:30 Program National Science Board and Its • Subdivisions; Sunshine Act Meeting p.m.) Room 1295: Cyberinfrastructure • • Minutes Polar Subcommittee DATE AND TIME: October 15, 2003: 8 a.m.– • Guidelines for Closed NSB Sessions Plenary Session of the Board (1 p.m.– 5:30 p.m. Subcommittee on Polar Issues (1 3:45 p.m.) Room 1235: Concurrent Sessions: p.m.–1:45 p.m.) Room 1235: • Minutes 8 a.m.–9:40 a.m.—Open Session • Approval of Minutes • Closed Items, November 2003 • 9:40 a.m.–10 a.m.—Closed Session OPP Director’s Report: • Chairman’s Items • 9 a.m.–10 a.m.—Open Session International Polar Year Planning • Director’s Items • Icebreaker Availability 10 a.m.–10:20 a.m.—Closed Session • • Discussion: Update on NSB Elections Antarctic Treaty Issues • 10:20 a.m.–12 Noon—Open Session • Tourism Presentation: Update on S&E visas 12 Noon–12:30 p.m.—Open Session • Canada to Join ATCM • Presentation: OMB Draft Peer Review 12:30 p.m.–1 p.m.—Closed Session • Briefing on International Arctic Standards 1 p.m.–1:45 p.m.—Open Session Research Center • Committee Reports 1:45 p.m.–2 p.m.—Closed Session • Update on MREFC Projects • South Pole Station Modernization Closed 2 p.m.–4 p.m.—Open Session • 4 p.m.–5 p.m.—Open Session LC–130 Conversion Committee on Programs and Plans (8 Committee on Education and Human a.m.–9:15 a.m.) Room 1235: October 16, 2003: 8 a.m.–3:35 p.m. Resources (2 p.m.—4 p.m.) Room 1235: • Concurrent Sessions: NSB Award Action: Division of Ocean • Minutes Sciences 8 a.m.–9:15 a.m.—Closed Session • Approval of Minutes • NSB Award Action: Division of • 9:15 a.m.–10:30 a.m.—Open Session Comments from the Chair Biological Infrastructure 10:45 a.m.–12:30 p.m.—Closed • Status of NWP Task Force Report • • NSB Award Action: Office of Polar Session Reports form Working Groups (K– Programs 1 p.m.–3:45 p.m.—Open Session 12, Undergraduate & Graduate) • Report from Subcommittee on S&E Plenary Session of the Board (10:45 PLACE: The National Science a.m.–12:30 p.m.) Room 1235: Foundation, 4201 Wilson Boulevard, Indicators • Status Report on follow-up of the • Arlington, VA 22230, http:// Closed Minutes August 12th Workshop on • www.nsf.gov/nsb. Award Actions Broadening Participation • Closed Session Committee Reports FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: NSF • Report from the EHR AD Information Center (703) 292–5111. • New Business Michael P. Crosby, STATUS: Part of this meeting will be Ad Hoc Task Group on Long-Lived Executive Officer, NSB. closed to the public. Part of this meeting Data Collections (4 p.m.–5 p.m.) Room [FR Doc. 03–25847 Filed 10–7–03; 3:38 pm] will be open to the public. 1235: BILLING CODE 7555–01–M

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:04 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00063 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\09OCN1.SGM 09OCN1 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Notices 58363

NUCLEAR REGULATORY report, September 2003 (NUREG–1779); assessment and finding of no significant COMMISSION (3) the licensee’s updated final safety impact. analysis report; and (4) the [Docket Nos. 50–335 and 389] Environmental Assessment Commission’s final environmental Florida Power and Light Company, et impact statements (NUREG–1437), Identification of the Proposed Action al., St. Lucie Plant, Unit Nos. 1 and 2; Supplement 11, for St. Lucie, Units 1 The proposed action would exempt Notice of Issuance of Renewed Facility and 2, dated May 19, 2003. These MP3 from the requirements of 10 CFR Operating License Nos. DPR–67 and documents are available at the NRC’s part 50, section 50.44, section 50.46 and NPF–16 for an Additional 20-Year Public Document Room, One White appendix K, to allow the use of up to Period Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, first eight Lead Test Assemblies (LTAs) floor, Rockville, Maryland 20852, and fabricated with Optimized ZIRLO, a Notice is hereby given that the U.S. can be viewed from the NRC Public cladding material that contains a Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the Electronic Reading Room at http:// nominally lower tin content than Commission) has issued Renewed www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. previously approved cladding materials. Facility Operating License Nos. DPR–67 Copies of Renewed Facility Operating The proposed action is in accordance and NPF–16 to Florida Power and Light License Nos. DPR–67 and NFP–16 may with the licensee’s application dated Company (the licensee), the operator of be obtained by writing to the U.S. July 1, 2003. the St. Lucie Plant, Unit Nos. 1 and 2 Nuclear Regulatory Commission, (St. Lucie, Units 1 and 2). Renewed Washington, DC 20555–0001, Attention: The Need for the Proposed Action Facility Operating License No. DPR–67 Director, Division of Regulatory As the nuclear industry pursues authorizes operation of St. Lucie, Unit 1, Improvement Programs. Copies of the longer operating cycles with increased by the licensee at reactor core power safety evaluation report (NUREG–1779), fuel discharge burnups and more levels not in excess of 2700 megawatts and the final environmental impact aggressive fuel management, the thermal in accordance with the statements (NUREG–1437), Supplement corrosion performance specifications for provisions of the St. Lucie, Unit 1, 11, for St. Lucie, Units 1 and 2 may be the nuclear fuel cladding become more renewed license and its Technical purchased from the National Technical demanding. Industry data indicates that Specifications. Renewed Facility Information Service, Springfield, corrosion resistance improves for Operating License No. NPF–16 Virginia 22161–0002 (http:// cladding with a lower tin content. The authorizes operation of St. Lucie, Unit 2, www.ntis.gov), 1–800–553–6847, or the optimum tin level provides a reduced by the licensee at reactor core power Superintendent of Documents, U.S. corrosion rate while maintaining the levels not in excess of 2700 megawatts Government Printing Office, requestor’s benefits of mechanical strengthening thermal in accordance with the Government Printing Office deposit and resistance to accelerated corrosion provisions of the St. Lucie, Unit 2, account number or VISA or MasterCard from abnormal chemistry conditions. In renewed license and its Technical number and expiration date. addition, fuel rod internal pressures Specifications. (resulting from the increased fuel duty, St. Lucie, Units 1 and 2, are Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 2 day of use of integral fuel burnable absorbers October, 2003. pressurized, light water moderated and and corrosion/temperature feedback cooled, nuclear reactors located on For The Nuclear Regulatory Commission. effects) have become more limiting with Hutchinson Island in St. Lucie County, Pao-Tsin Kuo, respect to fuel rod design criteria. By Florida. Program Director, License Renewal and reducing the associated corrosion The applications for the renewed Environmental Impacts Program,Division of buildup, and thus, minimizing licenses complied with the standards Regulatory Improvement Programs, Office of temperature feedback effects, additional and requirements of the Atomic Energy Nuclear Reactor Regulation. margin to fuel rod internal pressure Act of 1954, as amended (the Act), and [FR Doc. 03–25604 Filed 10–8–03; 8:45 am] design criteria is obtained. the Commission’s regulations. As BILLING CODE 7590–01–P As part of a program to address these required by the Act and the issues, the Westinghouse Electric Commission’s regulations in 10 CFR Company has developed an LTA chapter I, the Commission has made NUCLEAR REGULATORY program, in cooperation with the appropriate findings, which are set forth COMMISSION licensee, that includes a fuel cladding in each license. Prior public notice of [Docket No. 50–423] with a tin content lower than the the action involving the proposed currently licensed range for ZIRLO. The issuance of these renewed licenses and Dominion Nuclear Connecticut, Inc., NRC’s regulations in 10 CFR part 50, of an opportunity for a hearing Millstone Power Station, Unit No. 3; section 50.44, section 50.46, and regarding the proposed issuance of these Environmental Assessment and appendix K, make no provision for use renewed licenses was published in the Finding of No Significant Impact of fuel rods clad in a material other than Federal Register on December 27, 2001 Zircalloy or ZIRLO. The licensee has (66 FR 66946). The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory requested the use of up to eight LTAs For further details with respect to this Commission (NRC) is considering with a tin composition that is less than action, see (1) the Florida Power and issuance of exemptions from Title 10 of that specified in the licensing basis for Light Company’s renewal application the Code of Federal Regulations (10 ZIRLO, as defined in Westinghouse for St. Lucie, Units 1 and 2, dated CFR) part 50, section 50.44, section design specifications. Therefore, use of November 29, 2001, as supplemented by 50.46, and appendix K, for Facility the LTAs calls for exemptions from 10 letters dated January 8, June 25, August Operating License No. NPF–49, issued CFR part 50, section 50.44, section 26, September 26 (four letters), October to Dominion Nuclear Connecticut (the 50.46, and appendix k. 3, October 10, November 27, December licensee), for operation of the Millstone 23, 2002, and January 9, February 4, Power Station, Unit No. 3 (MP3), Environmental Impacts of the Proposed March 27 (two letters), March 28, April located in Waterford, Connecticut. Action 25, May 30, June 10, and June 23, 2003; Therefore, pursuant to 10 CFR 51.21, the The NRC staff has completed its (2) the Commission’s safety evaluation NRC is issuing this environmental environmental evaluation of the

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:04 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00064 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\09OCN1.SGM 09OCN1 58364 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Notices

proposed action and concludes that the For further details with respect to the Federal Official, Mr. Howard J. Larson proposed exemptions would not proposed action, see the licensee’s letter (Telephone: 301/415–6805) between increase the probability or consequences dated July 1, 2003. Documents may be 7:30 a.m. and 4:15 p.m. (ET) five days of accidents previously analyzed, and examined, and/or copied for a fee, at the prior to the meeting, if possible, so that would not affect facility radiation levels NRC’s Public Document Room (PDR), appropriate arrangements can be made. or facility radiological effluents. located at One White Flint North, Public Electronic recordings will be permitted The proposed action will not File Area O1 F21, 11555 Rockville Pike only during those portions of the significantly increase the probability or (first floor), Rockville, Maryland. meeting that are open to the public. consequences of accidents, no changes Publicly available records will be Further information regarding this are being made in the types of effluents accessible electronically from the meeting can be obtained by contacting that may be released offsite, and there Agencywide Documents Access and the Designated Federal Official between is no significant increase in Management System (ADAMS) Public 7:30 a.m. and 4:15 p.m. (ET). Persons occupational or public radiation Electronic Reading Room on the internet planning to attend this meeting are exposure. Therefore, there are no at the NRC Web site, http:// urged to contact the above named significant radiological environmental www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. individual at least two working days impacts associated with the proposed Persons who do not have access to prior to the meeting to be advised of any action. ADAMS, or who encounter problems in potential changes in the agenda. With regard to potential accessing the documents located in Dated: October 2, 2003. nonradiological impacts, the proposed ADAMS, should contact the NRC’s PDR Sher Bahadur, action does not involve any historic Reference staff by telephone at 1–800– sites. It does not affect nonradiological Associate Director for Technical Support, 397–4209 or 301–415–4737, or by e-mail ACRS/ACNW. plant effluents and has no other to [email protected]. environmental impact. Therefore, there [FR Doc. 03–25600 Filed 10–8–03; 8:45 am] Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 2nd day BILLING CODE 7590–01–P are no significant nonradiological of October 2003. environmental impacts associated with For The Nuclear Regulatory Commission. the proposed action. NUCLEAR REGULATORY Accordingly, the NRC staff concludes James W. Clifford, COMMISSION that there are no significant Chief, Section 2, Project Directorate I, Division environmental impacts associated with of Licensing Project Management, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation. Advisory Committee on Nuclear the proposed action. [FR Doc. 03–25605 Filed 10–8–03; 8:45 am] Waste; Notice of Meeting Environmental Impacts of the BILLING CODE 7590–01–P The Advisory Committee on Nuclear Alternatives to the Proposed Action Waste (ACNW) will hold its 146th As an alternative to the proposed meeting on October 21–23, 2003, Room action, the staff considered denial of the NUCLEAR REGULATORY T–2B3, 11545 Rockville Pike, Rockville, proposed action (i.e., the ‘‘no-action’’ COMMISSION Maryland. alternative). Denial of the application Advisory Committee on Nuclear Waste The entire meeting will be open to would result in no change in current Meeting on Planning and Procedures, public attendance. The schedule for this meeting is as environmental impacts. The Revised Notice of Meeting environmental impacts of the proposed follows: action and the alternative action are The ACNW will hold a Planning and Tuesday, October 21, 2003 similar. Procedures meeting on October 21, 2003, Room T–2B1, 11545 Rockville 10:30 a.m.–10:40 a.m.: Opening Alternative Use of Resources Pike, Rockville, Maryland. Statement (Open)—The Chairman will The action does not involve the use of The entire meeting will be open to open the meeting with brief opening any different resources than those public attendance, with the exception of remarks, outline the topics to be previously considered in the Final a portion that may be closed pursuant discussed, and indicate items of Environmental Statement for MP3, to 5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(2) and (6) to discuss interest. dated December 1984. organizational and personnel matters 10:40 a.m.–12 Noon.: Summer Intern that relate solely to internal personnel Project (Open)—The ACNW summer Agencies and Persons Consulted rules and practices of ACNW, and intern will provide her final report to On August 22, 2003, the staff information the release of which would the Committee on the project titled, consulted with the Connecticut State constitute a clearly unwarranted ‘‘Assessment Model Uncertainty in official, Mr. Michael Firsick, of the invasion of personal privacy. Performance Assessment.’’ Connecticut Department of The agenda for the subject meeting 1 p.m.–1:30 p.m.: Biosphere Scenarios Environmental Protection, regarding the shall be as follows: and Dose Calculation Working Group environmental impact of the proposed (Open)—The Committee will review the action. The State official had no Tuesday, October 21, 2003—8:30 a.m.– agenda and speakers for the Biosphere comments. 10 a.m. Working Group scheduled for February The Committee will discuss proposed 24–26, 2004 in Rockville, Maryland. Finding of No Significant Impact ACNW activities and related matters. 1:30 p.m.–2 p.m.: Site Visit—Yucca On the basis of the environmental The purpose of this meeting is to gather Mountain, Nevada (Open)—The assessment, the NRC concludes that the information, analyze relevant issues and Committee will finalize its November proposed action will not have a facts, and formulate proposed positions 18, 2003, trip to Yucca Mountain and significant effect on the quality of the and actions, as appropriate, for the Amargosa Valley, and its subsequent human environment. Accordingly, the deliberation by the full Committee. technical discussions in Las Vegas, NV NRC has determined not to prepare an Members of the public desiring to with DOE representatives and environmental impact statement for the provide oral statements and/or written stakeholders during the 147th ACNW proposed action. comments should notify the Designated Meeting, November 19–20, 3004.

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:04 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00065 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\09OCN1.SGM 09OCN1 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Notices 58365

2:15 p.m.–6 p.m.: Committee Retreat 9:30 a.m.–9:45 a.m.: Discussion of Further information regarding topics (Open/Closed)—The Committee will Topics for Meeting with the NRC to be discussed, whether the meeting continue its discussion (from the 145th Commissioners (Open)—The Committee has been canceled or rescheduled, the meeting) on technical topics it intends will discuss topics scheduled for the Chairman’s ruling on requests for the to examine over the next 12 to 18 ACNW Meeting with the NRC opportunity to present oral statements months and ACNW activities and Commissioners at 10 a.m. and the time allotted therefore can be related matters. 10 a.m.–12 Noon: Meeting with the obtained by contacting Mr. Howard J. Note: A portion of this session may be NRC Commissioners (Open)—The Larson. closed pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552b(c) (2) and Committee will meet with the NRC ACNW meeting agenda, meeting (6) to discuss organizational and personnel Commissioners in the Commissioners’ transcripts, and letter reports are matters that relate solely to internal Conference Room, One White Flint available through the NRC Public personnel rules and practices of the ACNW, North to discuss the following: Document Room at [email protected], or by and information the release of which would calling the PDR at 1–800–397–4209, or • Chairman’s Report constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of from the Publicly Available Records • Status and Pathway to Closure on personal privacy. System (PARS) component of NRC’s Key Technical Issues document system (ADAMS) which is Wednesday, October 22, 2003 • High-Level Waste Risk Insights • accessible from the NRC Web site at 8:30 a.m.–8:35 a.m.: Opening Total System Performance http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/ Statement (Open)—The Chairman will Assessment (TSPA/TPA) Working adams.html or http://www.nrc.gov/ make opening remarks regarding the Group • reading-rm/doc-collections/ (ACRS & conduct of today’s sessions. Performance Confirmation Working ACNW Mtg schedules/agendas). 8:35 a.m.–12:15 p.m.: Yucca Group Videoteleconferencing service is Mountain Pre-Closure Safety and Drift 1 p.m.–2:45 p.m.: Preparation of available for observing open sessions of Degradation Issues (Open)—The ACNW Report (Open)—The Committee ACNW meetings. Those wishing to use Committee will hear from will discuss potential reports on Yucca this service for observing ACNW representatives of the NRC staff on these Mountain Pre-Closure Safety and Drift meetings should contact Mr. Theron issues. Presentations will include a Degradation Issues and Updated Staff Brown, ACNW Audiovisual Technician summation of the status of related Performance Code TPA 5.0 (tentative). (301/415–8066), between 7:30 a.m. and agreements, a demonstration of the pre- 2:45 p.m.–3 p.m.: Miscellaneous 3:45 p.m. ET, at least 10 days before the closure safety analysis tool, and the (Open)—The Committee will discuss meeting to ensure the availability of this MECH–FAIL computer code used to matters related to the conduct of service. Individuals or organizations evaluate drift degradation within a Committee activities and matters and requesting this service will be geologic repository. specific issues that were not completed responsible for telephone line charges 1:30 p.m.–3:30 p.m.: Updated Staff during previous meetings, as time and and for providing the equipment and Performance Assessment Code TPA 5.0 availability of information permit. facilities that they use to establish the and Peer Review Comments (Open)— Procedures for the conduct of and video teleconferencing link. The The Committee will hear from participation in ACNW meetings were availability of video teleconferencing representatives of the NRC staff on the published in the Federal Register on services is not guaranteed. updated TPA Code 5.0 and how external October 11, 2002 (67 FR 63459). In Dated: October 3, 2003. peer review comments were accordance with these procedures, oral Andrew L. Bates, incorporated into the code. or written statements may be presented Advisory Committee Management Officer. 3:45 p.m.–4 p.m.: Waste by members of the public. Electronic [FR Doc. 03–25602 Filed 10–8–03; 8:45 am] Management—Related Safety Research recordings will be permitted only Report (Open)—The Committee will during those portions of the meeting BILLING CODE 7590–01–P discuss plans for ACNW review of NRC that are open to the public. Persons waste management-related safety desiring to make oral statements should NUCLEAR REGULATORY research. notify Mr. Howard J. Larson, Special COMMISSION 4 p.m.–6 p.m.: Preparation for Assistant (Telephone 301/415–6805), Meeting with the NRC Commissioners between 7:30 a.m. and 4 p.m. ET, as far Biweekly Notice; Applications and (Open)—The next meeting with the NRC in advance as practicable so that Amendments to Facility Operating Commissioners is scheduled to be held appropriate arrangements can be made Licenses Involving No Significant at 10 a.m. in the Commissioners’ to schedule the necessary time during Hazards Consideration; Correction Conference Room, One White Flint the meeting for such statements. Use of North on October 23, 2003. The still, motion picture, and television AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Committee will review its proposed cameras during this meeting will be Commission. presentations. limited to selected portions of the ACTION: Biweekly notice; correction. meeting as determined by the ACNW Thursday, October 23, 2003 Chairman. Information regarding the SUMMARY: This document corrects a 8:30 a.m.–8:35 a.m.: Opening time to be set aside for taking pictures notice appearing in the Federal Register Statement (Open)—The Chairman will may be obtained by contacting the on September 18, 2003 (68 FR 54747). make opening remarks regarding the ACNW office prior to the meeting. In This action is necessary to correct an conduct of today’s sessions. view of the possibility that the schedule erroneous date. 8:35 a.m.–9:30 a.m.: Update on Waste for ACNW meetings may be adjusted by FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Management Topics (Open)—The the Chairman as necessary to facilitate Michael T. Lesar, Chief, Rules and Committee will receive its semi-annual the conduct of the meeting, persons Directives Branch, Division of update on waste management topics planning to attend should notify Mr. Administrative Services, Office of from the Director, Division of Waste Howard J. Larson as to their particular Administration, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Management, NMSS. needs. Commission, Washington, DC 20555–

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:04 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00066 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\09OCN1.SGM 09OCN1 58366 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Notices

0001, telephone (301) 415–7163, e-mail OIRA after December 31, 2004. TIME: The meeting will be held [email protected]. (However, if the draft proposed rule is commencing at 6:30 p.m. on SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On page subject to the Circular, then the draft Wednesday, October 29, 2003. 54748, in the first column, in the fourth final rule will also be subject to the ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at complete paragraph, in the first line, the Circular, even if it is submitted prior to the Officers’ Club, 50 Moraga Avenue, date ‘‘October 16, 2003’’ should read January 1, 2005.) To the extent Presidio of San Francisco. ‘‘October 20, 2003.’’ practicable, agencies should comply FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: earlier than these effective dates. Karen Cook, General Counsel, the Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 3rd day Agencies may, on a case-by-case basis, of October, 2003. Presidio Trust, 34 Graham Street, P.O. seek a waiver from OMB if these Box 29052, San Francisco, California For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. effective dates are impractical. Michael T. Lesar, 94129–0052, Telephone: (415) 561– A draft of this Circular was developed 5300. Chief, Rules and Directives Branch, Division by OMB and the Council of Economic of Administrative Services, Office of Advisors (CEA). The draft was subject to Dated: October 3, 2003. Administration. public comment, external peer review, Karen A. Cook, [FR Doc. 03–25603 Filed 10–8–03; 8:45 am] and interagency review. General Counsel. BILLING CODE 7590–01–P FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: [FR Doc. 03–25585 Filed 10–8–03; 8:45 am] Keith Belton, Office of Information and BILLING CODE 4310–4R–P Regulatory Affairs, Office of OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND Management and Budget, 725 17th BUDGET Street, NW., New Executive Office Building, Room 10201, Washington, DC RAILROAD RETIREMENT BOARD Circular A–4, Regulatory Analysis 20503 (tel. (202) 395–4815). Agency Forms Submitted for OMB AGENCY: Office of Management and John D. Graham, Review Budget, Executive Office of the Administrator, Office of Information and President. Regulatory Affairs. SUMMARY: In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 ACTION: Notice. [FR Doc. 03–25606 Filed 10–8–03; 8:45 am] U.S.C. Chapter 35), the Railroad SUMMARY: OMB announces the issuance BILLING CODE 3110–01–P Retirement Board (RRB) has submitted of Circular A–4, Regulatory Analysis. the following proposal(s) for the This Circular provides the Office of collection of information to the Office of Management and Budget’s (OMB’s) PRESIDIO TRUST Management and Budget for review and guidance to Federal agencies on the Notice of Public Meeting approval. development of regulatory analysis as Summary of Proposal(s) required under Section 6(a)(3)(c) of AGENCY: The Presidio Trust. Executive Order 12866, ‘‘Regulatory ACTION: Notice of public meeting. (1) Collection title: Vocational Report. Planning and Review,’’ the Regulatory (2) Form(s) submitted: G–251. Right-to-Know Act, and a variety of SUMMARY: In accordance with § 103(c)(6) (3) OMB Number: 3220–0141. related authorities. The Circular also of the Presidio Trust Act, 16 U.S.C. (4) Expiration date of current OMB provides guidance to agencies on the § 460bb note, Title I of Public Law 104– clearance: 11/30/2003. regulatory accounting statements that 333, 110 Stat. 4097, and in accordance (5) Type of request: Extension of a are required under the Regulatory Right- with the Presidio Trust’s bylaws, notice currently approved collection. to-Know Act. The new Circular can be is hereby given that a public meeting of (6) Respondents: Individuals or accessed through the OMB Web site the Presidio Trust Board of Directors households. (http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/ will be held commencing 6:30 p.m. on (7) Estimated annual number of circulars/index.html). Wednesday, October 29, 2003, at the respondents: 6,000. This Circular refines OMB’s ‘‘best Officers’ Club, 50 Moraga Avenue, (8) Total annual responses: 6,000. practices’’ document of 1996 (http:// Presidio of San Francisco, California. (9) Total annual reporting hours: www.whitehouse.gov/omb/inforeg/ The Presidio Trust was created by 3,045. riaguide.html), which was issued as a Congress in 1996 to manage (10) Collection description: Section 2 guidance in 2000 (http:// approximately eighty percent of the the Railroad Retirement Act provides for www.whitehouse.gov/omb/memoranda/ former U.S. Army base known as the the payment of disability annuities to m00–08.pdf), and reaffirmed in 2001 Presidio, in San Francisco, California. qualified employees and widower(s). (http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/ The purposes of this meeting are to: The collection obtains the information memoranda/m01-23.html). It replaces (1) Introduce the new members of the needed to determine their ability to both the 1996 ‘‘best practices’’ and the Board of the Trust; (2) provide the work. 2000 guidance. Executive Director’s general status Additional Information or Comments: The effective date of this Circular is report; (3) hear from the three short- Copies of the forms and supporting January 1, 2004 for regulatory analyses listed teams responding to a Request for documents can be obtained from Chuck received by OMB in support of Proposals for the rehabilitation and Mierzwa, the agency clearance officer proposed rules, and January 1, 2005 for reuse of the Public Health Service (312–751–3363). regulatory analyses received by OMB in Hospital (PHSH) complex; (4) receive Comments regarding the information support of final rules. In other words, oral scoping comments under the collection should be addressed to this Circular applies to the regulatory National Environmental Policy Act on Ronald J. Hodapp, Railroad Retirement analyses for draft proposed rules that the Trust’s proposed environmental Board, 844 North Rush Street, Chicago, are formally submitted to OIRA after review for the PHSH project; and (5) Illinois 60611–2092, and to the OMB December 31, 2003, and for draft final receive public comment in accordance Desk Officer for the RRB, at the Office rules that are formally submitted to with the Trust’s Public Outreach Policy. of Management and Budget, Room

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:04 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00067 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\09OCN1.SGM 09OCN1 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Notices 58367

10230, New Executive Office Building, transactions involving the issuance and Gulf currently is authorized to issue Washington, DC 20503. sale of an aggregate of $150,000,000 of Preferred Securities in an aggregate preferred securities, from time to time, amount of up to $30,000,000 through Chuck Mierzwa, through December 31, 2006. December 31, 2005, pursuant to Clearance Officer. In connection with the issuance of the Commission orders dated January 16, [FR Doc. 03–25567 Filed 10–8–03; 8:45 am] preferred securities, Gulf proposes to 1998 and June 8, 2001 (HCAR No. 26817 BILLING CODE 7905–01–M organize one or more separate and HCAR No. 27417, respectively). subsidiaries as a business trust under Gulf proposes that this Application’s the laws of the State of Florida or a authorization of $150,000,000 supersede SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE statutory trust under the laws of the and replace the amounts remaining in COMMISSION State of Delaware or another comparable these previous authorizations. [Release No. 35–27733] trust in any jurisdiction, or any other Gulf states that it will acquire all of entity or structure, foreign or domestic, the common stock of any Trust for an Filings Under the Public Utility Holding that is considered advantageous by Gulf amount not less than the minimum Company Act of 1935, as Amended (individually a ‘‘Trust’’ and collectively required by any applicable law and not (‘‘Act’’) the ‘‘Trusts’’).1 Gulf proposes that the exceeding 21% of the total equity Trusts will issue and sell from time to capitalization from time to time of the October 3, 2003. time preferred securities, as described in Trust (i.e., the aggregate of the equity Notice is hereby given that the this Application (the ‘‘Preferred accounts of such Trust).3 The aggregate following filing(s) has/have been made Securities’’), with a specified par or of such investment by Gulf hereafter is with the Commission pursuant to stated value or liquidation amount or referred to as the ‘‘Equity Contribution.’’ provisions of the Act and rules preference per security. Gulf requests Gulf may issue and sell to any Trust, at promulgated under the Act. All the Commission to reserve jurisdiction any time or from time to time in one or interested persons are referred to the over the use of a foreign entity as a more series, subordinated debentures, application(s) and/or declaration(s) for Trust. promissory notes or other debt complete statements of the proposed Gulf has a total amount of instruments (individually a ‘‘Note’’ and transaction(s) summarized below. The $115,000,000 of Preferred Securities collectively the ‘‘Notes’’) governed by an application(s) and/or declaration(s) and issued and outstanding through Trusts, indenture or other document. The Trust any amendment(s) is/are available for as of June 30, 2003. The outstanding will apply both the Equity Contribution public inspection through the Preferred Securities were issued through made to it and the proceeds from the Commission’s Branch of Public Trusts rather than directly by Gulf as sale of Preferred Securities by it, from Reference. subordinated debt because certain rating time to time, to purchase Notes. Interested persons wishing to agencies recognize preferred securities Alternatively, Gulf may enter into a loan comment or request a hearing on the of this kind, issued through trusts, as agreement or agreements with any Trust application(s) and/or declaration(s) having some equity content, rather than under which the Trust will lend Gulf should submit their views in writing by directly issued subordinated debt, (individually a ‘‘Loan’’ and collectively October 27, 2003, to the Secretary, which has no equity content. Gulf states the ‘‘Loans’’) both the Equity Securities and Exchange Commission, that transactions of the Trusts are Contribution to the Trust and the Washington, DC 20549–0609, and serve reported by Gulf on its financial proceeds from the sale of the Preferred a copy on the relevant applicant(s) and/ statements and asserts that it is Securities by the Trust, from time to or declarant(s) at the address(es) desirable for Gulf to continue to specified below. Proof of service (by maintain a degree of similarity in its (‘‘FASB’’) Statement No. 150 ‘‘Accounting for affidavit or, in the case of an attorney at financial statements by issuing Preferred Certain Financial Instruments with the law, by certificate) should be filed with Securities through the Trusts rather than Characteristics of both Liabilities and Equity.’’ In May 2003, FASB issued Statement 150, which the request. Any request for hearing 2 directly issuing subordinated debt. requires reclassification of certain financial should identify specifically the issues of instruments within its scope, including shares that facts or law that are disputed. A person 1 Applicants state that the ability to use trusts in are mandatorily redeemable as liabilities, and who so requests will be notified of any financing transactions can sometimes offer Statement No. 150 is currently effective. Gulf states hearing, if ordered, and will receive a increased state and/or federal tax efficiency. that the reclassification as a result of Increased tax efficiency can result if a trust is implementation of Statement No. 150 did not have copy of any notice or order issued in the located in a state or country that has tax laws that a material effect on its Statements of Income and matter. After October 27, 2003, the make the proposed financing transaction more tax Cash Flows. application(s) and/or declaration(s), as efficient relative to the company’s existing taxing 3 The constituent instruments of each Trust, filed or as amended, may be granted jurisdiction. Decreasing tax exposure, however, is including its Trust Agreement, will provide, among usually not the primary goal when establishing a other things, that the Trust’s activities will be and/or permitted to become effective. trust. Use of a trust can provide potentially limited to the issuance and sale of Preferred Gulf Power Company (70–10154) significant benefits to a company, even without a Securities, from time to time, and the lending to net improvement in its tax position. Trusts can Gulf of (i) the resulting proceeds, (ii) the Equity Gulf Power Company (‘‘Gulf’’), One increase a company’s ability to access new sources Contribution to the Trust, and (iii) certain other Energy Place, Pensacola, Florida 32520, of capital by enabling it to undertake financing related activities. Consequently, Gulf proposes that transactions with features and terms attractive to a a Trust’s constituent instruments will not include a wholly owned electric utility wider investor base. Trusts can be established in any interest or dividend coverage nor will a Trust subsidiary of The Southern Company jurisdictions or on terms favorable to the sponsoring have capitalization ratio restrictions on its ability to (‘‘Southern’’), 270 Peachtree Street, company and, at the same time, give targeted issue and sell Preferred Securities. Because each NW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303, a investors attractive incentives to invest and so issuance will be supported by a Note and Guaranty, provide financing. Many of these investors would capitalization ratio restrictions would not be registered holding company, has filed not be participants in the company’s bank group relevant or necessary to enable a Trust to maintain an application-declaration and, typically, would not hold company bonds or an appropriate capital structure. Furthermore, each (‘‘Application’’) under sections 6(a), 7, commercial paper. Consequently, they represent Trust’s constituent instruments will state that its 9(a), 10 and 12 (b) of the Act and rules potential new sources of capital. common stock is not transferable (except to certain 2 Gulf notes that it reclassified $115,000,000 of permitted successors), that its business and affairs 45, 52 and 54. Gulf proposes to organize outstanding mandatorily redeemable Preferred will be managed and controlled by Gulf (or one or more subsidiaries for the purpose Securities as liabilities, effective July 1, 2003, permitted successor), and that Gulf (or permitted of effecting various financing pursuant to Financial Accounting Standards Board successor) will pay all expenses of the Trust.

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:04 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00068 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\09OCN1.SGM 09OCN1 58368 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Notices

time. Gulf will issue Notes, evidencing Each Trust will have the parallel right of Southern that are rated are rate such borrowings, to the Trust. to defer dividend payments or investment grade. For purposes of this Gulf also proposes to guarantee distributions on the related series of provision, a security will be deemed to (individually a ‘‘Guaranty’’ and Preferred Securities for five or more be rated ‘‘investment grade’’ if it is rated collectively the ‘‘Guaranties’’) (i) years, provided that, if dividends or investment grade by at least one payment of dividends or distributions distributions on the Preferred Securities nationally recognized statistical rating on the Preferred Securities of any Trust of any series are not paid for eighteen organization, as that term is used in if, and to the extent, the Trust has funds (18) or more consecutive months, then paragraphs (c)(2)(vi)(E), (F) and (H) of legally available, (ii) payments to the the holders of the Preferred Securities of rule 15c3–1 under the Securities Preferred Securities holders of amounts such series may have the right to Exchange Act of 1934, as amended. Gulf due upon liquidation of the Trust or appoint a trustee, special general requests that it, nevertheless, be redemption of the Preferred Securities partner or other special representative to permitted to issue a security that does of such Trust and (iii) certain additional enforce the Trust’s rights under the not satisfy these conditions if the amounts that may be payable by the related Note and Guaranty. The requirements of rule 52(a)(i) and rule Preferred Securities. Gulf’s credit would dividend or distribution rates, payment 52(a)(iii) are met and the issue and sale support any Guaranty. dates, redemption and other similar of the security have been expressly Gulf states that each Note will have a provisions of each series of Preferred authorized by the Florida Public Service term of up to fifty (50) years. Prior to Securities will be substantially identical Commission.5 Gulf also requests the maturity, Gulf will pay interest only on to the interest rates, payment dates, Commission to reserve jurisdiction over the Notes at a rate equal to the dividend redemption and other provisions of the any guaranties or securities that do not or distribution rate on the related series Notes issued. satisfy these conditions. of Preferred Securities, which dividend Gulf states that the Notes and related For the Commission, by the Division of or distribution rate may be either fixed Guaranties will be subordinate to all Investment Management, pursuant to or adjustable, to be determined on a other existing and future delegated authority. periodic basis by auction or remarketing unsubordinated indebtedness for Margaret H. McFarland, procedures, in accordance with a borrowed money of Gulf and will have Deputy Secretary. no cross-default provisions with respect formula or formulae based upon certain [FR Doc. 03–25568 Filed 10–8–03; 8:45 am] to other indebtedness of Gulf (i.e., a reference rates, or by other BILLING CODE 8010–01–P predetermined methods.4 default under any other outstanding The interest payments will constitute indebtedness of Gulf would not result in each respective Trust’s only income and a default under any Note or Guaranty). SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE will be used by it to pay dividends or However, Gulf may be prohibited from COMMISSION distributions on its Preferred Securities declaring and paying dividends on its outstanding capital stock and making [Release No. 34–48584; File No. SR–CSE– and dividends or distributions on its 2003–13] common stock. Dividend payments or payments in respect of pari passu debt unless all payments then due under the distributions on the Preferred Securities Self-Regulatory Organizations; Notice Notes and Guaranties (without giving will be made on a monthly or other of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness effect to the deferral rights discussed periodic basis and must be made to the of Proposed Rule Change by the above) have been made. extent that the Trust issuing the Cincinnati Stock Exchange, Inc., To The distribution rate to be borne by Preferred Securities has legally available Extend Its Liquidity Provider Fee and the Preferred Securities and the interest funds and cash sufficient for such Rebate Pilot Program purposes. However, Gulf may have the rate on the Notes will not exceed the right to defer payment of interest on any greater of (i) 300 basis points over U.S. October 2, 2003. issue of Notes for five or more years. Treasury securities having comparable Pursuant to section 19(b)(1) of the maturities or (ii) a gross spread over Securities Exchange Act of 1934 1 2 4 The Preferred Securities of any series may be U.S. Treasury securities that is (‘‘Act’’), and Rule 19b–4 thereunder, redeemable at the option of the Trust issuing the consistent with similar securities issued notice is hereby given that on series (with the consent or at the direction of Gulf) by other companies having comparable September 29, 2003, the Cincinnati at a price equal to their par or stated value or maturities and credit quality. Stock Exchange, Inc. (‘‘CSE’’ or liquidation amount or preference, plus any accrued Gulf will use the proceeds from the and unpaid dividends or distributions, (i) at any ‘‘Exchange’’) filed with the Securities time after a specified date not later than sale of the securities in connection with and Exchange Commission approximately ten (10) years from their date of its ongoing construction program, to pay (‘‘Commission’’) the proposed rule issuance, or (ii) upon the occurrence of certain scheduled maturities and/or refundings change as described in Items I and II events, among them that (a) the Trust is required of its securities, to repay short-term to withhold or deduct certain amounts in below, which Items have been prepared connection with dividend, distribution or other indebtedness to the extent outstanding by the Exchange. The Exchange has payments or is subject to federal income tax with and for other general corporate filed this proposal pursuant to section respect to interest received on the Notes issued to purposes. 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act 3 and Rule 19b– the Trust, or (b) it is determined that the interest Gulf represents that it will maintain 4 payments by Gulf on the related Notes are not 4(f)(6) thereunder, which renders the deductible for income tax purposes, or (c) the Trust its common equity as a percentage of proposal effective upon filing with the becomes subject to regulation as an ‘‘investment capitalization (inclusive of short-term Commission.5 The Commission is company’’ under the Investment Company Act of debt) at no less than thirty (30) percent. 1940, as amended. The Preferred Securities of any Gulf further represents that no 5 Gulf is a Maine corporation doing business in series may also be subject to mandatory redemption the State of Florida and does not do business in the upon the occurrence of certain events. Gulf also guaranties or other securities may be issued in reliance upon the requested State of Maine. may have the right in certain cases, or in its 1 discretion, to exchange the Preferred Securities of authorization, unless (i) the security to 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). 2 any Trust for the Notes or other junior subordinated be issued, if rated, is rated investment 17 CFR 240.19b–4. debt issued to the Trust. In addition, rather than 3 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A). issuing Preferred Securities of a Trust, Gulf may grade; (ii) all outstanding securities of 4 17 CFR 240.19b–4(f)(6). instead issue Notes or other junior subordinated Gulf that are rated are rated investment 5 The CSE asked the Commission to waive the 5- debt directly to purchasers. grade; and (iii) all outstanding securities day pre-filing notice requirement and the 30-day

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:04 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00069 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\09OCN1.SGM 09OCN1 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Notices 58369

publishing this notice to solicit passes on to the liquidity provider, i.e., interest, for the protection of investors, comments on the proposed rule change the party providing the displayed quote/ or otherwise in furtherance of the from interested persons. order, $0.003 per share with the purposes of the Act. Exchange retaining $0.001 per share. The Exchange has requested that the I. Self-Regulatory Organization’s With this rule filing, CSE is extending Commission waive the 5-day pre-filing Statement of the Terms of Substance of the Program through December 31, notice requirement and the 30-day the Proposed Rule Change 2003. operative delay. The Commission The Exchange proposes to extend its believes that such waivers are consistent pilot program for the Liquidity Provider 2. Statutory Basis with the protection of investors and the Fee and Rebate (‘‘Program’’) through The Exchange believes the proposed public interest, for they will allow the December 31, 2003. The pilot was rule change is consistent with section pilot to continue without interruption. originally proposed in SR–CSE–2002– 6(b) of the Act 10 in general, and furthers For these reasons, the Commission 16,6 and is set to expire on September the objectives of section 6(b)(5) 11 in designates the proposal to be effective 30, 2003.7 The CSE proposes no particular, in that it is designed to and operative upon filing with the substantive changes to the Program, promote just and equitable principles of Commission.15 other than extending its operation trade and to remove impediments to and IV. Solicitation of Comments through December 31, 2003. The text of perfect the mechanism of a free and the proposed rule change is available at open market and a national market Interested persons are invited to the CSE and at the Commission. system and, generally, in that it protects submit written data, views and investors and the public interest. The arguments concerning the foregoing, II. Self-Regulatory Organization’s CSE believes that the proposed rule including whether the proposed rule Statement of the Purpose of, and change is also consistent with section change is consistent with the Act. Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule 6(b)(4) of the Act,12 in that it is designed Persons making written submissions Change to provide for the equitable allocation of should file six copies thereof with the In its filing with the Commission, the reasonable dues, fees, and other charges Secretary, Securities and Exchange Exchange included statements among CSE members by crediting Commission, 450 Fifth Street, NW, concerning the purpose of and basis for members on a pro rata basis. Washington, DC 20549–0609. Copies of the proposed rule change and discussed the submission, all subsequent B. Self-Regulatory Organization’s any comments it received on the amendments, all written statements Statement on Burden on Competition proposed rule change. The text of these with respect to the proposed rule statements may be examined at the The CSE does not believe that the change that are filed with the places specified in Item IV below. The proposed rule change will impose any Commission, and all written Exchange has prepared summaries, set inappropriate burden on competition. communications relating to the forth in sections A, B, and C below, of C. Self-Regulatory Organization’s proposed rule change between the the most significant aspects of such Statement on Comments on the Commission and any person, other than statements. Proposed Rule Change Received From those that may be withheld from the Members, Participants orOthers public in accordance with the A. Self-Regulatory Organization’s provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be Statement of the Purpose of, and No written comments were solicited available for inspection and copying in Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule or received in connection with the the Commission’s Public Reference Change proposed rule change. Room. Copies of such filing will also be 1. Purpose III. Date of Effectiveness of the available for inspection and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All On October 22, 2002, CSE filed SR– Proposed Rule Change and Timing for submissions should refer to file number CSE–2002–16,8 which proposed to Commission Action SR–CSE–2003–13 and should be establish a pilot transaction credit for Because the foregoing proposed rule submitted by October 30, 2003. liquidity providers that is paid by change does not: For the Commission by the Division liquidity takers on each intra-CSE of Market Regulation, pursuant to 9 execution in Nasdaq securities. Under (i) Significantly affect the protection delegated authority.16 the pilot, the Exchange amended CSE of investors or the public interest; Rule 11.10A(g)(1) by adding (ii) Impose any significant burden on Margaret H. McFarland, subparagraph (B) to charge the liquidity competition; and Deputy Secretary. taker, i.e., the party executing against a (iii) Become operative for 30 days [FR Doc. 03–25569 Filed 10–8–03; 8:45 am] previously displayed quote/order, from the date on which it was filed, or BILLING CODE 8010–01–P $0.004 per share. The Exchange then such shorter time as the Commission may designate, it has become effective operative delay. See Rule 19b–4(f)(6)(iii). 17 CFR pursuant to section 19(b)(3)(A) of the DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS 13 14 240.19b–4(f)(6)(iii). Act and Rule 19b–4(f)(6) AFFAIRS 6 Securities Exchange Act Release No. 46848 thereunder. At any time within 60 days (November 19, 2002), 67 FR 70793 (November 26, of the filing of the proposed rule change, 2002) (’’Original Pilot’’). Advisory Committee on Cemeteries 7 The pilot, which was originally set to expire on the Commission may summarily and Memorials; Notice of Meeting March 31, 2003, was subsequently extended until abrogate such rule change if it appears September 30, 2003. Securities Exchange Act to the Commission that such action is The Department of Veterans Affairs Release No. 47596 (March 28, 2003), 68 FR 16594 necessary or appropriate in the public (VA) gives notice under Public Law 92– (April 4, 2003) (SR–CSE–2003–03). 8 See Original Pilot, supra note 6. 15 For purposes only of accelerating the operative 10 15 U.S.C. 78f(b). 9 An ‘‘intra-CSE execution’’ is any transaction that date of the proposed rule change, the Commission 11 is executed on the Exchange for which the 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5). has considered the proposed rule’s impact on executing member on the buy-side of the 12 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4). efficiency, competition, and capital formation. 15 transaction differs from the executing member on 13 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A). U.S.C. 78c(f). the sell-side of the transaction. 14 17 CFR 240.19b–4(f)(6). 16 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12).

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:04 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00070 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\09OCN1.SGM 09OCN1 58370 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Notices

463 (Federal Advisory Committee Act) Cynthia Riddle, Designated Federal recommendations to the Secretary of that a meeting of the Advisory Officer, at (202) 273–5223. The Veterans Affairs on proposed research Committee on Cemeteries and Committee will accept written studies, research plans and research Memorials will be held November 5–6, comments; however, the writers must strategies relating to the health 2003, at the Department of Veterans identify themselves and state the consequences of military service in the Affairs Central Office, 810 Vermont Ave, organizations, associations, or person(s) Southwest Asia theater of operations NW., Washington, DC. The meeting will they represent. Comments can be during the Persian Gulf War. be held in Room 930, beginning at 8 transmitted electronically to the On October 27, the Committee will a.m. and concluding at 4:30 p.m. on Committee at hear research presentations on birth both days. The meeting is open to the [email protected] or mailed to defects and family health and public. National Cemetery Administration (40), The purpose of the Committee is to identifying possible molecular targets of 810 Vermont Avenue, NW., neurotoxic exposures in Gulf War advise the Secretary of Veterans Affairs Washington, DC 20420. on the administration of national illnesses. The Committee will also Dated: October 2, 2003. cemeteries and soldiers’ lots and plots receive an update on VA-sponsored Gulf and on the selection of new national By Direction of the Secretary. War research activities. On October 28, cemetery sites, the erection of E. Philip Riggin, the committee will receive an update on appropriate memorials, and the Committee Management Officer. published research. The committee will adequacy of Federal burial benefits. The [FR Doc. 03–25596 Filed 10–8–03; 8:45 am] hear presentations on the following topics: possible role of vaccines in Gulf Committee will make recommendations BILLING CODE 8320–01–M to the Secretary regarding these War veterans’ illnesses, monitoring activities. health outcomes in Gulf War veterans at On November 5, the Committee will DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS VA and overview of federal research receive updates on the National AFFAIRS funding for Gulf War illnesses and Cemetery Administration’s National chemical defense. Time will be Shrine Commitment, organizational Research Advisory Committee On Gulf available for public comment on both assessment, and other issues related to War Illnesses; Notice of Meeting days. the administration and maintenance of Members of the public may submit national cemeteries. The Committee will The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) gives notice under Public Law 92– written statements for the Committee’s travel to Alexandria National Cemetery review to Ms. Laura O’Shea, Designated for talks related to the National Shrine 463 (Federal Advisory Committee Act) that the Research Advisory Committee Federal Officer, Department of Veterans Commitment. Affairs (008A1), 810 Vermont Avenue, On November 6, the Committee will on Gulf War Veterans’ Illnesses will NW., Washington, DC 20420. Any receive an update on the construction of meet on October 27–28, 2003 at the member of the public seeking additional new national cemeteries and meeting Department of Veterans Affairs, 810 information should contact Ms. Laura veterans’ burial needs. The meeting will Vermont Avenue, NW., Room 630, O’Shea at (202) 273–5031. conclude with any unfinished business Washington, DC. The meeting on and recommendations for future October 27 will convene at 8:30 a.m. Dated: October 1, 2003. programs, meeting sites, and agenda and adjourn at 5 p.m. The meeting on By Direction of the Secretary. topics. October 28 will convene at 8:30 a.m. No time will be allocated for receiving and adjourn at 3:30 p.m. Both meetings E. Philip Riggin, oral presentations from the public. Any will be open to the public. Committee Management Officer. member of the public wishing to attend The purpose of the Committee is to [FR Doc. 03–25595 Filed 10–8–03; 8:45 am] the meeting is requested to contact Ms. provide advice and make BILLING CODE 8320–01–M

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:32 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00071 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\09OCN1.SGM 09OCN1 58371

Corrections Federal Register Vol. 68, No. 196

Thursday, October 9, 2003

This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND September 22, 2003, make the following contains editorial corrections of previously SECURITY correction: published Presidential, Rule, Proposed Rule, and Notice documents. These corrections are Bureau of Customs and Border §12.104g [Corrected] prepared by the Office of the Federal Protection On page 55004, in §12.104g(a), in the Register. Agency prepared corrections are table, under the heading ‘‘T.D. No.’’, issued as signed documents and appear in ‘‘CBP Dec. 03–BC28’’ should read ‘‘CBP the appropriate document categories 19 CFR Part 12 Dec. 03–28’’. elsewhere in the issue. [CBP Decision 03–28] [FR Doc. C3–24085 Filed 10–8–03; 8:45 am] RIN 1515-AD34 BILLING CODE 1505–01–D Import Restrictions Imposed on Archaeological Materials From Cambodia Correction In rule document 03–24085 beginning on page 55000 in the issue of Monday,

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:17 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4734 Sfmt 4734 E:\FR\FM\09OCCX.SGM 09OCCX Thursday, October 9, 2003

Part II

Department of Labor Office of Labor-Management Standards

29 CFR Parts 403 and 408 Labor Organization Annual Financial Reports; Final Rule

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:10 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4717 Sfmt 4717 E:\FR\FM\09OCR2.SGM 09OCR2 58374 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR organizations to report investments that workforce and labor organizations have have a book value of over $5,000 and changed dramatically over the last forty Office of Labor-Management exceed 5% or more of the union’s years and the fact that the form used by Standards investments. A new schedule will labor organizations to report financial require labor organizations to report the information has not changed 29 CFR Parts 403 and 408 number of members by category, but significantly in the same time period. RIN 1215–AB34 will allow each labor organization to The proposed revisions also reflected define the categories used for reporting. the Department’s belief, based on the Labor Organization Annual Financial Reporting labor organizations must accumulated experience of investigators Reports estimate the proportion of each officer’s and other staff in the Employment and employee’s time spent in each of Standards Administration’s (ESA’s) AGENCY: Office of Labor-Management the functional categories on the Form OLMS, that more detailed and Standards, Employment Standards LM–2 and report that percentage of transparent reporting of labor Administration, Department of Labor. gross salary in the relevant schedule. organizations’ financial information ACTION: Final rule. Labor organizations that have would be more useful to union members, more effectively deter fraud, SUMMARY: The Department proposed to $250,000 or more in annual receipts will and enable OLMS investigators to more revise the forms used by labor be required to file a Form T–1 for any easily discover fraud when it occurs. organizations to file the annual financial trust in which the labor organization is Finally, the proposal noted the report required by the Labor- interested, if the trust has $250,000 or Department’s view that, because of Management Reporting and Disclosure more in annual receipts and the labor technological advances, these revisions Act (LMRDA). This document sets forth organization contributed $10,000 or will impose less burden on labor the Department’s review of and more to the trust during the reporting organizations than revisions proposed response to comments on the proposal year, or that amount was contributed on in previous years. and the changes that will be made to the the labor organization’s behalf. Unions Before issuing this proposal, various Form LM–2 used by the largest labor with less than $250,000 in annual Department officials met with many organizations to file the required report. receipts will not be subject to this representatives of the regulated The Department will require each labor requirement. No Form T–1 will be community, including union officials organization that has annual receipts of required if the trust files a report pursuant to 26 U.S.C. 527, or pursuant and their legal counsel, to hear their $250,000 or more to file a Form LM–2 views on the need for reform and the electronically and to itemize receipts to the requirements of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974, likely impact of changes that might be and disbursements of $5,000 or more, as made. The Department’s proposal, well as receipts not reported elsewhere 29 U.S.C. 1023 (ERISA), or if the organization files publicly available developed with these discussions in from, or disbursements to, a single mind, requested comments on entity that total $5,000 or more in the reports with a Federal or state agency as a Political Action Committee (PAC). numerous specific issues in order to reporting year, in specified categories. base any revisions on a complete record The Department has combined two Finally, a labor organization may substitute an audit that meets the reflecting the views of the parties proposed categories (‘‘Contract affected and the Department’s Negotiation and Administration’’ and criteria set forth in the Instructions for the financial information otherwise responses. In addition, the Department ‘‘Organizing’’) into a single schedule contracted with a professional provider entitled ‘‘Representational Activities,’’ reported on a Form T–1 for a qualifying trust. of information technology services, SRA added a category entitled ‘‘Union International (SRA), to assess the EFFECTIVE DATE: Administration,’’ combined the This rule will be technical feasibility of electronically proposed categories for ‘‘Political effective on January 1, 2004, but will collecting and reporting the information Activities’’ and ‘‘Lobbying’’ into a single apply only to annual financial reports that would be required by the proposed schedule, and eliminated the category filed by unions for fiscal years changes. The Department initially entitled ‘‘Other Disbursements.’’ beginning on or after January 1, 2004. provided for a 60-day comment period, Reporting labor organizations will be FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lary but later extended that period for an permitted, however, to report sensitive Yud, Deputy Director, Office of Labor- additional 30 days. information for some categories that Management Standards (OLMS), U.S. When the comment period closed, on might harm legitimate union or privacy Department of Labor, 200 Constitution March 27, 2003, ESA/OLMS had interests with other non-itemized Avenue NW, Room N–5605, received over 35,000 comments. Most of receipts and disbursements, provided Washington, D.C., [email protected], the comments received were copies of the labor organization indicates that it (202) 693–1265 (this is not a toll-free approximately 110 different form letters has done so. Using this procedure, number). Individuals with hearing signed by individuals who said they however, will constitute just cause for impairments may call 1–800–877–8339 were members or officers of unions and any union member to review the (TTY/TDD). commented in general terms. Although underlying data upon request. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: many of these form letters expressed Moreover, under the statute (29 U.S.C. opposition to the Department’s proposal 436), the labor organization must I. Background to revise the forms, many other form maintain the records for inspection by On December 27, 2002, the letters expressed support for the the Department. The new Form LM–2 Department issued a notice of proposed proposal. In addition, approximately will have schedules for reporting rulemaking (67 FR 79820) proposing 1,200 unique comments, including information regarding delinquent revisions of the forms used by labor lengthy, substantive and specific accounts payable and receivable, but organizations to file the annual financial comments, were received from union specific information need only be reports required by section 201(b) of the members, local, intermediate, national reported for accounts that total $5,000 LMRDA, 29 U.S.C. 431(b). As the notice and international labor organizations, or more during the reporting year. The explained, the proposed revisions were employers and trade organizations, revised Form LM–2 will require labor based upon the fact that the American public interest groups, accountants,

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:10 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\09OCR2.SGM 09OCR2 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations 58375

accounting firms, academicians, and subtotals of itemized and aggregated recordkeeping systems. A sentence was Members of Congress. Some amounts for some categories or the need also added to indicate that information commenters addressed their comments to add amounts from other parts of the about the software and the technical to specific limited issues, others—most form. Several titles of categories were specifications can be found at the OLMS notably, the American Federation of revised to better reflect the information Web site. Labor and Congress of Industrial to be reported. Thus, the title of Item 36, Organizations (AFL–CIO)—commented ‘‘Dues and Other Payments,’’ has been II. Comments on the Proposal and on virtually all aspects of the proposal. changed to ‘‘Dues and Agency Fees,’’ Responses to the Comments All comments have been carefully the title of Schedule 1 was changed to A. General Comments reviewed and considered. The ‘‘Accounts Receivable Aging Schedule,’’ Department’s analysis of and responses and the title of Schedule 8 was changed Before discussing the many specific to the comments are set forth below (see to ‘‘Accounts Payable Aging Schedule.’’ comments that the Department received, Sections II, III, and IV). In Schedule 9, ‘‘Loans Payable,’’ the it should be noted that the Department In addition, this rule makes minor Instructions were revised to state that also received many comments that changes to the forms and the interest paid must be reported in simply expressed general support for, or Instructions that did not directly result Schedule 18, ‘‘General Overhead,’’ in opposition to, the proposal. Union from any comments. Many of these place of the reference to the now members, employers, and public changes reflect the differences between obsolete ‘‘Other Disbursements interest organizations filed numerous the proposed and final rule, requiring Schedule.’’ general comments in support of the the addition of lines to the forms, the re- The text of the Instructions pertaining Department’s proposed reform. One labeling of others, and the combination to some schedules and categories was union member asked, ‘‘Government is of schedules. Many of the minor revised where greater clarity was accountable to taxpayers and changes to the Instructions also reflect needed. Additional examples were corporations are accountable to these differences. These differences are included to assist filers in completing shareholders, shouldn’t unions be discussed in detail below in the certain categories. For example, in accountable to dues-paying members?’’ Department’s analysis of the comments. Section X, a building corporation was The commenters included a former vice Many of the changes in the Instructions, added as an example of types of trusts, president of a local union who however, simply correspond to changes and new examples for ‘‘Other Receipts’’ expressed ‘‘full support of the proposed in the format of the form and the need were provided to better reflect the anti-corruption initiative’’ and wrote, to rework the Instructions so that they transactions to be reported on the ‘‘We should all know how the money is inform the filers and the public, schedule. Additional explanation for the being spent at every level.’’ Other union whether they rely on the electronic or ‘‘Detailed Summary Page’’ and the members suggested that the proposal paper formats, about how to complete ‘‘Initial Itemization Page’’ was added. was ‘‘long overdue.’’ and use the forms. In analyzing the The ‘‘Continuation Itemization Page’’ Some union members advocated more comments and preparing the final rule, was created for labor organizations that sweeping change. One union member some inadvertent omissions were utilize the hardship exemption and do commented, ‘‘We need protection from discovered, as were some ambiguities in not file electronically. Some terms that our supposed labor leaders.’’ Another the text of the Instructions, requiring the might be unfamiliar to filers were commented, ‘‘Just please be sure the redrafting of some of the Instructions explained, including terms such as unions cannot get around these and, in some instances, changes to the ‘‘net,’’ ‘‘basis,’’ and ‘‘book value.’’ In [proposed] requirements through form. In reviewing the schedules for Items 39 and 60, the following were creative accounting tricks.’’ A reporting disbursements to officers and added to illustrate items to be reported commenter who described himself as employees, it became apparent that a as supplies: union logo clothing, lapel having been a union member for 33 filer would benefit from seeing the pins, and bumper stickers. years, wrote, ‘‘I do not believe that these Additional information about names of the schedules from which new regulations go far enough to hold information was to be obtained, and compliance assistance also was added. unions more accountable.’’ therefore line I in each schedule was In the ‘‘How to File’’ section, filers are revised to include the names of the five provided a website address for obtaining Some comments from union members schedules. the filing software www.olms.dol.gov; centered on their difficulties in The Department’s review revealed the reference in the proposed obtaining financial information from some inadvertent omissions from the instructions to a CD–ROM their union under the current reporting proposed Form LM–2. For example, in accompanying the report package was scheme. A shop steward said that Schedule 12, lines 7 and 8 were deleted as obsolete. Updated repeated requests for information to the omitted. The final form includes these information is provided in the ‘‘If You union leadership had ‘‘gone lines. Line 7 will provide space for Need Assistance’’ section at the end of unanswered’’ and that he ‘‘feel[s] it is ‘‘totals from continuation pages (if the instructions. In Item 18, ‘‘Changes in time that unions be required to account any),’’ and line 8 will be used to report Constitution and Bylaws or Practices for every penny of the dues they the ‘‘total of lines 1–7.’’ In Item 30, and Procedures,’’ the language was collect.’’ Numerous other commenters ‘‘Schedule 8’’ was omitted from the revised to indicate that if the form is joined in describing futile, or largely ‘‘Form Schedule Number’’ column. This filed electronically, the constitution and futile, attempts made to obtain omission has been corrected. The bylaws must be submitted as an information about union finances from language of the attestation has been electronic attachment. In the second the union leadership. Some commenters changed slightly to ensure that it paragraph of the general instructions for indicated that such requests for complies substantially with 28 U.S.C. completing Schedules 14 through 22, information generate resentment or 1746. the statement relating to the invite retaliation from union leaders. In several other places, additional compatibility of the Department’s Another union member wrote, ‘‘You lines were added in order to reflect software was revised to reflect that the shouldn’t have to beg or plead with your changes in the Instructions, including software will be compatible with the Business Manager/Agent to see financial the need for additional lines to reflect most commonly used electronic reports for an organization you finance.’’

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:10 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\09OCR2.SGM 09OCR2 58376 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations

Other commenters claimed to have made for and against the proposed The Secretary shall have authority to issue, witnessed questionable union revision of the forms used by labor amend and rescind rules and regulations expenditures, which increased organizations to report annual financial prescribing the form and publication of disclosure would have revealed. information as required by the LMRDA. reports required to be filed under this title Another comment asserted, ‘‘Significant and such other reasonable rules and B. The Secretary’s Statutory Authority regulations (including rules prescribing money is spent on items which many reports concerning trusts in which a labor would consider a waste of funds if only Some of the commenters questioned organization is interested) as he may find the members knew.’’ Others said that the Department’s authority to make the necessary to prevent the circumvention or the greater detail in the proposed form proposed changes, arguing that the evasion of such reporting requirements. ‘‘will make thefts harder to cover up.’’ Department is upsetting the delicate These provisions make it clear that Another member supported the balance between labor and management the Secretary has discretion to initiative to ‘‘help prevent fraud and that was recognized by Congress in the determine the format in which the corruption,’’ as well as to permit National Labor Relations Act. Some information required by the statute must ‘‘informed decisions about workplace unions complained that the proposal be provided, as well as the detail in issues.’’ A public interest organization would require that labor organizations which the information must be reported. commented that ‘‘the information disclose confidential trade secrets, such The statutory language describing the provided by the AFL–CIO in the Form as organizing strategy and negotiating information that labor organizations are LM–2 is not sufficient to give the plans, which some courts have ruled are required to report is broad. Each labor average union member an accurate not discoverable by union members and organization must include in its annual picture of how the AFL–CIO spends would give adversaries a greater financial report: much of the dues collected.’’ One knowledge of the inner workings of the (1) Assets and liabilities at the commenter noted that requiring unions labor organizations with which they beginning and end of the fiscal year; to estimate the amount of time spent by may deal in connection with collective (2) receipts of any kind and the union officers and employees bargaining or organizing activities. sources thereof; performing various duties will provide These commenters argue that the (3) salary, allowances and other direct significant new information to union Department’s proposal is inconsistent or indirect disbursements (including members. The commenter also stated with the principle that governmental reimbursed expenses) to each officer that, together with reporting receipts intrusion into the affairs of labor and disbursements by functional and also to each employee who, during organizations should be limited because such fiscal year, received more than categories, the proposed rule will the Constitution protects the right of provide information that will help $10,000 in the aggregate from such labor association, there purportedly is no organization and any other labor ensure that union leadership is acting in evidence that union members want this the interests of its membership. Another organization affiliated with it or with information, and, they alleged, other which it is affiliated, or which is public interest organization commented voluntary organizations are not that more ‘‘detailed financial reporting affiliated with the same national or subjected to this level of disclosure. international labor organization; is needed’’ to avoid ‘‘waste, fraud and The Department takes seriously the corruption.’’ A 25-year union member (4) direct and indirect loans made to concerns expressed that the proposed stated, ‘‘It will be a great victory for [the any officer, employee, or member, rule would intrude too deeply in the union’s] membership when the reform which aggregated more than $250 internal affairs of labor organizations is passed.’’ during the fiscal year, together with a Many commenters opposed the and provide unfair advantages to the statement of the purposes, security, if proposed changes, expressing their adversaries and competitors of such any, and arrangements for repayment; beliefs that the proposed rule is: organizations. Accordingly, the (5) direct and indirect loans to any political payback designed to punish Department has made numerous business enterprise, together with a organized labor; designed to weaken the changes, described below, to avoid these statement of the purpose, security, if union movement; intended to hamper unintended and unwanted results. In any, and arrangements for repayment; the ability of unions to service their the Department’s view, however, none and members; designed to strain union of these changes is necessitated by any (6) other disbursements made by it budgets; intended to expand the lack of authority on the part of the including the purposes thereof; all in requirements of Communication Department to revise the reporting forms such categories as the Secretary may Workers of America v. Beck, 487 U.S. or the manner in which reports must be prescribe. 735 (1988); and intended to secure filed. On the contrary, the LMRDA gives 29 U.S.C. 431(b)(1)–(6). Comments additional information for employers the Secretary of Labor authority to make that the Secretary lacks authority to and anti-union organizations rather than such changes, for the reasons outlined require that receipts and disbursements union members. Although a number of in the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking be itemized or that disbursements be unions and their members submitted (NPRM) and in this rule. Section 201(b) reported in categories are inconsistent helpful comments on the substance of of the LMRDA, 29 U.S.C. 431(b), with the plain language of the statute. In the rule, some of the general comments requires that: fact, the statute authorizes the Secretary in opposition simply criticized the Every labor organization shall file annually to require labor organizations to report Administration and Department with the Secretary a financial report signed every receipt and disbursement, in any officials, and lacked specific by its president and treasurer or amount, and in any categories recommendations on the substance of corresponding principal officers containing prescribed by the Secretary. The the proposal. They nevertheless the following information in such detail as statute’s requirement that labor expressed strongly held feelings in may be necessary accurately to disclose its organizations report ‘‘receipts’’ and financial condition and operations for its ‘‘disbursements’’ does not, as some opposition to the proposed changes. preceding fiscal year *** Acknowledging that there are strong comments argue, call for only views on both sides of the issue, the (Emphasis added.) In addition, section aggregated receipts and disbursements. Department has carefully considered all 208 of the LMRDA, 29 U.S.C. 438, states Neither the fact that the Secretary has of the comments and the arguments in part: not heretofore exercised the full extent

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:10 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\09OCR2.SGM 09OCR2 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations 58377

of her statutory authority nor the fact In the Department’s view, this C. Comparison With Reporting that forms previously required less argument is unpersuasive. The revised Requirements for Corporations and detailed reporting diminishes the form calls for more detail than the Non-Profit Organizations authority provided the Secretary by the previous form, but does not require Several commenters, asserting that LMRDA as enacted in 1959. disclosure of the underlying records corporate scandals have surpassed any In the Department’s view, this rule necessary to verify the report. See 29 union misconduct in recent years, meets both the letter and the spirit of U.S.C. 431(c). The fact that the Secretary argued that corporations should first be the LMRDA, both generally and with has exercised her authority to determine made to file disclosure reports like those respect to its provisions specific to that more detailed financial information proposed by the Department before union reporting requirements. The rule should be reported on a Form LM–2 unions are asked to do so. Some union promotes the two related overarching than previously does not limit a union’s members argued that labor organizations purposes of union reporting: to fully ability to maintain additional are already subject to more stringent inform union members, on a yearly information, in any format it desires, reporting requirements than basis, about their union’s ‘‘financial including the physical evidence of corporations or other non-profit condition and operations,’’ 29 U.S.C. financial transactions (such as cancelled organizations. Many commenters felt 431(b); and, by public disclosure of this checks, bills, or receipts), nor does it that unions are like small businesses information, to deter union officials and eliminate each union member’s right to and should be provided the same employees from abusing their examine such information, enforceable protections from intrusive reporting stewardship duties and to allow in district court upon a showing of ‘‘just requirements that, they assert, small members, the Department, and the cause.’’ Congress conditioned a union businesses are provided by the public an opportunity to review a member’s right to examine records Department and other regulatory union’s financial information as a check necessary to verify the union’s annual agencies. on the actions of its officials and financial report on a showing of just Other commenters noted that employees. See United States v. cause in order to relieve unions from the corporations and their executives are Budzanoski, 462 F.2d 443, 450 (3d Cir.), harassment of repeated requests for subject to significantly more cert. denied, 409 U.S. 949 (1972); Int’l documents based simply on curiosity. burdensome reporting requirements Bhd. of Teamsters, et al. v. Wirtz, 346 See Kinslow v. American Postal Workers than are unions. One commenter noted F.2d 827, 831 (D.C. Cir. 1965). The Union, Chicago Local, 222 F.3d 269, 273 that labor organizations, unlike Department’s reforms also advance the (7th Cir. 2000). This requirement, corporations, are not subject to various LMRDA’s declared purpose ‘‘that labor however, ‘‘simply entails a showing that external controls and scrutiny by such organizations, employers, and their the union member had some reasonable entities as Wall Street investment officials adhere to the highest standards basis to question the accuracy of the analysts, portfolio managers, financial of responsibility and ethical conduct in LM–2 or the documents on which it was media, and millions of shareholders. administering the affairs of their Another commenter found the organizations.’’ 29 U.S.C. 401(a). based, or that information in the LM–2 has inspired reasonable questions about comparison between labor organizations The AFL–CIO commented that the the way union funds were handled.’’ Id. and corporations irrelevant because proposed rule attempts to dictate to at 274; see also Mallick v. Int’l Bhd. of unlike commercial entities, which are unions what they should treat as their Elec. Workers, 749 F.2d 771, 781 (D.C. accountable based on their profit or loss, ‘‘most * * * important purposes’’ in labor unions are accountable only in Cir. 1984). No matter how much detail structuring their budgets and accounts terms of the stewardship responsibilities a union provides on its Form LM–2, and is contrary to the LMRDA insofar as of their officers. One commenter also members have a right to examine the the statute reflects the theory that, noted that like corporate disclosure actual documents or other evidence of ‘‘[g]iven certain minimum standards, requirements, which have been recorded transactions to determine, for ‘individual members are fully amended periodically, union disclosure competent to regulate union affairs’’’ example, whether the union accurately requirements should be changed in (quoting S. Rep. No. 85–1684, at 4–5 recorded the information. Moreover, as order to keep pace with the times. (1958)). In the view of the AFL–CIO, explained more fully below, in Section Another commenter estimated that the Congress deliberately established a two- III(B)(2), in response to comments from reporting and disclosure burdens on step process, found in 29 U.S.C. 431, to numerous unions that making certain businesses are many times the burden inform members about their union’s information available to the public at on labor organizations. finances and operations. The process large would be harmful to legitimate The Department has concluded that, was established to protect unions from interests, the Department will permit while there are important differences improper government intervention in labor organizations to report some among corporations, public interest their affairs and harassment from receipts and disbursements as part of organizations, and labor organizations, members that would divert them from the aggregated total, without specificity, increased transparency is as important their representational function. The first provided, with limited exceptions, it for labor organizations as for other such step requires the preparation of a indicates on the Form LM–2 that it has organizations. Moreover, for the reasons financial report in such detail as needed done so. If a labor organization uses this set forth below, the Department is not to disclose the union’s financial option, only those of its members who persuaded that the requirements condition (29 U.S.C. 431(b)); the second satisfy the ‘‘just cause’’ standard and the imposed by this rule are more restrictive step requires a union, upon a member’s Department will be entitled to review than those that apply to other entities. showing of just cause, to disclose the specific information related to these If anything, these requirements are less additional information (29 U.S.C. disbursements. Far from eliminating the intrusive, less burdensome, and require 431(c)). In the AFL–CIO’s view, the method Congress provided members to less disclosure than reporting proposed rule collapses this two-part review their union’s finances in more requirements governing other entities. process and destroys protections for a detail pursuant to section 201(c), 29 First, no comparison should be drawn union’s confidentiality and trade secrets U.S.C. 431(c), that statutory tool is between union reporting requirements in violation of established protections. central to these reforms. and requirements imposed on a

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:10 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\09OCR2.SGM 09OCR2 58378 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations

privately held enterprise where the funding can condition it on the public companies must certify audits for operator of the business is also the disclosure of any financial information the accuracy of information in their source of much of the venture’s concerning the company seeking annual and quarterly reports. See 68 FR financing. Legally mandated financial funding, can demand that the 36636 et seq. (discussed above); disclosure regimes for both unions and information be provided in any level of Bloomenthal & Wolff, Securities and publicly held corporations are designed detail desired, and can use contractual Federal Corporate Law § 7:35.13 (2002). primarily to address a fundamental remedies to enforce the condition. A substantial amount of quantitative problem common to both institutions: Union members, by contrast, are financial information is contained in that managerial control of an entity lies entitled only to the report that their both annual and quarterly reports. beyond the direct control of the people union files with the Department of These reports must disclose ‘‘material’’ who fund the entity. See generally Henn Labor pursuant to the LMRDA and, financial information. See Law of & Alexander, Hornbook on Laws of upon a showing of just cause, ‘‘to Securities Regulation §§ 3.2–3.7, 9.4; Corporations § 186 et seq. (1983). examine any books, records, and Understanding the Securities Laws § 12– Corporate and union financial accounts necessary to verify such 8; Cyclopedia of the Law of Private disclosure regimes are intended to report.’’ 29 U.S.C. 431(b), (c). Corporations § 6862. In its Statement of reduce the informational advantages Accordingly, the only reporting Financial Accounting Concepts No. 2 agents have over principals and permit requirements applied to businesses that (SFAC No. 2), the Financial Accounting principals to monitor and assess the are relevant for comparison with the Standards Board (FASB) stated the performance of agents. See Fletcher, annual union financial report are those essence of the concept of materiality as Cyclopedia of the Law of Private applied to publicly-traded companies. follows: Corporations §§ 2213 et seq., 6842–43 Generally speaking, the regulatory The omission or misstatement of an item (perm. ed.), available on Westlaw at regime governing financial reporting by in a financial report is material if, in the light Fletcher-CYC. Adequate transparency large and small public companies is of surrounding circumstances, the magnitude encourages union officers and corporate much more extensive than the system of the item is such that it is probable that the directors (agents) who are elected by judgment of a reasonable person relying upon that exists for labor organizations. See the report would have been changed or union members and corporate generally Hazen, Law of Securities influenced by the inclusion or correction of shareholders (principals) to conduct the Regulation §§ 3.2–3.7, 9.4 (2002), the item. business of their organizations in the available on Westlaw at LAWSECREG; best interests of the people who provide Id. at ¶ 132. See discussion below in Understanding the Securities Laws Section (II)(D). Due to the myriad factors the operating funds. Agents failing to do § 2:2.2. Furthermore, the reporting so can be removed through the involved in determining whether requirements under the securities laws financial information meets this rather mechanisms of corporate and union have been substantially increased since vague threshold, professional assistance democracy. See Cyclopedia of the Law the enactment of the Sarbanes-Oxley is required. See id. at ¶¶ 123–132. As of Private Corporations § 351 et seq. Act, Pub. L. 107–204, 116 Stat. 745. See noted above, the SEC generally requires In a privately held enterprise, where generally 68 FR 36636–01 et seq. (June public companies to disclose in their the operator of the business is also the 18, 2003) (amending various disclosure annual reports ‘‘material’’ quantitative source of the venture’s financing, there rules established by the Securities and information on balance sheets or income is no principal to perform the Exchange Commission (‘‘SEC’’), statements related to numerous types of monitoring and no agent to be including 17 CFR 240.13a–14, 240.13a– assets, accounts, and expenditures. See monitored. See generally Laws of 15, 240.15d–14, 240.15d–15, 249.220f). Law of Securities Regulation §§ 3.2–3.7, Corporations § 257 et seq.; see also Labor organizations must file only one 9.4. Public companies must disclose Soderquist, Understanding the form a year, need not disclose ‘‘material’’ financial data on executive Securities Laws § 2:2.2 (2001), available qualitative information, and are not compensation, including: annual salary; on Westlaw at PLIREF–SECLAW. While required to conduct certified audits of bonuses; other annual compensation; privately held companies are required to their financial statements. See 29 U.S.C. restricted stock; and options. Id. They make certain financial disclosures 431. The financial reporting scheme for must also provide ‘‘material’’ related to franchise taxes, Small public companies, as amended by the quantitative information on Business Administration loans, Federal Sarbanes-Oxley Act, requires the computation of per share earnings and Communications Commission licenses disclosure of both quantitative and market risk. Id. The Sarbanes-Oxley Act and other regulatory schemes, these qualitative information and imposes added several additional categories of disclosures are designed to assess taxes, strict audits and significant internal material, quantitative data that public fees, or eligibility for government- controls on public companies, their companies must disclose, including provided benefits, not to ensure officers, directors, auditors, accountants disclosing in each annual and quarterly transparency of managerial and attorneys. See generally 17 CFR report all ‘‘material’’ off-balance sheet performance. See generally Cyclopedia Parts 210–211, 228–32, 239, 241, 249 transactions, arrangements and of the Law of Private Corporations (Subparts A–D) (2003) (particularly obligations (including contingent § 6666 et seq. The only scenario in provisions amended by 68 FR 4820 (Jan. obligations). See Title III, 116 Stat. 775, which it is instructive to compare the 30, 2003), 68 FR 5110 (Jan. 31, 2003), 68 and Title IV, 116 Stat. 785. financial disclosure regime of a FR 15354–02 (Mar. 31, 2003), 68 FR Since its inception, the LM–2 privately held company to a union is 36636–01 (June 18, 2003). See also reporting system has eschewed the use when a privately held firm creates a Bloomenthal, Sarbanes-Oxley Act in of a vague standard based on principal/agent relationship by Perspective § 10 (2002), available on individualized judgments regarding accepting funding through the venture Westlaw at SEC–SOAP S 10. Small and materiality for determining what capital markets. This scenario, however, large public companies are required to quantitative data a union must report, also offers no basis for comparison with file annual and quarterly reports. See 17 and has instead required specific the relationship between a union and its CFR 240.13a–1 et seq.; Cyclopedia of the information regarding all assets, members because financial institutions Law of Private Corporations § 6842; Law liabilities and transactions. The and other entities that provide such of Securities Regulation § 9.6[4]. All Department has determined that it will

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:10 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\09OCR2.SGM 09OCR2 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations 58379

continue with this approach. This the detailed qualitative analysis public independent audits. Many unions, one avoids forcing labor organizations to companies are required to disclose. individual commented, have incur the expenses and burdens Following the passage of Sarbanes- constitutional provisions that already associated with making determinations Oxley, the SEC and the Public Company require an audit by an outside about whether given items are Accounting Oversight Board (‘‘the accounting firm. While some ‘‘material.’’ Even those commenters that Board’’) oversee the audits of public commenters argued that requiring suggested that the Department should companies; establish accounting and unions to obtain annual audits is within consider implementing a materiality audit report standards and rules for the Department’s statutory authority, no standard recognized that such a public companies; and certify, provision of the LMRDA vests the standard would introduce an element of investigate, inspect, and enforce Secretary of Labor with any express judgment in the reporting process with compliance with standards applicable to authority to require unions to obtain potential for complicating the professionals involved in the audits and the Department has chosen investigative process. Although a preparation of audits and financial not to attempt to impose such a commenter argued that such tradeoffs reports by public companies. See Title requirement, to avoid imposing on the are similar to those necessitated by I, 116 Stat. 750. Annual audits and labor organizations that are not dollar thresholds for reporting, the financial reporting by public companies currently obtaining private audits any Department believes that a dollar must be under the control of an audit need to hire financial experts to conduct threshold is easier for reporting unions committee composed exclusively of a qualitative analysis of the union’s to apply, for the Department to enforce, independent directors. See Title II, records. Simply permitting those unions and for union members to understand. § 202, 116 Stat. 772–73; Title III, 116 that currently obtain annual audits to In addition to the detailed Stat. 775–77. These independent file whatever audit is currently quantitative data, the annual and committees must include at least one performed is not likely to ensure that all quarterly reports of large and small ‘‘financial expert’’ and are directly of the statutorily-required information is public companies must also disclose responsible for the appointment, reported, nor would it ensure that the ‘‘material’’ qualitative data. See Law of compensation, and oversight of the information is provided in a standard Securities Regulation §§ 3.4, 3.6, 9.4. certified firms that do private audits of format that is both readily This includes narrative descriptions of public companies. See Title IV, § 408, understandable and accessible to union ‘‘material’’ aspects of a company’s 116 Stat. 790–91. To effectuate the members. Information that may be businesses and principal products. Id. whistleblower provisions of the meaningful to trained financial analysts Public companies must also disclose Sarbanes-Oxley Act, these audit or auditors may not be useful to many information on relationships the committees must also establish union members. company has that may have a procedures for the receipt, retention and Accordingly, the statutory ‘‘material’’ effect on current or future review of anonymous complaints by a requirements, and the Secretary’s financial condition, liquidity, capital public company’s employees regarding longstanding implementation of those expenditures, capital resources, or accounting practices, internal financial requirements, have been framed in significant components of revenues or controls, and auditing matters. See Title terms of assets, liabilities, expenses of the company. Id. This III, §§ 301–04, 116 Stat. 775–78. Public disbursements and receipts, rather than includes an explanation of a company’s companies must give their audit more general financial terms. The dependence on customers whose loss committees the financial resources Department has concluded that would materially affect the company’s necessary to hire any independent continuing to require unions to report financial health and an explanation of advisors or attorneys required to carry holdings and transactions, rather than material changes in the mode of out these responsibilities. Id. third-party descriptions of their conducting business. Id. ‘‘Material’’ The LMRDA does not require labor financial conditions, will provide legal proceedings must be reported, unions to perform any audits. It does understandable information to including full identification of parties not mandate that unions use governance members, permit members to compare and the circumstances and basis of the structures that ensure independent reports of different years, permit proceedings. Id. ‘‘Material’’ property oversight of financial operations, such members to compare reports with those holdings must also be identified and as independent audit committees. of other unions, and enhance the described, including their use and any Union members have no whistleblower detection and deterrence of fraud. encumbrances upon them. Id. rights. The Department does not enforce Alternatively, commenters suggested, Public companies are also required to any independent system of certification, the Department should annually make forward-looking statements about quality control, ethics, independence conduct a compliance audit of each the future financial performance of the standards or other regulation of firms union. The Department’s responsibility company, including analysis of all that some unions use to prepare annual for insuring the financial integrity of ‘‘material’’ risks facing the company. Id. Form LM–2 reports. There are also no unions involves both requiring adequate Public companies must also report restrictions on other services that a firm reporting and conducting compliance ‘‘material’’ information about market preparing Form LM–2 reports may audits. The statute does not contemplate risk, such as potential loss in future perform for a labor organization. In the two components as mutually earnings of cash flow based on changes contrast to the reviews the SEC performs exclusive; in fact, the Department in interest rates, foreign currency on public companies not less than once intends to increase the number of exchange rates, commodity prices and every three years (see 15 U.S.C. 7266(c)), compliance audits, as resources permit, other relevant market factors. Id. A labor unions currently can expect, on at the same time it implements the detailed explanation of internal controls average, to be audited by the revised Form LM–2. Additional and procedures must also be provided. Department of Labor approximately compliance audits would not, however, Id; see also 68 FR 36636–01. The once every 150 years. Ten of the 25 constitute a satisfactory alternative to Department has decided not to require largest unions have never been audited the reforms embodied in the revised labor organizations to provide their because of OLMS’s limited resources. Form LM–2, as compliance audits members with any qualitative Several commenters suggested that would address the accuracy of the information on its finances, much less unions be required to file annual information provided in the existing

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:10 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\09OCR2.SGM 09OCR2 58380 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations

Form LM–2, but would not improve the in the context of determining reporting understanding of the reporting labor transparency of labor organizations’ standards. Nevertheless, although other organization’s financial performance. finances, increase the information reporting standards will not be treated The Department proposed requiring available to members, or make the data as benchmarks or models, the labor organizations to provide certain disclosed in reports more Department has considered the specific itemized information in addition to the understandable and accessible. comments of labor organizations and aggregated totals in order to provide As one commenter noted, it is even others in assessing the appropriateness users of the Form LM–2 with additional more difficult to deter financial of each proposed change to the financial information on specific mismanagement by labor organization reporting forms, as discussed in the financial issues. In fact, the FASB officials than it is in a corporate setting succeeding sections. recognizes the appropriate inclusion of because of the absence of natural market disaggregated information in financial D. Application of Generally Accepted influences and because there are fewer reporting: Accounting Principles regularly occurring checks on the Disaggregated information that permits financial performance of unions. The Some commenters argued that the users of financial information to relate same commenter noted that the changes proposed by the Department components of revenues to components of additional disclosure as a result of the depart from the generally accepted expenses also is often preferable to proposed changes would make it more accounting principles (GAAP) information provided by their aggregated difficult, and more expensive, to hide promulgated by the FASB and the amounts. fraud. Recognizing that achieving this American Institute of Certified Public Financial Accounting Standard 117 goal will also make it more expensive Accountants (AICPA). In particular, this (FAS 117), ¶ 118. for unions to report, and that disclosure position was advanced by a professor of Several commenters asserted that the alone will reduce but not entirely accountancy whose comments were individual items reported on the Form overcome fraud, the Department has made on behalf of, and attached to the LM–2 supporting schedules in and of attempted to achieve a balance in this comment of, the AFL–CIO. This themselves are not material financial rule between the benefits and burdens commenter said that many of the terms information that will be relevant to the of more detailed disclosure, and intends used and information required by the user. The FASB states that materiality of to follow promulgation of the rule both Department’s proposal are inconsistent information is not measured solely on with more effective enforcement, using with various interpretations of GAAP. its magnitude. SFAC No. 2. ‘‘Materiality the additional information disclosed to These assertions fail to recognize, is a pervasive concept that relates to the uncover fraud when it occurs, and with however, that not all GAAP standards qualitative characteristics, especially more compliance assistance to respond are consistent with the disclosure relevance and reliability.’’ Id. The to questions and concerns. requirement of the LMRDA. 29 U.S.C. Supreme Court, in deciding whether an The Department is also not persuaded 431(b). Although the Department has omitted fact was material, described a by the comments that suggest that the considered the GAAP standards, and general standard of materiality as: reporting requirements for labor has accepted them in principle where A substantial likelihood that, under all the organizations should be comparable to they further the purposes of the circumstances, the omitted fact would have those that govern non-profit LMRDA, the Department will not adopt assumed actual significance in the organizations. The LMRDA was enacted GAAP standards when they are not deliberations of the reasonable shareholder. in the aftermath of a congressional consistent with these purposes. For Put another way, there must be a substantial investigation in the 1950’s that found example, as many commenters noted, likelihood that the disclosure of the omitted corruption in union leadership and a the current Form LM–2 mandates fact would have been viewed by the disregard for the rights of the rank-and- reporting on a cash accounting basis, reasonable investor as having significantly file. See Wirtz v. Hotel, Motel & Club which is inconsistent with GAAP, but altered the ‘‘total mix’’ of information made available. Emp. Union, Local 6, 391 U.S. 492, 497– some cash accounting procedures are 98 (1968). The over-riding purpose of made necessary by the statute’s TSC Industries Inc. v. Northway Inc., the reporting provisions of the LMRDA requirement that the union disclose 426 U.S. 438, 449 (1976). The FASB is to provide union members with ‘‘all ‘‘receipts’’ and ‘‘disbursements.’’ See 29 agrees that the ‘‘usefulness of the vital information necessary for them U.S.C. 431(b). Further, Form LM–2 is a information must be evaluated in to take effective action in regulating special-purpose financial report relation to the purposes to be served, affairs of their organization.’’ See S. Rep. prepared for compliance with the and the objectives of financial reporting 187, 86th Cong., 1st Session, p.9, 1959 LMRDA. Special financial reports to are focused on the use of accounting U.S.C.C.A.N. 2318, 2325 (1959). The government regulatory bodies are information in decision making.’’ Id. Senate Labor Committee declared: ‘‘A generally prepared in conformity with The Department has concluded, based union treasury should not be managed Other Comprehensive Basis Of on the experience of its investigators as the private property of union officers, Accounting (OCBOA). and the comments received from many however well intentioned, but as a fund This commenter also argued that the union members, that the information governed by fiduciary standards Department’s proposal calls for the that will be reported as a result of this appropriate to this type of organization. presentation of disaggregated revision of the Form LM–2, in fact, will The members who are the real owners information, which is contrary to GAAP have the capacity to make a difference of the money and property of the and confusing for the user of the in the ability of union members to make organization are entitled to a full reported information. Although GAAP decisions regarding workplace and accounting of all transactions involving precepts do not control the inquiry, the union governance issues. As indicated their property.’’ See S. Rep. 187 at p. 8, revised Form LM–2, like the current in Section III(B)(3), (4), the proper 1959 U.S.C.C.A.N. at 2324. In light of Form LM–2, includes Statements A and threshold for when a union must these congressional directives, the B, which provide aggregated totals of itemize and separately report a receipt Department is not persuaded as a financial information. Form LM–2 users or expenditure is subject to competing general matter that a comparison do not have to rely solely on the arguments. Setting the threshold lower between labor organizations and itemized information contained in the (or eliminating it entirely) increases the ordinary non-profit organizations is apt schedules to obtain an overall number of receipts and expenditures

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:10 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\09OCR2.SGM 09OCR2 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations 58381

that must be reported, which opined regarding the appropriate scope voluminous records. It also noted a correspondingly increases the of financial statements for not-for-profit specific concern regarding the reporting information available for inspection. organizations: of membership information, noting that The availability of this information A complete set of financial statements of a its system to track membership is not makes concealment of fraud more not-for-profit organization shall include a integrated with its general ledger, with difficult, and allows members to statement of financial position as of the end the result that it has no general ledger evaluate the wisdom of the union’s of the reporting period, a statement of account set up to capture written off or financial transactions. The threshold is activities and a statement of cash flows for uncollected dues income. Similarly, one significant: union members ordinarily the reporting period, and accompanying labor organization noted concerns with protect their rights by reviewing these notes to financial statements. FAS 117, ¶ 6. regard to reporting accounts receivable reports, unlike investors in public FAS 117, however, applies only and accounts payable (insofar as they corporations and other individuals broad, general standards for reporting require ‘‘aging’’ information). The protected by the audit, oversight, and information in not-for-profit commenter explained that this change whistleblower provisions discussed in organization financial statements (FAS would require it to spend considerable Section II(C). While a strong argument 117, ¶ 48), and the FASB recognizes that additional time to properly complete a could be made that all expenditures are general purpose financial statements Form LM–2. It explained that many thus significant and should be itemized, may not fulfill the special-purpose local unions have members’ dues sent to a lower threshold would increase the needs of regulatory requirements like third parties or their particular accounting burden. The $5,000 those imposed by the LMRDA (FAS 117, international and that the locals’ portion threshold adopted strikes a balance ¶ 45). Even not-for-profit organizations of the dues is only later remitted to the between the opposing viewpoints. Thus, subject to FAS 17 are required to report locals. One commenter stated that the while the revised form neither permits expenses by functional categories and to cash basis method better effectuates the nor necessitates individual assessments allocate costs among significant LMRDA’s focus on receipts and of the materiality of information about programs as applicable (see FAS 117, ¶ disbursements. particular transactions, it requires the ¶ 26–28) because of differences in Some commenters, however, read the disclosure of information that is indicators of performance as compared proposed rules as continuing the cash significant to union members. to for-profit business organizations (FAS basis requirement. In their comments, Commenters also argued that 117, ¶ 61). they requested that the Department, as proposed Form LM–2 violates GAAP Comments on the Department’s part of the final rule, allow unions the because the costs of reporting the proposal indicate some confusion option to utilize the accrual method of information exceed the benefits to users regarding the question whether accounting. In support of this approach, of the information. While the costs of revisions to Form LM–2 will require they noted that accrual accounting is the revised Form LM–2 are addressed in labor organizations to maintain their required by GAAP, reflecting, in their more detail in the Regulatory Flexibility financial records using a cash basis or view, the belief that accrual accounting and Paperwork Reduction Act Analyses, accrual method. Some unions and provides a more effective gauge of an see Section V, the Department has individuals have read the proposed organization’s financial condition. In determined that these costs are rules to require unions to maintain their this regard, one commenter noted that outweighed by benefits. FASB and other financial records system on an accrual the Department itself once recognized, government regulatory bodies have basis. In this regard, some of the when it proposed revisions to the Form discovered that the total benefits commenters noted that Schedule 1 of LM–2 in 1992 (later withdrawn in part), derived from shared information are the proposed Form LM–2 requires that ‘‘accrual accounting generally nearly impossible to quantify. reporting of receivables, a concept provides a more accurate indication of Information is different from other associated with accrual accounting. an organization’s financial condition commodities because the benefits from Some of the commenters also expressed and operations.’’ 57 FR 49282 (Oct. 30, information can extend beyond the their view that the majority of unions 1992). Other commenters noted that the immediate users. The revised Form LM– use the cash method of accounting and current cash basis requirement forces 2 directly benefits union members that it would be a substantial burden for them to convert information in their because increased disclosure permits them to make the conversion to the accrual-based system for the sole members to make better decisions about accrual method. Some of the purpose of submitting a Form LM–2, an union governance and helps deter and commenters also noted that cash basis expensive and time-consuming detect fraud. The public also benefits reporting comports with IRS undertaking. One labor organization from the deterrence of fraud, due to the requirements. noted that its accounting personnel last costs fraud imposes on, for example, the A local union explained that its year spent nearly half of the 1,200 hours criminal justice system, and from the accounting system uses the cash basis it spent in preparing the Form LM–2 in promotion of ethical conduct in the method. It noted that the proposed converting information from its accrual- administration of labor organization Schedule 1 (Accounts Receivable) and based system to a cash basis mode. affairs, which increases the stability of Schedule 8 (Accounts Payable) call for Several commenters also noted that the labor organizations, and thus promotes information maintained by systems set IRS accepts reports using the accrual the flow of commerce. See 29 U.S.C. 401 up on the accrual method of accounting. method of accounting. (‘‘Declaration of Findings, Purposes, and The local explained that this An international labor organization, Policy’’). The information required on information is not readily available from the Air Line Pilots Association (ALPA), the revised Form LM–2 thus benefits a cash basis systems, noting that explained that it uses an accrual system wide variety of users, which is commercial accounting systems track to collect detailed information for its consistent with SFAC No. 2, ¶ 143. income and expenses, not receipts and payroll, employee expense reports, Commenters noted several issues disbursements. The local expressed its member accounts receivable, and flight related to the application of FAS 117, concern that it would be able to provide pay loss. ALPA noted that the current Financial Statements of Not-For-Profit the accounts receivable and accounts requirement that unions employ the Organizations, to labor organization payable information only by cash method in preparing a Form LM– financial reporting. The FASB has undertaking manual searches through 2 requires time-consuming conversion

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:10 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\09OCR2.SGM 09OCR2 58382 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations

of ALPA’s financial information, be prepared using the cash method of reporting goals can be achieved without preventing it from ever meeting the accounting,’’ was dropped, however, as directing all unions to use accrual March 31 deadline imposed by the it was not wholly accurate and could be accounting as the foundation of their LMRDA. Another international, the misleading. financial management systems. Such a International Brotherhood of Electrical As explained in greater detail below, mandate is unnecessary and has been Workers (IBEW), stated that it maintains the Department has not proposed to rejected in light of the comments that its books on an accrual basis for two require unions to establish a particular most unions maintain their books on the reasons: first, it enables the organization method to account for, and manage, cash basis. Nor is the Department to match revenue and expenses to the their finances. Unions, for various persuaded that accrual accounting proper time period; and second, it reasons, may choose to track their should be mandated because it accords enables the organization to comply with finances on a cash basis, accrual basis, with GAAP. As discussed above, GAAP accounting rules and to receive an a hybrid of the two, or some other practices are neither binding nor ‘‘unqualified’’ opinion from an method of accounting. As noted by necessarily appropriate for all aspects of independent auditor as to the some commenters, the Form LM–2 financial reporting, particularly insofar organization’s financial health. reporting format requires unions to as the operations of not-for-profit In the Department’s 1992 rulemaking, utilize some elements of both cash basis entities are concerned. The the Department specifically proposed and accrual accounting. To a large Department’s concern is in ensuring the that unions would be required to utilize extent, however, that format is driven by disclosure of information that satisfies the accrual accounting method. In the fact that the statute itself requires the statutory requirements of the response to the comments submitted, both types of information. For example, LMRDA in a manner best suited to meet however, the 1992 final rule allowed the statement of ‘‘receipts and the purposes of the statute, which can unions the option to utilize either the disbursements’’ required by the LMRDA be accomplished without requiring a cash or accrual method of accounting in is basically an accounting of the inflow labor organization to use an accounting reporting their finances. This option and outflow of an organization’s cash method that may not be best suited to was rescinded in December 1993. This during the fiscal period. Consequently, its overall needs. action was taken in response to a ‘‘profit and loss’’ statement prepared comments that only relatively few of the on the accrual basis is unacceptable as E. Additional Reforms Considered larger unions used the accrual method compliance with the Act since it reflects Several commenters suggested that and to correct the mistaken perception the income and expenses of an the Department should undertake other held by some unions that the organization in the fiscal period and not reforms, in addition to those proposed. Department’s rule, in practice, was the disposition of its cash. See 29 U.S.C. While some comments expressed encouraging unions to utilize accrual 431(b). general support for wide dissemination accounting, a departure from the cash In contrast, the statement of ‘‘assets of information filed with the basis method that had been prescribed and liabilities’’ required by the LMRDA Department of Labor on the labor for reports in the past and the method is essentially an accrual type of organization annual financial reports, used by the vast majority of unions. One statement and provides for reporting all others thought that more specific union commenter on the current rule, receivables, payables, accruals and dissemination requirements should be however, asserted that the option deferred items. Consequently, it should imposed. One commenter suggested that concept was well thought-out because it be unnecessary for an organization that unions be required to post their most recognized that although some unions maintains its records on the accrual recent labor organization annual used the accrual method of accounting, system of accounting to change its financial report on union bulletin imposing this method on many smaller procedures in order to prepare the boards in union halls and on employer unions would present a real hardship to statement of assets and liabilities. bulletin boards reserved for union use these unions because they rely on Preparation of a ‘‘cash receipts and in employer workplaces, while another volunteers, not accountants, to prepare disbursement’’ statement when the suggested that labor organizations the Form LM–2. As discussed accrual method of accounting is used should make their annual financial immediately below, this option is normally requires only an analysis of reports available at their membership indeed available to unions, which may the organization’s cash receipts and meetings. One comment suggested that choose to track their finances on a cash disbursements records in order to information reported on the labor basis, accrual basis or some other properly reclassify the necessary cash organization annual financial reports method of accounting. transactions to conform to the types of should be sent by unions to their Since the 1992 rule was rescinded, accounting classifications represented members by mail or included in the Form LM–2 has, in fact, required by like items on the prescribed forms. newsletters, as well as be made that receipts and disbursements be More importantly, the necessary available on the Internet. Finally, one reported on a cash basis, but has also modifications to either a cash based or comment urged the Department to required the reporting of certain accrual based system that may be implement the provisions of section 105 information more typically maintained necessary to comply with the format of of the LMRDA, requiring ‘‘[e]very labor in an accrual-based system (e.g., the revised Form LM–2 are no different organization [to] inform its members Schedule 1 ‘‘Loans Receivable, than modifications that labor concerning the provisions of this Act.’’ Schedule 8 ‘‘Loans Payable, Accounts organizations currently perform to file See 29 U.S.C. 415. Payable, Mortgages Payable). Thus, the existing Form LM–2. Section 205 of the LMRDA provides requiring a combination of both types of The Department believes it would be that the reports filed with the information in one form, which might inappropriate to dictate the particular Department under Title II of the Act be characterized as modified cash basis system by which a union keeps track of ‘‘shall be public information’’ and accounting, represents no change from its finances. While some unions may permits the Secretary of Labor to the existing Form LM–2 and was not find it easier to use the accrual method publish any information obtained. See identified as a change in the NPRM. The of accounting and convert information 29 U.S.C. 435. Section 208 gives the statement in the Instructions to the to complete Form LM–2 items reporting Secretary of Labor authority to issue existing Form LM–2 that the form ‘‘must the inflow and outflow of funds, the rules and regulations prescribing the

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:10 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\09OCR2.SGM 09OCR2 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations 58383

form and publication of reports required the expanded form, without regard to LM–2, and under the new rule it would to be filed under Title II. See 29 U.S.C. the amount of their annual receipts. also meet the Form LM–2 filing level. 438. Neither sections 205 and 208 nor Other commenters argued that the In this example, by virtue of a one- any other provision of the Act expressly current threshold is too low and should time-only event, annual receipts would vest the Secretary of Labor with any be raised. be quintupled. This union would likely authority to require labor organizations Shortly after the LMRDA was enacted not keep records conducive to providing to disseminate information filed with in 1959, the threshold for filing the the kind of details required by Form the Department of Labor on labor more detailed Form LM–2 was set by LM–2—and particularly the details and organization annual financial reports at the Secretary at $20,000. The threshold new schedules envisioned in the revised membership meetings, on labor was raised by the Secretary in 1962 to Form LM–2. In addition, labor organization websites, in labor $30,000 and again in 1981 to $100,000. organizations with such small annual organization newsletters or otherwise by If any of these levels were now adjusted receipts would be less likely to have mail to the members, or on union or for inflation, the amount would be less electronic recordkeeping than their employer bulletin boards. Neither the than the current threshold of $200,000. larger counterparts. terms of section 105, nor of any other Nevertheless, the Department has In this situation, if a labor provision of the LMRDA, vest the decided to raise the threshold to organization lacks the capability of Secretary of Labor with any express $250,000, an amount that approximates filing electronically, it could invoke the authority to enforce section 105. See 29 an inflation adjustment of the current continuing hardship exemption, and U.S.C. 415. threshold. Although the overwhelming thereby be excused from filing The Department, however, has majority (79%) of all reporting labor electronically for that year. The developed and implemented, with organizations are currently exempt from Department has concluded that direction from Congress to do so, an filing Form LM–2, changing the providing any other relief is extensive system for making available threshold to $250,000 will reduce the unnecessary and could undermine the on the Internet the labor organization recordkeeping and reporting burden for purpose of these reforms in situations where transparency and full disclosure annual financial reports filed with the approximately 500 labor organizations. are most important. First, union Department for the years 2000 and The Department will continue its past members are likely to be especially thereafter, as well as reports filed under practice of periodically assessing the interested in how ‘‘windfall’’ funds are section 203 of the LMRDA by labor appropriateness of the filing threshold handled. Second, if a union’s annual relations consultants who engage in to ensure that it is relevant in terms of receipts meet the filing threshold only persuader activity and the employers the current economy. who enter into agreements for such because of a one-time event, the union A number of labor organizations services. See 29 U.S.C. 433. Using this is unlikely to have many other commented that the Department should system, any member of a labor transactions within the reporting period permit unions to ‘‘pass through’’ funds organization or the general public with and fewer subject to the disclosure received during the reporting period Internet access can review all such thresholds of the final rule. The union reports (at http://union-reports.dol.gov) like per capita fees collected by local therefore will not face substantial except those for the approximately 600 unions for transmission to a national or burdens in collecting the information very small labor organizations whose international labor organization and/or necessary to file a Form LM–2, even national organizations file summary to use net dollar figures in order to though it has not been required to keep reports on their behalf pursuant to 29 avoid meeting the filing threshold. This track of this information in the past. CFR 403.4(b) because those small concern should be alleviated somewhat There is no sound reason to permit a unions had no assets, liabilities, by increasing the filing threshold to union that has $250,000 in annual receipts, or disbursements during the $250,000 but, more importantly, the receipts to avoid the reporting reporting period. Department does not agree that the obligation imposed on all other unions concern is valid. Labor organizations with similar receipts simply because the III. Responses to Comments on should be accountable for all funds union has not had similar receipts in Proposed Changes to Form LM–2 received and in their custody or control other years. during the reporting period. Members A. Which Labor Organizations Must File 2. Intermediate Unions Without Private a Form LM–2 who pay dues and per capita fees to their locals have a right to know what Employee Members 1. The Filing Threshold action their local took with respect to Three labor organizations—the Since 1994, only labor organizations those funds. Similarly, members have a National Education Association (NEA), with $200,000 or more in annual right to know how much money came the American Federation of Teachers receipts have been required to file a into their union during the year, not just (AFT), and the AFL–CIO—and one Form LM–2; smaller unions are the net amount left at year’s end. individual union member submitted permitted to use the simpler Forms LM– Several commenters, including the comments on the Department’s proposal 3 or LM–4. Although the Department AFL–CIO, cited the situation where a to adopt the holding of the U.S. Court considered raising the threshold for small labor organization with a history of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit in Chao filing a Form LM–2 in its 2002 NPRM, of filing either Form LM–3 or LM–4, i.e., v. Bremerton Metal Trades Council, thus reducing the number of labor one with annual receipts below AFL–CIO, 294 F.3d 1114 (2002), organizations affected by most of the $200,000, by virtue of an unusual event interpreting section 3(j) of the LMRDA. changes proposed, it did not propose an during the year had receipts boosted to In that case, the court of appeals ruled increase. The Department did solicit in excess of $200,000. For example, a that an intermediate labor organization comments, however, on the appropriate small union with consistent annual that has no dealings itself with private level of annual receipts to trigger a Form receipts of $50,000 sells a surplus piece employers and no members who are LM–2 obligation. Some commenters of real estate for $200,000, resulting in employed in the private sector may expressed the view that the current annual receipts for that year of nevertheless be a labor organization threshold is too high and some argued $250,000. Under current practice, the engaged in an industry affecting that all unions should be required to file union would be required to file Form commerce within the meaning of

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:10 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\09OCR2.SGM 09OCR2 58384 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations

section 3(j) of the LMRDA if the Congress was to exempt ‘‘wholly public the application of the statutory terms to intermediate body is ‘‘subordinate to a sector’’ labor organizations from the the circumstances of each case. While national or international labor coverage of the Act. The Bremerton this rulemaking provides a vehicle for organization which includes a labor court found that an intermediate labor making clear the Department’s organization engaged in commerce.’’ organization is not ‘‘wholly public interpretation of the statutory term, after The Department proposed to follow this sector’’ and exempt from the Act where notice and comment, the factual holding by adding language to the it is subordinate to a parent organization question whether a particular labor instructions for Forms LM–2, LM–3, and that meets the definition of a labor organization meets the statutory test LM–4 clarifying that any ‘‘conference, organization engaged in an industry applying that interpretation cannot and general committee, joint or system affecting commerce. The Department’s should not be resolved in this context. board, or joint council’’ that is regulation at 29 CFR 451.3(a)(4) is not The NEA’s state affiliates and other subordinate to a national or contrary to the Bremerton decision entities are free to challenge the international labor organization will be when the regulation is read as giving application of the Bremerton required to file an annual financial effect to the court’s interpretation of the interpretation to their organizations and report if the national or international term ‘‘wholly public sector labor labor organization is a labor organization.’’ The Department to pursue any avenues relative to the organization engaged in an industry concludes that none of the commenters issue of their coverage under the affecting commerce within the meaning provides a persuasive argument for LMRDA. The proposed language in the of section 3(j) of the LMRDA. disagreeing with the Bremerton court’s instructions and accompanying The three union commenters objected reading of the statute and therefore will references are not intended to forestall to the application of the LMRDA to maintain the expanded language in the any such action, but rather to make clear wholly public sector intermediate instructions for the Form LM–2. The the Department’s views regarding the bodies pursuant to Bremerton as expanded language adopting the general meaning of the statutory terms. contrary to the statutory language, Bremerton court’s construction of the One commenter mistakenly read the established case law, and Department of statute will also be added to the instructions and the preamble language Labor regulations at 29 CFR 451.3(a)(4). instructions for Forms LM–3 and LM–4, to include state or local central bodies Additionally, the NEA and AFT but since no other changes will be made among those organizations that must opposed the extension of the LMRDA to to those forms, neither the forms nor the file. The LMRDA and the Department’s wholly public sector bodies through the instructions for those forms will be regulations at 29 CFR 451.5 make clear regulatory process and commented that reprinted in the appendix. that a ‘‘state or local central body’’ is such an extension should require In its comments, the NEA excepted from the definition of labor Congressional action. They further incorporated by reference the arguments commented that the decision in presented by its state affiliates in organization in section 3(i) and the Bremerton does not bring wholly public Alabama Education Association, et al. definition of a labor organization sector intermediate bodies within v. Chao, No. 1:03CV00253 (D.D.C. filed deemed to be engaged in an industry LMRDA coverage, and any reference to Feb. 14, 2003). There, the NEA’s state affecting commerce in section 3(j). The Bremerton should, therefore, be taken affiliates argue that they represent only Department’s adoption of the reasoning out of the new rules where such public employees and are self of the Bremerton court does not bring reference is used to attempt coverage of governing, autonomous organizations these organizations within the ambit of wholly public sector organizations. affiliated with the NEA, not subordinate the LMRDA, either explicitly or The expanded language in the bodies within the meaning of section implicitly. instructions merely incorporates and 3(j)(5) of the LMRDA and, therefore, not An additional comment urged the restates the language of section 3(j) of subject to the LMRDA, even if the NEA Department to continue to seek full the statute. The reference to the is subject. The AFL–CIO, in a comment disclosure from the Washington State Bremerton decision clarifies that the related to the NEA state affiliates’ Education Association, as state law Department intends to interpret this argument in Alabama Education provided no comparable protection for language in a manner consistent with Association, et al. v. Chao, cautioned public sector employees. The that decision. Bremerton is the most that neither the Department of Labor nor Department will seek compliance from recent court decision interpreting the Ninth Circuit can do away with the all organizations required by the section 3(j). The Department recognizes statutory limitation of the section 3(j) that the interpretation of section 3(j) set proviso to entities that are LMRDA to file labor organization forth in Bremerton represents a ‘‘subordinate’’ to a national or reports. departure from previous court decisions international union covered by the B. Itemization of Major Receipts and and the Department’s prior LMRDA. The AFL–CIO further Disbursements administration of the Act. However, the commented that the proposal to amend Department has concluded that the coverage language should not be used to 1. General Comments Concerning Bremerton court’s interpretation is the preempt pending litigation, and the Itemization correct reading of the statutory NPRM preamble should not be used to language. Further, neither the create an argument in litigation that the The Department received numerous Department nor the court has added Department of Labor’s adoption of this comments concerning proposed statutory language or otherwise statutory instruction is entitled to Schedules 14 through 19. These encroached on Congressional deference. Schedules call for individual prerogatives here. The court, pursuant The question whether a particular identification of certain receipts and to its constitutional authority, labor organization falls within the disbursements for various categories interpreted terms contained in the Bremerton test is not decided by the that reflect the services provided to statute, and the Department, operating proposed language of the instructions or union members. Receipts and within its authority to administer the the references to Bremerton in the disbursements are allocated to statute, has stated its intention to adopt NPRM. That coverage issue involves a Schedules 14 through 19 and are either that interpretation. The stated intent of factual determination that will turn on listed as individual entries or as

VerDate jul<14>2003 18:18 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\09OCR2.SGM 09OCR2 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations 58385

aggregated entries. Individual (or more costly than it is under current descriptive purpose. Although some ‘‘major’’) receipts and disbursements, as disclosure rules.’’ commenters asserted that this is a well as payments to or from a single Many commenters turned to recent dramatic policy shift tantamount to entity or individual that aggregate to corporate finance scandals in describing imposing a new accounting system, meet the disclosure threshold, must be their general support for greater unions have always been required to reported. transparency among institutions, allocate each disbursement to one or The Department received several whether governmental, business, or more disbursement categories on the comments supporting itemization. Most labor organizations. They stated that Form LM–2. The revised form alters the of these comments expressed general greed can infect any organization and categories but not the underlying approval for requiring disclosure of that disclosure is its best remedy. As method of allocating these financial information in greater detail. A noted by some commenters, the fiscal disbursements. Indeed, there are fewer common theme of these comments was integrity of labor organizations has a disbursement categories on the new a belief that the Department’s proposal profound impact on the financial form. After allocating the disbursement, would increase the accountability of stability and security of employees. The the union officer or bookkeeper makes union officials to union members, serve mismanagement, or failure, of labor a brief entry on the ‘‘purpose’’ for each to discourage union corruption, and organizations can cause major transaction in a memo field. These sorts improve overall union democracy. One disruptions in work relationships, of operations are routine within comment cited a specific instance in retirement plans, and overall employee accounting systems; organizations which union officials concealed well being. change the way disbursements are improper transactions within aggregated The Department received voluminous classified in the normal course of disbursements, which could have been comments opposing itemization and business. prevented (or at least identified) by raising a number of concerns about the The AFL–CIO’s survey data also itemized reporting. Similarly, necessity of reporting this information; suggests that many unions already commenters related well-publicized potential problems involving adequate maintain their records and accounting situations involving union officers who accounting systems; possible adverse systems in ways that are readily allegedly misappropriated funds as consequences from disclosing the compatible with the requirements of the examples of instances where required information; and a variety of final rule. For example, the AFL–CIO’s itemization, by allowing members to other issues. survey data suggest: 59% of national detect questionable transactions, would Several comments opposed and international unions record have limited the damage to the union itemization in general as too costly or expenses by type of activity or and its finances and, perhaps, deterred burdensome because current union functional category; 62% of unions can the individuals involved from breaching accounting systems or practices do not generate the required itemization detail; the obligations entrusted to them. Other capture all of the information required 86% of unions do not have trouble commenters stated that without by the criteria, and that electronic downloading information from their itemization ‘‘and the transparency it record keeping systems will have to be account systems into a spreadsheet; brings to union finances ‘‘union reconfigured to comport with the 40% of national and international members have little defense against the revised form. The Department believes unions have a system of accounts potential mismanagement and the comments overstate the receivable that is immediately misappropriation of union funds. technological difficulties involved in compatible with the final rule, and 66% Unusual spending patterns or shifts in transforming existing accounting of national and international unions expenses, as revealed in a Form LM–2, systems to accommodate itemization have a system of accounts payable that a commenter stated, may tip union procedures. Preliminarily, union is immediately compatible with the members off to fraud and abuse, officers and employees will need to final rule. Labor organizations that do allowing them the option of disciplining study the instructions and forms, and not currently maintain electronic books, or removing wasteful or corrupt union thereby gain an understanding of the or that use accounting software that leaders. new requirements. The Department will cannot be modified to track the data Other comments supported launch a compliance assistance required by the revised form, will itemization because it replaces broad initiative that includes an overview of experience an increased burden, but as categories with more useable, the requirements, a comparison to the the analysis under the Paperwork informative, and detailed data. These old requirements, a tentative schedule Reduction Act indicates in Section V, commenters emphasized the members’ of seminars for international, national, the burden is, on average, a modest one. right and need to know how a union is intermediate and local unions hosted The burden of reporting the spending their money to ensure that it throughout the country, an email list- individual items required by Schedules is being managed well and spent wisely. serve to provide periodic updates to 14–19 is minimized by the electronic Members expressed particular concerns interested parties, web-based materials reporting system, which creates about the lack of information about that include frequently asked questions, efficiency gains by performing the various categories of expenses, among a description of the Form T–1 administrative functions of the reporting them political activities, joint labor- registration process, and other topics of system. To this end, the Department has management programs, and the transfer interest to filers. provided technical specifications to of funds to other entities. The Once union officials understand the assist labor organizations in converting Regulatory Studies Program of the new reporting requirements, it may be financial data into a form supported by Mercatus Center at George Mason necessary to make some adjustments to the Department’s electronic filing University commented, ‘‘By increasing their recordkeeping systems. The most software. The technical specifications the number of classification categories, important change that should be made contained in the appended Data lowering the dollar level of disclosures, immediately involves the tracking of Specifications Document (DSD) inform and by potentially increasing the disbursements and ‘‘other’’ receipts to affected unions of the various data number of people who must participate ensure that each disbursement and formats that can be exported into the in a potential fraud, the revised reports ‘‘other’’ receipt is allocated to the proper electronic form. Filers will have the * * * should make committing fraud disbursement category with a option of exporting itemized data from

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:10 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\09OCR2.SGM 09OCR2 58386 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations

standard accounting reports in one of Together with reporting receipts and entity or organization must meet. The several common file formats. There will disbursements by functional categories, argument is neither accurate nor be a non-recurring burden as the filers the proposed rule will provide persuasive. First, as explained in detail create the proper reports, which can information that will help ensure that in Section II(C), this argument is based then be used in future years. It is union leadership is acting in the upon incorrect assumptions. Second, important to note that smaller filers that interests of its membership. other agencies do, in fact, require would only report a handful of itemized The Department disagrees with those itemized reporting of financial transactions for the year may choose to comments that suggest itemization will transactions by certain kinds of complete the form manually through overwhelm interested parties with organizations (for example, the Internal copy-and-paste techniques rather than information. These comments rest on Revenue Service requires itemized using the DSD to set up the necessary the erroneous premise that an reporting of disbursements by Section accounting reports to export the individual seeking information must 527 organizations and the Federal itemized data. As the analysis of the rely on hard-copy documents to review Election Commission requires itemized burden associated with making the the Form LM–2. Labor organizations reporting of receipts and disbursements changes required by the revised form, (with few exceptions), however, must by federal political committees. Third, set forth in Section V, demonstrates, the file the form electronically. The new reporting practices for a regulated burdens anticipated by many procedures provide more detailed, and community may vary depending on the commenters are overstated. more accessible, information than the particular requirements imposed by existing system by utilizing the As explained in Section V, the various laws. The appropriate standards advantages of computer technology. Department agrees with some of the for financial disclosure by labor Electronic filing permits the reviewer to comments that, even though the organizations must be determined in focus his or her review using a search Department has received no comments light of the LMRDA, and not the engine to guide the inquiry; on-screen over the years regarding its published practices, policies or criteria of other (or paper) review of each entry is assessments of the burden of filing the laws. In that vein, the LMRDA sought to unnecessary. Further, the current Form current Form LM–2, the burden of filing address the particular problems posed LM–2 informs the member only of the by labor organization reporting by the current form may have been aggregate disbursements (or receipts); requiring reports containing ‘‘such underestimated. The Department has the member must go through the trouble detail as may be necessary to disclose its revised its assessment of the burden of obtaining more detailed information financial conditions and operations.’’ associated with the current form from the union concerning the See 29 U.S.C. 431(b). The fact that other upward in response to the comments it individual transactions in order to find agencies, administering other laws, received in order to improve the any meaningful information regarding utilize different reporting criteria and estimate of the additional time and cost specific receipts and disbursements. practices is not a valid objection to involved in filing the revised form. Even Itemized reporting provides the detailed requiring itemization for purposes of the using these higher estimates and information in a searchable format as an LMRDA. acknowledging that there will be initial matter. Finally, Statement B of increased costs for reporting labor the revised Form LM–2 provides 2. Itemization of Confidential organizations as a result of these aggregate figures for each disbursement Information reforms, the Department has concluded Schedule. A member reviewing the One of the most significant concerns that the advantages derived from the revised Form LM–2, therefore, has expressed by many comments more detailed reporting outweigh the access to both the aggregate and the concerned the potential harm to union extra burden imposed on unions. As individual disbursements for each interests in disclosing confidential noted above, the FASB acknowledges category. Resort to the more detailed financial and personal information the utility of itemized (or information remains at the member’s required by Schedules 14–19. ‘‘disaggregated’’) financial data. FAS No. discretion. Commenters contended that such 117, ¶ 118. By contrast, reporting in In a related vein, one comment detailed disclosure could adversely general ‘‘bottom-line’’ amounts does not contended that the level of detail affect union interests and activities that provide the level of detailed information required by itemization will inevitably should be kept confidential as a matter that will effectively answer an result in unintentional reporting errors, of law or public policy. The comments interested member’s inquiry. Moreover, ‘‘costly criminal investigations’’ for focused principally on disclosure of the generalized reporting places the burden misreporting, and ‘‘prosecutorial information to individuals or on the member to obtain the information abuse.’’ Two comments expressed an organizations outside the union that from the union, including resort to additional concern that the errors could might use the information to impede litigation if the union fails or refuses to be used to prosecute union officers legitimate union activities or otherwise disclose the requested information under the LMRDA because the officers harm union interests. The comments voluntarily. OLMS experience over must certify the correctness of the cited a variety of examples in which years of auditing and investigating reported information. The commenters’ such itemization could be detrimental to union financial activities indicates that suggestion that increased reporting the union itself or other organizations increased access to information errors may prompt unwarranted and individuals involved with the concerning a union’s financial picture investigations and prosecutions is union and its activities: (i) Identifying will enable its members to protect their speculative and unsupported by any individuals paid by the union to seek own interests through more effective evidence in the rulemaking record. employment with a non-union employer vigilance over union funds, and will aid Moreover, only willful violations, not in order to assist the union in organizing OLMS in future enforcement efforts. inadvertent errors, can result in criminal its workforce; (ii) revealing ‘‘job- Disclosure of basic information about liability. See 29 U.S.C. 439. targeting’’ or ‘‘market recovery’’ major transactions is the most effective Several comments argued that programs; (iii) discouraging the union means of providing information to itemization imposes a unique reporting from seeking legal advice if fee union members who are interested in standard on unions that no other disclosure reveals the attorney-client their organization’s financial affairs. oversight agency requires and no other relationship; (iv) violating legal rules

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:10 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\09OCR2.SGM 09OCR2 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations 58387

that limit discovery about experts in procedure should be made available for [union’s] financial interest in litigation (e.g., FRCP 26(b)(4)(B)); (v) the following types of information: nondisclosure against the injury to the violating confidentiality agreements in • Information that might identify interest of [a requesting union member] settlements; (vi) revealing information individuals paid by the union to work and other union members in about union organizing campaigns, in a non-union facility in order to assist determining how funds held in trust for political activities and legal strategies; the union in organizing employees, them are being spent.’’ Mallick v. Int’l (vii) affording tactical advantages to provided that such individuals are not Bhd. of Elec. Workers, supra, 749 F.2d service vendors and opposing parties in employees of the union who receive at 785. In the Department’s view, this contract negotiations; and (viii) more than $10,000 in the aggregate in result is not required by the statute and endangering the lives of foreign labor the reporting year from the union (in is, in fact, inconsistent with the activists supported by the union. In which case the statute requires that it be statutory mandate that any member be some cases, the comments viewed reported, see 29 U.S.C. 431(b)(3)); permitted to examine records to verify disclosure as the direct cause of a • Information that might provide the union’s financial report merely upon potential harm; in other cases, the insight into the reporting union’s a showing of just cause, without regard comments contended that disclosure organizing strategy; and to any competing interest of the union. may provide clues from which an • Information that might provide a Accordingly, language has been added adverse party could educate itself about tactical advantage to parties with whom to § 403.8 to make clear the union activities, relationships, and the reporting union or an affiliated Department’s view that the fact that a strategic goals. Some commenters made union is engaged or will be engaged in union has chosen not to disclose the similar arguments with respect to the contract negotiations. identity of an entity that has received a proposal to require itemization of With respect to these specific types of disbursement of $5,000 or more, on the receipts. information, if the reporting union ground that disclosure to third parties The Department agrees that there may believes that itemized disclosure of a might be adverse to the union’s be some situations in which the specific major disbursement or interests, is just cause for union potential harm to union interests aggregated disbursement would be members to inquire as to the identity of occasioned by disclosing certain types adverse to the union’s legitimate the recipient or donor and the reason for of confidential information warrants an interests, it may report the disbursement the transfer of funds. The statute exception from the requirement to in the ‘‘All Other Disbursements’’ requires no additional showing to provide itemized information regarding portion of either Schedule 15 require the union to permit a member to major receipts that are not reported (Representational Activities) or examine the underlying records. elsewhere on the form and major Schedule 19 (Union Administration) on Further, a reporting union will also be disbursements. These situations are the Detailed Summary Page. The union permitted to report amounts received or likely to be far more limited, however, must also enter a notation in Item 69 disbursed pursuant to a settlement that than suggested by some comments. (‘‘Additional Information’’) identifying is subject to a confidentiality agreement, Unions are not required to provide non- the Schedule(s) from which the union or that the union is otherwise prohibited financial information regarding excluded any itemized receipts or by law from disclosing, in the ‘‘All organizing strategy, notes of meetings, disbursements because of an asserted Other Receipts’’ or ‘‘All Other or names of volunteers on a Form LM– legitimate interest in confidentiality. Disbursements’’ portion of the 2. Rather, they are required only to A union member, however, has the applicable Schedule on the Detailed provide certain information regarding statutory right ‘‘to examine any books, Summary Page. Similarly, the financial transactions. Generally records, and accounts necessary to Department agrees that in the extremely speaking, the information disclosed will verify’’ the union’s financial report if rare situation where disclosure would indicate simply that a disbursement was the member can establish ‘‘just cause’’ endanger the health or safety of an made to, or money received from, a for access to the information. 29 U.S.C. individual, the information need only particular individual for a purpose 431(c); 29 CFR 403.8 (2002). In the be reported in the ‘‘All Other Receipts/ described by the union. Although there Department’s view, any exclusion of Disbursements’’ portion of the may be certain consequences as a result itemized disbursements from Schedules applicable Schedule. In these of such disclosure—as where, for 15–19 would constitute a per se circumstances, non-itemized reporting example, a union indicates that a demonstration of ‘‘just cause’’ for of the information, by itself, will not payment has been made for ‘‘job purposes of the Act. Consequently, any constitute just cause for additional targeting’’ that some might consider union member (and the Department, disclosure. inappropriate—such consequences must which need not establish ‘‘just cause’’), Finally, some commenters asserted be both serious and beyond the scope of but not a member of the public, upon that disclosure of itemized information consequences intended by the LMRDA request, has the right to review the regarding benefits provided to to warrant consideration of overriding undisclosed information that otherwise individuals, such as, for example, burial the interest in disclosure embodied in would have appeared in the applicable expense benefits, would invade the that statute. Schedule if the union withholds the privacy of those individuals. This The Department has decided, information in order to protect argument, while persuasive, affects only however, that commenters have made a confidentiality interests. The disbursements that may properly be persuasive argument that certain Department has added to the final rule reported in Schedule 20 (Benefits). information need not be made available a provision that clarifies the Accordingly, as discussed below, the to the general public and that disclosure Department’s interpretation of the Department has decided to retain the could be sufficiently adverse to union statute in light of the specific previous Schedule for Benefits, rather interests that the modification described modification of the proposed than the one proposed in the NPRM, below is warranted to permit labor itemization requirement in response to and to continue to permit labor organizations to protect certain the numerous comments received in organizations to report these confidential information on certain this regard. disbursements only in the aggregate. schedules. Specifically, the Department Some courts have held that a finding The Department believes that the has concluded that this special of just cause ‘‘requires balancing the modified disclosure procedures for

VerDate jul<14>2003 18:18 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\09OCR2.SGM 09OCR2 58388 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations

confidential financial information union. In these circumstances, there is Finally, labor organizations may resolve satisfactorily address the privacy nothing in the revised regulation or any serious privacy concerns with concerns raised by the comments. The forms that would prevent the union respect to the types of information comments focus primarily on the from seeking a protective order or some specified above by exercising their potential harm in disclosing a union’s other means of protecting its interests. option to report the disbursement in confidential information about a The Department disagrees with the question in the ‘‘All Other particular disbursement to the general comment that a union’s compelled Disbursements’’ entry for the schedule public, especially individuals and disclosure of information relating to on the Detailed Summary Page. While entities whose interests may conflict legal fees associated with an organizing concealing the identity of individuals or with the union’s interests. The union campaign would improperly intrude entities receiving disbursements may must report the disbursement in some upon the union’s attorney-client raise questions concerning the form. The modified procedures enable privilege. This privilege does not disbursement’s legitimacy, such the union to withhold the confidential generally extend to the fact of questions are precisely the reason that information from general public consultation or employment, including labor organizations will be required to disclosure while complying with the the payment and amount of fees. See indicate in Item 69 (‘‘Additional Act’s reporting requirements. The McCormick on Evidence, § 90, (5th ed. Information’’) that they have used this union, however, may not withhold the 1999, updated 2003). Further, while the procedure and that use of this procedure information from its members because privilege might protect the identity of a will constitute ‘‘just cause’’ for union they have a statutory right to examine client when sought from an attorney, a members who request access to the the information underlying the reported client can be required to divulge the underlying information. data if ‘‘just cause’’ exists. name of its attorney, which would be Unless disclosure is prohibited by law relevant here. Id. Similarly, the 3. Itemization of Major Receipts or would endanger an individual, the Department has concluded that the rule The Department proposed changes to concerns justifying the decision to that limits discovery about experts in Schedule 14 to require additional permit nondisclosure of specific litigation to ‘‘exceptional information for reporting ‘‘other information derive from an interest in circumstances’’ is not relevant, in that receipts’’ in the reporting period. ‘‘Other preventing members of the public, other the language of the rule protects the receipts’’ consist of all receipts that the than union members and the ‘‘facts known or opinions held’’ of the labor organization does not report Department, from gaining access to that expert, which would not be revealed in elsewhere in Statement B of Form LM– information. In the Department’s view, a Form LM–2. See FRCP 26(b)(4)(B). Nor 2. Specifically, the Department withholding on these grounds is the mere fact that a disbursement has proposed requiring a labor organization information that should otherwise be been made likely to reveal a union’s to identify all the other receipts that are disclosed in the Form LM–2 is a legal strategies. Further, to the extent ‘‘major’’ receipts. A ‘‘major’’ receipt is sufficient basis for ‘‘just cause.’’ The that a payment to an attorney or expert either an individual receipt of $5,000 or union’s concerns regarding disclosure to can meet the standards for non-itemized more, or the aggregate receipts from an third parties arise outside the context of disclosure—that is, for example, individual source over the reporting the members’ right to information. In because disclosure of a payment to an period totaling $5,000 or more. Each order to protect both the union’s and its attorney would somehow provide a such receipt must be listed by payee members’ competing interests, tactical advantage to a party with whom with the following information: the recognizing that the failure to report the reporting union is engaged in name and address of the entity specific information for a major receipt contract negotiations—a union may providing the receipt; the type of or disbursement constitutes ‘‘just cause’’ utilize those procedures. The business or job classification of the for examining withheld information in Department does not agree that it is entity; the purpose of the receipt; the these circumstances, together with the necessary to permit unions to avoid the date of the receipt; and the amount of aggregate reporting of disbursements for itemized reporting obligation simply the receipt. benefits, strikes an appropriate balance. because disclosure might reveal the A variety of comments addressed the Unions will have ample opportunity union’s political activities. Indeed, as proposed $5,000 threshold for ‘‘major’’ to argue that the Department’s demonstrated by the comments receipts. Some comments considered interpretation of the ‘‘just cause’’ discussed in Section C (4), such the threshold too high because $5,000 provision of the statute (29 U.S.C. disbursements are likely to be of allows a margin within which union 431(c)) is in error before it discloses particular interest to union members officials may still commit financial information that it has reported only in and no convincing argument has been improprieties, and prevents union the non-itemized total. Unless a union advanced regarding any legitimate need members from reviewing the smaller voluntarily discloses information when to keep such information confidential. amounts for potential improprieties, i.e., it is requested by a member, the member Other comments objected to reporting complete transparency for union will still be forced to seek enforcement a recipient’s address because the finances. The comments recommended of the right to this information in federal information was unnecessary or thresholds ranging from zero to $2,000 district court and the union will be able impinged on the recipient’s privacy as a means of obtaining greater (or to argue to the court that the through its publication. The Department complete) information about a union’s Department’s interpretation of the disagrees. The schedules only require receipts. Other comments considered statutory requirement is incorrect. Even the disclosure of business addresses, if the threshold too low. The majority of if the court agrees that use of this available, but at least the recipient’s city these comments recommended $25,000 reporting procedure is sufficient to and state. This information is necessary as an appropriate figure; others support a finding of just cause, the for verifying the recipient’s existence suggested basing the threshold on a union may argue that it has a legitimate and identity. The privacy concern is percentage of the union’s receipts (the concern that a union member may questionable given the public higher of either 4% or $15,000, or a further disclose the underlying records, availability of most addresses for level related to the GAAP concept of or information about the underlying individuals and business entities on the materiality). A related recommendation records, in a manner detrimental to the Internet and in telephone books. applied a graduated threshold that

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:10 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\09OCR2.SGM 09OCR2 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations 58389

increases with the increase in a union’s union may determine whether a receipt Reduction Act Analysis, in Section V, income. In general, the proponents of must be reported as a major receipt, as the cost of maintaining sufficient higher thresholds contended that the well as one that members may use with information to permit the aggregation of $5,000 figure results in burdensome ease and certainty in reviewing the major receipts not reported elsewhere reporting requirements and excessive Form LM–2. Some commenters from, and disbursements to, a single detail. recommended that the Department entity over the course of the year, The Department believes that $5,000 index the threshold annually for combined with all of the other changes is an appropriate threshold for reporting inflation. The Department disagrees for as a result of this rule, were estimated ‘‘other’’ receipts. The comments the same reason it rejects the use of a in order to arrive at a realistic underscore the competing interests in percentage-based threshold: adopting a assessment of the overall cost of these setting a reasonable figure. Setting the figure that is subject to annual reforms. Balancing this cost for threshold lower (or eliminating it fluctuation creates an unpredictable reporting unions against the benefits for entirely) increases the number of standard. The Department believes all union members, and for unions receipts that must be reported, which parties will benefit from a defined themselves, resulting from increased correspondingly increases the standard that applies to all unions. The transparency—including the information available for inspection. A Department also rejects the use of a enhancement of the ability of members lower threshold, however, also would graduated threshold linked to union to fully participate in the democratic increase the burden, particularly for income. This approach suffers from the governance of their unions and the aggregated receipts from individual same defects as percentage-based deterrent value of disclosure in sources. Raising the threshold would thresholds and thresholds indexed to preventing mismanagement and reduce the reporting burden, but it also inflation, discussed above. Furthermore, misappropriation of union funds—the would reduce the financial information a single standard unrelated to union Department has concluded that captured for review and thereby income promotes the purposes of the itemization, to which only a portion of undermine the goal of transparency. LMRDA. Although the economic this cost is attributable, is not only a While a strong argument could be made significance to the union of $5,000 may worthwhile, but an essential, element of that all disbursements are significant vary with the size of a union’s income, this reform. and should be itemized, the Department the interest of the membership in having 4. Itemization of Major Disbursements concludes that some threshold must be access to a broad array of information used that accommodates both the concerning the sources and uses of The Department also proposed to purpose behind the disclosure of such union finances, and in the detection and require labor organizations to report information and the concerns about the deterrence of fraud, remains constant. ‘‘major’’ disbursements in specified burden of tracking and reporting the The proposed Schedule 14 requires a categories. A ‘‘major’’ disbursement is information. The $5,000 threshold union to report aggregated receipts from either an individual disbursement strikes a balance between the opposing each individual source if the total meeting the threshold-reporting amount viewpoints. Full-time workers who were amount received from the individual or a series of payments to an individual union members had median usual source is $5,000 or more. Some that, in the aggregate, reach the weekly earnings of $740 in 2002. See comments opposed aggregation because threshold, in a single category. The Union Members in 2002, Bureau of tracking each receipt throughout the Department requested comments on the Labor Statistics News Release (USDL– fiscal year to determine whether all appropriate threshold for a ‘‘major’’ 03–88) (http://www.bls.gov/ receipts from a specific source disbursement, proposing a $2,000– news.release/union2.nr0.htm). Thus, it ultimately reach the threshold is $5,000 range. The Department also is reasonable to assume that to union burdensome. The Department believes requested comments on whether members, $5,000 represents a significant that aggregation of receipts is individual disbursements among amount of money. A receipt (or appropriate. In terms of its interest to a different categories should be aggregated aggregated receipts from an individual union member, there is no difference to reach the threshold. source) in this amount may reasonably between a single $5,000 (or more) The Department received numerous attract interest in the payment’s source. receipt from one source and several comments concerning the appropriate The Department will continue to be receipts from one source totaling $5,000 threshold for itemizing disbursements mindful of the need for any future or more. Consequently, reporting on the various Schedules. Several adjustment in the threshold for aggregated receipts is equally important comments recommended setting the itemization in order to ensure that the in terms of achieving transparency for a threshold in the $200–$500 range to information reported is meaningful. union’s financial picture. increase the amount of information The Department rejects the suggested Despite the concerns expressed by about disbursements that the unions use of percentage-based thresholds numerous commenters, tracking must disclose; one comment suggested rather than defined dollar amounts. A multiple receipts from a specific source setting the threshold at zero for the same percentage-based threshold will vary throughout the fiscal year will not reason. Conversely, many comments annually depending on the figure (e.g., impose unreasonable additional burden criticized the proposed threshold as too annual receipts) from which it is on a reporting union. The revised form low. Several comments expressed derived. This figure cannot be alters the categories but not the general opposition but did not provide determined until the close of the fiscal underlying method of allocating these a specific alternative. Commenters that year. In any given year, moreover, the disbursements, and, indeed, reduces the did propose an alternative threshold base figure itself may be controversial if number of disbursement categories. typically recommended using a $25,000 the Department and the union disagree After allocating the disbursement to the figure. A few comments suggested as to the monies that should be included proper category, the union officer need indexing the threshold to some other in that figure. A percentage-based only make a brief entry on the figure (e.g., total assets, disbursements threshold is therefore unstable and more ‘‘purpose’’ for each transaction in a or annual revenues) to establish a difficult to enforce. A defined dollar memo field. These sorts of operations floating threshold linking it to the threshold provides an unequivocal and are routine within accounting systems. union’s size or financial activity. As predictable standard by which each As demonstrated in the Paperwork with itemization of ‘‘other’’ receipts, the

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:10 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00017 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\09OCR2.SGM 09OCR2 58390 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations

proponents of higher thresholds threshold will vary annually depending assistance, thus increasing the burden contended that a lower baseline would on the base figure from which the on the labor organization. See id. result in burdensome and excessive threshold is derived. This figure cannot A few comments opposed reporting detail. be determined until the close of the aggregated disbursements to a single The Department has decided to adopt fiscal year. In any given year, moreover, entity or individual if the total amount $5,000, the highest proposed amount, as the base figure itself may be meets the threshold because the union the threshold for itemizing controversial if the Department and the would have to track each disbursement disbursements. As with the ‘‘other’’ union disagree as to the monies that through the fiscal year to determine receipts threshold, the fundamental should be included in the base figure, whether the aggregated amount meets issue involves a balancing of competing complicating a union’s ability to comply the threshold at the end of the year. interests. Advocates of a low (or no) with, and the Department’s ability to Other comments treated aggregation as threshold emphasized the need for enforce, the reporting requirements. part of itemization and opposed both transparency of union finances; by Any disagreement over the base figure requirements because they perceived lowering or eliminating the threshold, will necessarily affect the indexed the entire reporting process as imposing the union must divulge a greater amount threshold and disrupt the reporting of burdensome and costly compliance of financial information. Ultimately, disbursements. Thus, a figure that is requirements; providing too much greater transparency enhances the subject to annual fluctuation creates an information to be useful; imposing a deterrence of union financial unpredictable standard. A defined unique and more rigorous standard on misconduct and provides union dollar threshold provides an labor unions than applies to any other members with more knowledge about unequivocal and predictable standard organization; and requiring significant the union’s activities, regardless of any by which each union may determine and costly changes to the union’s potential financial mismanagement. whether a disbursement must be current accounting system. Greater transparency, however, also reported. Although the economic With respect to tracking minor (less involves a greater burden on the unions significance to the union of $5,000 may than $5,000) disbursements through the in terms of reporting. Proponents of a vary with the size of a union’s income, fiscal year, the Department does not higher threshold focused on this aspect, the interest of the membership in having believe the comments identify a and urged the Department to set a high access to a broad array of information substantial basis for abandoning the standard, e.g., $25,000. After concerning the sources and uses of aggregation principle. Once the union consideration of both viewpoints, the union finances, and in the detection and installs or modifies its accounting Department believes that a $5,000 deterrence of fraud, remains constant. software to appropriately chart each threshold strikes the proper balance disbursement, tracking every between the benefits and costs of The proponents of an indexed disbursement regardless of amount will itemization. First, it is plain that threshold or a materiality standard not be burdensome. Indeed, unions virtually any disbursement is significant premised their arguments on the belief already must track every disbursement, in that it provides information on how that a bright line threshold will require and must know the type and amount of the union is being run, and provides a reporting of immaterial disbursements. each disbursement, in order to report potential avenue for fraud. Second, the As explained above, the Department’s them in the appropriate aggregate Department has concluded that the adoption of a $5,000 threshold is based amounts for each category on the threshold should be set at an amount in large part upon the view that receipts existing Form LM–2. Furthermore, the that will, in effect, establish a uniform and disbursements of that amount are advantages of aggregation offset any standard for determining that a significant to union members. Further, additional burden from tracking all particular transaction, or set of the Department does not believe that the disbursements. Aggregation denies the transactions, is reportable. Third, the GAAP’s test for materiality is persuasive incentive to break up a ‘‘major’’ threshold must accommodate the in this context. As a commenter noted, disbursement to a single entity or concerns about the burden of tracking unlike commercial entities, which are individual in order to avoid the and reporting the information. The accountable based on their profit or loss, threshold for itemizing the payment to Department will continue to be mindful labor unions are accountable in terms of circumvent the reporting requirements of the need for any future adjustment in the stewardship responsibilities of their of the statute. Aggregation therefore the threshold for itemization in order to officers. Consequently, the use of a sum provides a more accurate picture of a ensure that the information reported is that would have little effect on an union’s disbursements because it meaningful. Several comments entity’s viability may be safely ignored focuses on the total amount of money recommended using indexed thresholds by an investor who cares only for return the union pays a particular entity or rather than defined dollar amounts. The on investment, but may be of individual, rather than only the ‘‘major’’ comments contended that indexed considerable interest to a union member disbursements. Given the benefits of thresholds provide a more accurate when spent by his or her union, as the aggregation and the fact that unions are basis for determining whether a union member’s interest extends well already required to track each disbursement is significant in light of beyond a concern with the union’s disbursement, the Department rejects the union’s overall level of outlay. Two bottom line, to the furtherance of its the position that aggregation will be comments merely suggested adopting an overall mission. A materiality standard overly burdensome by requiring the indexed threshold as a general would not give sufficient weight to union to track all disbursements, proposition. Other comments identified these non-economic concerns, for a including those that ultimately will not specific alternative formulae: 5% of union member is interested not solely in be reported as itemized payments. total union assets; 5% of total the funds themselves, but the activities The Department invited comments on disbursements; or a percentage based on of the union. See Statement of Financial whether to require itemization of the GAAP concept of materiality. Accounting Concepts No. 2 (SFAC No. disbursements to an individual or entity The Department rejects the indexed 2), ¶¶123–132. Further, adoption of the that, in the aggregate, total less than the threshold approach because it does not vague materiality standard as the threshold amount in a particular provide a desirable level of certainty for threshold for itemization would require Schedule once the threshold has been the reporting community. An indexed unions to obtain substantial professional reached either in another Schedule or in

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:10 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00018 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\09OCR2.SGM 09OCR2 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations 58391

a combination of Schedules. The which requires that each vendor paid For instance, in the case of credit card comments reflected little or no support with a credit card be treated as a transactions for which the union’s for aggregation among the Schedules. separate disbursement, is an example of receipts and monthly statements do not Although virtually all disbursements are a new burden that the Department’s provide the full legal name of a payee significant, cross-Schedule aggregation analysis simply ignored. The union also and the union does not have possession would perceptibly increase the burden noted that this recordkeeping of any other documents that would on unions, as it would require an requirement was far from a standard contain the information, the union additional modification to the union’s business practice. Although another should report the name as it appears on accounting programs or procedures, and union noted that the proposed changes its receipts and statements. Similarly, if would require internal accounting in reporting expenses paid by credit the union’s credit card receipts and reports to be generated for all payees card would vastly increase the number statements do not include a full street under all Schedules, rather than of individual transactions that must be address, the union should report as permitting more focused inquiries on a entered, processed and reported, this much information as is available, but no Schedule-by-Schedule basis. As noted union stated that it currently follows less than the city and state. A labor elsewhere, the Department believes that standard business practices and divides organization may choose to report either the $5,000 threshold strikes a balance the charges that are paid with a credit the date of the charge or the date of the between the benefits of transparent card into separate accounting entries for payment for a credit card transaction as financial disclosure and the burdens each underlying type of expense and long as the method of reporting is caused by detailed reporting. The most responsible department. The union also consistent throughout the form. effective means of preserving this noted that any credit card charge that is The Department has considered the compromise in the context of categorical required to be reported as a comments that assert that an reporting is to apply the threshold to disbursement to an individual officer or unreasonable burden will be incurred each individual Schedule. Further, each employee (per the instructions for by the filers in recording each Schedule reflects the distinctiveness of current Schedules 9 and 10) is coded so transaction in their recordkeeping the disbursements in that particular that information is available for the systems, but is not persuaded by them. category. If disbursements to an entity current Form LM–2 report. As noted by The burden is similar to the burden or individual in a particular category are the preceding comment, unions are now already imposed by the current Form minor as measured by the threshold for required to break out credit card LM–2 reporting requirements. The reporting, then the union should not disbursements by category on the current Form LM–2 requires unions to have to itemize those disbursements current form, rather than simply treating track all credit card transactions to (and all other categories of the payment as a transaction solely determine whether each transaction disbursements) simply because involving the creditor bank. To the must be reported on one of the dissimilar disbursements in another extent any union may have disbursement schedules or elsewhere in category are comparatively more misapprehended this requirement, the the report. The current form does not substantial and do meet the threshold. revised Form LM–2 makes this point treat a payment to a credit card Disbursements to an entity or individual explicitly. company as a single disbursement. For must therefore reach the threshold for Another union commented that many instance, a single payment to a credit each Schedule before a union must credit card transactions involve plane card company may include amounts tickets or hotel bills and frequently have itemize the disbursements attributable that must be reported in ‘‘Disbursements charges issued when a trip is booked to that specific category. Meeting the for Official Business’’ in column (F) of and a credit issued if the trip is threshold for any one Schedule will Schedule 9, ‘‘Other Disbursements’’ in cancelled or changed and that the have no effect on the obligation to column (G) of Schedule 9, and ‘‘Office charges and credits may appear in itemize disbursements for any other and Administrative Expenses’’ on different monthly statements— Schedule. This approach not only Schedule 13. This has always been a sometimes in amounts that are not reduces the overall reporting burden, requirement. Many credit card exactly the same. The union stated that but also preserves the distinction among companies have made it easier to track it is not clear from the proposed the various categories of disbursements information regarding vendors for instructions if the Department intends specific charges by allowing their established by the Schedules. that such charges and refunds be customers to download the contents of The Form LM–2 requires the union to matched or reported separately. Such monthly statements or individual provide the following information for amounts must be tracked in the current transactions electronically via the each itemized disbursement in and revised Form LM–2, as they Internet. Once these transactions have Schedules 15–19: The recipient’s name constitute receipts and disbursements. been incorporated into the union’s and address; the recipient’s business or The method by which these amounts record keeping system they can be job classification; the purpose or reason should be tracked is set forth in the treated like any other transaction for for making the disbursement; the date instructions. Otherwise, as the union purposes of assigning a description and on which the union made the itself noted, if the transactions are disbursement; and the disbursement’s reported without any attempt to match purpose. amount. The Department received them, anyone trying to read and C. Disbursement Schedules 14–19 numerous comments objecting to understand the report will find it 1. Reporting by Functional Category reporting this information. A few virtually impossible to calculate the comments expressed specific concerns amount of true expenses. The Department received a large about the difficulty in tracking and The Department recognizes that filers number of comments on its proposal to recording all of the required information will not always have the same access to require unions to report their for credit cards, e.g., the date of information regarding credit card disbursements by defined categories payment (rather than charge), and the payments as with other transactions. based, in part, on a grouping of full name and address of the recipient. Filers should report all of the functional activities performed by a In this context, one union stated that the information required in the itemization union, its officers, and employees. The proposed treatment of credit cards, schedules that is available to the union. Department proposed to include eight

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:10 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00019 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\09OCR2.SGM 09OCR2 58392 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations

reporting categories on the Form LM–2: union’s financial transactions, which unions, would fail to achieve its goal of (1) Contract negotiation and they characterized as a burdensome and better informing members about union administration, (2) organizing, (3) time-consuming undertaking. Union finances and operations. As put by one political activities, (4) lobbying, (5) commenters asserted that they lack the commenter, the proposal creates contributions/gifts/grants, (6) general present capability to maintain their artificial and misleading categories of overhead, (7) benefits, and (8) other records in a way that would allow them disbursements that will overwhelm a disbursements. Almost all the national to meet the proposal’s requirements. member with a deluge of detail, not and international unions that submitted The Department finds these contentions enlighten him. These comments rest on comments addressed this issue, as did unpersuasive. Unions have always been the erroneous premise that an most of the trade associations and required to allocate each disbursement individual seeking information must public interest organizations. A number to a category on the Form LM–2. The sort through a paper submission to of local union officials and members revised form alters and reduces the review the Form LM–2. Electronic submitted comments, as did many number of categories, but not the reporting permits a union member to ‘‘agency fee payers’’ (and other allocation process. Accounting software focus his or her review using a search individuals who did not indicate will need to be adjusted to reflect the engine to guide the inquiry; on-screen whether they worked in units revised categories, but these sorts of (or paper) review of each entry is represented by unions). operations are routine within unnecessary. Further, the current Form The Department received several accounting systems and do not present LM–2 informs the member only of the comments from trade associations, an unreasonable burden. One union aggregate disbursements (or receipts); public interest organizations, union commenter noted that long distance the member must go through the trouble members and others in support of the charges and utility payments, under the of obtaining more detailed information proposal. They asserted that the revised rule, must be allocated across from the union concerning the proposed changes in reporting multiple functional schedules and that individual transactions in order to find requirements are necessary to allow such a process would pose a significant any meaningful information regarding members and potential members to burden. This commenter has failed to specific receipts and disbursements. better understand the operation of note, however, that these telephone and Itemized reporting provides the detailed particular unions and to make informed utility payments would have to be information in a searchable format as an choices about whether to join, or retain coded to a category under the existing initial matter. Finally, Statement B of their membership in, these unions. They form, and further classified by general the Form LM–2 provides aggregate stated that the proposed Form LM–2 groupings or bookkeeping categories. figures for each disbursement Schedule. would permit a member to determine Several labor organizations A member reviewing the revised Form the union’s priorities and whether they acknowledged that they already LM–2, therefore, has access to both the accord with the member’s own priorities categorize their activities, including aggregate and the individual and those of the general membership. disbursements, by functional category. disbursements for each category. Resort The same information would inform Some explained that they do so in order to the more detailed information individuals who may be considering to comply with Beck, but others remains at the member’s discretion. voting for or joining a particular union. explained that functional reporting is a Several commenters also expressed the useful financial management tool. Still Instead of putting unions to the view that functional reporting would others said that they categorize for the burden and expense of creating the better enable members, the Department, functions reported on the current form. detail required by the Department’s and the public to uncover any improper At the same time, however, some proposal, one union expressed the view use of union funds and deter union commenters explained that even with that the Department should rely on a officials or employees from embezzling sophisticated functional accounting union member’s ability to vote out or otherwise making improper use of systems in place, it would be difficult officials who are pursuing an unpopular such funds. for unions to program their systems to agenda, not by imposing additional Although some commenters stated meet the Department’s proposed paperwork requirements. Another that the proposed changes would requirements. As demonstrated in the commenter suggested that the impose some burdens on unions, these Section V, in the Paperwork Reduction Department could achieve its goal by costs, in their opinion, are outweighed Act analysis, the Department has permitting unions to allocate their by the gain in transparency. Today’s considered these burdens and expenditures, based on the estimates of electronic recordkeeping systems, in determined that the burden is its officers and staff, and thus one commenter’s opinion, make it reasonable. dispensing with the need to possible for labor unions to provide a The AFL–CIO stated that the exhaustively ‘‘account for every sheet of wealth of financial information with Department’s proposal would force each paper, every pen and pencil, etc.’’ The minimal burden. The commenter also union to conform its operations to the Department has considered these stated that the burden would decrease manner in which the Department proposals and has determined that they once unions learn of the need to code assumes all unions operate or should would not effectively provide an transactions in ways that fit the operate. In this connection, some of the adequate amount of reliable information reporting categories. unions state that the Department’s to union members concerning the A number of labor organizations proposal misapprehends the way in union’s financial operations and stated that the proposed system, if which unions conduct their affairs. conditions. The revised reporting adopted, would entail very substantial Many unions argued that the requirements will enhance union burdens and costs to the union without Department’s proposal represents the democracy, by providing members with significant gain, if any, in informing first time that unions have been information needed to cast an informed union members about the operation of required to collect and report vote. In addition, the suggestion that their union. A few commenters information by functional categories. unions should be allowed to allocate indicated that there would be severe Several commenters expressed disbursements by estimate would practical problems posed by the need to concern that the proposal, in spite of the necessarily produce reports of ‘‘code,’’ by function, virtually all the burden and expense it would impose on questionable accuracy.

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:10 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00020 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\09OCR2.SGM 09OCR2 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations 58393

One union stated that the Department more effectively further the the Department does not hold the same could achieve its goal without such transparency goals of the LMRDA. See views on this issue as it did in 1993, the drastic changes in the requirements by 29 U.S.C. 431(c). statute provides—now, as in 1993—the using the methodology in the current The Department does not agree with Department latitude in determining the Form LM–2. In its view, the Department the assertion that the better course is to form and amount of detail that should could have taken the ‘‘natural simply disaggregate the categories in the be reported by unions. Most categories’’ on the present Form LM–2 existing Form LM–2 to effect more significantly, there have been advances and divided them into natural detailed reporting. In response to in technology (including its availability ‘‘subcategories,’’ or it could have specific comments, the Department has and application) in the last 10 years, as developed schedules similar to those combined two proposed categories computers and financial management presently required for ‘‘Office and (‘‘Contract Negotiation and programs have become much more Administrative Expenses’’ or ‘‘Benefits.’’ Administration’’ and ‘‘Organizing’’) into widely used. Internet access is more While such revisions would still involve a single schedule entitled commonly available and the benefit of reporting disbursements in the ‘‘Representational Activities,’’ added a making information available over the aggregate, members would have the category entitled ‘‘Union Internet has been generally, and right under Section 201(c) of the Administration,’’ combined the congressionally, recognized. These LMRDA, 29 U.S.C. 431(c), to obtain proposed categories for ‘‘Political changes make it possible to provide more detailed data directly from their Activities’’ and ‘‘Lobbying’’ into a single substantially more information to union union. The Department rejects the schedule, and eliminated the category members and the public with less suggestion that unions should be entitled ‘‘Other Disbursements.’’ The burden on unions than the changes allowed to design their own functional categories that remain are tailored to considered in 1992 and 1993 would reporting categories or add categories to reflect the activities performed by have imposed at that time. unions, and will allow union members those prescribed by the Department. As Union commenters challenged to readily gauge whether the union is explained by the FASB in the assumptions that underlie the committing its resources in the sums Qualitative Characteristics of Department’s functional category and proportions they consider Accounting Information, at ¶ 16, not proposal on two related grounds. First, appropriate. Requiring itemization of even the FASB expects ‘‘all its policy they contended that unions are not major disbursements within the current decisions to accord exactly with the required to collect and report their categories would not serve this purpose. preferences of every one of its expenses in the categories prescribed by constituents.’’ Union commenters faulted the proposal for failing to address the the proposed rule by either ‘‘standard Indeed, they clearly cannot do so, for the business practices’’ as reflected in preferences of its constituents do not accord Department’s prior position, articulated in 1993, that functional reporting GAAP or by ‘‘existing [federal] forms’’ with each other. Left to themselves, business such as the IRS Form 990. Second, the enterprises, even in the same industry, would imposed a very substantial burden on probably choose to adopt different reporting unions without significantly advancing unions asserted that the categories methods for similar circumstances. But in a member’s understanding of his or her proposed by the Department do not return for the sacrifice of some of that union’s operations and finances. There ‘‘describe the most common important freedom, there is a gain from the greater is no merit to the assertion that the purposes for which unions spend comparability and consistency that Department’s proposal failed to address money.’’ GAAP and the IRS Form 990, adherence to externally imposed standards the Department’s earlier position. The they assert, leave it to the reporting brings with it. There also is a gain in organization to identify what the credibility. The public is naturally skeptical NPRM described the Department’s about the reliability of financial reporting if rulemaking efforts in 1992 and 1993; its organization believes to be its most two enterprises account differently for the discussion addressed the same basic important functions. The union same economic phenomena. points that were the focus of the 1992 commenters contended, in effect, that the Department seeks to impose one Statement of Financial Accounting and 1993 rulemaking and outlined the artificial, static functional reporting Concepts No. 2 (SFAC No. 2), ¶ 16. On reasons why the Department’s current system on all unions without any regard this point, the FASB also explained: proposals are appropriate. The NPRM also identified aspects of the proposal as to how they presently account for Information about an enterprise gains that differ from the 1992 final rules, their expenditures. In support of these greatly in usefulness if it can be compared arguments, the comments provided few, with similar information about other thereby providing the public with a full enterprises and with similar information exposition of the Department’s position if any, examples of the most common about the same enterprise for some other and its views on the various points purposes for which unions spend period or some other point in time. The addressed in 1992 and 1993. money, or appropriate reporting significance of information, especially The commenters correctly noted that categories. The AFL–CIO argued that the quantitative information, depends to a great the Department’s current proposals relevant accounting standards provide extent on the user’s ability to relate it to some resemble the views expressed in support for two basic types of expense benchmark. of the Department’s 1992 final rule more classification. The first type is ‘‘natural Id., ¶ 111. Further, a union member’s closely than the later concerns that led expense classification,’’ which ‘‘group[s] statutory right, under Section 201(c) of to the Department’s reconsideration of expenses according to the kinds of the LMRDA, to examine records functional reporting and the rescission economic benefits received in incurring underlying the report is a complement of the final rule. Although the 1993 th[e] expenses,’’ for example, ‘‘salaries to, but does not supplant, a union’s rulemaking identified some perceived and wages, employee benefits, supplies, statutory duty to report. In light of the problems with the 1992 final rule, rent, and utilities’’ (citing, AICPA Not- comments from union members which the Department addresses in the For Profits Guide 514). The AFL–CIO concerning the difficulties members instant rulemaking, the tension between asserted that the other basic type is have faced in obtaining review of these the positions was based largely on ‘‘functional classification,’’ which records, the Department has determined policy assessments as to the relative ‘‘group[s] expenses according to the that altering the categories, rather than utility and burden associated with the purpose for which the costs are merely relying on Section 201(c), would change in reporting requirements. While incurred.’’ Id. at 513. ‘‘The primary

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:10 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00021 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\09OCR2.SGM 09OCR2 58394 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations

functional classifications are program that they use functional reporting as a proposed by the Department, the services and supporting activities.’’ Id. management tool and none of the larger Department cannot reasonably impose The AFL–CIO then proceeded to argue unions has claimed an inability to such a requirement is unpersuasive. that the categories proposed by the categorize receipts and disbursements. These comments appear to overlook the Department have no inherent rationality Labor unions are not-for-profit Department’s responsibility to require since some, like organizing and contract organizations and, as such, should reports that best fit the disclosure administration, relate to functions or utilize functional reporting in preparing purposes of the LMRDA, not a revenue programs, and others, like benefits, have financial statements. FAS 117, ¶ 26. As statute or a methodology developed no functional or programmatic stated by the FASB, ‘‘[S]pecialized under a statute administered by the relevance. accounting and reporting principles and National Labor Relations Board (NLRB). As discussed, in Section II(D), the practices that require certain Each agency has the responsibility to GAAP standards do not govern the organizations to provide information require information relevant to the role content of LM Forms, and are not about their expenses by both functional established by its enabling statute. entirely consistent with the and natural classifications are not The union commenters have provided congressionally imposed disclosure inconsistent with the requirements of no support for the proposition that the requirements of the LMRDA, 29 U.S.C. this Statement.’’ It also noted that not- interests served by the LMRDA are 431(b). Further, the Department for-profit organizations often provide obviated by other reporting obligations, disagrees with the assertion that the use that information in regulatory filings to internal or external. Similar reporting of functional categories is either the IRS and certain state agencies, requirements apply in the regulation of unauthorized or inappropriate in any which are available to the public. FAS securities, public utilities, and health respect. In the Department’s view, the 117, ¶ 3. The IRS requires not-for-profit care. In those settings, it would be increased use of functional reporting organizations, including unions, to inaccurate to suggest that a corporation categories in the Form LM–2 will report their expenditures by certain could meet its responsibility under a promote transparency and categories and the IRS uses several particular securities, tax, employment or accountability in the reporting of a functional categories that parallel, in other statute simply by submitting a union’s financial condition and many respects, the categories in the copy of a report filed with a particular operations. The revised Form LM–2, proposed Form LM–2. For example, agency without regard to whether it utilizing both functional and ‘‘natural’’ both the Form 990 and the new Form conformed to the purposes of the actual categories, will provide detailed LM–2 require political and lobbying statute involved. The argument is also information about financial transactions disbursements to be reported. unpersuasive in the context of the of labor organizations in an easily There is no merit to the contention LMRDA. understood format. The new reports will that the proposed rule would 2. Beck Requirements be usefully organized according to the unlawfully intrude upon the ability of services and functions provided to unions to follow their own accounting A number of commenters expressed union members. By using the new Form procedures for their own internal views regarding the effect of the LM–2, members will be able to identify purposes. The report calls for the Department’s proposals on the major receipts and disbursements for a submission of data in certain categories, obligation, imposed on some labor variety of activities. The new Form LM– but does not preclude the use of other, organizations by the National Labor 2 strengthens enforcement of the internal manipulations of the data. Relations Act (NLRA), to allocate LMRDA by giving members and the Unions may track expenses in any way expenditures in a way that distinguishes public a more complete account of the they believe appropriate and, for their between activities that are germane to financial operations of a union than own purposes or the purposes of third the union’s representational function provided by the current Form LM–2. parties (for example, as required by a and those that are not. See Moreover, achieving this improvement financial institution for a loan or a state Communication Workers of America v. has been made easier and less costly by agency), they may report financial Beck, 487 U.S. 735 (1988). Labor technological advances that enable matters in the manner appropriate to organizations that receive dues from electronic recordkeeping and filing. that purpose. Further, contrary to some non-member ‘‘agency fee payers’’ in Functional accounting is not a new commenters’ contentions, the states permitting union security concept to labor organizations. The Department’s proposals effectuate the agreements requiring such payments as current Form LM–2, through its use of broad purposes of the LMRDA, while, at a condition of employment must make categories, requires labor organizations the same time, serving the law’s purpose such an allocation to ensure that agency to report certain disbursements by to ensure that members be fully fee payers who object to paying the function. Although the types of apprised of their union’s financial equivalent of full dues are not charged functional categories are being updated condition and operations. As noted more than their fair per capita share of to make them more useful to union above, these commenters have given the union’s costs involved in providing members, it is unlikely that this would insufficient weight to the Department’s representational services to them. These require Form LM–2 filers to make responsibility to determine the detail reporting and allocation requirements wholesale changes in their accounting necessary to accurately disclose the are often referred to as Beck systems. The Department has, however, unions’ financial conditions and requirements, a shorthand reference to a included time in its burden hour operations and to establish categories leading Supreme Court case addressing estimates to account for acquiring any that will identify the purpose of the obligation of unions to individuals new or updated accounting software disbursements, 29 U.S.C. 431(b), and to who pay agency fees to unions in lieu and modifying existing accounting, ‘‘[prescribe] the form of publications of membership dues. recordkeeping, and reporting systems. and reports’’ required by Title II of the Comments generally supportive of the Moreover, functional accounting is LMRDA, 29 U.S.C. 438. Department’s various reporting required of not-for-profit organizations The argument that, because neither proposals were received from trade under the standards established by the the IRS nor the Beck line of authority associations, public interest groups, FASB. Many of the labor organizations require labor organizations to collect or union members, agency fee payers, and that submitted comments acknowledged report information in the categories individuals apparently unrepresented

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:10 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00022 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\09OCR2.SGM 09OCR2 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations 58395

by unions. Several commented that the handling jurisdictional disputes with between the Form LM–2 and Beck proposed rule would make it easier for other unions, and litigation before reports will lead to confusion among agency fee payers to enforce the unions’ administrative agencies and the courts members or that such overlap will lead obligation to allocate between their involving members of the unit. Also in to an increase in litigation by agency fee representational and non- general terms, the non-chargeable payers. representational functions upon the activities have been held to include 3. Schedule 15 (Representational request of agency fee payers represented activities such as advocating political Activities) by a particular union as required by support or opposition in elections of Beck. In the current system, a union government officials, lobbying, The NPRM proposed a Schedule 15 member states, union officials have a including promoting or opposing (Contract Negotiation and powerful incentive to classify non- legislation, advertising relating to non- Administration) and a separate representational activities as chargeable matters, administration of Schedule 16 (Organizing). The proposed representational, and the existing union benefits unavailable to non- Schedule for contract negotiation and reporting forms permit this to be done members, union building fund administration called for reporting of without detection. This problem, in the activities, the publication of newspapers disbursements for preparation for, and member’s view, will be remedied by the or similar activities (to the extent they participation in, the negotiation of Department’s proposals, because they report on non-representational matters), collective bargaining agreements and will enable an agency fee payer to and litigation services that do not the administration and enforcement of identify the percentage of receipts used directly concern the unit. See generally collective bargaining agreements, for non-representational activities. This The Developing Labor Law (4th ed. including the administration and member also asserted that the enhanced 2001) 1970–75, 2046–54; The arbitration of union member grievances. reporting would permit access to Developing Labor Law (2002 The proposed Schedule for organizing information without having to use a Supplement) 330–32; NLRB General required reporting of disbursements for potentially adversarial process. Another Counsel Memorandum (Aug. 17, 1998), activities in connection with becoming commenter stated that while it generally available at 1998 WL 1806351; NLRB the exclusive bargaining representative approved of the Department’s proposals, General Counsel Memorandum (Nov. for any unit of employees, or to keep the Department should require unions 15, 1988), available at 1988 WL 236187. from losing a unit in a decertification to keep contemporaneous records in election or to another labor It is not and has not been the intent order to meet Beck standards. organization, or to recruit new members. Other comments challenged the of the Department to collect information Based on comments received from labor Department’s proposals on the following specific to the Beck requirements. The organizations and others, the grounds: first, that they represent an NLRB, not the Department of Labor, is Department has decided to eliminate the attempt to impose Beck requirements responsible for enforcing compliance separate category for reporting generally on unions, even though the with Beck. At the same time, the partial organizing disbursements and to require NLRB, not the Labor Department, is overlap of categories under the that disbursements for organizing be responsible for Beck enforcement and proposed rule and those established by reported in combination with contract the Beck requirements only apply to Beck is unremarkable. The Form LM–2 negotiation and administration unions with agency fee payers; second, functional categories for reporting a disbursements in a single Schedule they will cause an unnecessary burden union’s disbursements and estimating entitled ‘‘Representational Activities.’’ on unions that already prepare Beck the time expended by union officers and Several commenters expressed the reports; and third, the Department’s employees in performing various union view that organizing activities should be proposal to establish categories that do activities were designed to capture the reported in the same category as not replicate Beck requirements will various kinds of disbursements and contract negotiation and administration, create confusion and promote activities associated with conducting both to avoid unduly burdening labor unnecessary and harassing litigation. union business. Beck seeks to identify organizations that must meet Beck Beck requires affected unions, upon union activities that are not germane to requirements and to avoid disclosing objection by an agency fee payer (a the representation provided to agency sensitive information regarding a labor request by a member of the union does fee payers and therefore not properly organization’s organizing strategy. Some not trigger the obligation), to subtract assessed to agency fee payers if they union commenters asserted that it is from the amount of the dues required of object to subsidizing the union’s non- inconsistent with NLRB practice and members a sum that reflects the per representational activities. The precedent to separate organizing from capita share of the union’s non- information reported in the new Form the category for collective bargaining/ representational activities. In general LM–2 may be helpful to an agency fee contract administration. The NLRB, they terms, the ‘‘chargeable’’ representational payer to roughly evaluate his or her stated, recognizes that the two activities activities have been held to include union’s Beck compliance, but it is not are sometimes tightly intertwined. such activities as collective bargaining, designed as a substitute for the Beck- Several labor organizations, including contract administration, grievance specific reporting requirements, which most notably the Building and arbitration, business meetings and social are established by the NLRB, as guided Construction Trades Department of the events open to members and non- by judicial precedent. The Department AFL–CIO (BCTD), commented that it member employees, union publications takes no position on whether disclosure simply is not possible in the (to the extent they reflect the union’s of the information required by the Form construction industry to separate representational activities), LM–2 satisfies Beck requirements. disbursements made in connection with administration of benefits available to Similarly, Beck reports, principally organizing efforts from disbursements members and non-members alike, because they lack the individual and made for contract negotiations and national conventions, and expenses of transaction-specific information administration. In this regard, they refer litigation related to negotiating and required by the revised Form LM–2, do to section 8(f) of the NLRA (29 U.S.C. administering the agreement, handling not provide a useful alternative to the 158(f)). This section provides, inter alia, grievances within the bargaining unit, Form LM–2. The Department is not that it is not an unfair labor practice for fulfilling its duty of fair representation, persuaded that the partial overlap a construction industry employer to

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:10 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00023 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\09OCR2.SGM 09OCR2 58396 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations

enter into pre-hire collective bargaining the union at a disadvantage when attempting to organize a workplace in a agreements with a labor organization organizing or negotiating contracts with new geographic area), employers would whose majority status has not companies.’’ These regulations, he be able to easily discern from a labor previously been established and which argued, ‘‘would give the company inside organization’s Form LM–2 what agreement requires membership in the information to whether or not the union workplaces the union campaign is union as a condition of employment. In would have the ability to sustain a strike targeting and what steps the union is these ‘‘top down’’ bargaining situations, or the ability to fight unfair tactics by taking in pursuit of that campaign. the BCTD explains, the terms and the company during organizing drives.’’ Several organizations urged the conditions of employment are Several labor organizations Department to protect from disclosure negotiated and agreed upon before any commented that sensitive information of information that, they asserted, could be employees express support for or this type has generally not been used to reveal the target and location of actually become members of the union. available to members, except on a an organizing drive. For example, by The BCTD and others expressed the showing of just cause. See 29 U.S.C. requiring that the schedule contain view that it is not possible in these 431(c). Moreover, they asserted that discrete data showing substantial situations to separate disbursements where just cause has been disbursements to a hotel where union into contract negotiations differentiated demonstrated, access to the information organizers are staying (particularly in a from organizing. is given to union members only, small town or remote location, or one Further complicating the situation for whereas the Department’s proposal with only a single industry or employer) building trades unions, these unions would provide Internet access to this the Department’s proposal would enable assert, is the fact that often these same sensitive information to the world, an employer to learn of the organizing unions also engage in traditional regardless of the strength of the union’s drive and initiate action to undermine ‘‘bottom up’’ organizing. For such interest in confidentiality or the the campaign. The unions stated that purposes, these unions would have to potential damage that release of this they attempt to keep such information separately allocate disbursements for information might cause to the union— from an employer whose workforce is organizing and contract negotiations. and without any showing of ‘‘just being organized. The Steelworkers Several commenters who supported the cause.’’ The AFL–CIO noted that unions explained that until they receive a proposal to establish the organizing would have no opportunity to protect substantial majority of signed schedule argued that union members their confidentiality interests by seeking authorization cards, they do not disclose needed detailed information on their protective orders. It further argued that to an employer that they have an union’s organizing activities to enable information that the courts have held is organizing drive underway. them to accurately assess their union’s not subject to disclosure, even when the Another commenter, an employer overall success or failure in its § 201(c) standard of just cause is met, association, suggested that in lieu of organizing efforts. The commenters cannot, a fortiori, be subject to routine shielding the employer’s name or the argued that if, as the Department has annual disclosure under § 201(b) of the bargaining unit identity, the reporting concluded, separate allocations cannot LMRDA. unions should be given an opportunity be made in the pre-hire situation arising Numerous labor organizations to submit both redacted and unredacted pursuant to section 8(f) of the NLRA, complained that under the Department’s versions of the Schedule and an but separate allocations could be made proposal unions would be required to accompanying ‘‘Confidential Treatment for other traditional organizing efforts list the names of union ‘‘salts,’’ Request.’’ Under this procedure, a by the same union, a member would at individuals who receive subsidies from reporting union could offer grounds to best get an incomplete picture and at a union to assist in its organizational the Department in support of its request worst an inaccurate and misleading activities while working for an employer for identity exemption, and specify the impression of the union’s disbursements that is the subject of the organizing time period sought for such exemption. and overall effectiveness in organizing. drive. Two specific concerns were The Department would then review the Labor organizations generally raised by the commenters: (1) The listed request, and either grant or deny the opposed the creation of a separate individuals can be targeted by an requested redactions before making the category for organizing. Comments from employer and subjected to discharge or Form LM–2 publicly available. officers of labor organizations at both other retaliatory action; and (2) by Based on these comments, the the national/international and local identifying these individuals by name Department has decided to eliminate the levels expressed strong opposition to on the new schedule, employers would separate category for reporting the proposal to create a new Form LM– be able to learn of an organizing drive organizing disbursements and to require 2 schedule on which all major in its early stages and take action to that disbursements for these activities disbursements relating to a union’s undermine the union’s efforts. be reported in combination with organizing efforts would be reported In the view of the AFL–CIO, Contract Negotiation and and then made publicly available over publication of detailed information Administration disbursements in a the DOL website. The common thread to about what types of investigators and single Schedule entitled these comments was a significant consultants a union is using and for ‘‘Representational Activities.’’ The concern that employers would become what purposes carried with it the Department agrees with the comments privy to sensitive union information not potential to undermine the success of that organizing strategies deserve some otherwise available, such as organizing the union organizing efforts. In its view, level of protection. In crafting the final strategies or the extent of a union’s the Department’s concession that unions rule, the Department has balanced the financial commitment to a given would not be required to reveal the legitimate need for members to be campaign. As one union member who ‘‘name of the employer’’ or the ‘‘specific apprised of how union funds are was active in organizing his workplace bargaining unit’’ that is the subject of expended for this important function stated, the new requirements to list organizing activities is insufficient to with the need to minimize the risk of major disbursements within eight protect the union’s interest in the disclosing sensitive information. By categories ‘‘would do nothing to help confidentiality of these campaigns. The combining the categories, the union members achieve better AFL–CIO noted that with regard to Department also meets the concerns representation but would literally put smaller local unions (or larger unions expressed by the building trades unions

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:10 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00024 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\09OCR2.SGM 09OCR2 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations 58397

that they would be unable to allocate services as a ‘‘salt’’ in organizing an 4. Schedules 16 (Political Activities) precise amounts to contract negotiations employer that exceed $5,000 but not and 17 (Lobbying) and organizing efforts. $10,000, the labor organization may By combining these Schedules, the choose to refrain from disclosing The Department proposed separate Department believes that an employer specific information regarding such Schedules on the Form LM–2 for would be far less likely to be able to payments on the Form LM–2, but only reporting disbursements for ‘‘political identify itself as an organizing target if it indicates that this reporting activities’’—intended to influence the merely by examining Schedule entries. procedure has been used and provides selection, nomination, election, or Unless one or more disbursements to an the underlying information to any union appointment of anyone to a public individual meet the threshold to member who requests it. See Section office, or a particular outcome in a constitute a ‘‘major disbursement,’’ III(b)(2). ballot initiative, or for material assessing disbursements would be aggregated a political candidate’s views on issues— with other non-major disbursements for The Department disagrees with the and for ‘‘lobbying’’—for the purpose of contract negotiations and administration view that it has applied the LMRDA passing or defeating new legislation, and organizing, thus further shielding more stringently to unions than to advancing the repeal of existing laws, or such data. Further, the confidentiality employers. Unlike the situation with the promulgation of rules or regulations procedures, explained in Section regard to labor organizations, for over 40 (including litigation expenses). The III(b)(2), allow a labor organization to years employers and their consultants Department received some comments withhold any information that would have been statutorily required (29 U.S.C. supportive of the proposed category for disclose the recipient or target of an 433(a) and (b)) to include particular political activities. Labor organizations organizing expense in reporting the ‘‘persuader’’ information in their annual did not oppose the Schedules and the disbursement on the Form LM–2. reports, while labor organizations have AFL–CIO did not challenge (apart from The Department decided that this not. Implementation of this statutory its general opposition to any functional approach is preferable to the suggestion scheme by the Department cannot be reporting) the Department’s premise that by one commenter that unions submit considered as evidence of either anti- such information should be reported. both a redacted and unredacted union or anti-employer bias, and the The AFL–CIO, however, contends that schedule for organizing expenses and a suggestion of a double standard is the separate ‘‘political activities’’ and request that certain expenses be unwarranted. ‘‘lobbying’’ Schedules should be withheld from public disclosure. The The Department also rejects the combined into a single category. Based statute requires the Secretary to publicly comment that strike benefits should be on the concerns expressed by comments disclose the information it receives. 29 reported in the same category as other from labor organizations and others, and U.S.C. 435. (‘‘The contents of the reports representational activities. The AFL– for the reasons described below, the and documents filed with the Secretary CIO argued that because economic Department agrees that the two * * * shall be public information.’’) pressure devices, such as strikes, work Schedules should be combined into a Further, the concerns raised by the stoppages and lockouts, are ‘‘part and single revised Schedule 16, ‘‘Political comments concerning sensitive parcel of the system’’ of collective Activities and Lobbying.’’ information, confidentiality, and the bargaining, this exclusion is bound to One commenter stated its belief that burden involved in distinguishing create a seriously distorted presentation organizing activities from contract the categories are closely related to each of the reporting union’s collective other and that each is likely to draw a negotiation and administration can be bargaining disbursements. This addressed without the need to redact a relatively insignificant portion of the argument is unconvincing. The amount reporting union’s resources. It explained schedule, and thus more effectively that a labor organization spends on serve the transparency objectives of the that political activity and lobbying by representational activities, including unions typically involve statute. strike benefits, will be readily apparent Substantial case law under the NLRA communications with, and mobilization by adding the total disbursements in recognizes the employee status of of, the union’s membership concerning both schedules together. On the other individuals paid by a union to seek issues of interest to the membership. employment with an employer in order hand, only by maintaining a separate Lobbying, as distinct from membership to assist the union in organizing its line item for Strike Benefits will union mobilization, it argued, thus is likely to workforce and the need to protect them members be able to discern the true cost consume a relatively small amount of from retaliatory conduct by their of the use of this economic weapon. union resources. The AFL–CIO added employer. See, e.g., NLRB v. Town & Finally, we disagree with the that the Department’s proposal to Country Electric, Inc., 516 U.S. 85 comment that a union’s compelled require the separate reporting of (1995); Willmar Electric Service, Inc. v. disclosure of information relating to ‘‘political activity’’ and ‘‘lobbying’’ is NLRB, 968 F.2d 1327 (D.C. Cir. 1992), legal fees associated with an organizing exacerbated by the requirement that cert. denied, 507 U.S. 909 (1993). At the campaign would improperly intrude time estimates be recorded in 10% same time, the individual’s status as an upon the union’s attorney-client increments. It asserted that many unions employee of the union and the amount privilege. This concern is misplaced, as have programs that are at least as of the payments received by him affects this privilege does not generally extend important to their members, and often the obligation of the union to disclose to the fact of attorney consultation, consume more resources, than either information that may reveal his identity. retention, or employment, including the ‘‘political activity’’ or ‘‘lobbying.’’ Some On both the existing and the revised LM payment and amount of fees. See labor organizations noted that the forms, if a ‘‘salt’’ is paid $10,000 or McCormick on Evidence, § 90 (5th ed. Department’s current reporting rules do more per year as an employee of the 1999, updated 2003). Further, while the not require that payments by a political union, the union is obliged by statute to privilege might protect the identity of a action committee be reported if such list him by name on the Form LM–2 and client when sought from an attorney, a information already is reported to to report the amount of his client can be required to divulge the federal, state, or local government compensation. If a labor organization name of its attorney, which would be agencies. The proposal, it argued, layers makes payments to an individual for relevant here. Id. another burden on the local unions,

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:10 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00025 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\09OCR2.SGM 09OCR2 58398 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations

adding unnecessary administrative time applicable to these other regimes. The activity. In part, this may be based on and cost. Department has devised a definition, the unions’ misapprehension of the Several commenters supported the reflected in the examples set forth in the proposal. As discussed above, the itemization of political disbursements Instructions to Form LM–2, expressly Department’s proposed schedule is by unions without distinguishing designed to provide a reasonable more comprehensive than the FEC and between electoral politics and lobbying, amount of usable information to union IRS requirements that limit the activities the distinction crafted by the members. that must be reported. For example, Department’s proposal. No commenters The revised Form LM–2 is intended to under the Department’s proposed and expressed any opposition to combining require unions to report many of the final rules, unions are required to report the categories. A labor policy group disbursements that would not otherwise funds that they use in setting up a PAC supported the Department’s expansive be reported. Labor unions, unlike most and raising funds for it, as well as definition for political activities, tax exempt organizations under 26 lobbying activities normally associated recognizing that under the definition U.S.C. 501(c), are not required to report with ‘‘governmental relations’’ and unions ‘‘would be required to report any lobbying expenses to the IRS. See ‘‘member communications.’’ Further, and all expenditures that are made for Instructions for Form 990 (for line 85); the Department’s decision to combine any type of political activity, including Judith E. Kindall and John Francis the two Schedules will increase the political activity directed at a union’s Reilly, Lobbying Issues 336 (IRS likelihood that the Schedule will be own membership.’’ It asserted that publication available at IRS Web site), used to report a sufficient amount of union members deserve to know the see also Rev. Proc. 95–35 (Aug. 7, 1995); information to prove useful to union nature and extent of political activities, Rev. Proc. 98–19 (Feb. 2, 1998). In members. lauding the Department’s efforts at contrast, labor organizations must As discussed, the revised Form LM– transparency. The same commenter also include in Schedule 16 (Political 2 will provide union members with a supported the Department’s proposal Activities and Lobbying) better understanding of their union’s with regard to the reporting of lobbying ‘‘disbursements for political political activities, providing them a expenses. In this connection, it asserted communications with members (or measure of the union’s financial and that a labor organization, as a practical agency fee paying non-members) and human resources dedicated to these matter, can avoid reporting its lobbying their families, registration, get-out-the- activities. Upon consideration of the and political expenses to the IRS. The vote and voter education campaigns, comments, however, the Department is commenter supported the Department’s and the expenses of establishing, persuaded that there is merit to the effort to require unions to follow the administering and soliciting suggestion that the two schedules same reporting requirements as contributions to union segregated should be combined into a single generally applicable to tax exempt political funds (or PACs) and other schedule. Distinguishing between organizations (but not unions) under the political disbursements.’’ Under the ‘‘political activities,’’ in the election- IRS rules. It suggested, however, that the revised Form LM–2, labor organizations specific sense of that term, and Department clarify the meaning of also are required to report ‘‘lobbying’’ is not always easy. And, for ‘‘lobbying’’ so that it includes ‘‘any disbursements supporting their dealings most union members, the distinction is attempt to influence the general public, with the executive and legislative likely to be much less important than or segments thereof, with respect to branches of the Federal, State, and local being assured that they can ascertain the public policy and legislative matters.’’ governments and with independent purpose and amount of their union’s Another policy group, while supportive agencies and staffs, including resource disbursements in the political overall of the proposal, asserted that the disbursements for advocating or arena. In the Department’s view, this Department’s proposed categories need opposing legislation (including new schedule will provide meaningful to be modified to expressly include litigation challenging such legislation), information to union members without ‘‘grassroots lobbying’’ and ‘‘issue and advocating or opposing regulations requiring unions to submit separate advocacy’’ by unions. (including litigation challenging such schedules for this purpose. Thus, the The comments support the regulations). Thus, the Form LM–2 will Department has decided to include a Department’s view, embodied in its gather information not otherwise single schedule (16) for political proposal, that the itemization and reported, and further, the activities that activities and lobbying in the revised aggregation of disbursements must be reported in the Form LM–2 are Form LM–2. undertaken by unions in the political much broader than those included in 5. Schedule 20 (Benefits) arena will provide information that is the IRS definition and easier to apply useful to union members and allow than the more nuanced IRS application This category, which tracks a category them to better understand the amount (as evidenced by the three pages of in the current Form LM–2, captures and purpose of their union’s activities instructions the IRS devotes to reporting information relating to all direct and in this area. This information will membership dues and lobbying indirect benefit payments made by the supplement the limited information expenses). Labor organizations also will union, including, for example, now available to members under other be required to report disbursements on disbursements relating to life insurance, statutory programs. See, e.g., Federal the Form LM–2 that would not be health insurance, and pensions. Direct Election Campaign Act (FECA), 2 U.S.C. reported to the FEC because they are payments are made from the union’s 431; Lobbying Disclosure Act of 1995, 2 directed only at the union’s employees funds directly to its officers, employees, U.S.C. 1601; IRS Form 990. While there and members and their families. Viewed members, and their beneficiaries. are similarities between the information from this perspective, the Form LM–2 Indirect disbursements include, for required under these other reporting does not duplicate any reports filed by example, a union’s payment of the regimes and the LMRDA, Form LM–2 is unions with the IRS or the FEC. premium on group life insurance to a designed for the special purpose of The Department believes that the separate and independent entity such as providing meaningful information to unions’ comments understate the a trust or insurance company. The union members who are not necessarily overall amount of disbursements and Department proposed that labor informed regarding the various officer and employee time that will be organizations would be required to exceptions and interpretations reported as lobbying or political separately identify all ‘‘major’’

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:10 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00026 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\09OCR2.SGM 09OCR2 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations 58399

disbursements during the reporting disbursement of benefits provides member education programs (other than period in this category. information that may be of interest to political education, as discussed above). The Department received only a few members as a measure of the union’s By adding this category, labor comments specific to this category. The ‘‘fixed expenses,’’ allowing them to organizations will be able to accurately AFL–CIO opposed the collection of evaluate the cost-benefit of the policies characterize the disbursements made for benefits to employees and members in providing for the benefit payments. the many activities they undertake a single category. In its view, ‘‘employee because of the requirements of the 6. Schedules 19 (Union Administration) benefits’’ is a ‘‘natural expense LMRDA or other activities associated and 18 (General Overhead) classification,’’ and the inclusion of with union administration. ‘‘member benefits’’ cannot be justified The Department proposed a Schedule With the creation of this new on the grounds that the schedule has for general overhead, which would category, there no longer is a need for been amended to convey more include disbursements for overhead that a category designated simply as ‘‘Other information about union program do not support a specific function, such Disbursements,’’ and the Department activities or supporting services. One as support personnel at the union’s will eliminate this category from the labor policy group recommended that headquarters, and that, therefore, cannot Form LM–2. The ‘‘General Overhead’’ ‘‘benefits’’ should be removed as a be reasonably allocated to the other category will be retained. This schedule category and, instead, reported as ‘‘other disbursement schedules. Several labor includes disbursements that do not disbursements.’’ The same group stated organizations noted that the categories support a specific function—for that unions should have to specifically proposed by the Department would example, disbursements to support identify other disbursements in order to force a large portion of the union’s personnel, such as maintenance and minimize embezzlement. Several important and recurring activities into security staff at the union’s comments related to the issue of overhead or other expenses. The SEIU headquarters—and that, therefore, itemization, however, noted that a estimates that this latter category will cannot be reasonably allocated to the requirement to disclose specific contain 90% of all its disbursements. other disbursement schedules. information about benefit payments Several labor organizations expressed Wherever possible, however, the salary could result in unwarranted invasions the fear that reporting disbursements in paid to support staff and other of the privacy of individuals. the manner proposed by the Department disbursements for overhead that the In light of the comments received, the will provide misleading information union tracks in relation to specific Department is persuaded that the that will be used by those antagonistic programs or functions should be privacy of individual benefit recipients, to unions to suggest that the union is allocated to the relevant category. For including those receiving payments for diverting its funds to interests example, if a union has an organizing medical procedures, insurance or unconnected with the union’s core department and a political affairs pension claims, or burial benefits, representational function. Several labor department and currently apportions should be protected. Accordingly, the organizations sought clarification telephone and utilities payments to both Department has decided to retain the concerning particular activities. In the functional schedules, those current schedule for reporting these AFL–CIO’s view, for example, the disbursements should be allocated to types of disbursements, rather than Department seems to indicate that the corresponding schedule. Similarly, using an itemized schedule, and all certain governance expenses, like the salary paid to other support staff payments to individuals for such meetings and conventions, are to be should be allocated at the same ratio as purposes should be reported only on reported as ‘‘general overhead the program staff they support. For this schedule. A reporting labor expenses,’’ even though accounting example, if the union’s secretary- organization, thus, will be required to principles counsel in favor of including treasurer employs a staff of ten report an aggregate amount of any direct such expenses as ‘‘general management employees and the secretary-treasurer benefit disbursements, which are those expenses.’’ In this regard, the AFL–CIO reports 60% of his time on activities made to officers, employees, members, states that under Beck standards union relating to union administration, 10% and their beneficiaries from the union’s governance activities are treated as on political or lobbying activities, and funds, and need only identify the entirely chargeable whereas those same 20% on representational activities, the recipients of such disbursements by a standards provide that union overhead staff salaries should be allocated to the general description, for example, ‘‘union costs generally should be allocated corresponding schedules using these members.’’ Indirect disbursements— between chargeable and non-chargeable percentages rather than reporting the those made to a separate and categories. Several commenters salaries as ‘‘general overhead.’’ If the independent entity, such as an expressed the view that the categories labor organization does not currently insurance company that pays benefits to prescribed by the Department’s proposal apportion disbursements for utilities or covered individuals—will also be fail to account for many basic, recurring similar expenses according to program reported in the aggregate and the entity union activities. or function, it will not be required to do to which the payment is made will be In response to these comments about so on the Form LM–2, but may choose identified by a general descriptive term. the large number of disbursements to do so to provide greater clarity for its These changes also address the relating to union administration, the members. In any event, the labor comments made by labor organizations Department has added a new Schedule organization should accurately describe concerning the reporting burden. 19 (Union Administration) to capture the purpose of the disbursement, The Department is not persuaded, this information. In this schedule, labor whether it is reported in a specific however, that this schedule should be organizations will report disbursements functional category or as ‘‘General modified in any other respect. As relating to the nomination and election Overhead.’’ discussed in Section II(D) and Section of union officers, the union’s regular III(C)(I), accounting principles do not membership meetings, intermediate, 7. Schedule 17 (Contributions, Gifts and restrict a regulatory agency from national, and international meetings, Grants) combining ‘‘natural expense’’ and union disciplinary proceedings, the The existing Form LM–2 requires program functions in a report. administration of trusteeships, and the reports of all disbursements for Moreover, a union’s aggregated administration of apprenticeship and contributions, gifts and grants during

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:10 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00027 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\09OCR2.SGM 09OCR2 58400 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations

the reporting year. The NPRM proposed disbursements in order to minimize certifies under penalty of perjury that no that labor organizations be required to embezzlement. funds used in a job targeting program separately identify any ‘‘major’’ receipts In the Department’s view, it is have been derived from wages paid to during the reporting period. Although appropriate to keep this schedule. As employees on Davis-Bacon covered the Department proposed no changes to noted in the Department’s proposal, projects. The commenter also asserted this category, a few comments specific such funds should be reported in the that similar modifications should be to this category were received. The other functional categories as made to the Department’s T–1 AFL–CIO asserted that the Department appropriate (and, where in excess of the proposals. was mistaken in establishing a separate $5,000 threshold, itemized as a The Department has determined that category for ‘‘contributions, gifts and contribution, gift, or grant). Nonetheless, it would be inappropriate in this grants.’’ It noted that such funds, as there will be some disbursements that rulemaking to require reporting recognized by the Department itself in cannot be easily allocated to another requirements specific to job targeting its proposal, should be reported in any functional category. By keeping this funds. In the Department’s view, specific services category to which they category, union members will be able to receipts and disbursement of job relate (not as part of the residual more easily identify such targeting funds that exceed the schedule). The AFL–CIO asserted that disbursements. If the reported itemization threshold will be disclosed this recognition by the Department aggregated amount warrants further as a result of the general reforms evinces that the schedule does not inquiry, members may request further implemented by this rule. Additionally, constitute a separate major program information from the union to the Department notes that the NPRM service. The AFL–CIO also submitted a determine whether such voluntary made no reference to the possibility of report prepared by Dr. Ruth Ruttenberg payments conform to the union’s creating reporting requirements specific as an attachment to its comments, internal rules and to evaluate whether to job targeting funds. The unions and which argued, based on a survey of 65 they were made for legitimate and the organizations that engage in job national and international AFL–CIO worthy purposes. targeting initiatives have an obvious interest in whether specific reporting affiliates, that only 60% of all reporting 8. Job Targeting national and international unions requirements should apply. They The Department received a few capture the required data and of these should be provided a full opportunity to comments requesting that the unions ‘‘less than 18% of reporting address this issue before the Department Department establish an explicit unions are currently able to report promulgates a rule specific to the requirement that unions report contributions to an entity aggregating to concern identified by the commenter. If, particular details for certain ‘‘job- $2,000 or more and then allocate the however, a labor organization has an targeting funds’’ (and funds serving the interest in, and contributes $10,000 or disbursements by prescribed functional same purpose, but labeled as ‘‘industry category.’’ more to, an entity that meets the advancement,’’ or ‘‘market recovery’’ definition of a trust and that entity These particular comments appear to funds). One commenter asserted that makes targeted disbursements for the reflect a misunderstanding about what these funds have become widespread in purpose of increasing employment unions now are required to report under the construction industry and that opportunities for its members, the labor the current Form LM–2. First, unions express reporting requirements are organization must file a Form T–1 if the are currently required to report essential to correct widespread entity has $250,000 or more in annual information about disbursements for violations of the Davis-Bacon Act. The receipts. ‘‘contributions, gifts and grants,’’ thus commenter asserted that the Labor calling into question the validity of the Department, the NLRB, and two courts D. Schedules 1 and 8—Accounts statement that only approximately 40% of appeal (D.C. and Ninth Circuits) Receivable and Payable Aging of unions capture data related to this recognize that job targeting programs are Schedules category. Second, the reported inability antithetical to the purposes of the Davis- The Department proposed the of a few unions to report contributions Bacon Act because they represent an creation of new aging schedules for at the lowest proposed threshold level unlawful payment from the workers’ accounts receivable and accounts and then ‘‘allocate the disbursement by wages to the contractors performing payable that would require labor prescribed functional category’’ suggests Davis-Bacon jobs and tend to distort organizations to report: (1) Individual that the Ruttenberg report confuses this local prevailing wages. The commenter accounts that are valued at $1,000 or aspect of the Department’s current argued that the Department has allowed more and that are more than 90 days proposal with the Department’s 1992 this practice to continue unchecked. As past due at the end of the reporting reporting rule. While that rule contained a result, according to the commenter, period or were liquidated, reduced or such a requirement, the Department’s millions of dollars are being written off during the reporting period; current proposal requires only that misappropriated by unions from their and (2) the total aggregated value of all contributions, gifts and grants be members’ Davis-Bacon wages, through other accounts (that is, those that are reported in Schedule 17, without any the device of compulsory dues (as well less than $1,000) that are more than 90 further allocation to any additional as payroll deductions), and returned to days past due at the end of the reporting ‘‘functional’’ categories. Other aspects of the benefit of employers via job period or were liquidated, reduced or the AFL-CIO’s Ruttenberg report are targeting funds. written off during the reporting period. discussed below. The commenter recommended that A number of comments criticized as Some commenters who supported the the Department require unions to report: too low the $1,000 threshold for proposal suggested some modifications. the employers receiving the job targeting itemizing individual accounts payable One policy group recommended that funds; the amounts paid to each and receivable that are more than 90 ‘‘contributions, gifts, and grants’’ should employer; the project(s) for which the days past due at the end of the reporting be removed as a category and, instead, employer received the funds; and the period. Some unions with substantial should be reported as ‘‘other source of the funds. As an alternative, receipts asserted that the Department disbursements’’ and that unions should the commenter suggested that such was mistaken in stating that ‘‘[t]he have to specifically identify other accounting could be avoided if a union threshold of $1,000 eliminates the

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:10 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00028 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\09OCR2.SGM 09OCR2 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations 58401

burden of individually reporting routine in their view are relatively insignificant accounts that may be symptomatic of collections of dues and other fees,’’ 67 in light of the very substantial finances embezzlement by union officers or FR 79285. The unions stated that union of some unions. By setting the threshold employees. Under the new schedules, dues would routinely be reported on the at $5,000, the interests of union such delinquencies would have been accounts receivable aging schedule members will still be adequately served reported and such disclosure might under the $1,000 threshold. Some by ensuring the disclosure of significant have deterred the fraud, in the first unions stated that for unions with union accounts that have not been paid instance. substantial dues it is not that unusual or collected in a timely manner. Itemization of delinquent accounts is for union members to fall more than Several unions also broadly criticized also preferable to either aggregate $1,000 behind in dues payments. the itemization requirement, disputing reporting or sole itemization of Unions stated that the itemization of that itemization would benefit anyone. liquidated accounts in that it provides $1,000 accounts would be unduly These commenters stated that reporting union members with a more detailed burdensome (resulting in thousands of aggregate numbers for accounts payable picture of the union’s finances, small entries), would invade the privacy and receivable would be far less including with whom the union rights of union members, and would be burdensome to unions without diluting conducts business and the manner in of little informational value. One the value of the information to which that business is conducted. The organization commented that in the members. The commenters explained itemization requirement is tailored to a context of Schedule 5 (individual that accounts more than 90 days past union member’s legitimate interest in marketable securities), the notice of due are relevant, if at all, only as they knowing, for example, whether the proposed rulemaking stated, ‘‘$1,000 relate to an individual union’s overall union continues to do business with an can now be considered a de minimis cash flow. Several organizations stated entity that fails to pay its debts or amount.’’ 67 FR 79285. This that there is no analogous requirement whether the union continually falls organization suggested that the of itemization placed on public behind in payments to a certain vendor. Department set the thresholds for companies, as the SEC requires only Some unions complained that the Accounts Receivable Aging Schedule aggregate reporting. Itemized accounting ordinary interaction between national (Schedule 1), Accounts Payable Aging is also inconsistent with GAAP, these and international unions and their Schedule (Schedule 8), and Investments commenters argued. Finally, a number locals regarding per capita tax payments Other Than U.S. Treasury Securities of unions proposed an alternative that routinely results in delayed payment of (Schedule 5) at $5,000 in order to be unions disclose only those accounts locals’ per capita taxes until more than consistent. Several other unions payable or receivable that are liquidated 90 days after the tax is technically due. advocated raising the accounts payable or written off at the end of the reporting Reporting these payments on the accounts receivable schedule, they and receivable threshold to at least period. In the Department’s view, itemized argued, would be burdensome and $5,000. One commenter proposed a new disclosure is important because it uninformative. The Department believes threshold of $10,000. On the other side, provides a vital early warning signal of that a national or international union one organization asserted that the financial distress. In setting the may set the specific date (and manner $1,000 threshold was too high and reporting threshold at 90 days, the of collection) of these per capita tax should be lowered to require disclosure Department took into account the payments, but once the date is chosen, of smaller accounts. One organization typical payment cycle of 30 days for that date controls when the per capita stated $1,000 was the correct level, and most accounts and determined that an payment is due. If, at the end of the one union stated that the requested account unpaid after three payment reporting period, a local union has information would not be a burden at intervals warrants ‘‘flagging’’ as a matter failed to pay $5,000 or more for 90 days the $1,000 level. Finally, a few unions of good business practice. Union or more past the specified date— recommended eliminating the dollar members similarly will benefit from this irrespective of the customary interaction amount altogether and replacing it with information as a gauge of their union’s between union and local—that an alternative threshold, such as, for overall fiscal management and provide delinquent account must be disclosed example, 10% of the union’s aggregate them with the ability to identify on the Form LM–2. The union is free to receipts. These commenters noted that particular transactions or a series of provide any explanatory information such an approach is consistent with the transactions that may merit further concerning the delayed payment along Department’s regulation of employee review. Although there is no general with these per capita aged accounts. benefit plans investments. accounting principle that holds that 90 Several unions also criticized the In response to these comments, the days is a significant time period, it is a accounts payable and receivable Department has decided to raise the benchmark often used, inasmuch as the schedules on the basis that these threshold for itemization in Form LM– normal pay cycle for accounts is closer schedules require accrual-based 2 Schedules 1 and 8 to $5,000. This to 30 days. As one commenter pointed accounting and many unions only keep dollar threshold is consistent with the out, the Washington Teachers’ Union accounting records on a cash basis. weight of the comments and had failed to timely pay many of its bills Many union accounting systems, other corresponds with the itemization in the years leading up to the discovery commenters argued, track only income threshold developed for other disclosure of embezzlement and misappropriation and expenses, not receipts and requirements under Form LM–2 of funds by union officials. disbursements. Moreover, one including: (1) Investments Other Than As the commenter noted, early accounting firm commented that unions U.S. Treasury Securities (Schedule 5); reporting of delinquent accounts that operate on a cash basis system will and (2) Itemization of Receipts and payable might have prevented the fraud have to review their books and records Disbursements (Schedules 14–21). In against the teachers’ union before to tabulate each individual account the Department’s view, the higher millions of dollars were diverted. The irrespective of the precise threshold for threshold will significantly reduce the Department’s own investigations in itemized reporting. As noted above, the burden identified by some unions of other cases reveal situations where a LMRDA itself requires some accrual having to itemize accounts, such as union’s failure to pay its per capita taxes basis accounting information, such as individual union dues receivable, which is part of a pattern of delinquency on assets and liabilities. See 29 U.S.C.

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:10 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00029 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\09OCR2.SGM 09OCR2 58402 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations

431(b)(1)–(3). Because the current Form what the schedule looks like, union constitute a significant burden on LM–2 requires this information, the new insiders who wish to embezzle money reporting labor organizations. Rather, Form LM–2 imposes no qualitative or to defraud the union will willfully the comments expressed various views change in the nature of union financial evade Department reporting of the usefulness of the information that disclosure, even if the specific requirements. Commenters stated that would be disclosed under the schedules for accounts payable and corrupt officials are not likely to record Department’s proposal as compared to receivable are new. Moreover, no unions their activities on disclosure forms. The information that would be disclosed will be forced to manually review Department acknowledges this under alternative thresholds suggested previous books and records to identify problem—one that is a recurring by the comments. delinquent accounts because the new concern in any reporting or disclosure Two local labor organizations stated rule only applies to fiscal years system. While it is true that even the that the itemization of marketable beginning January 1, 2004, or thereafter. most thorough disclosure form will not securities under the Department’s Every union will thus have be entirely effective in eradicating fraud, proposal would pose no difficulty for approximately three months (at least, the new requirements significantly reporting labor organizations, but and as many as 14 months depending advance the cause by making financial asserted that the schedule would on the union’s fiscal calendar) from fraud more difficult to hide. The new provide no information that would publication of the rule to make any financial disclosure forms require assist union members. In the view of necessary adjustments to their record greater specificity and accountability for these locals, the existing schedule on keeping practices before the first fiscal union funds across the board, including the current Form LM–2 was adequate. year for which such information must delinquent accounts payable and One commenter stated that the be reported even begins. receivable. In the Department’s view, information required to be reported One union asserted that the Secretary the more detailed reporting required by under the Department’s proposal would lacks authority to require itemization of the revised Form LM–2 will allow the be intrusive without providing any accounts payable and accounts Department and union members to more useful information. receivable and that the Secretary is only closely scrutinize a union’s finances and The AFL–CIO expressed the view that authorized under section 201(b) of the more easily identify ‘‘gaps’’ or apparent the $1,000 threshold of the current Form LMRDA to require disclosure of inconsistencies in reports. The greater LM–2, given contemporary financial categories of financial information—not the risk to the actual or would be reality, could be considered de minimis, itemized information. A number of perpetrator that improper conduct will and that only more substantial unions similarly commented that the be discovered, the less likely such investments should be required to be underlying individual financial data conduct will occur or go undetected. itemized under the Department’s composing the aggregate categories is The revised disclosure forms are thus a proposal. The AFL–CIO also suggested already available to union members critical part of the oversight by the that any lower threshold might exceed upon a showing of just cause under 29 Department and union members over the Department’s authority because, in U.S.C. 431(c). The Department’s the financial operations of unions. Both the AFL–CIO’s view, the Department is response to these arguments is set forth this Department and the Department of constrained to require unions to report above. Justice, in prosecuting criminal fraud, only information material to the Several commenters raised concerns rely heavily on union members to financial condition and operations of about individual privacy if unions were review and evaluate the financial unions. In its view, most transactions forced to itemize accounts payable and disclosures of their unions and report lower than $1,000 would not be material receivable over $1,000, including any suspected activity for investigation, to even a union with meager revenues. concern that, for example, union as may be appropriate. A trade association supported the members owing dues would be Department’s proposal to raise the identified by name on the Department E. Schedule 5—Investments Other Than threshold for reporting individual website. Commenters requested U.S. Treasury Securities securities and other investments to therefore that the Department clarify The Department’s proposed Schedule $5,000. In the association’s view, that all union dues—both individual 5 required a labor organization to list: investments worth only $1,000 should and per capita—are exempt from the each marketable security that has a book be considered de minimis. The accounts receivable aging schedule as value of more than $5,000 and association further suggested that the suggested by the notice of proposed constitutes more than 5% of the total Department should also set a $5,000 rulemaking. The Department notes the book value of all the union’s marketable threshold for individual accounts to be increased threshold of $5,000 should securities; and each other investment reported in Schedule 1—Accounts eliminate nearly all concerns about (e.g., mortgages purchased on a block Receivable Aging Schedule and individual union dues appearing on the basis or investments in a trust) that has proposed Schedule 8—Accounts accounts receivable schedule. It would a book value of more than $5,000 and Payable Aging Schedule, two new be unusual—and likely take years—for a constitutes more than 5% of the total schedules proposed by the Department. union member to become more than book value of all the union’s other A labor relations foundation, contrary to $5,000 delinquent on union dues. If a investments. The current Schedule 2 of the Department’s proposal to raise the union member is more than 90 days the Form LM–2 requires labor threshold dollar amount to $5,000, delinquent on dues in excess of $5,000, organizations to list such securities and argued that $1,000 was not de minimis that fact should be disclosed. Per capita investments if they have a book value of and that a higher threshold would invite tax payments do not implicate privacy $1,000 and exceed 20% of the total book corruption. concerns and, as discussed above, must value of the respective securities and Two intermediate labor organizations be disclosed when an account is over 90 investments of the union. The agreed that $5,000 was appropriate as a days past due and exceeds $5,000. Department invited comments regarding dollar threshold, but they urged the Several unions contended the whether the two thresholds of the Department to raise the percentage accounts payable aging schedule will proposal are appropriate. threshold from 5% to 15% of the total falter on its stated purposes of deterring None of the comments indicated that book value of the reporting labor financial fraud because, irrespective of the Department’s proposal would organization’s marketable securities and

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:10 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00030 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\09OCR2.SGM 09OCR2 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations 58403

other investments. Two other comments the largest marketable securities and 19 investments that would be itemized from local labor organizations of its largest other investments. By under the Department’s dual thresholds recommended that the threshold for providing this information to union of 5% and $5,000. The Department requiring itemization of individual members, they will be able to make their believes that ordinarily the disclosure of investments be based solely on a own judgments regarding the value and an investment equal to 5% of a labor percentage of the total book value of all appropriateness of the union’s holdings organization’s total holdings would of the union’s marketable securities or and thereby the soundness of that provide useful information to members other investments. Finally, the comment important aspect of their union’s regarding the soundness and of a firm of certified public accountants financial operations and condition. appropriateness of a union’s also recommended a single threshold The Department also has concluded management of that aspect of its but suggested that the threshold be that neither of the proposed thresholds financial affairs. based solely on the book value of the should be either raised or deleted. F. Schedules 11 and 12—Disbursements individual security or other investment. Raising the threshold percentage for to Officers and Employees The commenter recommended that such proposed Schedule 5, for example, from a threshold be set at a book value of 5% to 15% of the total book value of a The Department received more than between $25,000 and $100,000. labor organization’s marketable 150 comments on its proposal to revise Upon careful consideration of the securities and other investments would the information to be reported by unions varying views on reporting investments, require a labor organization to list at about disbursements to their officers the Department has concluded that the most six marketable securities and a and employees and to require unions to proposed dual thresholds of $5,000 and maximum of six other investments report, by estimation and category, how 5% are appropriate to provide union (because 15% × 7 = 105%), rather than these individuals expend their working members with useful information about a maximum of nineteen of each type. time on behalf of the union. The the union’s investments without Reporting these few investments would Department proposed that unions would unnecessarily burdening unions. The portray a limited picture of a union’s report for each officer and certain Department has not been persuaded that numerous and very diverse investments. employees (all those paid a yearly salary it should require unions to report The 5% threshold will disclose to union of more than $10,000) their net salaries individual union investments with less members a fuller, more accurate picture and the amounts of withholdings for than a book value of $5,000. The of the soundness of the union’s each individual, along with the amount Department believes that the current selection of investments and of that of taxes paid by the union in connection threshold of $1,000 (on Schedule 2 of important aspect of the overall financial with the individual’s compensation. the current Form LM–2), especially condition and operations of the union Under the current report, only gross considered in light of the asset price without imposing a significant reporting salaries are required to be reported for increases that have occurred since 1962, burden on the organization. each officer and employee. when the reporting threshold was set at Similarly, raising the book value Withholdings and taxes are reported, that level, would require a union to threshold of individual marketable but only on an aggregated basis. report holdings too small to provide securities and individual other The Department also proposed to significant, useful information to union investments to amounts from $25,000 to require unions to provide an estimate of members. This would be true whether $100,000 would foreclose disclosure of the time expended by their officers and such holdings represented at least 20% all but the very largest union holdings. employees in each of eight functional of the union’s total investments (in each Especially among labor organizations categories prescribed generally for of the covered investment categories: that file the Form LM–2 or other Form union receipts and disbursements. The ‘‘marketable securities’’ and ‘‘other LM–2 filers without extensive Department proposed that unions report investments’’), the requirement investment holdings, thresholds set at each individual’s work time, per prescribed by the current From LM–2, book values of $25,000 to $100,000 category, rounded to the nearest 10%. or as little as 5% of the union’s total might except any investment from being The proposed categories are discussed investments, as proposed by the disclosed. In the Department’s view, in greater detail at Section III(C)(1). In Department. members of such unions would have a 1992, the Department issued a final rule, Under the Department’s proposal, a substantial interest in examining, and later rescinded, that also would have union is required to report for each of reaching conclusions regarding, the required unions to identify, on an the two investment categories its value and appropriateness of the individual-by-individual basis, how nineteen largest investments, if any, union’s limited holdings and the their officers and employees expended over $5,000, as measured by the book implications with respect to the general their work time. The 1992 rule also value of the investments. For example, condition and operations of the required unions to report unions with total marketable securities organization. disbursements, including officer and valued at less than $20,000 would only As indicated above, two commenters employee salaries, in various categories. have to report a maximum of four recommended that the Department That rule, however, required unions to holdings in each category. adopt a single threshold based on a report the actual percentages of time The Department does not find percentage of the total book value of the expended by the officers and employees persuasive the comments that argued union’s investments as the basis for in each of the categories. that the Department’s proposals were determining when a union must report The Department’s current proposal intrusive, not useful, or not material. As individual investments for both also invited comments on whether noted above, because only investments marketable securities and other unions should be required to more that exceed 5% of the union’s holdings investments. The Department recognizes exactly calculate, by category, how the are reported and no union can have that in some circumstances the use of a officers and employees expended their more than 19 such investments (5% × single threshold percentage, such as the time. The Department inquired whether 20 = 100%), the proposed Schedule 5 Department’s proposed threshold of 5% a precise accounting of their time would will never require any labor of the total book value of investments, be more useful to union members than organization to disclose to members of would not change the number or mix of the proposal to allow estimates that are the labor organization more than 19 of marketable securities and other rounded to 10%.

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:10 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00031 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\09OCR2.SGM 09OCR2 58404 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations

Several commenters supported the A labor policy group expressed the One commenter expressed the view Department’s proposal. One commenter view that the timekeeping requirement that the provision for reporting in 10% stated that an estimate of the amount of would be burdensome, especially for increments does not relieve any of the time spent by union employees and larger unions. It nonetheless supported administrative burden imposed by the officers in performing their various the Department’s proposal because the Department’s timekeeping proposal. In duties will provide significant new salaries and duties of a union’s officers its view, detailed records must be kept evidence to union members about the and employees are an important part of just to approximate the time expended priorities of their union leadership. union expenditures and reflect the by each officer or employee. The Together with the proposed requirement priorities established by union commenter stated that it is unfair to that unions report receipts and leadership. require union officers and staff to keep disbursements by functional category, a Unions generally opposed the time records, when, in its view, this commenter wrote, these requirements proposal, typically for the same reasons obligation is not required of top will provide information that will be they objected to the Department’s business executives or government very helpful to employees in making proposed requirement that they officials. decisions about whether to support or categorize their receipts and One commenter stated that the join a union. Another commenter disbursements by functional category. Department’s proposed schedules fail to asserted that the estimates would enable See discussion at Section III(C)(1). One reflect the wide variety of tasks union members to understand how their international union predicted that if the performed by the union officers in order leaders are spending their time and help contemplated changes are adopted: (1) to serve their members’ interests, e.g., ensure that union leadership is acting in Union officers would be prevented from attending union meetings, preparing the interests of its membership. fulfilling their responsibilities; (2) newsletters, providing union-sponsored A trade association stated that it unions would be forced to hire health/safety services, and operating job strongly supports the Department’s employees to track disbursements and training and enhancement programs. proposal, adding, however, that unions allocate expenditures; (3) local unions According to this commenter, the should be required to identify more would have to reconfigure their proposed categories are misleading in specifically any time allegedly spent in accounting systems; (4) union officers that they suggest that besides collective the category of ‘‘other disbursements.’’ and employees would have to be trained bargaining, union officers and One local union stated that the on how to translate their daily activities employees only participate in political estimation requirement strikes the right to fit the categories; (5) unions would and lobbying activities. This commenter balance between the need for become the target of inappropriate suggested that all of the other activities information and the burden imposed on government intervention; and (6) union would be considered as ‘‘other’’ labor organizations. The same union, officers would be subjected to criminal suggesting that the individuals spend however, stated that it would object to penalties for inadvertent discrepancies the majority of their time on matters less any requirement for more detailed time in completing the form. significant to members. keeping than proposed by the The AFL–CIO stated that there is no The AFL–CIO contended that two of Department. way to ‘‘exactly calculate’’ how officers the categories proposed by this Another commenter asserted that the and employees spend their time. The Department (‘‘benefits’’ and time reports would enable agency fee AFL–CIO submitted a survey that, it ‘‘contributions, gifts, and grants’’) have payers to quickly identify the contended, demonstrates that any no employee activity associated with percentage of time used for non- attempt to require something more exact them. These are pure expense representational matters and, therefore, than good faith estimations would categories, and the only employee determine whether their agency fees impose significant new costs on unions. activity associated with them will be the have been properly calculated. In this According to its survey, only 4% of the relatively minor activity connected to commenter’s view, the proposed unions that responded now have the disbursement. Thus, in the AFL–CIO’s changes would reduce the burden on capability to allocate officer and staff opinion, it is highly misleading to unions to defend suits from agency fee time by the functions proposed by the include these as two of the eight payers attempting to determine the Department. The AFL–CIO stated that categories in which officer and staff proper amount of their agency fees. only 10%-20% of responding unions time is allocated. In its view, two other One labor consultant expressed the stated that they have any type of categories (‘‘general overhead’’ and view that implementation of the electronic systems to keep track of ‘‘other’’) are largely residual and do not proposed functional time reporting officer or employee time by category. relate directly to any major union proposal would not result in significant The AFL–CIO noted that any programs. By narrowing the choice of and costly changes to most unions’ requirement that unions maintain program categories to only four accounting systems. He stated that many contemporaneous timekeeping records categories—contract negotiation and unions already have their officers and would greatly increase the burden on administration, organizing, political and employees completing activity report the union without any corresponding lobbying—it asserts that the form will forms or time sheets that categorize their gain in the value of the information inflate the amount of staff time reported time into major program areas and that obtained. The AFL–CIO also contended as ‘‘other.’’ the automated accounting systems used that the Department’s authority does not One individual commenter asked the by these unions can be modified easily, extend to prescribing particular types of Department to clarify whether an if necessary, to conform to the recordkeeping. Another union individual should record all the time he Department’s proposed categories. He complained that the recordkeeping or she expends on union business added that unions that do not utilize requirement would limit the services (typically 60 hours or more per week in time reporting systems could adopt the provided by the union. It estimated that his estimate). This commenter policies and procedures followed by even if recordkeeping requires only 20 questioned the proper reporting of unions with systems already in place. minutes per day to perform, this attendance at a Labor Day parade on a The same commenter asserted that translates into the loss of many hours legal holiday or a political rally that officers should be required to report that could be devoted to delivering takes place during regular working actual time, not estimated time. services to the union’s members. hours. Another commenter questioned

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:10 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00032 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\09OCR2.SGM 09OCR2 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations 58405

the proper reporting of time spent by an should be guided by the purpose of the So long as the union has a reasonable officer attending a funeral for an reporting requirement—providing operating procedure in place and takes employer representative on a joint accurate information to union reasonable steps to ensure that officers union-employer committee. members—in deciding how best to and employees are following that A union sought clarification whether characterize their activities for reporting procedure, the individual responsible a union can report all the hours worked estimated time. Finally, no official who for submitting the report generally has by its support staff (e.g., receptionists, makes a good faith, reasonable effort to no reason for concern. Only ‘‘willful’’ stenographers, secretaries, and mail accurately report estimated time need violations—actions that are intentional room personnel) under a single fear criminal liability, even if the or taken in reckless disregard of legal category, or is required to provide an estimate proves arguably inaccurate. See requirements—will give rise to liability. estimate for each individual by each of 29 U.S.C. 439. See 29 U.S.C. 439. While the the functional categories. The Department has determined, as a responsible official’s reporting duties The AFL–CIO contended that the general rule, that it is unnecessary to have increased, the standard by which proposed rule has the potential for impose on unions a requirement that this duty is measured has remained reporting misleading information. In they report their time on a more precise unchanged. this regard, it states that the NPRM, but basis than a 10% estimation. The not the proposed instructions, indicates Department is not requiring unions to The final Form LM–2 instructions ‘‘[t]he time allocated among the keep detailed time records. The labor have been revised to clarify how categories for each officer [or employee] organization need only estimate the particular activities should be reported should total 100% of that [individual’s] time spent on each activity. It is up to and how some common multi-task time.’’ This possible requirement, the labor organization to determine the activities may be allocated. See Section coupled with the 10% increment for least burdensome way to provide the III(C). As discussed in the final estimates, creates the risk of distorting information. However, the Department instructions, union officers and how the individual spends his or her believes the 10% estimation will be employees should provide estimates time. The AFL–CIO posed the question sufficient to enable members to evaluate based on the total number of hours they of how a union should report an how the time of the union’s officers and work on union business, not merely the employee’s time if she spends 85% to employees is directed and whether it first 40 hours or other measure of an 90% of her time on ‘‘contract reflects an appropriate use of the individual’s paid workweek. Despite the negotiation and administration,’’ 5% to union’s financial resources. To avoid Department’s efforts to provide clear 7% of her time on ‘‘political activities,’’ the misperception that a union’s officers instructions, the quality of the estimates and the same amount of her time on and employees spend no time in a reported will ultimately depend upon ‘‘lobbying.’’ A union expressed concern category (or categories)—a possibility if the care taken by the reporting unions about the liability of union officials who time in a category is less than 5%—we in making them. Nevertheless, the will be required to sign the union’s have revised the instructions to provide Department believes that permitting report. In its view, it is unfair to impose that where the time reported by an unions to estimate the time spent in this obligation upon the reporting individual in an activity is less than 5% specific activities provides a appropriate officials, given what it considers the of his total work time, he should use his balance between the dual objectives of subjective nature of the reporting and or her best estimate to the nearest providing as much useful and relevant the official’s inability to verify any percentage and report this amount. information to union members while estimates provided by other individuals. Similarly, in reporting aggregate totals reducing, to the extent practicable and The Department believes that of time, the union, instead of rounding appropriate, any burden on reporting requiring unions to report the estimated down to zero, must report its best amount of time expended by their unions. Reporting unions will be estimate to the nearest percentage and encouraged to provide information that officers and employees will provide report this amount. This change should is objective, accurate, and reliable useful information to their members. It enable unions to ensure that reported because they will want their members to will enable members to determine better time estimates add up to 100% for each be aware of the time spent by their how the union utilizes its human employee and this requirement has been union’s officers and employees in resources. A union’s own labor costs made clear in the instructions. represent a substantial portion of its The Department does not believe that activities on their behalf. Moreover, yearly disbursements, and the allocation allowing unions to customize categories because the information will be of the time expended by the officers and or establish subcategories of existing presented in a clear and complete employees serves the same purpose as categories, as some commenters manner, union members will be in a the allocation of a union’s other proposed, would promote the purposes position to determine whether the time disbursements. Moreover, by reporting of the statute. As discussed in further reported appears to be appropriate and how its officers and employee spend detail above with respect to the use of accurate, thus encouraging unbiased their time, by functional category, union functional categories for reporting reporting. Because union members elect members are better able to gauge the disbursements, a ‘‘customizing’’ their officers and are responsible for the union’s total investment of resources— approach would result in vast governance of their union, even labor and capital—to a group of differences in reporting formats from estimated reporting of the manner in activities. Based on its review of the union to union. This divergence would which officers and employees spend entire record, the Department concludes eliminate a baseline of comparison, their time will be far more useful than that such reporting will not impose result in confusion, and decrease the the total lack of any such information in undue burden on the union or the value of information reported to Form LM–2 prior to these revisions. individuals on its payroll. While union members and the public. Similarly, the Accordingly, even though allocating officials will be required to exercise concerns about the difficulty of attesting time by estimated percentages is not as judgment in making the necessary to the time estimates appear to be precise as exact measurements of time, estimates, it should be remembered that overstated. The union should be able to the fact that the estimates will be only a good faith estimate, not precise determine without difficulty the manner reviewed with interest by union reporting, is required. Union officials in which time estimates are to be made. members is itself an incentive that is

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:10 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00033 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\09OCR2.SGM 09OCR2 58406 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations

likely to ensure the quality of the Statement B on which the reporting to advance these goals. Consequently, information reported. labor organization will report the the Department has decided not to Several commenters opposed the aggregate amount of withholding taxes require labor organizations to report $10,000 salary threshold. The law’s and other payroll deductions from all membership in these categories. purpose, as stated by one commenter, salaries, the total disbursed, and the Most comments indicated that, was to require unions to report the total withheld but not disbursed. This contrary to statements in the NPRM, salaries of only their highest paid change will protect individual privacy unions do not currently keep officers and staff. Under the and also reduce the union’s reporting membership information in the Department’s rules, however, unions are burden for these schedules. The categories required by the new Schedule required to report the salaries of reporting union must then allocate each 13. Commenters provided several virtually all their employees. The officer’s and employee’s gross salary, examples of different methods of $10,000 threshold is established by based on a good faith estimate, rounded categorizing members, including: statute, 29 U.S.C. 431(b), and therefore to the nearest 10%, among five specified • The International Union of the Department is without authority to schedules (Representational Activities, Operating Engineers (IUOE) does not change the threshold amount. Political Activities and Lobbying, maintain information on members by No commenters specifically Contributions, General Overhead, and category. • supported the proposal to require Administration). The American Federation of unions to report the net pay, Teachers (AFT) tracks members, for withholdings, and tax payments for G. Schedule 13—Membership Categories accounting purposes, by ‘‘full each officer and employee, but a Several commenters indicated their membership equivalents.’’ number of comments opposing the support for the Department’s proposal to • The International Brotherhood of proposal were submitted. An require unions to report the total Electrical Workers (IBEW) tracks international union argued that the number of members according to members by industry. • proposed reporting of net salaries is various types of membership categories. The building trades unions do not contrary to standard business practices These commenters agreed that the track apprentice, retired or inactive and governmental regulations involving newly required information would be members. • an organization’s payroll. It asserted (as useful to union members. A number of One union indicated that they did one individual) that no other profit commenters, including several classify members as ‘‘active’’ and or nonprofit organization reports net ‘‘retired.’’ International unions, disagreed with the • wages. Moreover, it observed that a proposed changes to the unions’ annual Retired members in the United publicly traded corporation is required reporting requirements. Some Association of Plumbers (UA) maintain only to disclose the gross commenters expressed doubt about the active status (and pay dues) to maintain compensations of its chief executive authority of the Department to require certain benefits. It thus appears that while each union officer (CEO) and four senior executive unions to submit detailed demographic maintains membership information in officers if, and only if, that information in their annual reports. some manner, it may not maintain that compensation exceeds $100,000. Others expressed doubt that union information in the precise categories The AFL–CIO stated that the members were interested in the more contemplated by the proposed new Department’s current requirement that detailed membership information. Some Schedule 13. Union commenters also unions report the gross salaries of their commenters, while supporting the basic indicated that, because they do not officers and employees provides approach of the NPRM, suggested that maintain membership information in members with sufficient information to the Department require unions to report the categories contained in the new meet any legitimate purpose under the information in additional categories. Schedule 13, it would be similarly LMRDA. It contended further that the These suggested categories included difficult for unions to report the total LMRDA provides no statutory information on: authorization for the Department to • Members working on projects amount of dues paid by each of the collect this type of personal financial covered by the Davis-Bacon Act various categories of members and the information about union officers and • All employers with whom the amount that the union paid or received employees. In this regard, it asserted union has collective bargaining in per capita dues for each category. that the statute does not authorize the agreements (CBA) While the Department continues to Department to inquire, even indirectly, • The length and duration of each believe that information regarding the into such matters as whether an CBA number and type of members of a individual officer elects to purchase • The number of employees in each reporting labor organization is supplemental insurance or allocates covered bargaining unit information that is important to the substantial portions of his or her • Male and female members members of that organization, the paycheck to the United Way. • Members in each state for unions Department also agrees that each labor Based on the concern that the that cover more than one state. organization should be able to maintain Department’s proposal could interfere The purpose of the Department’s such information in the manner that the with the legitimate privacy interests of proposed Schedule 13 is to give union believes will be most useful to it union officers and employees, the members a clearer sense of the current as an institution. Accordingly, the Department has determined that the health and future viability of their union Department has concluded that each better course is to maintain the current and to give members a sense of what reporting labor organization should be practice of requiring unions to report changes should be made to the union in permitted to name and report on its own the gross salary (before taxes and other order to improve the organization. Over categories of members so long as the deductions) for each officer and time, this information will enable union provides a definition of each employee, on an individual basis. members to judge how effectively their category in Item 69 (Additional Accordingly, in keeping with the dues are being spent on organizing and Information). For example, if a union current Form LM–2, Schedules 11 and if any additional resources should be feels that it is best for it to maintain 12 have been adjusted to reflect this devoted to that activity. None of the membership statistics on ‘‘active,’’ change and a line item added to proposed additional categories appears ‘‘retired’’ and ‘‘apprentice’’ members,

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:10 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00034 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\09OCR2.SGM 09OCR2 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations 58407

then it should report that information in international union. In some respects— organizations, however, expressed their the appropriate place on the schedule as where, for example, an international disagreement with the proposal that and provide a definition of each union derives substantial support and unions begin to file Form LM–2 and category in Item 69. The union will not funding from the members of affiliated Form T–1 electronically after the be required to manufacture or report subordinate unions—such ‘‘double issuance of the final rule. These information for membership categories reporting’’ may not necessarily be an commenters indicated that mandatory it does not keep. inaccurate reflection of the financial electronic filing would be a This change will address the most health of the labor organization. considerable burden to unions, prominent areas of concern highlighted H. Mandatory Electronic Filing particularly those unions with volunteer by the comments. First, unions, and or part-time officers and staff. The union their members, presumably have some For several years, and with substantial commenters noted that the Department’s interest in the statistics if the union is Congressional urging, assistance and claim that electronic filing will be more already keeping them. Second, it should leadership, the Department has pursued efficient is untested, particularly be no great burden for unions to report the development and implementation of because the software that will allow membership statistics that they are electronic filing of annual reports unions to transfer their electronic data already keeping in the normal course of required by the LMRDA, along with an to the reports is not yet available. One business. The Department recognizes indexed and easily searchable computer commenter also noted that the that the requirements for reporting database of the information submitted, Department had indicated in a membership in the final rule may not accessible by the public over the Government Accounting Office (GAO) disclose as much information to the Internet. See H.R. Conf. Rep. 105–390, report that any electronic filing of members as the original proposal. The 1997 U.S.C.C.A.N. 2061; H.R. Conf. Rep. reports should be voluntary. The Department believes, however, that the 105–825; H.R. Conf. Rep. 106–419; H.R. Department notes that its earlier views final rule will disclose more needed Conf. Rep. 106–479; H.R. Conf. Rep. were shaped by the less mature information to the members concerning 106–1033; H.R. Conf. Rep. 107–342, technology that then existed and their unions without undue burden. 2002 U.S.C.C.A.N. 1690; H.R. Conf. Rep. without the benefit of continued and At least one organization, a provider 108–10, 2003 U.S.C.C.A.N. 4. In repeated Congressional urging to make of information regarding labor furtherance of that goal, the Department all such reports available on line. The organizations to companies, labor proposed that all Form LM–2 annual Department’s present view is shaped by attorneys, union democracy groups and reports be filed electronically and today’s technology, its impact on the proposed to develop software to enable academics, cited the tendency of labor ability to obtain, process, disclose, and that process. organizations that have national, utilize information, as well as the The Department received several intermediate and local bodies to double- increased awareness of the importance count members and to report the same comments, including comments from of transparency to the governance of persons as members of more than one of members of Congress, accountants, and institutions. the related organizations. This practice, other organizations, that supported according to this commenter, can give mandatory electronic filing. The In addition, several unions members an inaccurate picture of a commenters indicated that electronic commented that the Department has labor organization’s overall strength and filing is consistent with the overestimated unions’ capability to file is due, at least in part, to the differences recordkeeping requirements for human reports electronically. For example, the in the definition of ‘‘member’’ used by resource professionals working under International Union of Operating different labor organizations. In this other federal statutes and would bring Engineers (IUOE) stated that despite a regard, the Department notes that the the financial disclosure requirements of concerted effort on their part to have statute defines the term ‘‘member’’ to unions under the LMRDA into the locals file their per capita reports include modern era. The commenters pointed electronically, only 21 of the 147 IUOE locals do so. In addition, the any person who has fulfilled the out that millions of people of all requirements for membership in such economic groups now conduct their International Longshoremen’s organization, and who neither has financial business, including managing Association (ILA) reports that none of voluntarily withdrawn from membership nor their 401(k) and IRA accounts, on the its over 100 locals that file LM–2 reports has been expelled or suspended from Internet. The commenters explained currently files electronically. A survey membership after appropriate proceedings that mandatory electronic filing would conducted by the AFL–CIO indicates consistent with lawful provisions of the also be consistent with the that only 14% of the national and constitution and bylaws of such organization. Congressional directives to ESA every international unions and only 9% of the 29 U.S.C. 402(o). Every labor year since 1997 to establish an local unions file their Form LM–2 organization should use this definition electronic filing system to provide reports electronically. The Department to determine whether an individual is a greater public access to the materials notes, however, that, in fact, a much member of the labor organization for filed under the LMRDA. smaller percentage of unions have purposes of Schedule 13. Applying this A few commenters did not think the actually filed their Form LM–2 reports definition, however, may well result in Department’s proposal went far enough. electronically, a circumstance that is two or more labor organizations These commenters suggested that all hardly surprising inasmuch as this filing reporting certain individuals as unions, even those with receipts of less option did not exist until December of members because those individuals pay than $200,000, be required to file their 2002, when the Department’s system dues to, and fulfill all other LM forms electronically. In addition, at became able to utilize digital signatures. requirements for membership in, a local least one commenter suggested that The Department’s experience further labor organization and in an affiliated labor organizations be required to reflects that far more of the reports filed intermediate and/or national or provide a link on their own website to in paper are actually prepared international labor organization. In fact, the union’s electronically posted LM electronically, even though they are membership in an affiliated local labor form, whether located at the submitted by mail to the Department. organization may well be a requirement Department’s LM website or elsewhere The fact that the AFL–CIO reports many for membership in an intermediate or on the union’s website. Many labor more reports filed electronically than

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:10 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00035 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\09OCR2.SGM 09OCR2 58408 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations

actually have been filed suggests manually, if they wish. The technical committed, however, to taking the steps confusion on the part of those asking the feasibility study performed by SRA for necessary to effectuate the new system survey questions, or those answering the Department indicated that the with minimal problems. them, or both. proposal could be implemented with Although the Beaconfire study also The unions that commented stated relative ease, and this understanding is suggests that costs to labor organizations that it would be expensive and perhaps consistent with the Department’s own may be higher than the Department not feasible for them to develop the new familiarity with recordkeeping software assumed, Beaconfire acknowledges that accounting systems, purchase the new and union recordkeeping practices. their figures, like those developed by computers, and train their staff to make While the AFL–CIO disputes the SRA, are merely estimates. Beaconfire the changeover to electronic filing number of current electronic filers of assumed, without explanation, that the within the timeframe required by the Form LM–2, it argues that there are average data file to be transmitted by proposed effective date. For example, actually nearly twice as many electronic unions to the Department will be the United Food and Commercial accounting programs in use by labor substantially larger than the size Workers (UFCW) estimates that it will organizations than the Department assumed by SRA. SRA, by contrast, cost two million dollars and take two assumed. In fact, many of the larger stated that it extrapolated file size years to make the necessary changes. labor organizations that commented on requirements based on the data types Similarly, a study conducted for the the proposal argued not that they were and volume currently being reported on AFL–CIO estimates that it will take two unfamiliar with electronic accounting Form LM–2, taking into account the fact to four years for unions to make the programs but that their own that data volume varies significantly conversion to electronic filing. sophisticated programs capture different from union to union. For data that is not Therefore, the commenters suggested data than that required by the currently being reported, SRA made that the Department conduct a pilot Department’s proposal. ‘‘worst case’’ assumptions that it viewed program during which some, but not all, The NPRM noted a substantial as conservative. See Technical unions are required to file number of filers using the Department’s Feasibility Study for an On-Line electronically. In the alternative, the software to complete the existing LM Financial Downloading System, SRA, commenters suggested that the reports; in fact, more recent data Sec. 3.4.1. Without an explanation of Department devise a phase-in period indicate that 76% of the Form LM–2 Beaconfire’s contrary assumptions, it is during which the requirement for reports filed in 2002 were completed difficult to assess their validity, electronic filing is postponed, giving using the Department’s software. The particularly in light of the recognized unions time to adapt their systems and AFL–CIO figures cited above, indicating incentive on the part of regulatees ‘‘to train their people to meet the new that far fewer labor organizations use inflate cost estimates in the hope of requirements. the software, cannot refute the securing a less stringent regulation.’’ These comments suggest that the Department’s actual usage data. First, McGarity and Ruttenberg, Counting the relevant issue with respect to electronic the Department’s data is based on Cost of Health, Safety, and filing is not whether it should be review of all reports filed during the Environmental Regulation, 80 Texas required, but rather how and when it year, whereas the AFL–CIO survey is Law Review 1997, 2044–45 (2002). should be accomplished. Indeed, in based upon questions answered by a In addition, the Beaconfire study fails light of the Congressional direction that relatively small number of filers. to recognize that the information these reports should be filed and made Second, the AFL–CIO provided only required by the new Form LM–2 is not available electronically, and the delay survey results, not the actual survey structurally complex or fundamentally and expense attendant to scanning instrument, and there is little different from the information that has paper forms in order to make them information provided by which to assess been reported on the current form. The available on the Internet, electronic its validity. Finally, as noted above, if study, which notes problems filing is clearly necessary and beneficial. the AFL–CIO’s assertions regarding its encountered in the initial development In response to numerous comments numbers are read literally, they are of the Department’s e.LORS program, arguing that more lead-time is required, higher, in some respects, than the also fails to take into account the the Department has modified the Department’s own numbers, indicating, Department’s plans to leverage existing proposed effective date for electronic at best, some confusion on the part hardware and software components and filing, but remains firmly convinced that either of those asking the AFL–CIO to integrate the enhanced reporting the technological concerns associated survey questions, or those answering system into the Department’s existing with electronic filing are overstated. them, or both. infrastructure. First, the electronic filing requirement The most comprehensive response to In revising its estimates of the likely applies only to the largest labor the SRA technical feasibility report, a cost of compliance with this rule, and organizations, those that have over study performed by Beaconfire in particular of compliance with the $250,000 in annual receipts. Thus, 4,732 Consulting, Inc., was submitted along requirement that labor organizations file unions (about 19% of the total) will be with the AFL–CIO’s comment. This the Form LM–2 electronically, the required to file their reports study does not claim that labor Department carefully considered the electronically. Unions with annual organizations cannot file their annual information in the record regarding the receipts less than this threshold (62,668 Form LM–2 reports electronically, but existing capabilities of labor or about 81% of the total) will not be that the Department has underestimated organizations. The AFL–CIO submitted subject to this requirement. See the cost and time involved in converting survey data from its affiliates that discussion in the Paperwork Reduction to an electronic filing system. Most of suggests: 12.5% of local unions do not Act analysis (Section V(F), from which the issues raised by the Beaconfire study use computer accounting software; 21% these numbers are derived. These relate not to the cost of compliance for of national and international unions and unions, which are less likely than the labor organizations, but rather to the 33% of local unions would need new larger unions to have full-time staff cost to the Department to develop the hardware; 62% of national and familiar with electronic bookkeeping software that will allow labor international unions and 75% of local and reporting, can still file the simpler organizations to submit their reports unions would need new or upgraded Form LM–3 or Form LM–4 reports electronically. The Department is software; and 14% of all unions said it

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:10 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00036 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\09OCR2.SGM 09OCR2 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations 58409

would be impossible to expand the rule without knowing how the software manage their finances. This technology recordkeeping capacity of their current will work. has been available for several years and accounting systems to accommodate the In light of all of these concerns, the is used by many individuals to manage additional data required by the Department reassessed its estimate of their family finances. As discussed proposed rule. The AFL–CIO survey the burden and cost of complying with elsewhere, the changes that need to be also found that all national and this revision of Form LM–2 and revised made by unions in their bookkeeping international unions maintain their its estimate significantly upward. The and accounting practices are accounting data on in-house computer Department has never contended that incremental ones. The Department systems—but many of those systems are the changes would be without cost; the believes that most unions’ existing incapable of interfacing with the real question is whether the increase in financial software will accommodate the Department’s software. Information cost, once it is accurately measured, is minimal changes required to comply submitted by the AFL–CIO also justified by the increased benefits to with the rule. For data entry purposes, suggests, however, that: 79% of national union members. The Department has the only changes required will be the concluded, on balance, that and international unions and 67% of modification of the categories and fields technological advances have made it local unions will not need any new to chart the union’s accounts in a way possible to provide the level of detail that tracks the reporting categories. computer hardware; 38% of national necessary for union members to have a While the Department acknowledges and international unions and 25% of more accurate picture of their union’s that it will take the individuals local unions will not need any new or financial condition and operations responsible for tracking each union’s upgraded computer software; and 86% without imposing an unwarranted financial matters some time to can expand their current accounting burden on reporting unions. familiarize themselves with the systems to include the additional fields OLMS staff who review the reports instructions in order to modify to accommodate functional reporting. filed and provide compliance assistance categories, the actual time required to Moreover, raising the Form LM–2 filing to unions have found that a majority of add the modified accounts to the threshold to $250,000 will enable 501 of unions required to file Form LM–2 use tracking software will be nominal (from the smallest filers, and those most likely computerized recordkeeping systems a few days to a week or more). to have software and hardware issues, to and have embraced the technology Similarly, as discussed below, there is file the less burdensome Form LM–3. necessary to provide reports in no apparent obstacle for unions to Further, as identified in the technical electronic form. Several OLMS field comply with the actual electronic feasibility study performed by SRA, the offices report that even smaller unions submission of the information to the Department is committed to developing that file Form LM–3 reports keep Department, an obligation that no union reporting software for LM–2 filers that is electronic books. The development of will have to meet until about 18 months compatible with the major export electronic software that will permit after the publication of the final rule. formats available in commercial, off-the- unions that keep their records After considering the comments shelf accounting software. Finally, in electronically to import data from their regarding implementation, the the event that a labor organization programs to the Form LM–2 software Department has chosen to delay the encounters severe difficulties, the should reduce the burden of reporting effective date of the rule to provide hardship exemption will be available for financial information with the additional time for all labor its use. specificity required by the final rule. organizations to make the adjustments While labor organizations have not One union noted that it is going to be necessary to record the information previously been required to report all of very difficult and maybe impossible for required. The Department believes that this information, they have been unions using a commercial off-the-shelf a pilot program is unnecessary. If the required to make judgments regarding bookkeeping system (Quickbooks, technology was not mature or the rule the appropriate characterization of was introducing a concept or Peachtree, etc.) to find a way to disbursements in order to report those requirement unfamiliar to unions, a incorporate these details into their disbursements by category in the pilot program might have served a accounting databases. Almost all current form. Once the necessary useful purpose. The rule, however, unions, it observed, will have to do adjustments have been made to relies on mature technology that is in special programming to find a way to do electronic recordkeeping systems, no common use among unions, businesses, this. For the integrity of all the other additional burden will be entailed by and other organizations. The accounting functions, the system must the need to make similar judgments Department’s investigative and audit show the payee of the check (e.g., with respect to fewer categories. Labor experience reflects that unions are well American Express), but for the revised organizations that do not currently experienced in tracking receipts and Form LM–2 the system will have to maintain electronic books, or that use disbursements and reporting this ignore that vendor and instead insert the accounting software that proves information to members. Unions also names of the hotels, airlines, incompatible with the software have demonstrated considerable restaurants, etc. Finally, one union developed by the Department, will proficiency in using software to obtain asserted that the Department’s burden experience an increased burden. these results. estimates are completely mistaken, and The Department has given serious For similar reasons, the Department are based on alleged efficiencies to be consideration to the comments believes it unnecessary to phase-in the gained from using software that the suggesting that the Department employ new rule. As discussed, the Department Department purports will seamlessly a pilot program before implementing a does not believe that unions will export financial data. In its view, it is final rule or allow a delayed phase-in of encounter significant problems in impossible to determine which, if any, the electronic reporting requirement. As revising their current bookkeeping and financial software packages will be explained (and further elaborated accounting procedures to meet the compatible with the Department’s below), the Department’s final rule reporting requirements. And, to the software. There is no way, in its builds upon the existing technology extent unions are concerned about the opinion, to comment meaningfully on used by large and small businesses, actual submission of the data to the the burden associated with the proposed labor unions, and other organizations to Labor Department, that will not occur

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:10 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00037 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\09OCR2.SGM 09OCR2 58410 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations

until about 18 months after this rule only temporary. As noted above, the • Establishing a section on the OLMS issues (and then only for unions that concerns expressed about website devoted to the revised Form have fiscal years beginning on January ‘‘criminalization’’ of innocent mistakes LM–2 and making regular updates to it. 1, 2004). Moreover, the rule has a built- are misplaced because sanctions are • Developing a ‘‘list serve’’ system to in ‘‘phase-in’’ component that will available only for willful violations and send email messages to unions, allow for adjustments to be made, if and thus depend upon intentional or accountants, union members, and other when problems arise. Because each reckless actions by responsible officers. interested individuals to provide up-to- labor organization’s filing date is Finally, the Department continues to the-minute information to assist in dependent on its chosen fiscal year, the be fully committed to providing meeting the reporting requirements for filing of annual financial reports is extensive compliance assistance at all the revised Form LM–2. staggered throughout the year. stages of implementation. OLMS is • Developing guidance to assist In the event that any labor developing compliance assistance unions to configure off-the-shelf organization encounters serious materials outlining and explaining the software to best capture the information difficulties with electronic filing, the changes to Form LM–2 and new Form needed to provide the data required for hardship exemption will be available. T–1 and will present seminars and submitting the LM–2 and T–1 reports. The Department proposed a hardship workshops advising union officers of I. Effective Date exemption modeled after the procedures the new reporting requirements. used by the SEC (17 CFR 232.201–202) Contemporaneously with the The Department proposed to make the and invited comments regarding publication of this rule, the Department use of the revised Form LM–2 and the whether the hardship exemption is making available a Data new Form T–1 mandatory for reports for procedures are appropriate and whether Specifications Document that will fiscal years commencing after the there are any alternative procedures that enable the unions’ staffs to prepare their publication of the final rule. The might better address legitimate bookkeeping systems in order to submit Department specifically invited problems. International unions their reports electronically to the comments concerning whether one year commented that the hardship Department. If unions do not complete is an appropriate time period before exemption should be broadened to this interface, they will still be able to labor organizations are required to use permit a reasonable phase-in period and use the Form LM–2 software by the ‘‘cut the new forms and whether labor that smaller Form LM–2 filers be given and paste’’ method or by keying organizations should be required to use permanent exemptions because of the information directly into the electronic the revised form to report information burden and cost of electronic filing. form. The Form LM–2 software will be for a fiscal year that begins within 30 Trade associations, on the other hand, available to download from the OLMS days of the date that a final rule is argue that hardship exemptions should website at www.olms.dol.gov well before issued. One commenter said the be narrowly limited and that labor any labor organization will have to use effective date was appropriate observing organizations should be required to it to file their reports, which will give that ‘‘[t]he proposed electronic filing affirmatively prove hardship. Some the Department plenty of time to procedures and effective dates strike a commenters asked for clarification of conduct compliance assistance and the standards to be used when reasonable balance between limiting evaluating hardship claims. An attorney answer questions posed by the filing reporting burdens and increasing for a local union expressed concerns community. members’ access to important over the possible criminalization of The Department’s extensive information.’’ Two other comments innocent errors given the present lack of compliance assistance will include from organizations proposed that the clear guidance on the proposed rule. some or all of the following actions: effective date should be even earlier. One association commenter suggested • Mass mailings to all reporting These commenters indicated that while that individual union members be unions explaining the final rule and the the new rule would require additional permitted to appeal the grant of an effective date. reporting burdens, the essential exemption to their union. • Briefings for national/international information to be reported remained The Department has decided to retain unions, including meetings with unchanged. These commenters also the hardship exemption and not to national/international secretary- expressed concern that unions would attempt to define with more treasurers and their staffs and follow-up file the new forms late as many unions particularity the circumstances in which training sessions. do with the current forms. it might be available. The exemption • Training OLMS staff on the new The majority of the comments was left deliberately broad in order to forms software and how to respond to specifically dealing with the rule’s permit accommodation of a wide range inquiries from users. effective date opposed the proposed effective date saying that it was too of variable situations. Moreover, the • Establishing and publicizing a toll- soon. The commenters, most of whom Department is unaware of any problem free telephone number for software were labor organizations, argued that experienced by the SEC in using a trouble-shooting. similar formulation. If, however, unions the final rule should not be imposed • Maintaining a help desk with a toll- have serious difficulty with electronic until the software that will be provided filing, the hardship exemption presents free telephone number and a dedicated by the Department is tested, a fail-safe option for any reporting labor email address for handling reporting implemented and fully operational. organization that needs it. With respect inquiries. Several unions suggested that the • to the suggestion that a union member Development of users’ guides for effective date be delayed six months to be allowed to challenge his or her the new forms software. two years. Some commenters said that union’s exercise of the hardship • Development of Powerpoint given the Department’s experience with exemption, the Department does not briefings on the new forms software. e.LORS and the SEC’s experience with believe that such an appeal would be • Presentation of Powerpoint its reporting system, a delay of two to practical. Exemptions will be granted briefings by OLMS field offices in four years before full implementation only upon a proper showing of need by compliance assistance sessions with was more realistic. Other commenters the union and the exemption will be filers. suggested that the Department’s

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:10 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00038 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\09OCR2.SGM 09OCR2 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations 58411

software be subject to a separate review required for submitting the LM–2 and able to make any needed adjustments to and comment process after it is issued. T–1 reports, a tentative schedule of their bookkeeping and data processing The Department continues to believe seminars for international, national, practices to capture and allocate that an earlier or immediate effective intermediate and local unions hosted transactions in the categories prescribed date would not be appropriate for a throughout the country, an email list- by the Form LM–2 and to later transmit proposed rule of this magnitude. Some serve to provide periodic updates to such data without incurring an undue interim period will be needed for interested parties, web-based materials burden. unions to adapt their recordkeeping that include frequently asked questions, Addressing unions’ additional practices to the new requirements. a description of the Form T–1 concerns, it is the Department’s position Similarly, there will be a later need for registration process, and other topics of that neither the time spent by the SEC the Department and labor organizations interest to filers. in the development of its Electronic to test and implement the reporting Once union officials understand the Data Gathering, Analysis, and Retrieval software that will be provided by the new reporting requirements it will be (EDGAR) system nor the time required Department. The aim of the Department necessary to make some adjustments to for the Department to implement its is to balance some reasonable amount of their recordkeeping systems. Most e.LORS system provide appropriate time that unions will need to adapt to changes will be very minor. The most paradigms for determining the time the new reporting requirements and the crucial change involves the tracking of necessary to implement mandatory members’ immediate interest in disbursements to ensure that each electronic filing of the Form LM–2. knowing how their dues money is spent. disbursement is allocated to the proper First, the phase-in of the mandatory This member interest is reflected in the disbursement category with a electronic filing on the SEC’s EDGAR numerous comments from members descriptive purpose. Each union will system was completed on May 6, 1996, indicating general support for the track new disbursements according to over seven years ago. See 61 FR 13544; proposed changes and emphasizing the the account classifications created by http://www.sec.gov/info/edgar/ members’ right to have information that union and classify them according regoverview.htm. Since then, technology concerning their union. to the disbursement categories of the has continued to develop, building, in In addressing unions’ concerns, it is part, on experience gained from using appropriate to sketch the tasks to be revised Form LM–2. Some commenters asserted that this is a dramatic policy systems like EDGAR, and computerized undertaken by unions to meet the recordkeeping and communication have requirements of the new reporting shift tantamount to imposing a new recordkeeping system, which would become more accessible and better regime. The tasks involve two phases of understood. As the SEC itself preparation. First, filers will need to cause a significant burden, but this ignores the fact that unions have always commented, in implementing recent study and understand the new improvements: requirements, make adjustments to the been required to allocate each union’s recordkeeping system, and train disbursement to one or more Recent technological advances, most staff. Second, filers that choose to take disbursement categories on the Form notably the rapidly expanding use of the advantage of the electronic importation LM–2. For example, unions have always Internet, have led to unprecedented changes been required to allocate credit card in the means available to corporations, features of the Department’s reporting government agencies, and the investing software will need to create reports payments to multiple categories of the Form LM–2 based upon the purposes of public to obtain and disseminate within their accounting systems that information. Today many companies, will be used to export their data to each charge. A single credit card charge regardless of size, make information available populate the reporting forms. As to a travel agent may include expenses to the public through Internet web sites. On discussed in greater detail below, the that must be allocated to three or more those sites and through links from one web first phase likely can be completed different places on the Form LM–2. The site to others, individuals may obtain a vast within a few weeks of the rule’s Department has changed the categories amount of information in a matter of seconds. publication and certainly by the but not the underlying method of Advanced data presentation methods using effective date of the rule, whereas the allocating these disbursements. In fact, audio, video, and graphic and image material there actually fewer disbursement are now available through even the most second phase need not be completed inexpensive personal computers or laptops. until the form is filed, at the earliest, categories on the new form and the five nearly 18 months after publication of new categories are thoroughly defined 65 FR 24788–89. this rule (and then only for unions that in the instructions to the form. After Moreover, the EDGAR system is far have fiscal years beginning on January allocating the disbursement, they will more complex and multi-faceted than 1, 2004). enter a brief purpose for each the filing of the one or two forms The grace period of about three transaction in a memo field. These sorts contemplated by this rule. In fact, months is relevant to the first phase of operations should be easy to perform EDGAR accommodates the filing of over discussed above, which begins since such changes to the classification 75 separate forms by a variety of immediately upon publication of the of transactions and the creation or different types of entities. See http:// final rule. The preamble, instructions modification of accounts are made on a www.sec.gov/info/edgar/ and forms will be the authoritative week-to-week or day-to-day basis in the forms.htm#common. The fact that such source of information regarding the new normal course of business. It may a massive system could be implemented reporting requirements. Union officials require some retraining to understand with a three-year phase-in period over will use these documents to understand the new categories and the use of the seven years ago lends support to the what is required of them. Additionally, memo field, but this is guidance that Department’s assertion that the far the Department will provide substantial bookkeepers are accustomed to simpler architecture required to permit compliance assistance that will include receiving. Nothing during this phase is similar organizations to file two forms, an overview of the requirements, a particularly time consuming, difficult, at most, can be implemented in much comparison to the old requirements, or outside the common routine of less time. In addition, the Department guidance to assist unions to configure individuals engaged in bookkeeping and will be able to utilize both the off-the-shelf software to best capture the accounting. In sum, the Department architecture developed for e.LORS, as information needed to provide the data believes that Form LM–2 filers will be well as experience gained in developing

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:10 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00039 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\09OCR2.SGM 09OCR2 58412 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations

and implementing that system, to T–1 (Trust Annual Report) in order to The association also suggested that it facilitate the establishment of a system fulfill the purpose of the statutory might be appropriate to require smaller of mandatory electronic filing for the reporting requirements. labor organizations, otherwise eligible to current Form LM–2. Although some A ‘‘trust in which a labor organization file their labor organization annual commenters also pointed to delays in is interested’’ is defined in Section 3(l) financial report on Forms LM–3 or LM– publication of recordkeeping rules by of the LMRDA (29 U.S.C. 402(l)) as 4, to file their annual reports on the the Occupational Safety and Health follows: more detailed Form LM–2 for any year Administration, those delays are * * * a trust or other fund or organization in which such organizations meet the irrelevant inasmuch as they were related (1) which was created or established by a requirement for filing the Form T–1. to policy changes, not technical labor organization, or one or more of the Many unions submitted comments difficulties. See 68 FR 38601. trustees or one or more members of the that would except some unions from the The Department continues to believe governing body of which is selected or Department’s proposal. These that labor organizations will have appointed by a labor organization, and (2) a commenters stated that unions, adequate time to conform to the revised primary purpose of which is to provide regardless of the size of their forms and comply with the more benefits for the members of such labor membership or their financial resources detailed reporting requirements. As organization or their beneficiaries. would have virtually the same indicated above, unions will have a The Department sought comments on responsibility and tasks, even though minimum of approximately 18 months a number of issues relating to this new only a small number of the unions before their first report on the new form, which are discussed below. would have the staff or other resources forms is due. During this time, they to obtain, prepare, and file timely and already will have made changes to their A. Who Should Be Required To File a accurate information on Form T–1. bookkeeping practices needed to Form T–1 Many commenters stressed the capture the information that will be 1. Labor Organizations That File Forms limited human resources available to reported. Thus, the unions will be able LM–3 and LM–4 some unions. These commenters to focus their efforts on training their observed that many unions have no The Department proposed that all staff in the new requirements of the clerical employees and must rely either labor organizations, including smaller actual reporting software. As the on part-time officers or, in very many Department has acknowledged, there labor organizations eligible to file their cases, unpaid members who volunteer were some complications with the labor organization annual financial their services after work hours. In the implementation of the previous e.LORS report on Forms LM–3 and LM–4, as view of these commenters, very few of system. The Department has learned well as larger labor organizations those officials and employees have the from this process. Building upon the required to file Form LM–2, would be computer or accounting experience or existing infrastructure, the Department required to file Form T–1 for any trust training sufficient to readily process and is employing more advanced technology in which a labor organization is submit the necessary financial in developing the reporting software interested if the total annual receipts of information for the Form T–1 in than was the case in the initial e.LORS the trust were at least $200,000 and to electronic format. project. Similar software has proven which the labor organization Commenters stated that many labor efficient with other government contributed at least $10,000, or to which organizations conduct and record their agencies. $10,000 was contributed on behalf of financial and other union affairs by As discussed above, the Department the labor organization, during the hand and seldom have ready access to has decided to delay the effective date reported year. The proposed Form T–1 current-generation computers, software, of the final rule by postponing its is designed to require unions to report and other electronic equipment. These application until unions begin their next financial information about union funds commenters expressed concern that fiscal year after December 31, 2003, i.e., that have been invested in such trusts, these organizations, which already often about three months after publication of information that has not been disclosed find it necessary to hire professional this rule. Approximately two thirds (2⁄3) under the current reporting regimen for assistance to meet current reporting of the reporting unions begin their fiscal unions. The proposed reporting scheme requirements, in many cases would be year on January 1. The first report was established to discourage constrained further to hire and rely on containing the information required circumvention or evasion of the computer, accounting, legal, and other under the new rule for these unions reporting requirements for such trusts, consulting assistance to comply with would be due on March 31, 2005. Labor while imposing minimal burdens on the Department’s Form T–1 proposal. organizations that use a fiscal year labor organizations. The Department Additionally, these commenters stated beginning on a date other than January invited comments on whether this that such unions would find it 1 will have even more time to comply. aspect of the Department’s proposal necessary to expend significant amounts strikes an appropriate balance between of their resources for training on how to IV. Summary of Changes to the the need for transparency and any meet their reporting obligations. The Proposal to Require Form T–1 burden on labor organizations. commenters further stated that, because Reporting for Trusts Numerous commenters expressed there is a significant turnover of the The Department proposed to require their views on the reporting burden that organization’s part-time and unpaid all unions to report the assets, liabilities, the proposal would entail. Some officials and employees, those costs may receipts, and disbursements of all funds commenters discussed the likely impact not only be a significant but also a or organizations that are not wholly on unions without substantial resources recurring expense for small owned by the union, but that meet the invested in covered trusts. A business/ organizations. Commenters stated that statutory definition of a ‘‘trust in which trade association asserted that the many organizations would be faced with a labor organization is interested,’’ that reporting burden on such unions would the dilemma of raising the dues of, or have annual receipts of $200,000 or be significantly less than on unions with cutting services to, their members. more and to which the labor more substantial assets, given that the The Department has been persuaded organization contributes at least $10,000 burden likely would be proportional to that the relative size of a union, as during the reporting year on a new Form the size of a union’s overall finances. measured by its overall finances, will

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:10 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00040 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\09OCR2.SGM 09OCR2 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations 58413

affect its ability to comply with the a labor organization is interested, it is These organizations stated that, at a proposed requirements relating to trusts appropriate to retain the existing minimum, unions be required to append in which the union has an interest. For inclusion of the receipts of a subsidiary to their Form LM–2 filings the pertinent this reason, the Department has decided (which is more clearly and more audit or annual report filed with the to limit the requirement for filing Form narrowly defined than a single entity) in other government agency. T–1 to labor unions that have receipts the receipts of a reporting union for the In response to these comments, the of at least $250,000 per year, the same sole purpose of deciding whether the Department has continued to provide filing threshold that applies to union must file a Form LM–2. four exceptions to the Form T–1 organizations that must file their annual Otherwise, removing the requirement requirements: (1) A PAC fund, if financial reports on Form LM–2. for unions with annual receipts of publicly available reports on the PAC’s Accordingly, the Department’s final rule $250,000 or less to file a report funds are filed with federal or state excepts from the trust reporting regarding trusts in which they are agencies; (2) any political organization requirement labor unions that are interested would permit unions to for which reports are filed with the IRS eligible to file Forms LM–3 and LM–4. allocate assets to a wholly owned, under 26 U.S.C. 527; (3) employee Because the proposed requirement controlled and financed entity and benefit plans filing a complete and that Form LM–3 and –4 filers file a avoid even the reporting requirements timely report under ERISA; and (4) any Form T–1 for trusts in which they are imposed with respect to such entities covered trust or fund for which an interested was the only significant before these reforms. independent audit has been conducted change proposed with respect to Forms in accordance with standards prescribed LM–3 and LM–4, neither these forms 2. Other Exemptions in the final rule. For the first three nor the Instructions for them will be The Department originally proposed categories, the exception is complete. included in the appendix to this rule. In four express exemptions to the Form T– No Form T–1 is required. For the fourth addition, a change will be made to the 1 Trust Annual Report: (1) Where an category, a union must file the Form T– Instructions for Form LM–2 to make organization makes freely available, and 1, but can file the independent audit in them consistent with the unchanged specifies the location of, an audit of the lieu of providing the financial Instructions for Forms LM–3 and –4, trust pursuant to 29 U.S.C. 186(c)(5)(B); information otherwise required by Form which provide that the term ‘‘total (2) where an organization files publicly T–1. The audit will be required to meet annual receipts’’ includes receipts of available reports about the trust as a either the requirements of 29 CFR any subsidiary organization, defined as Political Action Committee (PAC) with 2520.103–1 et seq. (relating to annual * * * any separate organization of which the a state or federal agency; (3) where a reports and financial statements ownership is wholly vested in the reporting report about the trust as a political required to be filed under ERISA) or the labor organization or its officers or its organization is filed with the Internal standards described in detail in the membership, which is governed or controlled Revenue Service pursuant to 26 U.S.C. Instructions to Form T–1. by the officers, employees, or members of the 527; or (4) where the trust is required to The standards prescribed in the Form reporting labor organization, and which is file an annual report pursuant to ERISA T–1 Instructions, generally, require that wholly financed by the reporting labor (29 U.S.C. 1023). The Department the audit be performed by an organization. invited comments concerning whether independent qualified public While an entity that meets the the proposed Form T–1 procedures— accountant who, after examining the definition of a subsidiary will also be a including the enumerated exemptions to financial statements and other books trust in which the union is interested, Form T–1 filing—were appropriate and records of the trust, as the the assets of which would not normally given the facts and circumstances of accountant deems necessary, certifies be included in ‘‘total annual receipts’’ of current union reporting. that the trust’s financial statements are the reporting union, an exception to the Many labor organizations supported presented fairly in conformity with normal rule will be added to the the proposed Form T–1 exemptions as accepted accounting principles. Notes to Instructions to make clear that the assets a reasonable approach that provides the financial statements included in the of a trust should not be included unless valuable financial disclosure, while audit must disclose, for the preceding the trust is also a subsidiary, as defined avoiding needless duplication of effort. twelve month period: Losses, shortages, above. The NPRM pointed out that one Other unions, apparently either or other discrepancies in the trust’s alternative to the proposed criteria for mistaken about, or unaware of, the finances; the acquisition or disposition filing a Form T–1 would be to require parameters of the exemptions, criticized of assets, other than by purchase or sale; a report for any entity that is dominated the Form T–1 on the ground that many liabilities and loans liquidated, reduced, or controlled to such a degree that trusts are heavily regulated by ERISA or written off without the disbursement assets, liabilities, receipts and (and other federal laws) and are already of cash; and loans made to union disbursements of the entity effectively required to file similar financial reports officers or employees. The audit must be are those of the union itself. with government agencies. In the accompanied by schedules that disclose, Commenters were specifically invited to Department’s view, these comments are for the preceding twelve month period: comment on the fact that assets and best read to provide implicit support for A statement of the assets and liabilities receipts of such an entity ‘‘would be the proposed exemptions. Several of the trust, valued at current value, and reportable as assets and receipts of the commenters suggested that the the same data displayed in comparative union itself (rather than assets of an Department extend the Form T–1 form for the end of the previous fiscal organization in which the union has an exemption to any entity willing to be year of the trust; a statement of trust interest)’’ and that the addition of such audited by an independent certified receipts and disbursements; and a list of amounts might require a union to file a public accountant and willing to make all entities, including the name and Form LM–2 rather than a Form LM–3 or that audit publicly available, description of the entity, with which the LM–4. See 67 FR 79285. Although, as irrespective of whether the trust trust conducted $10,000 or more of explained in Section IV. A. 3, the currently files an audit or report with a commerce during the reporting period, Department has rejected reporting based government agency. Finally, several as well as the aggregated total of all on ‘‘single entity’’ status in favor of the trade associations suggested that the receipts/disbursements with each such statutory definition of a trust in which Form T–1 permit no exemptions at all. entity during the reporting period.

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:10 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00041 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\09OCR2.SGM 09OCR2 58414 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations

These standards overlap partially with this context the need for itemization is One comment suggested that in some the standards required by the ERISA less significant than it is in reporting the circumstances the $10,000 threshold for rule, with changes necessary to serve union’s non-trust assets because the labor organization contributions to a the particular needs of the Department Form T–1 does not apply to trust was too high. That comment urged in administering the ‘‘interested trust’’ disbursements by labor organizations the Department to modify the proposal provisions of the LMRDA, as discussed directly. The Form LM–2 already so that a union that contributes either throughout this section of the preamble. captures specific union disbursements $10,000 or 10% of its total annual See generally AICPA, Professional and accounts payable to trusts. The receipts, whichever is less, would be Standards, Special Reports, AU §§ 600 Form T–1 is designed to provide required to file Form T–1. The comment and 623; FASB, FAS 117, Final information about an entity created by reasoned that amounts of less than Statements for Not-for-Profit the labor organization, or trustees or $10,000 may be significant, relative to Organizations, ¶¶ 45, 47, 63. members of the governing body of the organizations overall finances, for The new audit alternative is aimed at which are selected or appointed by the some unions, and that members of such promoting disclosure while avoiding labor organization, a primary purpose of unions should have the benefit of duplication for trusts that are already which is to provide benefits for the knowing how their money is being subject to an independent audit. The labor organization’s members or their spent. As noted above, the Department audit option enables unions to avoid beneficiaries. invited comments about the impact that reporting the detailed financial Many union members recommended the proposed trust reporting information on a Form T–1 if they are generally greater scrutiny of joint requirement would have on unions with already receiving an audit that meets the employer-union funds authorized under relatively small assets. The commenters specifications set forth above, by simply the LMRA. Moreover, while many union have persuaded the Department that filing a copy of such an audit along with members were critical of the current some smaller unions could encounter the first page of a Form T–1, which state of joint funds disclosure and significant and recurring difficulties in provides identifying information. The sought greater Department oversight of complying with the Department’s criteria set forth above are in line with these funds, these comments can be proposal. The Department’s decision to standard business practices (id.) and read equally as supporting the limit the requirement for filing Form T– provide the kind of information in requirements that unions specify where 1 to those unions with annual receipts which union members who submitted the audit is available. At least one union of at least $250,000 has rendered moot comments on this issue demonstrated member stated that the critical problem the suggestion to adopt an alternative an interest. The information required in was that requests for information about Form T–1 filing threshold for union such an audit, however, is somewhat these funds were ignored—not that the contributions of the lesser of $10,000 or more general than that otherwise substance of the information provided 10% of the union’s total annual receipts. required on a Form T–1. For example, was insufficient. Similar reasoning an audit need not specify the purpose supports extending the opportunity to The Department recognizes that for disbursements of $10,000 or more by reporting labor organizations to file a amounts less than $10,000 may be the trust, but need only list the qualifying audit in place of a Form T– comparatively more significant to some identities of those with whom the trust 1 for any trust. The Department unions. However, the Department engaged in $10,000 transactions. believes, however, that such audits believes that the value of such As discussed earlier, no union is should be filed with the Department, information to union members is required to file an audit for a covered rather than maintained separately from outweighed by the burden such trust. Instead, the union may choose to the labor organization’s other financial reporting could have on unions without meet the reporting requirement by information. Their filing with the a professional or even full-time staff. submitting either: (1) A statement that a Department will promote transparency Such unions also may have qualifying report (as identified above in and accountability by allowing union comparatively more difficulty in the categories listed) has been filed with members to access all trust information obtaining the detailed information and a separate government agency; (2) a quickly and easily in one location. preparing the detailed trust report on copy of an independent audit meeting Form T–1, especially in electronic the standards prescribed above; or (3) a 3. Form T–1 Reporting Threshold format. completed T–1 Form. These The Department proposed a reporting A number of commenters expressed requirements should not be read as threshold based on the trust’s annual the view that the $10,000 union diminishing or affecting in any way a receipts and a union’s annual contribution threshold for filing Form trust’s disclosure obligations under contributions to the trust (or the T–1 was too low and recommended other applicable law including, but not contribution made on the labor various alternatives: limited to, ERISA, state and federal organization’s behalf, or as a result of a • reporting laws governing PAC funds, negotiated agreement to which the labor Two comments suggested that the IRS regulations governing political organization is a party). The Department $10,000 threshold served a limited organizations, and Section 302(c) of the proposed $200,000 in annual receipts as purpose because a benefit program Labor Management Relations Act the trust threshold and $10,000 as the would readily meet that threshold; the (LMRA), 29 U.S.C. 186(c). threshold for a union’s contributions to comments cited as an example the fact The audit process provides a valuable the trust. Although most of the that a union with as few as 49 members qualitative check on the entity’s comments received focused on the size who work full-time and contribute $.10 finances by an independent examiner. of a labor organization’s contribution, per hour to a benefit program would Among other regulatory schemes, the rather than the size of a reportable trust, meet the threshold. A third comment SEC, as noted above, recognizes the the Department has decided to raise the suggested that the union annual important, rigorous role independent reporting threshold to require unions to contribution threshold be raised to audits serve in its regulation of public report only trusts with annual receipts $25,000. companies. The Department recognizes of $250,000 or more, consistent with the • Two comments stated that the that the audit option may not provide increase in the reporting threshold for Department’s proposal would require a the same detail as the Form T–1, but in the Form LM–2. union to file detailed reports on Form

VerDate jul<14>2003 18:21 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00042 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\09OCR2.SGM 09OCR2 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations 58415

T–1 regarding trusts in which a union established by a labor organization or such labor organizations meet the may have only a 5% ownership interest. one or more of the members of the annual contribution threshold that Those comments urged the Department governing body of which is selected or would trigger the obligations to file to revise the proposal so that the appointed by a labor organization. Thus, Form T–1 under the Department’s threshold was based on ownership or by definition one or more labor proposal, all labor organizations that are control of at least 50% of the trust. organizations probably will have required to file Form T–1 will submit • For similar reasons, three comments significant involvement in the affairs of virtually the same report. Members of suggested that a threshold of 20% or the trust. As a result, the Department the other participating labor 25% or some other percentage of the anticipates that in most instances the organizations that do not meet the receipts of the trust would be a better reporting union, either by itself or in annual contribution threshold and that measure of the union’s relationship with combination with other reporting are not required to file Form T–1 would the trust that would permit the union to unions, in practice will exercise have access to those trust reports obtain details of the trust’s financial sufficient influence to require or because the reports are public operations to be reported on the Form persuade the trust to provide the information under section 205 of the T–1. information necessary to file a Form T– LMRDA, 29 U.S.C. 435. However, the The Department has not been 1. It seems likely that in the great Department believes that it is persuaded that these comments provide preponderance of circumstances it impractical to restrict the reporting to a a sufficiently balanced and workable would not be necessary for a reporting single labor organization. Although it alternative to the Department’s union to have anything approaching might be possible to impose the proposal. The $10,000 threshold for 50% ownership or control of the trust in reporting obligation only on the labor union contributions proposed by the order to obtain the necessary organization that makes the largest Department represents, in the information from the trust to prepare contribution to the trust, this rule might Department’s view, the most and file Form T–1. be difficult to apply unless trusts were appropriate compromise between an The Department disagrees with the mandated to maintain an easily amount that is sufficiently high so that suggestion that a union’s reporting accessible and dynamic report of an undue reporting burden is not threshold be based on the union’s share contributions by each participant in the imposed on unions with limited of a particular trust’s annual receipts. trust, a condition that the Department is finances and an amount that is Under this approach, for example, a unable to impose. Allowing self- sufficiently low so that trusts will be union would have to file a Form T–1 selection among unions also would be a reported if they receive contributions only if the union’s per annum possible option, but there is no equal to a significant proportion of the contribution reflects 20% or 25% of the guarantee that this would be workable. reporting union’s other financial affairs. total contributions received by the trust There is no mechanism by which this Thus, a threshold contribution of during this period. This approach obligation could be enforced, and a $25,000 seems excessively high, would operate to except from reporting particular union’s failure to abide by especially in relation to the other information relating to substantial any voluntary arrangement would deny financial affairs of labor organizations. contributions by a union, even though members of several unions information Setting the threshold at this level would such contributions could represent the to which they are entitled. Thus, in the deny members information about primary investment of the union. Department’s view, this alternative does financial transactions involving a Moreover, this approach would deny not ensure that members would receive significant amount of money relative to members information, given the purpose information about their union’s trust the union’s overall finances and other of the trust, that is uniquely important holdings on a regular, predictable, and reportable financial transactions. to them as union members, even though enforceable basis. Basing a union’s obligation to file a the contributions of their particular trust report on the percentage of the union represents only a relatively small The Department also sought union’s ownership or control of the trust fraction of the contributions received by comments on an alternative ‘‘single also does not appear to be a workable the trust. A formula setting the entity’’ test to identify those funds or or appropriate approach. Union threshold at 20% or 25% of the annual other organizations for which a union ownership and control in the context of receipts of the trust might exclude from should report assets, liabilities, receipts a union’s participation in a trust that the reporting requirement those large and disbursements. The NPRM defined provides benefits to the union trusts that have numerous participating a ‘‘single entity’’ as one that is membership are very difficult concepts unions. Thus, even though the trust’s ‘‘dominated or controlled by the labor to quantify. Even if percentages of entire contributions come from unions, organization to such a degree that assets, ownership or control were susceptible no information would be disclosed by liabilities, receipts and disbursements of to reasonably precise calculations, in this trust unless a contributing union the entity effectively are those of the view of the many variables present in exceeds the suggested percentage of union itself.’’ Id. The test focuses on these situations, there is no readily total contributions. For example, if a such factors as commonality of apparent figure that would ensure the union need only file a Form T–1 for a ownership, directors and/or officers, cooperation of the various trusts. trust if it contributes 20% of the trust’s exercise of control, personnel policies, In any event, it seems unlikely that annual receipts, no disclosure will be and operations. If a related organization significant ownership or control need be required for even the smallest reportable and the union are effectively a ‘‘single vested in a single reporting labor trust, i.e., a trust with annual receipts of entity,’’ then the union would be organization in order to ensure trust $250,000, unless a single union required to include the related cooperation so that the labor contributes at least $50,000 annually to organization’s financial information as organization may obtain trust the trust, even though the trust receives part of the union’s own finances on the information sufficient for filing a Form all or most of its funding from a group appropriate LM form. The Department T–1. A trust in which a labor of six or more unions. invited comments on the following organization is interested is defined in The Department recognizes that specific issues: (i) Whether requiring a section 3(l) of the LMRDA to mean an where one or more labor organizations union to report financial data for any organization that was created or participate in a trust and fewer than all organization qualifying as a ‘‘single

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:10 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00043 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\09OCR2.SGM 09OCR2 58416 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations

entity’’ would provide better After consideration of the comments of entries alone for large trusts would be information to interested union received, the Department has decided overwhelming. Other commenters members than the current requirements against adopting the proposed ‘‘single supported itemization of Form T–1 for reporting trusts in which the union entity’’ test. The Department agrees that receipts and disbursements. One has an interest; (ii) whether a union the test is less effective than other organization cited the recent could easily identify organizations that criteria for determining whether a union Washington Teachers’ Union satisfy the ‘‘single entity’’ test; and (iii) is responsible for reporting financial embezzlement case as an example of whether the proposed ‘‘single entity’’ information from related organizations. financial corruption that might have rule may affect some smaller unions if The criticisms underscore the been prevented by Form T–1 the combined assets and receipts of the difficulties faced by union members in itemization. Commenters noted that the union and the related organization obtaining financial information from a Form T–1 included a schedule to report exceed the $200,000 threshold for union: A union could conceal its officer and employee salaries but requiring use of the proposed Form LM– relationship with the related comments that argued generally that the 2. organization, which would deny form was too burdensome did not The Department received very few interested union members the specifically address that schedule. After comments addressing the ‘‘single information necessary for initiating carefully considering the comments, the entity’’ test, all of which opposed the inquiries; or a union could refuse to Department continues to believe that proposal. One comment criticized the disclose information on the basis that unions should provide their members proposed test because it would be more the organization does not meet the with financial information about its costly to enforce and less effective than standard for a ‘‘single entity’’ significant financial investments with the current ‘‘bright-line’’ standard (i.e., relationship. In either case, the covered trusts. However, the final rule the $10,000 contribution threshold). The Department would have to resort to reduces the burden of reporting comment suggested that a union could litigation to obtain the withheld information about such trusts. As is the case with respect to simply deny that a related organization financial information. The ‘‘single itemization on Form LM–2, the qualifies as a deemed ‘‘single entity’’ entity’’ test does not reduce these obstacles. Moreover, the Department Department believes the benefits of and not disclose the financial acknowledges that the test may be disclosure to union members will information; interested union members difficult to apply in some cases. The test outweigh any corresponding burdens would then have to litigate the issue. requires close scrutiny of the related upon union officials. Union members According to the commenter, the organization to determine whether a have expressed through their comments relationship between the union and the sufficient commonality of personnel, serious concern over union dues that are other organization might not be policies and operations exists to deem deposited into trusts and joint ventures apparent to the union members and, as the union and the organization a ‘‘single and unaccounted for thereafter. Large a consequence, members would have no entity.’’ Union members may encounter trusts will be required to itemize reason to make inquiries about the significant difficulties in obtaining the numerous entries. These trusts, relationship between the organizations. necessary information to make the however, will have available to them the With respect to the impact on smaller comparison, which could reduce the same bookkeeping and accounting unions, the comment noted that the incentive to conduct such inquiries. software available to unions. Thus, for proposal might encourage those unions Even a fully informed investigation may the reasons discussed with respect to to under-report assets to avoid the Form not produce a conclusive answer the Form LM–2, no undue burden is LM–2 threshold. The comment because reasonable minds could differ imposed upon covered trusts in suggested lowering the Form LM–2 about the relationship between the compiling the information needed for threshold or importing the proposed organizations. In contrast, a ‘‘bright the union to file the Form T–1. Form LM–2 changes into the Form LM– line’’ standard based on a specified Moreover, there has been no suggestion 3 if the Department is concerned about dollar threshold is unambiguous and that covered trusts are ill equipped to under-reporting. Another comment easy to apply. The threshold determines comply with the bookkeeping or rejected the Department’s view that the whether the union’s ‘‘interest’’ in reporting requirements established by related organization’s finances must be another entity is sufficient to require its the final rule. Moreover, the trust combined with the union’s finances for disclosure. This approach imposes no information will be readily accessible to all purposes. The comment believed significant burden on interested union any union member with access to the ‘‘single entity’’ reporting only requires members. Internet. In sum, unions have not the union to report the related asserted that a trust in which a union is organization’s finances, but not to B. Information Required for a Trust in interested will encounter any significant combine the two organizations’ income Which a Labor Organization Is burden in connection with the to determine the applicable LM form. Interested collection of information needed to Determining the LM Form filing The Department proposed requiring complete a Form T–1, and none is threshold on the combined receipts of labor organizations to report, on a Form apparent. The unions also have failed to both entities is ‘‘absurd on its face,’’ T–1, itemized receipts and demonstrate that they will encounter stated the comment, because a ‘‘single disbursements of a covered trust. The any significant burden in providing the entity’’ finding recognizes two discrete comments on this proposal, in large information to the Department, a burden legal entities and is thus unlike a part, mirrored those with respect to that, in any event, is less significant finding that an organization is a itemization on Form LM–2. Several than the preparation of the Form LM– ‘‘subsidiary’’ of a labor organization commenters suggested that itemization 2. Unlike the Form T–1, the Form LM– under the current Form LM–2. A third was likely to significantly burden 2 imposes on the reporting union the comment broadly rejected the ‘‘single affected unions with little direct responsibility to capture the entity’’ test because it would create corresponding benefit. Labor information needed to prepare the ‘‘misleading’’ information about local organizations, they argued, do not required report with this Department. unions and generate ‘‘useless’’ financial currently have accounting systems for Many commenters opposed the data. this type of itemization and the number specific threshold of $10,000 for

VerDate jul<14>2003 18:18 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00044 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\09OCR2.SGM 09OCR2 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations 58417

itemized receipts or disbursements on in its place, require the union to state filing threshold is met; communicating the Form T–1. Again, these comments whether the trust has loaned money to with the trust; communicating with were similar to those on thresholds in officers or employees of the union other participating labor organizations; Form LM–2. Some commenters during the reporting period on terms obtaining the necessary information; suggested a greater dollar figure such as that are substantially more favorable and preparing and filing the Form T–1. $25,000 (possibly indexed to inflation) than terms available to others, or has A comment from a third union stated or a percentage of the total receipts or forgiven loans to officers or employees that the governing rules of its national disbursements of the trust such as 20% of the union during the reporting union require its books and LM report or 25%. Commenters asserted that the period. If the union answers in the to be audited and filed with the national use of a percentage threshold would be affirmative, information about the loan union before the deadline for filing the more consistent with the Department’s must be provided in Item 25 (Additional local union’s LM form and that current regulation of employee benefit Information). This information will be requiring Form T–1 to be filed at the plans. One organization recommended a beneficial to union members without same time would make it even more disjunctive threshold for itemization of burdening every reporting union. difficult for locals of that national to $10,000 or 10%, the latter to capture Several labor organizations raised meet their reporting deadline for their those instances where a union privacy challenges to the Form T–1 annual reports. contributes less than $10,000 but still itemization requirement, specifically The Department’s intention in controls a significant portion of the that disclosing the name and address of permitting a union to file its Form T– trust. Finally, one union member individuals receiving trust funds (as 1 within ninety days after the trust’s recommended that every disbursement well as the date, purpose, and amount fiscal year was to ease the burden for be itemized regardless of size. of the transfer) would be unwise and both the trust and the union. The As discussed in greater detail above, likely unlawful under federal privacy Department anticipates that a trust more the Department continues to believe that laws. Some commenters recommended readily will be able to provide necessary $10,000 is the appropriate threshold for aggregating all disbursement amounts. information to the reporting labor itemization. This amount, in the While aggregating all disbursements organization at the conclusion of the Department’s view, represents a would substantially reduce the amount trust’s fiscal year and that a labor substantial transaction that would be of and quality of the information reported organization will have correspondingly interest to union members. For that on a Form T–1, the Department is less difficulty in obtaining information same reason, a percentage threshold sympathetic to the concerns that the at that time. would be inappropriate, as it would disclosure of information in a Form T– The Department recognizes that deny information to members of unions 1, which will be available on the reporting labor organizations must with considerable assets about Internet, should not result in the obtain this information from their trusts, substantial transactions, denying them disclosure of private information but most of the steps outlined by the information about transactions that regarding individuals. Accordingly, the commenters above should take little might have a significant impact on the Department has concluded that labor time. A labor organization should union’s finances. Conversely, the organizations will be permitted to use a readily be able to determine from its Department believes that the other procedure similar to that used with own records whether the labor proposals to eliminate any threshold, or respect to sensitive information reported organization’s own contributions to the to replace it with a lower dollar figure on the Form LM–2 itself. If the labor trust equaled or exceeded $10,000 or a percentage of the assets of the union organization concludes that disclosure annually. A labor organization is likely (or the trust) (which could operate to of specific information about a trust’s to know from past audits or other require itemization of transactions of disbursements to, or receipts from, information provided by the trust less than $10,000) would impose an individuals will result in the whether the trust’s annual receipts unwarranted burden on the unions inappropriate disclosure of private approximate $250,000 or more, and, without corresponding benefit to the information regarding such individuals, whether or not the labor organization members, given the unlikely impact on the disbursement or receipt may be has that information, the labor the overall financial health of most aggregated with, and reported only as a organization’s request to the trust for unions of transactions that are between part of, the total amount of information necessary for filing Form T– $10,000 and a de minimis amount. In disbursements and receipts below the 1 could simply be conditioned on the the Department’s view, the difference itemized reporting threshold. The labor trust having that level of annual between the reporting threshold for organization that elects to use this receipts. It should not be necessary to itemized transactions under the Form procedure, however, must indicate on seek any information or assistance from LM–2 ($5,000) and the threshold under the Form T–1 that it has done so and the other unions that participate in the Form T–1 ($10,000) is appropriate use of this procedure will constitute trust. Even the assembly of information because the finances of a trust are less ‘‘just cause’’ for union members to by the trust and the subsequent likely to directly impact union members examine more specific information preparation of Form T–1 by union than the expenditures by the union regarding these transactions, unless officials should not require substantial itself. disclosure is prohibited by law or would expenditures of time, inasmuch as the One commenter questioned the endanger the health or safety of an Form T–1 requires only relatively basic wisdom of setting a $250 reporting individual. information regarding receipts, threshold under Schedule 4 for loans to disbursements and payments to officers officers, employees, or members. The C. Deadline for Filing a Form T–1 and employees of the trust. The time commenter stated that such threshold Comments from two unions stated and difficulty a labor organization may would require the reporting of routine that requiring the Form T–1 to be filed experience in obtaining and filing transactions, including relatively small within ninety days after a trust’s fiscal information on Form T–1 is thus credit card balances and most loans year would not provide sufficient time minimized. from a credit union trust. In response, for labor organizations to take all Two commenters, a union and an the Department has decided to eliminate necessary steps for filing Form T–1, accountant, observed that reporting this Schedule from the Form T–1, and, including: determining whether the unions may not control a trust for which

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:10 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00045 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\09OCR2.SGM 09OCR2 58418 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations

information must be filed on Form T– means to effectuate union self- its trusts, it is unlikely that many Form 1 and that it may be difficult for some government. The statute provides no T–1 reports, if any, will be required in unions to obtain the necessary authority to waive this deadline, even the first year. For example, if a union’s information from trusts. Though the when a union has made a good faith fiscal year begins on January 1, 2004, its trusts may have legal identities separate effort to comply with the deadline. The Form LM–2 will be due at the end of from reporting unions, the Department Department has concluded that neither March of 2005. If that union has an anticipates that in many and probably the current nor the revised reporting interest in a trust that begins its fiscal most instances the reporting union forms for labor organizations are likely year on October 1, the first fiscal year either by itself or in combination with to pose unreasonable difficulties for for which a Form T–1 will be required other reporting unions will in practice union officials who are reasonably for such a trust is the fiscal year that exercise sufficient influence to require diligent in their efforts to timely file the ends on September 30, 2005. Obviously, or persuade the trust to provide the union’s Form LM–2 and any Form T–1. no Form T–1 will be available to file necessary information. In this Another commenter, also an with the union’s first revised Form LM– connection, if the union’s members accountant, suggested that a reporting 2 filed in March. If, however, a union request further information about a labor organization be permitted to file that begins its fiscal year on January 1, particular trust or further details about information from the ‘‘latest available’’ 2004, has an interest in a trust that also a reported transaction, the union must report by the trust and that it would be begins its fiscal year on January 1, 2004, disclose to the member any relevant simpler to require Form T–1 to be filed the union should file a Form T–1 information within its possession at the at the same time that the labor covering the trust’s 2004 fiscal year time of the inquiry and make a good organization must file its annual report, when the union files its Form LM–2 in faith effort to obtain additional namely within ninety days after the end March of 2005. information from the trust. of the labor organization’s fiscal year, The Department recognizes that there V. Regulatory Procedures rather than ninety days after the end of may be some instances in which a trust the trust’s fiscal year. As discussed A. Executive Order 12866 will not fully cooperate in providing above, only certain reports will be This rule has been drafted and timely information to the reporting acceptable as substitutes for the Form reviewed in accordance with Executive union. However, the Department T–1. Nonetheless, this comment Order 12866, section 1(b), Principles of expects that, in those infrequent suggests a reasonable approach that will Regulation. The Department has instances, the reporting union officials will be able to demonstrate that they ensure that union members are able to determined that this rule is not an made a good-faith effort to obtain timely obtain relevant information about a trust ‘‘economically significant’’ regulatory information from the trust. In such in which his or her union has an action under section 3(f)(1) of Executive situations, the Department is prepared interest, while reducing any burden for Order 12866. Based on an analysis of to exercise any available investigative the reporting union. Thus, the the data the rule is not likely to: (1) and other authority to assist the Department has decided to require a Have an annual effect on the economy reporting union to obtain the necessary reporting labor organization to file its of $100 million or more or adversely information. One commenter, an Form T–1(s), or qualifying audits in affect in a material way the economy, a accountant, suggested that some of the substitution for Form T–1(s), at the same sector of the economy, productivity, information required to be reported on time as it files its own Form LM–2. The competition, jobs, the environment, Form T–1 may be reported by the trusts Form T–1, or qualifying audit, however, public health or safety, or state, local, or under other federal reporting need not cover the same reporting year tribal governments or communities; (2) requirements with later reporting as the Form LM–2. Rather, the reporting create a serious inconsistency or deadlines and that unions that file labor organization must provide, at the otherwise interfere with an action taken reports regarding those trusts should be time it files its Form LM–2, a Form T– or planned by another agency; or (3) permitted to use those later deadlines. 1 or qualifying audit for the trust’s most materially alter the budgetary impact of The Department concludes that a rule recent fiscal year that ended during the entitlements, grants, user fees, or loan with such uncertain deadlines would be labor organization’s reporting year— programs or the rights and obligations of difficult to administer and would not be essentially the ‘‘latest available’’ report. recipients thereof. The Department easily ascertained and applied by all If the trust’s fiscal year coincides with estimates the total cost of the final rule parties, including labor organizations, the reporting labor organization, the to be $79.9 million in the first year, their members, the trusts, the labor organization will have 90 days in $44.1 million in the second year, and Department, and the public. which to obtain the necessary $43.2 million in the third year (see the One commenter, a union business information to complete a Form T–1, or following Paperwork Reduction Act representative, urged the Department to the audit. If a trust’s fiscal year ends on section for a description of how these include a procedure for granting a different date than the labor costs were estimated). The three-year extensions of time to labor organizations organization’s, the reporting union will average cost of the rule is $55.7 million for filing their financial reports. The have, in addition, any time between the per year. The Department also estimates commenter argued that some labor end of the trust’s most recent fiscal year a benefit of $2.6 million per year in organizations already find it difficult to and the end of the union’s own fiscal savings for 501 smaller unions because file current LM forms in a timely year to obtain the information. they can file the less burdensome Form manner. Section 207 of the LMRDA Moreover, this requirement, like all LM–3 as a result of increasing the new expressly states that each labor other changes made by this rule, will be Form LM–2 reporting threshold to organization annual financial report effective for fiscal years beginning on or $250,000. Further, there are substantial must be filed within ninety days after after January 1, 2004. Accordingly, a unquantifiable benefits that result from the organization’s fiscal year. This union will be required to file a Form T– the greater transparency of labor requirement is consistent with the 1 only for fiscal years beginning on or organizations’ financial information to evident intention of Congress that union after January 1, 2004, of trusts in which its members and other benefits of members and others have access to it has an interest. Because a union need deterring fraud or discovering it earlier. regular and timely annual reports as a only file the ‘‘latest available’’ report for As a result, the Department has

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:10 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00046 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\09OCR2.SGM 09OCR2 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations 58419

concluded that a full economic impact efforts to comply with the requirements misplaced, as is the objection that its and cost/benefit analysis is not required of the Order. As explained below, the view of the most cost effective for the rule under section 6(a)(3) of the purpose of Executive Order 12866 is to alternative was not proposed. The Order. However, because of its facilitate the effective internal principles, objectives, and requirements importance to the public, the rule was management of the Federal Government of Executive Order 12866 are designed treated as an otherwise significant with respect to the development of to guide and assist the agency and OIRA regulatory action and was reviewed by regulatory actions. Indeed, Sections during the development of the agency the Office of Management and Budget 6(a)(3)(E) and 6(b)(4)(D) in fact provide rule and are not addressed to the public. (OMB). that an agency and OIRA will make The remedy for any agency failure to One commenter stated that the available to the public various comply with some requirement of the Department failed to meet certain information and documents regarding Executive Order, as the excerpt from requirements of Executive Order 12866. the development of agency rules only Section 10 referred to above makes Specifically, the comment asserted that ‘‘[a]fter the regulatory action has been clear, is not judicial review at the behest the Department failed in several published in the Federal Register or of the regulated or benefited community respects to adhere to the ‘‘Principles of otherwise issued to the public.’’ under the proposed rule; rather, the Regulation’’ set forth in Section 1(b) of Inasmuch as Executive Order 12866 is remedy is the President’s directive in the Order: intended solely for the internal Section 8 of the Order that the agency’s a. The Notice of Proposed Rulemaking management of federal regulatory rule may not be published in the did not demonstrate that the actions, the Order does not provide for Federal Register or otherwise issued to Department engaged in any judicial review or other public review of the public until OIRA either waives or investigation and assessment of the the procedures and substantive completes its review. problems addressed by the proposed requirements of the Order during the Some of the procedural and rule. developmental stages of a rule. That is substantive requirements of Executive b. The Notice of Proposed Rulemaking underscored in several provisions of the Order 12866, as expressly indicated in did not demonstrate that the Order. For example, Section 10 of the Section 1(b)(6) (‘‘recognizing that some Department considered any non- Order states: ‘‘This Executive Order is costs and benefits are difficult to regulatory alternatives for intended only to improve the internal quantify’’), are not susceptible to precise accomplishing the objectives of the management of the Federal Government definition and measurement. The proposed rule. and does not create any right or benefit, insistence of the comment that the c. The Notice of Proposed Rulemaking substantive or procedural, enforceable at Department did not choose ‘‘the most provided no evidence that the proposed law or equity by a party against the cost effective means to address the rule would reduce financial United States, its agencies or alleged problem’’ is itself not a mismanagement of labor organizations instrumentalities, its officers or statement that can be assessed with or was the most cost effective means to employees, or any other person.’’ objective precision. Any calculus of the address the objectives of the rule. The nature of Executive Order 12866 costs and benefits of the proposed rule d. There is no documentation that the as a tool for the development and is based in significant part on the value Department’s proposed rule is based on internal review of federal rules also is of transparency and accountability in the best reasonably obtainable evident throughout the text of the Order. union financial affairs as well as on very information. For example, ‘‘The Principles of difficult projections regarding the e. The proposed rule ignores the Regulation,’’ which the comment impact of the accessibility of financial preference expressed in Section 1(b)(8) appears to have treated as setting forth information on sound union financial of Executive Order 12866 for substantive legal requirements, is management and union democracy performance objectives rather than introduced by the statement that generally. That increased transparency design standards. agencies ‘‘should’’ adhere to those in union financial affairs will deter The comment also asserted that the principles ‘‘where applicable.’’ Section some mismanagement and malfeasance, requirements for significant regulatory 1(b)(8), as the comment suggests, promote democratic values in unions, action set forth in Executive Order expresses a preference for rules that and prevent the loss of trust by members 12866 were not properly observed in establish performance objectives rather and the loss of confidence by the public that: than rules that mandate specific generally in unions and their officials a. The Department did not engage in behavior or the specific manner of cannot be seriously doubted. But the any cost-benefit analysis of the compliance, but states that this should Department recognizes that it is very proposed rule. be sought ‘‘to the extent feasible.’’ difficult to quantify and balance the b. The Department did not seek the Section 1(b)(6), as suggested by the associated costs and benefits of those involvement of those intended to benefit comment, provides for an assessment of matters with any precision. from and expected to be burdened by the costs and benefits of a proposed rule The Department has concluded, the proposed rule. but adds, ‘‘recognizing that some costs therefore, that to the extent feasible, c. The Office of Information and and benefits are difficult to quantify.’’ In appropriate, and necessary, the Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) of the Office the instant rulemaking, the Department Department has disclosed in the Notice of Management and Budget (OMB) did has assessed fully the costs and benefits of Proposed Rulemaking and, more not take sufficient time to review the associated with the final rule. extensively, in this preamble to the final Department’s proposed rule for The commenter’s demand that the rule the pertinent aspects of the purposes of Executive Order 12866. efforts of the Department and OIRA to Department’s assessment of the As an initial matter, the Department comply with the procedural and problem, the information relied on, the firmly believes it has complied fully substantive principles, objectives, and costs and benefits involved, the with E.O. 12866 in all relevant respects. requirements of Executive Order 12866 alternatives considered, and the most The comment appears to have a be documented in detail, be described appropriate remedy. For the various fundamental misapprehension of the exhaustively for the review of the public reasons outlined above and contrary to purpose and function of Executive at this time, and be evidenced in the the apparent assumption of the Order 12866 and of the Department’s Notice of Proposed Rulemaking is comment, Executive Order 12866 did

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:10 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00047 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\09OCR2.SGM 09OCR2 58420 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations

not require the Department to set forth regulation that became effective on it essentially impossible for anyone to in the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking or October 1, 2000, that the maximum determine with any degree of specificity in this preamble other evidence of the annual receipts allowed for a labor what union operations their dues are Department’s efforts to comply with the union or similar labor organization and spent on, without which the purposes of Order in developing and submitting this its affiliates to be considered a small the LMRDA are not met. proposal to OIRA for review. organization or entity under section Today’s union members need relevant 601(4), (6) of the Regulatory Flexibility information provided in a usable format B. Small Business Regulatory Act was $5.0 million. 13 CFR 121.201 in order to make the decisions necessary Enforcement Fairness Act [Code Listing 813930]. This amount was to exercise their rights as members of The Department has concluded that adjusted for inflation to $6.0 million by democratic institutions. The this rule is not a ‘‘major’’ rule under the a regulation that became effective on information provided members on the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement February 22, 2002. Accordingly, the current forms lags well behind the Fairness Act of 1996 (5 U.S.C. 801 et following analysis assesses the impact financial information available to them seq.). In reaching this conclusion, the of these regulations on small entities as in other contexts of their lives as Department has determined that the rule defined by the applicable SBA size consumers, citizens, and investors. The will not likely result in (1) An annual standards. Department is committed to maintaining effect on the economy of $100 million accountability and promoting 1. Statement of the Need for, and or more; (2) a major increase in costs or transparency with full and fair Objectives of, the Rule prices for consumers, individual disclosure by labor organizations. industries, Federal, State or local The following is a summary of the Providing additional detail on Form government agencies, or geographic need for, and the objectives of, the final LM–2 and requiring similar disclosure regions; or (3) significant adverse effects rule. A more complete discussion is on the new Form T–1 of information on competition, employment, contained in the preamble above. about trusts in which the labor investment, productivity, innovation, or The Department is revising the forms organization has an interest is necessary on the ability of United States-based labor organizations use to file the to give union members an accurate enterprises to compete with foreign- annual financial reports required by the picture of their labor organization’s based enterprises in domestic or export Labor-Management Reporting and financial condition and operations and markets. Disclosure Act of 1959, as amended to prevent the circumvention or evasion (LMRDA or Act). This final rule of the statutory reporting requirements. C. Unfunded Mandates Reform modifies Form LM–2, which is the The revision of Form LM–2 is also For purposes of the Unfunded report required to be filed by the largest necessary to improve its usefulness as a Mandates Reform Act of 1995, this rule labor organizations and creates a new deterrent to financial fraud and does not include a Federal mandate that Form T–1 for these unions to report the mismanagement. OLMS case files might result in increased expenditures assets, liabilities, receipts, and repeatedly demonstrate that this goal of by State, local, and tribal governments, disbursements of trusts in which a labor the Act is not being met. Over the past or increased expenditures by the private organization has an interest. To reduce five years, OLMS investigations resulted sector of more than $100 million in any the burden on smaller labor in over 640 criminal convictions. As a one year. The basis for the Department’s organizations, the final rule also raises remedy, the courts ordered the estimate of the likely cost of compliance the threshold for filing Form LM–3 to responsible officials to pay $15,446,896 with this rule is set forth above. annual receipts of between $10,000 and in restitution, in addition to debarring $249,999 to correspond with the higher them from union service for a combined D. Executive Order 13132 (Federalism) Form LM–2 threshold ($250,000). These total of almost ten thousand years. In The Department has reviewed this forms are prescribed by the Secretary of many cases the broad aggregated rule in accordance with Executive Order Labor to implement the Act and categories on the existing forms enabled 13132 regarding federalism and has incorporated by reference in the union officers to hide embezzlements determined that the rule does not have applicable regulations. and financial mismanagement. More federalism implications. Because the Over the past forty years, the detailed reporting of all financial economic effects under the rule will not functions and operations of unions have transactions is likely to discourage and be substantial for the reasons noted evolved while the forms used by unions reduce corruption because it would be above and because the rule has no direct to file annual financial reports required more difficult to hide financial effect on States or their relationship to by the LMRDA have remained mismanagement from members and the Federal government, the rule does substantially unchanged. The forms no strengthen the effective and efficient not have ‘‘substantial direct effects on longer serve their underlying purpose enforcement of the Act by the the States, on the relationship between because they fail to provide union Department. the national government and the States, members with sufficient information to The objective of this rule is to or on the distribution of power and reasonably disclose to them ‘‘the increase the transparency of union responsibilities among the various financial condition and operation[s]’’ of financial reporting by revising the levels of government.’’ labor organizations as required by the LMRDA disclosure forms and to take LMRDA. As noted previously, it is advantage of modern technology to E. Regulatory Flexibility Analysis impossible for union members to reduce the reporting burden. This will The Regulatory Flexibility Act of evaluate in any meaningful way the enable workers to be responsible, 1980, 5 U.S.C. 601, et seq., requires operations or management of their informed, and effective participants in agencies to prepare regulatory flexibility unions when the financial disclosure the governance of their unions; analyses, and to develop alternatives reports filed with OLMS simply report discourage embezzlement and financial wherever possible, in drafting large expenditures (e.g., $62 million) for mismanagement; prevent the regulations that will have a significant broad, general categories like ‘‘Grants to circumvention or evasion of the impact on a substantial number of small Joint Projects with State and Local statutory reporting requirements; and entities. The Small Business Affiliates.’’ The large dollar amount and strengthen the effective and efficient Administration (SBA) determined, in a vague description of such entries make enforcement of the Act by OLMS.

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:10 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00048 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\09OCR2.SGM 09OCR2 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations 58421

2. Summary and Assessment of the Department’s choice of options Another alternative considered by the Significant Issues Raised by Comments discussed or the Department’s ultimate Department was to phase-in the and Changes Made to the Proposed Rule decisions concerning these options, the effective date for the Form LM–2 as a Result of Such Comments AFL–CIO has not shown and cannot changes in order to provide smaller Many comments, although not show that the Department did not Form LM–2 filers additional lead time directed specifically at the initial consider the options or acted in bad to modify their recordkeeping systems regulatory flexibility analysis, raised faith by not proposing them. In order to to comply with the new reporting issues related to the effect of the reduce the burden on smaller unions, requirements. This alternative also was proposed rule on small entities, and in the Department, among other revisions supported by a number of commenters. response, the Department made many for the same purpose, adopted the After reviewing the comments, the alternative, identified in the NPRM, to significant changes to its proposal. Department has changed its proposal, raise the reporting threshold for the These issues and changes are discussed which would have required unions to Form LM–2 from $200,000 to $250,000. in detail above. The following addresses use the new Form LM–2 to file the As discussed in detail in the preamble, comments that are specifically related to report for any fiscal year beginning other revisions, adopted in response to the Department’s initial regulatory immediately after the publication of the comments, should make compliance by flexibility analysis. final rule, and instead is requiring labor smaller unions easier than if the The AFL–CIO argues that the organizations to use the revised Form Department’s proposal was left Department did not meet the standards LM–2 to file the report for the fiscal unchanged. years that begin on or after January 1, of the Regulatory Flexibility Act and its The AFL–CIO contended that the requirements that agencies consider the 2004, about three months after Department failed to satisfy its publication of this rule. This change impact of rules on small entities. obligation under the Regulatory Although the AFL–CIO acknowledges provides approximately two-thirds of Flexibility Act to actively solicit the reporting unions with sufficient lead that the Department included a participation of small entities as part of Regulatory Flexibility Analysis time within which to adjust their its planning for this rulemakings. The procedures to keep track of the describing the impact of the proposed Department disagrees with this view rule on small entities, the AFL–CIO information they will need to prepare a and notes that it engaged in a Form LM–2 and to submit, 15 months claims that a purported lack of analysis substantial outreach effort, even before indicates that the Department’s inquiry after the start of their next fiscal year publication of the NPRM, in order to (beginning on January 1, 2004), or was not conducted in good faith. For solicit ideas for improving the example, the AFL–CIO argues that the nearly 18 months after the publication effectiveness of the annual financial of this rule, the report to the Department never seriously considered report to achieve the disclosure the alternatives listed in the initial Department, and even more time to the intended by Congress in establishing the remaining third of reporting unions that Regulatory Flexibility Act analysis. The LMRDA’s reporting requirements. To AFL–CIO contends that these use different dates for their fiscal years. this end, Department officials Thus, no union will have less than alternatives were just ‘‘straw men’’ that conducted numerous consultations with the Department considered only briefly, about three months to change its union representatives, including face-to- bookkeeping and accounting systems to knowing that they would be discarded. face meetings with 39 unions. After Among the alternatives that the capture data that later will be needed to publication of the proposal, Department submit the Form LM–2. Department should have considered and officials continued to meet with unions proposed for small unions, according to that requested meetings and added With this change, unions will have the AFL–CIO, were: (1) The ‘‘phasing notes of meetings with six unions adequate time to conform to the revised in’’ of the effective date for the rule; (2) during the public comment period to forms and comply with the more a permanent waiver of the electronic the rulemaking record. detailed reporting requirements. The filing requirement; and (3) an exemption An alternative suggested by public comments and OLMS auditing from functional reporting. These commenters that directly affects the and accounting experience confirm that alternatives are addressed in the smallest unions to whom the new rule many local (and therefore generally preamble and the discussion below. applies was to adjust upward for smaller) unions already collect and The Department noted in the NPRM inflation the Form LM–2 filing maintain some (and in some cases most) that the SBA’s definition of ‘‘small threshold from $200,000, the adjusted of the information required by the new entity’’ may not be appropriate in the amount set in 1994. The Department has form. Moreover, unions must already context of labor unions and their adopted this alternative and increased track and maintain records for all regulation under the LMRDA. the Form LM–2 threshold to $250,000 in disbursements in order to report total Nonetheless, the Department performed the final rule. As a result, 501 unions disbursements for the variety of an Initial Regulatory Flexibility that currently file a Form LM–2 will functional categories on the current Analysis for the NPRM and addressed now be able to satisfy the requirements Form LM–2. The survey data submitted each of the categories, applying the of the LMRDA by filing the simpler by the AFL-CIO suggests that 16 to 22% SBA’s definition as required by 5 U.S.C. Form LM–3. It should also be noted that of local unions already have the 603. The Department has also submitted the final $250,000 threshold is capability to itemize and track receipts a Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis significantly higher than the earlier and disbursements (including credit with this final rule as required by 5 thresholds for filing the Form LM–2 card transactions), as required by the U.S.C. 604. Thus, the Department has when they are adjusted for inflation— final Form LM–2. Further, after the met the procedural requirements of the 1959 ($20,000), 1962 ($30,000), and research and review of different types of Act. 1981 ($100,000). The Department will commercial-off-the-shelf accounting The Department specifically continue to monitor this threshold, as software, the Department believes that considered and discussed in some detail well as all other thresholds established updating and modifying accounting five options in its Initial Regulatory by this rule, and may make future systems to track all of the information Flexibility Analysis. Despite the AFL– adjustments if economic conditions required by the revised forms should be CIO’s disagreement with the warrant such a change. accomplished easily, given the lead time

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:10 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00049 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\09OCR2.SGM 09OCR2 58422 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations

built into the final rule. The steps relieved of the burden of compiling a associated with electronic filing is not required of unions to adjust their separate form and need only insist that through a permanent waiver, but bookkeeping and accounting procedures entities with annual receipts of through a hardship exemption (a term are discussed in the preamble. OLMS $250,000 or more, to which they borrowed from the SEC’s electronic also plans to provide compliance contribute $10,000 or more, or to which filing procedures), and that, for the assistance to any labor organization that that amount is contributed on their majority of filers, electronic filing is the requests it. In addition, a review of the behalf, provide only very basic least burdensome option. proposed revisions was undertaken to information regarding their fiscal The Department gave serious reduce paperwork burden for all Form operations. consideration to the comments LM–2 filers and an effort was made Another commenter suggested that a suggesting a pilot program or a delayed during the review to identify ways to reporting labor organization be phase-in of the reporting requirements, reduce the impact on small entities. The permitted to file information from the but has concluded that such alternatives Department believes it has minimized ‘‘latest available’’ report by the trust. are unnecessary. After reviewing the the economic impact of the form This commenter observed that it would recordkeeping and reporting revision on small unions to the extent be simpler to require Form T–1 to be requirements of the current Form LM– possible while recognizing workers’ and filed at the same time that the labor 2, the public comments that were the Department’s need for information organization must file its annual report, received, and the modifications that to protect the rights of union members namely within ninety days after the end unions may have to make to their under the LMRDA. of the labor organization’s fiscal year, accounting and recordkeeping systems To reduce the burden on small labor rather than ninety days after the end of to comply with the final rule, the organizations, several commenters the trust’s fiscal year. Although the Department believes that Form LM–2 suggested that unions be required to file ‘‘latest available’’ report of the trust may filers will be able to make the annual independent audits as an not be a sufficient substitute for a Form adjustments before the start of their first alternative to filing the Form LM–2. T–1 (depending on whether it meets the reporting period under the final rule— Although some commenters argued that prescribed audit criteria as discussed in a minimum of about three months from requiring unions to obtain annual audits the preamble), this suggestion presents the date of the rule’s publication— is within the Department’s statutory a reasonable alternative that should both without incurring an undue burden. The authority, no provision of the LMRDA alleviate burden for the reporting labor most important change involves the vests the Secretary of Labor with any organization and minimize confusion tracking of receipts reported in express authority to require unions to for those interested in this information. Schedule 14 and disbursements to obtain audits and the Department has Thus, the Department has decided to ensure that each disbursement is chosen not to attempt to impose such a require a reporting labor organization to allocated to the proper disbursement requirement. Moreover, an annual audit file all Form T–1s, or qualifying audits category on the revised Form LM–2 with requirement would require a reporting in substitution for Form T–1s, if it so a descriptive purpose and that all of the union to incur the expense of obtaining chooses, at the same time that it files its required information (name, address, the services of an independent auditor own Form LM–2. purpose, date, and amount) is captured and thus impose an additional burden To reduce the burden on smaller labor for each ‘‘other’’ receipt and on small unions, many of which, in the organizations, a few commenters, disbursement. Department’s experience, are not including the AFL–CIO, suggested that Some commenters stated that this is a currently obtaining private audits. the Department establish a permanent dramatic change in the Form LM–2 and Finally, this alternative was rejected waiver for electronic filing and/or pilot would impose a significant burden on because audits typically do not reveal testing of electronic filing as alternatives unions in order to change their the detail on the financial operations of to the Department’s proposal. As recordkeeping systems before the unions that is required by the statute (29 discussed in the preamble, the effective date of the final rule. However, U.S.C. 431) and requiring such detail Department has rejected the permanent this position fails to recognize that with the appropriate audit standards waiver alternative because for several unions have always been required to would be no less burdensome than the years Congress has urged the allocate each disbursement to one or final forms. Department to implement the electronic more disbursement categories on the A union, however, could meet its filing of annual reports required by the current Form LM–2 (and to maintain trust reporting obligation under the final LMRDA, along with an indexed and those records). For example, unions rule by utilizing any exceptions easily searchable computer database of have always been required to allocate provided for in the rule, including the the information submitted, accessible by credit card payments to multiple submission of an independent audit of the public over the Internet. See H.R. categories of the LM–2 based upon the the trust that meets the minimum Conf. Rep. 105–390, 1997 U.S.C.C.A.N. purposes of each charge. A single credit standards prescribed by the rule. In 2061; H.R. Conf. Rep. 105–825; H.R. card charge to a travel agent may permitting this last exception, the Conf. Rep. 106–419; H.R. Conf. Rep. include expenses that must be allocated Department recognizes that although 106–479; H.R. Conf. Rep. 106–1033; to three or more different places on the most audits do not provide an adequate H.R. Conf. Rep. 107–342, 2002 current LM–2. Although the Department substitute for the full disclosure of U.S.C.C.A.N. 1690; H.R. Conf. Rep. 108– has changed the functional categories on information generally required under 10, 2003 U.S.C.C.A.N. 4. Moreover, as the final form, the underlying method of the LMRDA, this statutory purpose can the public comments suggest, the allocating these disbursements and be achieved in the trust reporting relevant inquiry with respect to maintaining the records remains the context so long as the information is electronic filing is not whether it should same. verified by an independent examiner be required, but rather how and when Changing accounting and and meets the standards prescribed by it should be accomplished. After recordkeeping systems to capture all of the rule. By permitting a labor significant research and analysis (as the required information (name, organization to submit an audit in place discussed above), the Department has address, purpose, date, and amount) for of a Form T–1, smaller labor decided that the best method to address each other receipt and disbursement can organizations that file a Form LM–2 are any legitimate excessive burden be accomplished before January 1, 2004.

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:10 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00050 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\09OCR2.SGM 09OCR2 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations 58423

Filers will need to study and filing, a hardship exemption will be function. Moreover, functional understand the new requirements and available. accounting is required of not-for-profit may have to work with their staff or A few commenters suggested that organizations under the standards vendors to make adjustments to the unions only be required to report the established by the FASB and some of union’s accounting and recordkeeping debts they have written off as a less the labor organizations that submitted systems, and then train the staff. burdensome alternative to reporting all comments acknowledged that they use However, these sorts of operations— debts above the proposed $1,000 functional reporting as a management changing the way disbursements are threshold that are 90 days or more past tool. Furthermore, many commenters classified and the types of information due. This alternative was rejected overlooked the fact that the IRS requires recorded—are routine in the normal because: (1) The Department believes not-for-profit organizations, including course of business and relatively easy to that raising the itemization threshold to unions, to report their expenditures by perform within accounting systems. $5,000 for reporting debts will alleviate certain categories and that the IRS uses Moreover, as discussed in the preamble, much of the burden suggested by several functional categories that the public comments suggest that 60% commenters as a multitude of relatively parallel, in many respects, the categories of the national and international unions small accounts will no longer have to be in the proposed Form LM–2. For already maintain written records for the listed, particularly for smaller unions; example, both the IRS Form 990 and the information required by the new ‘‘other (2) as discussed above, itemized new Form LM–2 require disclosure of receipts’’ schedule and that many disclosure is important because it disbursements related to political unions already maintain records as part provides a vital early warning signal of activity and lobbying (even though, of their normal business practice that financial distress and possible fraud as unions typically report no information reflect the required detail for in the Washington Teachers’ Union under these categories to the IRS). disbursements for the revised form case; and (3) the itemization Finally, as explained above, the (even though between 10 and 40% of requirement is tailored to a union Department has made significant unions could not provide all of the member’s legitimate interest in changes to the functional categories and required detail). Finally, because each knowing, for example, whether the associated schedules in the new Form labor organization’s filing date is union continues to do business with an LM–2 to minimize the burden, dependent on its chosen fiscal year, entity that fails to pay its debts or particularly on small unions. many unions will have more than three whether the union continually falls 3. Number of Small Entities Covered months to complete any changes they behind in payments to a certain vendor. Under the Rule may have to make to their accounting Moreover, the public comments suggest and recordkeeping systems. that the majority of unions already The primary impact of this final rule Additionally, the Department will collect most, if not all, of the will be on the largest labor provide substantial compliance information required by the accounts organizations, defined as those that have assistance to unions to assist them in receivable and accounts payable $250,000 or more in annual receipts. understanding the new requirements schedules on the final form, which is There are approximately 4,778 labor and making adjustments to their not surprising considering the current organizations of this size that are recordkeeping and reporting practices. Form LM–2 requires aggregate reporting required to file Form LM–2 reports This initiative will include guidance of accounts receivable and accounts under the LMRDA (just 19.0% of all that provides an overview of the payable. labor organizations covered by the requirements, a comparison of the old Finally, a few commenters, together LMRDA). The Department estimates that and new requirements, the types of with the AFL–CIO, suggested an 4,463 of these unions, or 93.4%, are account changes unions may have to exemption from functional reporting to considered small under the current SBA make, guidance to assist unions to reduce the burden on smaller labor standard (annual receipts less than $6.0 configure off-the-shelf software to best organizations. The Department has million). These unions have average capture the information needed to rejected this alternative because it annual receipts of approximately $1.1 provide the data required for submitting would: (1) Eliminate the availability of million and an average of 14 officers the LM–2 and T–1 reports, a schedule meaningful information to over 12.3 and 4 employees. The rule will also of seminars for unions hosted million union members in unions with reduce the burden on 501 small unions throughout the country, an email list- less than $6.0 million in annual receipts that will be able to file Form LM–3 serve to provide periodic updates to (the current SBA small entity standard instead of Form LM–2 because of raising interested parties, web-based materials for unions) and significantly reduce the the LM–2 threshold to $250,000. These that include frequently asked questions, transparency and accountability in the estimates are based on 2001 and 2002 a description of the Form T–1 reporting of union financial condition data from the Office of Labor- registration process, and other topics of and operations, which may have far Management Standards e.LORS system. interest to filers. greater impact on, and relevance to, This system contains annual receipt Filers that choose to take advantage of union members, particularly since such data on all Form LM–2, LM–3, and LM– the electronic importation features of lower levels of union organizations 4 filers. Although these estimates may the Department’s reporting software will generally set and collect dues and not be predictive of the exact number of need to create reports within their provide representational and other small unions that will be impacted by accounting systems that will be used to services for their members; and (2) not this final rule in the future, the complete the revised Form LM–2 and provide any additional deterrence to Department believes these estimates to new Form T–1. However, this work fraud and embezzlement by officials in be sound and are derived from the best need not be completed until the form is smaller labor organizations. available information. ready to be filed, no earlier than 15 Moreover, functional accounting is months after the effective date of the not a new concept to labor 4. Reporting, Recordkeeping and Other final rule and nearly 18 months after organizations, large or small. The Compliance Requirements of the Rule publication. Further, in the event that current Form LM–2, through its use of This final rule is not expected to have any labor organization encounters categories, requires labor organizations a significant economic impact on a severe difficulties concerning electronic to report certain expenditures by substantial number of small entities.

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:10 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00051 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\09OCR2.SGM 09OCR2 58424 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations

The LMRDA is primarily a reporting comply with these requirements, The average annual reporting and and disclosure statute. It establishes reporting unions may need to make recordkeeping burden for the current various reporting requirements for labor adjustments in their recordkeeping and Form LM–2 is $8,381 or 0.3% of average organizations, labor organization bookkeeping procedures and, in some annual receipts for all Form LM–2 filers. officers and employees, employers, instances, to make changes in The average additional first year cost surety companies, and employer computing hardware or software to file (including first year non-recurring consultants pursuant to Title II of the the reports electronically. None of these implementation costs) of the final rule Act. Accordingly, the primary economic expenses is expected to have a for the 4,463 unions considered to be impact of the final rule will be the cost substantial impact on the 4,463 unions small by SBA standards for filing both to reporting unions of compiling, considered to be small by SBA the revised Form LM–2 and new Form recording, and reporting required standards (because they amount to only T–1 is less than $17,876, or 1.6% of information. The final rule establishes a 1.7% of these unions’ average annual average annual receipts (see Table 1). new set of reporting requirements for The average total first year cost of the those labor organizations with receipts receipts over three years), in large part revised Form LM–2 and new Form T– of $250,000 or more. See the following because the public comments and 1 on small unions is $26,257, or 2.3% Paperwork Reduction Act section OLMS’s auditing experience confirm of total annual receipts. Further, the (Overview of Changes to Form LM–2, that labor organizations, like most small average total cost for small unions falls and Overview of the New Form T–1) for entities following standard business greater detail on the reporting, practices, already maintain at least some to $18,322 or 1.6% of total annual recordkeeping, and other compliance of the receipt and disbursement records receipts in the second year. requirements of the rule. In order to required by the final rule. BILLING CODE 4510–CP–P

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:10 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00052 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\09OCR2.SGM 09OCR2 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations 58425

The Department believes that it is would incur many of the costs incurred receipts are likely to have far less very unlikely that small unions with by the typical Form LM–2 filer. (For complicated accounts covering far fewer about $250,000 in annual receipts example, unions near this amount of transactions than the typical Form LM–

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:10 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00053 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\09OCR2.SGM 09OCR2 ER09OC03.000 58426 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations

2 filer (with receipts between $500,000 disbursements that will have to be based on years of reviewing union and $49.9 million).) However, to assess individually itemized and reported by records in audits and investigations, the ‘‘maximum’’ or ‘‘worst-case’’ impact smaller labor organizations. (OLMS suggests that the AFL–CIO estimates of on small unions, the Department experience in reviewing union records costs are more likely to be too high than considered the unlikely event that a over the years in the course of audits too low. small union with $250,000 in annual and investigations suggests that smaller Unions with total annual receipts of receipts could incur the average unions typically have fewer large less than $250,000 (81.0% of all LMRDA compliance burden for unions with disbursements). As noted above, the covered unions) can still elect to file a annual receipts of $500,000 to $49.9 Department will continue to monitor all simplified report. Over 47.3% of all million for the revised Form LM–2 and of the reporting thresholds in the Form labor organizations may file a Form LM– the new Form T–1. Under this unlikely LM–2 to attempt to ensure that both the 3 that entails a lesser burden than the scenario, the total additional cost of the level of reporting and the information Form LM–2. The final rule makes no final rule would be $20,596 in the first reported remain relevant and change to the Form LM–3 and the only year, or 8.2% of annual receipts, and meaningful in light of changes in the changes to its instructions clarify the $11,206 in the second year, or 4.5% of economy. reporting obligation of intermediate annual receipts (see Table 1). For a Raising the threshold for filing a Form bodies that have no private employee small union with $500,000 in annual LM–2 from $200,00 to $250,000 will members, but are subordinate to receipts, the maximum additional cost enable 501 of the smallest unions that national or international labor of the final rule would be 4.1% of previously were required to file a Form organizations that are covered by the receipts in the first year and 2.2% in the LM–2 to now use the Form LM–3. The LMRDA. The instructions state that second year. latter form requires significantly less such intermediate bodies must file an As noted in section 3 above, the final recordkeeping and reporting annual financial report. The very rule will apply to 4,463 unions that requirements than Form LM–2, thus smallest unions, with total annual meet the SBA standard for small reducing the burden on unions with receipts of less than $10,000 (33.7% of entities, or just 18.0% of all unions with annual receipts between $200,000 and all LMRDA covered unions), can elect to annual receipts of less than $6 million $249,999. The 501 unions affected will file an abbreviated report, Form LM–4, that must file an annual financial report save an average of $5,104 from the cost which further reduces their under the LMRDA (the other, even of filing the current Form LM–2, recordkeeping and reporting burden. smaller, unions can file the less because they can file the less The Department also has made several burdensome Form LM–3 or Form LM– burdensome Form LM–3 rather than the other changes to the proposed rule that 4). Further, just 1,574 unions with current Form LM–2. In addition, each of will reduce the burden on small unions. annual receipts from $250,000 to these unions also will avoid an average Raising the reporting threshold for $499,999, or 6.3% of all unions covered $19,640 per year in costs that they itemizing accounts receivable and by the LMRDA, would be affected by the would incur if they had to file the new accounts payable to $5,000 will reduce final rule. Even less (than 6.3% of the Form LM–2 and an average $1,253 per the number of items that must be total) would incur the maximum year because they will not have to file reported, particularly for small unions additional costs of the final rule a Form T–1. Thus, each of the 501 that have few accounts receivable and described above. Therefore, the unions affected by raising the Form LM– accounts payable. Removing the Department has decided that the final 2 threshold from $200,000 to $250,000 itemization requirement for the benefits rule does not have a significant impact will avoid $17,616 in potential costs schedule will reduce the reporting on a substantial number of small increases (i.e., $19,640 + $1,253— burden for all unions and protect the entities. Moreover, raising the Form $3,277) by virtue of this change. privacy of individual benefit recipients, LM–2 filing threshold from $200,000 to Burden hour differences between the including those receiving payments for $250,000 will enable 501 of the smallest smaller labor organizations that are large medical procedures, insurance or LM–2 filers to use the less burdensome enough to be required to file Form LM– pension claims, or burial benefits. Form LM–3 and save them an average 2 and the largest labor organizations are Changing the reporting requirements on of $5,104 per year compared to filing the more likely to result from differences in the membership schedule will enable current Form LM–2. Smaller unions that the financial operations of the unions union members to easily obtain useful file Form LM–3 or LM–4 also will not themselves. Only the largest filers, those information without requiring unions to have to file any Form T–1. that have annual receipts in the manufacture or report information for millions, are likely to have extensive membership categories it does not keep. 5. Steps Taken To Minimize the Impact financial transactions. Unions with Finally, the new audit alternative for on Small Entities receipts of between $250,000 and $1.0 Form T–1 is aimed at promoting The Department has raised the million, which account for over 2,833 of disclosure while reducing the reporting threshold for the final Form the 4,778, or 59.3% of Form LM–2 filers, recordkeeping and reporting burdens for LM–2 and new Form T–1 to $250,000 are likely to have less difficulty using unions with trusts that are already from the $200,000 threshold in the the revised form. A survey of affiliated subject to an independent audit. proposed rule. The Department has also unions submitted by the AFL–CIO Small entities will also benefit from determined that the itemization during the public comment process OLMS’s electronic labor organization threshold for disbursements should be suggests that the median cost of the final reporting system (e.LORS), which set at the high end of the range proposed rule will be just $5,724 per year for utilizes technology to collect, maintain, ($2,000 to $5,000) and that specific unions with less than $1.0 million in and disclose the information it collects. information be required only if the receipts compared to more than The objectives of e.LORS are: (1) The amount of an ‘‘other receipt’’ or $820,000 for unions with $100.0 million electronic filing of Forms LM–2, LM–3, disbursement is $5,000 or more or, if to $250.0 million in annual receipts. As and LM–4 via the Internet; (2) LMRDA such receipts from or disbursements to explained more fully below, the program enhancements to improve a single entity, aggregate to $5,000 or predictive value of the AFL–CIO survey accuracy, completeness, and timeliness more during the reporting year. This is open to question in some respects. of Forms LM–2, LM–3, and LM–4; and change will reduce the number of The Department’s own experience, (3) the public disclosure of reports with

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:10 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00054 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\09OCR2.SGM 09OCR2 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations 58427

a searchable database via the Internet. understandable by reporting unions; (5) internal processes and financial Labor organizations are directed to use the disclosure requirements are operations.’’ an electronic reporting format and implemented in ways consistent and As labor organizations have become OLMS will make software available for compatible, to the maximum extent more multifaceted and have created downloading over the Internet that practicable, with the existing reporting hybrid structures for their various enables labor organizations to report and recordkeeping practices of unions activities, the form used to report financial information that can be that must comply with them; (6) this financial information with respect to electronically compiled in the proper preamble informs unions of the reasons these activities has remained relatively format for electronic filing. that the information will be collected, unchanged and has become a barrier to The use of electronic forms makes it the way in which it will be used, the the complete and transparent reporting possible to download information from Department’s estimate of the average of labor organization’s financial previously filed reports directly into the burden of compliance, which is information intended by the LMRDA. form; enables officer and employee mandatory, the fact that all information Moreover, just as in the corporate sector, information to be imported onto the collected will be made public, and the there have been a number of financial form; makes it easier to enter fact that they need not respond unless failures and irregularities involving information by manually typing in the the form displays a currently valid OMB pension funds and other member data, by electronically importing data by control number; (7) the Department has accounts maintained by labor schedule, or by electronically importing explained its plans for the efficient and organizations. These failures and data for the entire form; automatically effective management and use of the irregularities result in direct financial performs calculations and checks for information to be collected, to enhance harm to union members. If union typographical and mathematical errors its utility to the Department and the members had more complete, and other discrepancies, which reduces public; (8) the Department has understandable information about their the likelihood of having to file an explained why the method of collecting unions’ financial transactions, amended report; and allows the information is ‘‘appropriate to the investments, and solvency, they would submission of the form electronically purpose for which the information is to be in a much better position than they via the Internet. The error summaries be collected’’; and (9) the changes are today to protect their personal provided by the software, combined implemented by this rule make financial interests and to exercise their with the speed and ease of electronic extensive, appropriate use of rights of self-governance. The purpose filing, will also make it easier for both information technology ‘‘to reduce of the final rule is to provide them with the reporting labor organization and burden and improve data quality, such information. The information OLMS to identify errors in both current agency efficiency and responsiveness to collection achieved by this rule is and previously filed reports and to file the public.’’ See 5 CFR 1320.9; 44 U.S.C. integral to this purpose. The paperwork amended reports to correct them. 3506(c). The Department’s PRA analysis requirements associated with the rule OLMS also has revised the contains a summary, background on the are necessary to enable workers to be instructions for the final Form LM–2 current Form LM–2, an overview of responsible, informed, and effective and Form T–1 to provide examples and changes to each form, and the burden participants in the governance of their guidance on how to complete the report associated with the current forms and unions; discourage embezzlement and and maintain records, and will provide final rule. The Department also financial mismanagement; prevent the compliance assistance for any questions circumvention or evasion of the discusses various comments, specific to or difficulties that may arise from using statutory reporting requirements; and the PRA, that are not fully addressed the software. A help desk is staffed strengthen the effective and efficient elsewhere in the preamble. As during normal business hours and can enforcement of the Act by the discussed, the Department has revised be reached by calling a toll-free Department. telephone number: 1–866–4–USA–DOL its burden estimates for the final rule, Pursuant to the PRA, the information (1–800–487–2365). based upon its review of the comments collection requirements contained in and adjustments to its baseline estimate this final rule have been submitted to F. Paperwork Reduction Act of the costs associated with the OMB for approval. Within 30 days from This statement is prepared in requirements of the Department’s the date of publication of this final rule, accordance with the Paperwork current rule relating to the submission you may direct comments by fax (202– Reduction Act of 1995, 44 U.S.C. 3501 of annual financial reports by labor 395–6974) to: Desk Officer for the (PRA). See 5 CFR 1320.9. As discussed organizations. Department of Labor/ESA, Office of in the preamble to this final rule and the In this rulemaking, the Department Management and Budget. analysis that follows, the rule has sought to improve the usefulness implements an information collection and accessibility of information to 1. Summary that meets the requirement of the Act in members of labor organizations subject This final rule modifies the annual that: (1) The information collection has to the LMRDA. The LMRDA reporting reports required to be filed by the largest practical utility to labor organizations, provisions were devised to protect the labor organizations, prescribed by the their members, other members of the basic rights of union members and to Secretary of Labor to implement the Act public, and the Department; (2) the rule guarantee the democratic procedures and incorporated by reference in the does not require the collection of and financial integrity of labor applicable regulations. As discussed information that is duplicative of other organizations. The 1959 Senate report above and throughout the preamble to reasonably accessible information; (3) on the version of the bill later enacted the final rule, the revised paperwork the provisions reduce to the extent as the LMRDA stated clearly, ‘‘the requirements are necessary to effectuate practicable and appropriate the burden members who are the real owners of the the purposes of the LMRDA by on unions that must provide the money and property of the organization providing union members with information, including small unions; (4) are entitled to a full accounting of all information about their unions that will the forms, instructions, and explanatory transactions involving their property.’’ enable them to be responsible, information in the preamble are written A full accounting was described as ‘‘full informed, and effective participants in in plain language that will be reporting and public disclosure of union the governance of their unions;

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:10 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00055 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\09OCR2.SGM 09OCR2 58428 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations

discourage embezzlement and financial adopt the holding of Bremerton Metal annual financial report on the current mismanagement; prevent the Trades Council, AFL–CIO. Supporting Form LM–2, Labor Organization Annual circumvention or evasion of the documentation need not be submitted Report, within 90 days after the end of statutory reporting requirements; and with the forms, but labor organizations the union’s fiscal year, to disclose its strengthen the effective and efficient are required, pursuant to the LMRDA, to financial condition and operations for enforcement of the Act by the maintain, assemble, and produce such the preceding fiscal year. The current Department. The manner in which the documentation in the event of an Form LM–2 is also used by covered collected information will serve these inquiry from a union member or an labor organizations with total annual purposes is discussed throughout the audit by an OLMS investigator. receipts of $200,000 or more to file a preamble to the final rule. The Department’s NPRM in this terminal report upon losing their Two forms that will implement the rulemaking contained an initial PRA identity by merger, consolidation or new reporting requirements and their analysis, which was also submitted to, other reason. instructions are published in the and approved by, OMB. Based upon The current Form LM–2 consists of 24 appendix to this final rule: the revised careful consideration of the comments questions that identify the labor Form LM–2, a form now filed by the and the changes made to the organization and provide basic largest unions to report their annual Department’s proposal in this final rule, information (in primarily a yes/no financial information, and the new the Department has made significant format); a statement of 11 financial Form T–1, a form also to be filed by the adjustments to its burdens estimates. items on different assets and liabilities; The costs to the Department for a statement of receipts and largest unions to report the assets, administering the annual financial disbursements; and 15 supporting liabilities, receipts, and disbursements report requirements of the LMRDA also schedules. The information that is of trusts in which they have an interest. were adjusted. These federal annualized reported includes: whether the union The forms are designed to take costs, undifferentiated by form, are has any subsidiary organizations and advantage of technology that makes it separately discussed after the burdens trusts; whether the union has a political possible to increase the detail of on the reporting unions are considered. action committee; whether the union information that is required to be Based upon the analysis presented discovered any loss or shortage of funds; reported, while at the same time making below, the Department estimates that the number of members; rates of dues it easier to file and publish the contents the total first year burden to comply and fees; the dollar amount for seven of the reports. Union members thus will with the revised Forms LM–2 and LM– asset categories, such as accounts be able to obtain a more accurate and 3 and the new Form T–1 to be 3.4 receivable, cash, and investments; the complete picture of their union’s million hours, 1.4 million hours and 0.2 dollar amount for four liability financial condition and operations million hours, respectively. The total categories, such as accounts payable and without imposing an unwarranted first year compliance costs associated mortgages payable; the dollar amount burden on reporting unions. The rule with this burden, including the cost for for 16 categories of receipts such as dues also includes a clarification of the computer hardware and software, are and interest; and the dollar amount for Department’s interpretation of Section estimated to be $116.0 million for the 18 categories of disbursements such as 3(j)(5) (29 U.S.C. 402(j)(5)) of the Form LM–2, $39.0 million for the Form payments to officers and repayment of LMRDA, in agreement with the recent LM–3 and $5.5 million for the new loans obtained. Five of the supporting decision of the U.S. Court of Appeals for Form T–1. The actual cost of the final schedules include a detailed itemization the Ninth Circuit in Chao v. Bremerton rule, however, is not $160.5 million in of loans receivable and payable, the sale Metal Trades Council, AFL–CIO, 294 F. the first year. It is the difference and purchase of investments and fixed 3d 1114 (2002). The Department adopts between cost of the current forms and assets, and payments to officers. There that court’s view that any ‘‘conference, the revised Form LM–2 and new Form are also 10 supporting schedules for general committee, joint, or system T–1, or $79.9 million the first year receipts and disbursements that provide board, or joint council’’ that is ($160.5 million—$80.6 million). The union members with more detailed subordinate to a national or average three-year cost of the final rule information by general groupings or international labor organization is itself is $55.7 million. Therefore, this final bookkeeping categories to identify their a labor organization under the LMRDA rule is not a major economic rule. purpose. Unions are required to track and will be required to file an annual Both the burden hours and the their receipts and disbursements in financial report if the national or compliance costs associated with the order to correctly group them into the international labor organization is a revised Form LM–2 and the new Form categories on the current form. labor organization engaged in an T–1 decline in subsequent years. The The Department also has developed industry affecting commerce within the Department estimates that the total an electronic reporting system for labor meaning of section 3(j) of the LMRDA. burden averaged over the first three organizations, e.LORS, which uses This clarification applies to all financial years to comply with the revised Form information technology to perform some reports required to be filed under the LM–2 and the new Form T–1 to be 2.8 of the administrative functions for the LMRDA. The final rule also increases million hours and 0.1 million hours, current forms. The objectives of the the filing threshold for the Form LM–3, respectively. The total compliance costs e.LORS system include the electronic a form filed by unions with less annual associated with this burden averaged filing of current Forms LM–2, LM–3, receipts than Form LM–2 filers and over the first three years are estimated and LM–4, as well as other LMRDA requiring a less detailed accounting than to be $93.8 million for the Form LM–2 disclosure documents; disclosure of Form LM–2, a change that will reduce and $3.5 million for the new Form T– reports via a searchable Internet the recordkeeping and reporting burden 1. database; improving the accuracy, for smaller unions. The final rule did completeness and timeliness of reports; not raise the filing threshold for Form 2. Background on Current Form LM–2 and creating efficiency gains in the LM–4 and did not otherwise revise the Every labor organization whose total reporting system. Effective use of the Form LM–4, although the instructions annual receipts are $200,000 or more system reduces the burden on reporting for Form LM–4 have been altered to and those organizations that are in organizations, provides increased reflect the Department’s decision to trusteeship must currently file an information to union members, and

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:10 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00056 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\09OCR2.SGM 09OCR2 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations 58429

enhances LMRDA enforcement by 3. Overview of Changes to Form LM–2 One change to Form LM–2 is the OLMS. The OLMS Internet Disclosure The Department, among other requirement that unions provide an site is available for public use. The site revisions for the purpose of reducing the estimate of the time expended by their contains a copy of each labor burden on small unions, adopted the officers and employees on each of the organization’s annual financial report alternative, identified in the NPRM, to several categories prescribed generally for reporting year 2000 and thereafter as raise the reporting threshold for the for union receipts and disbursements well as an indexed computer database Form LM–2 from $200,000 to $250,000. including: representational activities; on the information for each report that The new rule adjusts upward the Form union administration; general overhead; is searchable through the Internet. The LM–2 filing threshold of $200,000 set in political activities and lobbying; and Department is developing an enhanced 1994 to account for inflation. As a result contributions, gifts, and grants. e.LORS system for the revised Form of raising the Form LM–2 threshold to However, the Department is not LM–2 and new Form T–1. $250,000 in the final rule, 501 unions requiring unions to keep detailed time records, and it is left up to the labor that currently file a Form LM–2 will To ease the transition to electronic organization to determine the least now be able to satisfy the requirements disclosure, OLMS includes e.LORS burdensome way to provide the of the LMRDA by filing the simpler information in its outreach program, information. including compliance assistance Form LM–3. It should also be noted that Another change to the Form LM–2 is information on the OLMS website, the final $250,000 threshold is the addition of two new schedules for significantly higher than the earlier individual guidance provided through accounts receivable and accounts thresholds for filing the Form LM–2— responses to e-mail, written, or payable. The new schedules require the 1959 ($20,000), 1962 ($30,000), and telephone inquiries, and formal group reporting of (1) The name of any entity 1981 ($100,000). sessions conducted for union officials or individual with which the labor In comparison to the current Form organization had an account payable regarding compliance. The current LM–2, the revised Form LM–2 includes: forms are provided on CD–ROM discs at valued at $5,000 or more that was more three fewer questions (21 instead of 24) than 90 days past due at the end of the no cost to labor organizations, can be that identify the labor organization and downloaded from the OLMS website, reporting period or that was liquidated, provide basic information (in the same reduced or written off during the and are available from OLMS field general yes/no format); the same 11 offices and from the OLMS National reporting period, and (2) the name of financial items on assets and liabilities any entity or individual with which the Office. OLMS has also implemented a in Statement A; an updated Statement B labor organization had an account system to permit union officers to that asks for information on fewer receivable valued at $5,000 or more that submit forms electronically with digital categories of receipts (13 instead of 16) was more than 90 days past due at the signatures. Unions are currently and disbursements (17 instead of 19); end of the reporting period or that was required, however, to pay a minimal fee and five additional supporting liquidated, reduced or written off during to obtain electronic signature capability schedules (20 instead of 15). The the reporting period. However, as noted for the two officers who sign the form. updated Statement B (Receipts and above, the Department is not requiring Information about this system can be Disbursements) also drops six old Form LM–2 filers to use accrual obtained on the OLMS Web site at categories of disbursements and adds accounting. Although the LMRDA and www.olms.dol.gov. Digital signatures five new categories that will provide the current Form LM–2 already require ensure the authenticity of Form LM–2 more useful information to union some accrual basis accounting reports without compromising members on the amount of union funds information, under the final rule unions efficiency. As discussed in the spent on representational activities, may choose the method by which to Regulatory Flexibility Analysis and the strike benefits, union administration, track their finances ‘‘on a cash basis, preamble, additional compliance general overhead, and political activities accrual basis, a hybrid of the two, or assistance will be provided in and lobbying. some other method of accounting ‘‘so connection with the new reporting and Over half (8) of the 15 current long as they can accurately report the filing requirements. supporting schedules are not changing. information required by the Form LM– These include loans receivable, loans 2. Filing labor organizations have payable, other assets, other liabilities, several advantages with the current The revised Form LM–2 also includes fixed assets, sale of investments and a new schedule for reporting their electronic filing system. With e.LORS, fixed assets, purchase of investments number of members by membership information from previously filed and fixed assets, and benefits. The category. Each labor organization, reports and officer or employee schedule for itemizing investments has however, is permitted to name and information can be directly imported to only a minor modification involving report on its own membership Form LM–2. Not only is entry of the information that is maintained in the categories (in the same manner as it information eased, the software also normal course of business—the keeps its membership records). It makes mathematical calculations and reporting threshold has changed from appears from the public comments checks for errors or discrepancies. over $1,000 and 20% of the total book received on the Department’s proposal Ready acceptance of the benefits of value of the union’s investments to over that each union maintains membership electronic reporting is predictable based $5,000 and 5% of the total. Two other information in some manner; however, on experience with software that OLMS supporting schedules (Office and a union will not be required to has developed and distributed to labor Administrative Expense, and Other manufacture or report information for organizations for completing the current Disbursements) on the current form membership categories it does not keep. Forms LM–2, LM–3, and LM–4. have been dropped from the revised The Form LM–2 also has been revised Approximately 76% of unions that form and the disbursements that were to require unions to individually currently file Form LM–2, LM–3, and reported on those schedules will now be identify receipts and disbursements for LM–4 take advantage of the ability to reported elsewhere on the revised Form two of the current supporting schedules enter data electronically on a LM–2 (such as the schedules for union (Other Receipts and Contributions, computerized form. administration or general overhead). Gifts, and Grants) and four of the new

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:10 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00057 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\09OCR2.SGM 09OCR2 58430 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations

supporting schedules (Representational files publicly available reports with a union will be excused from filing Activities, Union Administration, Federal or state agency. For such trusts, electronically for the period of the General Overhead, and Political and the union is required only to state on exemption. Lobbying Activities). Currently, two of the Form LM–2 that such a report has 4. Overview of Changes to Form LM–3 these schedules provide some detail been filed and where union members about various receipts and can obtain the report. In addition, a The only revision in the final rule to disbursements by general groupings or labor organization may substitute an Form LM–3 is the change that increases bookkeeping categories to identify their independent audit for most of the the size of labor organizations that are purpose. However, the revised Form information that otherwise would be permitted to file the form from LM–2 will require labor organizations to required on a Form T–1, provided the $199,999.99 to $249,999.99 in total individually identify receipts or audit meets certain criteria described in annual receipts. This is required disbursements, reported in six the preamble above. because the Form LM–2 reporting supporting schedules, of $5,000 or As discussed above, the instructions threshold is increasing to $250,000. more, or total receipts or total to Form LM–2 also adopt the recent The instructions to Form LM–3 also disbursements, reported in each of those holding in Chao v. Bremerton Metal adopt the holding in Chao v. Bremerton schedules, from an entity or individual Trades Council, AFL–CIO, clarifying Metal Trades Council, AFL–CIO, as the that aggregate to $5,000 or more during that any ‘‘conference, general Department’s interpretation of section the reporting period. For individually committee, joint, or system board, or 3(j)(5) of the LMRDA. The Department identified receipts and disbursements, joint council,’’ which is subordinate to estimates that this will add 50 new unions will have to report the name, a national or international labor Form LM–3 filers. address, purpose, date, and amount organization is itself a labor 5. Overview of the Form LM–4 associated with the transaction. organization under the LMRDA and will Under the final rule, labor be required to file an annual financial After carefully reviewing the organizations that file the Form LM–2 report if the national or international comments, the Department has decided are required to report the major receipts labor organization is a labor not to change the Form–LM–4 in the and disbursements of trusts in which organization engaged in an industry final rule. the labor organization has an interest. affecting commerce within the meaning 6. Overview of the New Form T–1 Currently, a union only has to report of section 3(j) of the LMRDA. See 29 information about subsidiary U.S.C. 402(j)(5). The Department A labor organization will be required organizations, defined as ‘‘wholly estimates that this will add 100 new to file Form T–1 if it has an interest in owned, wholly controlled, and wholly Form LM–2 filers. a trust, as defined in the LMRDA; if the financed by the reporting union.’’ Under Finally, under the rule, each labor union and the trust each have annual the final rule, if a union’s financial organization that has annual receipts of receipts of $250,000 or more; and the contribution to a trust, or a contribution $250,000 or more is required to file a union makes a financial contribution to made on the union’s behalf, is less than Form LM–2 electronically with the the trust, or a contribution is made on $10,000 or the union has an interest in Department. Based on reports filed with the labor organization’s behalf, of a trust that has annual receipts of less OLMS and the experience of its $10,000 or more. If a union’s financial than $250,000, the union only has to investigators, the Department recognizes contribution to a trust, or a contribution report on Form LM–2 the existence of that a majority of current Form LM–2 made on the union’s behalf, is less than the trust and the amount of the union’s filers currently use computerized $10,000 or the union has an interest in contribution or the contribution made recordkeeping systems and now a trust that has annual receipts of less on the union’s behalf. If the contribution possess, or can easily acquire, the than $250,000, the union only has to is $10,000 or more and the annual technology necessary to submit reports report the existence of the trust and the receipts of the trust are $250,000 or in electronic form. Several OLMS field amount of the union’s contribution or more, the labor organization will be offices report that even smaller unions the contribution made on the union’s required to report the receipts and that file Form LM–3 reports now behalf. disbursements of the trust on the new maintain their accounts electronically. Also to minimize the burden, unions Form T–1. Unions will be required to The availability of electronic software will not have to file a Form T–1 for separately identify each entity or that will permit unions that keep their organizations that meet the statutory individual from which the trust records electronically to export data definition of a trust if the trust files a received $10,000 or more during the from their programs to the Form LM–2 report pursuant to 26 U.S.C. 527, or reporting period. Unions will also be software should reduce the burden of pursuant to the requirements of ERISA, required to separately identify any reporting financial information with the or if the organization is a Political entity or individual to which the trust specificity required by the final rule. Action Committee (PAC) and files made disbursements of $10,000 or more, Under the final rule, unions have the publicly available reports with a Federal or that aggregated to $10,000 or more, choice to complete the reports for or state agency. For such trusts, the during the reporting period. For submission by either utilizing the union need only state on the Form LM– individually identified receipts and Department’s software to automatically 2 that such a report has been filed and disbursements, unions will have to transmit the information or by ‘‘cutting where union members can obtain the report the name, address, purpose, date, and pasting’’ the information into the report. In addition, a labor organization and amount associated with the Department’s on-line form. If, however, may choose to substitute an transaction. a labor organization is unable to file independent audit for most of the Unions will not have to file a Form T– electronically without undue burden or information that otherwise would be 1 for organizations that meet the expense, it can request a hardship required on a Form T–1, provided the statutory definition of a trust if the trust exemption from the Department. If the audit meets the criteria prescribed by files a report pursuant to 26 U.S.C. 527, Department determines that the grant of the final rule. In such instances, the or pursuant to the requirements of the exemption is appropriate and union is not required to provide the ERISA, or if the organization is a consistent with the public interest and financial details for the trust otherwise Political Action Committee (PAC) and the protection of union members, the required of filers.

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:10 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00058 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\09OCR2.SGM 09OCR2 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations 58431

The new Form T–1 follows the format The Department has carefully necessary for the proper functioning of of the revised Form LM–2. The Form T– considered these various comments as the Department. The AFL–CIO contends 1, however, is similar to Form LM–4 in well as the rest of the record and has that the Department’s paperwork that it is much shorter and requires less relied on many of the commenters’ analysis in the NPRM was information than the Form LM–2. The observations in refining its burden fundamentally flawed and dramatically Form T–1 includes: 20 questions that analysis. In many instances, as underestimated the paperwork burdens identify the trust, provide basic identified below, the Department has and costs to unions in complying with information (in a yes/no format), and used the data supplied by the the proposed reporting requirements. the total amount of assets, liabilities, commenters to better estimate how The AFL–CIO also argued that the receipts and disbursements of the trust; much time filers take to complete the proposed rule is not the least a schedule that separately identifies any current Form LM–2 and could take to burdensome approach that the individual or entity from which the complete the revised Form LM–2. By Department could have taken to achieve trust receives $10,000 or more during taking this information into account, the the goal of the LMRDA and the the reporting period; a schedule that Department has increased the baseline rulemaking to make union financial separately identifies any entity or burden assumptions for the current reports and underlying data more useful individual that received disbursements Form LM–2 that underlie most of the and accessible to their members. And, that aggregate to $10,000 or more from Department’s estimates. At the same as a final observation, the AFL–CIO the trust during the reporting period and time, the Department could not use all stated that the proposed rule might shift the purpose of disbursement; and a of the data submitted by the the cost of developing and schedule of disbursements to officers commenters in refining burden implementing electronic filing upon the and employees of the trust. estimates. Some of the data, for reporting unions. example, was no longer relevant to the The AFL–CIO’s contention that the 7. Recordkeeping and Reporting Burden analysis because a proposed changes in the reporting requirements Hour Estimates for the Current, Revised, requirement was revised or eliminated are not necessary for the proper and New Forms altogether in the final rule necessitating functioning of the Department lacks The Department received several the revision or elimination of the merit. The Secretary is charged under comments on the recordkeeping and burden associated with the proposed section 208 of the LMRDA, 29 U.S.C. reporting burdens associated with the requirement. In other instances, the 438, with the authority and current Form LM–2, and the proposed information, while illustrative of responsibility for determining ‘‘the form Form LM–2 and Form T–1, and the problems that had been identified by a and publication of reports required to be Department’s initial PRA analysis. Many particular union or unions, could not be filed under this title.’’ Unions, in turn, union members and a number of used to arrive at an average burden hour are required to file annual reports nonprofit organizations commented on estimate for unions generally or within containing certain listed minimum the usefulness of the information one of the defined tiers. For example, information ‘‘in such detail as may be provided on the proposed forms and ALPA explained that it uses a necessary accurately to disclose its expressed the view that the benefits of particularly sophisticated accounting financial condition and operations for the additional information outweighed program in maintaining its financial its preceding fiscal year.’’ 29 U.S.C. the marginal increase in recordkeeping information and would incur significant 431(b). These reports are statutorily and reporting costs. Other commenters burden in converting their program to required, not primarily for the proper expressed strong contrary views. Many comply with the proposed rule, but this functioning of the Department, but for of these comments already have been information could not be used to disclosing to the members of the addressed in the preamble. accurately estimate how many other organization how their dues money has Although the Department received unions have similarly sophisticated been used in the past year. As stated in only a few comments that were specific accounting programs and could incur its proposal and supported by many of to the Department’s compliance with similar burdens. Other information was the public comments received on the the requirements of the PRA, it did not used because it was based on a proposal, the Department believes that receive many comments on the NPRM misunderstanding of the NPRM. For the minimal information reported on the PRA analysis and burden hour example, some commenters stated that current Form LM–2 forms is inadequate estimates. The AFL–CIO and the local unions would incur significant to ensure that unions are reporting and Mercatus Center, the latter an economic costs associated with converting to an using funds in ways their members policy group based at George Mason accrual accounting method when the would approve. As discussed in the University in Virginia, submitted NPRM proposed no such requirement. preamble, comments by union members detailed comments and data. A third In most cases, the Department has explained their difficulties in obtaining commenter, the Center for Progressive reported data regarding its burden hour information about their union’s finances Regulation (CPR), self-described in its estimates to the nearest hundredth, as it and expressed frustration in their comments as a newly formed, did in the NPRM. Contrary to the inability to find out where their dues Washington, D.C.-based, organization of perception of a few commenters, the money was going. The more detailed academics specializing in legal, Department’s practice is not intended to reporting requirements in the final rule economic and scientific issues suggest greater precision than the will increase members’ awareness of surrounding federal regulation, underlying data would reflect. Instead, how their dues money is being spent by expressed views critical of the the figures used by the Department are their unions. This is consistent with the Department’s initial burden analysis. derived from the Department’s intent of the LMRDA and highlights the The latter organization, however, did computations based on assumptions, purpose served by the rule’s information not include in its submission any rounded to the nearest hundredth by an collection provisions. alternative data for the Department to Excel spreadsheet. The suggestion that the Department’s consider. Some unions also submitted initial burden analysis was comments critical of the Department’s a. General Comments fundamentally flawed is unpersuasive. analysis and provided some alternatives The AFL–CIO argued that the The AFL–CIO has failed to identify any for the Department to consider. proposed information gathering is not analytical shortcomings in the

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:10 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00059 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\09OCR2.SGM 09OCR2 58432 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations

Department’s approach. Instead, the estimate for filers for completing the problems that unions might encounter AFL–CIO’s contention rests, in large current Form LM–2. in classifying information by the part, on its view that the Department The AFL–CIO provided some categories included in the Department’s has underestimated the baseline burden information that appears to contradict proposals in developing burden hour hour data used by the Department for the burden hour estimates discussed estimates because of the subjective/ the current Form LM–2 and that, above. The AFL–CIO’s report included qualitative nature of the information. therefore, the Department has an estimate of burden for the current The Department used almost all of the underestimated the burden for the Form LM–2, based on an average of 52 AFL–CIO information concerning the revised form. As discussed below, this hours for each individual employed by computer software and hardware baseline was based on what the a union (but without specifying the capabilities of unions. This information Department believed was the accepted average number of individuals it used as added accuracy to the Department’s burden associated with the current a divisor). This figure is not consistent own data and estimates. Form LM–2, as reflected in the with its 1,500 and 200 burden hour The argument that the Department’s Department’s numerous, unchallenged estimate, when applied to the proposal shifted the cost of developing submissions to OMB in obtaining Department’s 2001 or 2002 e.LORS data and implementing electronic filing to OMB’s approval to continue using the that contains the reported number of unions by making unions responsible, form. Based on the information employees and officers for all Form LM– in part, for some of the software submitted by the AFL–CIO and other 2 filers. Thus, in the Department’s view, development ignores the fact that the commenters in response to the the AFL–CIO’s per employee estimate Department will provide, at no cost to Department’s proposal, and the may not accurately reflect a true unions, the software that allows unions Departments own analysis, however, the average. For this reason, the Department to file electronically with the Department has adjusted its burden chose, instead, to rely on the AFL–CIO’s Department. Reporting unions, however, hour estimates upward for the current alternative, per union, estimate of the may be required to make changes to the form. These adjustments are discussed number of hours required to complete way that they record the information in in detail below. the current Form LM–2. order to prepare the revised Form LM– Some of the AFL–CIO data involved Contrary to the AFL–CIO’s view, the 2 and submit it electronically, and the broad subjective or qualitative Department’s paperwork analysis in the Department has included the costs of categories that could not be used to NPRM was well reasoned, especially in such changes in the estimates discussed estimate burden hours. For example, the below. The AFL–CIO’s disagreement the absence of any earlier challenge to estimate that 45% of local unions said with the Department’s burden estimate the Department’s prior assessment of the that it would be quite difficult to in the NPRM was based, in part, on its time required to prepare the current extremely difficult to compile the name, view that unions currently experience Form LM–2. As discussed below, the address, date, amount, and purpose for considerable difficulty in timely Department has revised its estimates in all charges by functional category, is reporting annual financial information, preparing the PRA analysis for the final illustrative of the effort associated with and that the Department’s proposals, by rule and presents a more refined the itemization requirement in the final adding new requirements, are overly assessment by the Department of any rule but can not be used to develop burdensome. In support of this position, burden imposed on reporting unions actual burden hour estimates. Moreover, the AFL–CIO included information under the new Form LM–2. this estimate also demonstrates that about the unions’ current record on The Department used the AFL–CIO 55%, or a majority, of local unions find timeliness. While, as discussed above, and other commenters’ estimates when the change less difficult. Of course, the the Department has used the burden they provided information that the Department did not use the AFL–CIO’s hour estimates provided by the AFL– Department did not have and that data in computing the burden of CIO to reassess the Department’s increased the accuracy of its estimates complying with the revised Form LM– estimate of the time required for by adding to the Department’s own data 2 to the extent that the data pertained completing the current forms, and auditing experience. The to requirements that were addressed in qualitative assessments of difficulty or Department used the following AFL– the Department’s proposal, but not timely-submission data could not be CIO data estimating the average burden embodied in the final rule. used to develop burden hour estimates. for completing the current Form LM–2: The Department also used the AFL– The Department also did not utilize the 1,500 hours each for 141 national and CIO data on the number of unions using information used by the AFL–CIO to international unions and 200 hours each functional reporting to refine its support its assertion that the for 5,038 local unions. The latter recordkeeping burden estimates. Department had failed to consider number reflects the number of unions in Specifically, the AFL–CIO data relating whether, and the extent to which, the 2002 OLMS e.LORS data. These to the unions’ ability to itemize unions might need additional resources figures yield a weighted average of 239 disbursements were used to corroborate to comply with the proposal. Although hours, which the Department rounded the Department’s data and auditing this information illustrates the need to up to 240 hours for use in making experience. The Department notes, use external support staff or the need to additional burden assessments. The however, that the data either understate hire additional in-house staff to address Department had to make some the unions’ capacity to report the higher burden hours associated with assumptions about the local unions due information by functional categories or the revised Form LM–2, the information to the scarcity of data. The AFL–CIO by implication shows that a substantial is not helpful for estimating average or only surveyed 23 local unions on their number of unions are not in compliance total burden hours, but simply actual experience with the current form. with the current reporting requirements illustrates the choices unions have to Since the AFL–CIO did not include (the current report requires the tracking comply with the current and final rule. estimates for consulting, accounting, of all receipts and disbursements in The AFL–CIO’s contention that the legal, or similar costs, the Department order to place them in the appropriate Department could have chosen less had to assume additional hours for these schedule and category on the current burdensome alternatives to achieve the activities in order to arrive at a weighted form). However, the Department did not same objectives is unpersuasive. As average for computing a total burden use the AFL–CIO data relating to demonstrated by the final rule, the

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:10 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00060 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\09OCR2.SGM 09OCR2 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations 58433

Department has made numerous modify existing accounting systems, 32 will be incurred by filers. The labor changes to its proposal that reduce the hours; incorporate electric signatures, costs reflect the Department’s paperwork burden associated with the 16 hours, systems testing, 24 hours, and assumption that the unions will rely rule. Throughout the preamble, the employee training, 32 hours (8 hours x upon the services of some or all of the Department has explained its position 4 employees). To compute the following positions (either internal or on adopting, or not, alternative compensation costs associated with external staff, including union proposals suggested by the commenters. these tasks, it used $27.80 as ‘‘fully president, union secretary-treasurer, The Department, in crafting the final loaded wage rate of union employees.’’ accountant, bookkeeper, computer rule, has sought to reduce the Mercatus also noted that the programmer, lawyer, consultant) and paperwork burden on unions, without Department’s analysis did not the compensation costs for these compromising the Department’s appropriately recognize that the positions, as measured by wage rates statutory obligation to ensure that union Department’s proposal would have an and employer costs published by the members are provided annual reports on impact beyond the union’s bookkeeping Bureau of Labor Statistics or derived their unions’ finances. Both the NPRM and accounting staff. Mercatus noted from data reported in e.LORS. The and the final rule, in the Department’s that the rule likely would affect the Department also made assumptions view, fully comply with its manner by which union staff document relating to the time that particular tasks responsibilities under the LMRDA and or record their activities, and that such or activities would take. The activities the PRA. The final rule establishes the costs, though minimal on a transaction generally involve only one of the three least burdensome approach practicable basis, will have a measurable cost in the distinct ‘‘operational’’ phases of the to provide union members and the aggregate. The Department has rule: first, tasks associated with Department with the information considered such costs in its analysis of modifying bookkeeping and accounting required by the LMRDA. the final rule. practices, including the modification or The comments submitted by the b. Methodology for the Burden purchase of software, to capture data Mercatus Center were largely supportive Estimates needed to prepare the required reports; of the Department’s proposal, including and second, tasks associated with the Department’s effort to specifically In reaching its estimates, the recordkeeping; and third, tasks estimate the burden hours associated Department considered both the one- associated with sending or exporting the with the unions’ compliance with the time and recurring costs associated with data in an electronic format that can be proposal. The organization, however, the final rule. Separate estimates are processed by the Department’s import suggested that the burden estimates included for the initial year of software. Since the analysis is designed could be improved if the Department implementation as well as the second to provide estimates for a capitalized its estimates of costs and and third years. For filers, the ‘‘representative’’ union the provided additional documentation of Department included separate estimates, Department’s estimates largely reflect the Department’s own costs associated based on the relative size of unions as weighted averages. Where an estimate with the rule. Although capitalization measured by the amount of their annual depends upon the number of unions would be a reasonable alternative to the receipts. The size of a union, as subject to the LMRDA or included in direct cost approach used in this measured by the amount of its annual one of the tier groups, the Department rulemaking, the Department believes receipts, will affect the burden on has relied upon data in the e.LORS that averaging the costs over the first reporting unions. For example, larger system (for the years stated for each three years, as the Department has done unions have more receipts and example in the text or tables). here, yields approximately the same disbursements to itemize and more The following methodology and result in estimating burden. Moreover, employees who have to estimate their assumptions underlie the Department’s in this rulemaking, there was relatively time allocation. burden estimates: little to be capitalized. Only the The primary impact of this final rule • The size of a union, as measured by computer equipment and software and will be on the largest labor the amount of its annual receipts, will the one-time labor costs could be organizations, defined as those that have affect the burden on reporting unions. considered for capitalization. In its $250,000 or more in annual receipts. Larger unions have more receipts and analysis, the Department has assumed There are approximately 4,778 labor disbursements to itemize and more that most of the computer equipment organizations of this size that are employees who have to estimate their and software would be purchased for required to file Form LM–2 reports time allocation. Three tiers, based on normal business operations. The under the LMRDA (just 19.0 percent of annual receipts, have been constructed minimal additional costs associated all labor organizations covered by the to differentiate the burdens among Form with the final rule have been allocated LMRDA). The rule will also reduce the LM–2 filers. in the first year. This same procedure burden on 501 small unions that will be • A union’s use of computer was used for the one-time labor costs. able to file Form LM–3 instead of Form technology, or not, to maintain its While the procedure used by DOL does LM–2 because of raising the LM–2 financial accounts and prepare annual not include any ‘‘opportunity costs’’ for threshold to $250,000. These estimates financial reports under the current rule, capital (e.g., interest charges), DOL are based on 2001 and 2002 data from will affect the burden on reporting believes that its estimates, by using, in the OLMS e.LORS system. This system unions. Although few LM–2 filers do effect, a three year life cycle for all such contains annual receipt data on all Form not have computers, the larger the union costs has reasonably estimated the LM–2, LM–3, and LM–4 filers. Although the greater likelihood that it will be burden. these estimates may not be predictive of using a specialized accounting program Mercatus estimated that the average the exact number of small unions that instead of commercial-off-the-shelf burden associated with the will be impacted by this final rule in the accounting software. Department’s proposal, per union, at future, the Department believes these • Relative burden associated with the about 180 hours. It broke down its estimates to be sound and are derived final rule will correspond to the estimates as follows: install new from the best available information. following predictable stages: review of software, 4 hours; design/adjust report The Department’s estimates include the rule, instructions, and forms; forms and format structures, 72 hours; costs for both labor and equipment that adjustments to or acquisition of

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:10 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00061 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\09OCR2.SGM 09OCR2 58434 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations

accounting software and computer later years as users gain experience. 104.0 hours to collect and report their hardware; installation, testing, and Estimates for each of the first three years information on the current Form LM–3. review of the Department’s reporting and a three-year average will provide In addition, the Department assumes software; changing accounting useful information to assess the burden. that all Form LM–3 filers will take an structures and developing, testing, A weighted average provides a average 8.0 hours for accounting and 4.0 reviewing, and documenting accounting ‘‘snapshot’’ of the burden associated hours for legal review to complete the software queries as well as designing with the form for an individual current form for an average total burden query reports; training union officers reporting union. • of 116.0 hours per respondent (see Table and employees involved in bookkeeping Burden can be usefully reported as 2). Further, the Department estimates and accounting functions; training an overall total for all filers in terms of that 64.0 hours of the total is for hours and cost. This burden, for most union officers and employees to recordkeeping burden and 52.0 hours is purposes, can be differentiated for each maintain information relating to for reporting burden. These estimates transactions and estimating the amount individual form. The Federal burden and assumptions are based on the of time they expend in prescribed cannot be reasonably estimated by form. similarity of the Form LM–3 and Form categories; the actual recordkeeping of • The estimated burden associated data under the revised procedures with the current LM-forms is the LM–2 recordkeeping and reporting associated with itemizing receipts and appropriate baseline for estimating the requirements, as well as the relative disbursements and allocating them by burden and cost associated with the differences in the size of the unions that functional categories; aging accounts final rule. complete the two forms. receivable and accounts payable; c. Baseline Adjustments: Current Forms The Department has also updated the allocating time for officers and average annual cost of complying with employees by functional categories; After reviewing the public comments, the current Form LM–2 and LM–3 preparing a download methodology to the Department assumes that 5,038 local recordkeeping and reporting either submit electronic reports using unions now take 200 hours and 141 requirements as follows: The average national and international unions take ‘‘cut and paste’’ methods or the import/ total cost per respondent is $8,381 for 1,500 hours to collect and report their export technology allowing for a more the current Form LM–2 and $3,277 for information on the current Form LM–2 automated transfer of data to the Form LM–3. These figures include for a weighted average of approximately Department; the development, testing, estimates for consulting, accounting, and review of any translator software 240.0 hours for each of the 5,179 respondents. In addition, the legal, and programming costs and are that may be required between a union’s weighted averages across all accounting software and Department’s Department assumes that Form LM–2 filers take an average 24.0 hours for respondents and are based on total reporting software; obtaining digital compensation rates not hourly wage signatures for the union officers; accounting, 16.0 hours for rates. The total annual cost for all additional review by the president and programming, 8.0 hours for legal review, respondents is estimated to be $43.4 secretary-treasurer; and completing a and 4.0 hours for consulting assistance million for Form LM–2 and $37.2 continuing hardship exemption request to complete the current form for an if necessary. average total burden of 292.0 hours per million for Form LM–3 (see Table 2). It • Burden can be categorized as respondent (see Table 2). Further, the should be noted that although it may recurring or non-recurring, with the Department estimates that 160.0 hours appear that the Department has applied latter primarily associated with the of the total is for recordkeeping burden inconsistent dollar costs per hour to the initial implementation stages. and 132.0 hours is for reporting burden. burden hour estimates, the dollar costs Recordkeeping burden, as distinct from The difference in the number of per hour naturally differ between forms reporting burden, will predominate responses in Table 2 reflects that fewer because of the varying amounts of during the first months of unions filed LM–2’s and LM–3’s in 2002 accountant time, bookkeeping time, and implementation. than in 2001 according to OLMS e.LORS the time of the union secretary-treasurer • Burden can be reasonably estimated data. and president associated with each to vary over time with the greatest The Department also estimates that form, which yield different weighted burden in the initial year, decreasing in 11,356 local unions will take an average average costs per hour.

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:10 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00062 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\09OCR2.SGM 09OCR2 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations 58435

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:10 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00063 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\09OCR2.SGM 09OCR2 ER09OC03.001 58436 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations

d. New Form LM–2 commercial off-the-shelf accounting the new reporting software. Finally, in To estimate the burden hours and software program and will most likely Tier 3, there are the 46 unions with costs for the revised Form LM–2 and the use the ‘‘cut and paste’’ feature of the annual receipts of $50.0 million or new Form T–1 the Department divided new reporting software (see Table 3). In more. The Department assumes that Form LM–2 filers into three groups or Tier 2, there are 3,158 unions with unions within this tier most likely use tiers, based on the amount of unions’ annual receipts from $500,000 to $49.9 some type of specialized accounting annual receipts. In Tier 1, there are million. The Department assumes that software program and also will use all 1,574 unions with annual receipts from unions within this tier most likely use of the electronic filing features of the $250,000 to $499,999.99. The some type of commercial off-the-shelf new reporting software. Table 3 Department assumes that unions within accounting software program and will summarizes the Characteristics of Form this tier probably use some type of use all of the electronic filing features of LM–2 filers by annual receipts.

For each of the three tiers, the 14.6 hours to install and set up, or computer hardware; 11% of national Department estimated burden hours for reconfigure the computer hardware and and international unions and 40% of the additional nonrecurring (first year) accounting software (these are weighted local unions would need new software; recordkeeping and reporting averages of $1,500 for computer and 51% of national and international requirements, the additional recurring hardware and $250 for accounting unions and 35% of local unions would recordkeeping and reporting burden software across all LM–2 filers). need to upgrade their software. An hours, and a three-year annual average Although many unions currently have additional 12.5% of local unions do not for the additional nonrecurring and the hardware and software that is use computers; however, the recurring burden hours. necessary for the recordkeeping and Department assumes that 86.4% (501) of The Department estimates that LM–2 reporting requirements of the final rule, these unions will no longer have to file filers will spend an average of nearly data submitted by the AFL–CIO suggests the Form LM–2 because of the higher $1,000 for computer hardware, that 21% of national and international reporting threshold ($250,000) for the hardware upgrades, accounting unions and 33% of local unions would form. For those unions without software, and software upgrades, and need to purchase and install new computers, the Department also

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:10 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00064 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\09OCR2.SGM 09OCR2 ER09OC03.002 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations 58437

estimated that it would take an average The Department estimates an average seven minutes a week) and an hour at of 14.6 (nonrecurring) hours to install 30-minute reduction in burden for the the end of the year, the Department and/or upgrade the computer hardware changes to pages one and two and assumed that officers of the largest Form and software. In addition, for all unions Statement B of the Form LM–2 (for all LM–2 files (Tier 3, with annual receipts the Department estimated that it would three tiers) for reporting three fewer yes/ of $50 million or more) will spend 60 take an average of 8.9 (nonrecurring) no questions and 5 fewer minutes for minutes a month during the year hours to install, test, and review the reporting three fewer receipt categories (approximately 14 minutes a week) and OLMS reporting software. and two less disbursement category on an hour at the end of the year. The Department estimates that it will Statement B. The burden reduction is It is also assumed that Tier 1 take unions an average of 76.8 less for Statement B because the respondents will use the same features (nonrecurring) hours to change their information that is currently reported on in the new software that are in the accounting structures; develop, test, four lines must be still be gathered for existing OLMS software to complete the review, and document accounting the revised form, but are added together officer and employee schedules, and software queries; design query reports; and reported on just one line of the that it will take them an average of 2.0 and train accounting personnel. Unions revised form. additional hours to complete each that use a fiscal year beginning on The Department estimates no schedule in addition to the average of January 1 will need to spend less than reduction or increase in burden for Tier 6.0 hours to complete the officer half of these hours (32.5) making 1 filers associated with the eight schedule and 10.0 hours to complete the changes before January 1, 2004, in order unchanged schedules on the revised existing schedules. However, for Tier 2 to be ready to begin the recordkeeping Form LM–2. It is assumed that Tier 1 and Tier 3 filers, the Department necessary to be able to file the revised respondents will use the same features estimates an additional 6 hours to Form LM–2. Unions will have until 90 in the new software that are in the export and transmit data for the officer days following the end of their fiscal existing OLMS software to complete and employee schedules (3 hours for year to spend the remainder of these these schedules. However, for Tier 2 each schedule) and a 25% decrease in hours (44.3) making changes that will be and Tier 3 filers the Department reporting burden that results from necessary to actually populate the Form estimates a 50% decrease (12.5 hours or moving from the current manual or ‘‘cut LM–2, which will be due, at the earliest, 1.6 hours per unchanged schedule) in and paste’’ method on the existing form at the end of March 2005. These reporting burden that results from to an electronic data export capability moving from the current manual or ‘‘cut on the revised form. No additional estimates are based on the Department’s and paste’’ method on the existing form recordkeeping burden is estimated for review of a variety of accounting to an electronic data export capability the officer and employee disbursement software packages, its evaluation of the for the unchanged schedules on the schedules because the Department is not recordkeeping requirements of the revised form. requiring unions to maintain detailed current Form LM–2, and its review of The Department estimated the burden time records. the public comments. The Department associated with the three Form LM–2 For the two new schedules for relied upon the expertise of schedules that are being revised: accounts receivable and accounts investigators with first-hand knowledge investments, all officers and payable, the Department estimates that of union financial reporting, including disbursements to officers, and on average unions will take 4.9 the use of software, to determine which disbursements to employees. Each has a additional hours (of nonrecurring four commercial off-the-shelf software nonrecurring burden for respondents to burden) to develop, test, review, and packages were most commonly used by adapt to the revisions (e.g., new document accounting software queries; unions to maintain their finances and schedule reporting thresholds and design query reports; prepare a prepare financial reports. Using these additional detail) of 4.7, 15.6 and 7.8 download methodology; and train four common off-the-shelf software hours, respectively. For the revised personnel. packages, Department investigators officer and employee schedules, the The Department also estimates that on determined that it was possible to set up Department estimates an average of 60 average unions will take an additional categories or accounts tailored to minutes of training for each officer and (recurring) 0.8 hours of recordkeeping capture the information necessary to employee and from 30 to 60 minutes per burden to age their accounts receivable comply with the requirements of the month and an additional 60 minutes per and accounts payable, and an additional rule. The software packages tested year for each officer and employee to 1.4 (recurring) hours to prepare the new utilize a common processing format. estimate the amount of time spent on schedules. OLMS e.LORS data and the Many unions with commercial-off- each of the functional categories on the public comments suggest that many the-shelf accounting software will take schedule each month and then sum Form LM–2 filers with receipts of less less time and other, typically larger, them for the entire year (as described in than $50 million (99% of all filers) have unions with specialized accounting the preamble, the Department is only few or no accounts receivable or systems may take more time. Further, requiring officers and employees, as a accounts payable that meet the the public comments suggest that many general rule, to estimate their time to the threshold for the relevant schedule and unions already have accounting systems nearest 10%). In calculating the average that 50% of the national and that maintain at least some, if not all, of time union officers and employees will international unions already maintain the required information for spend estimating their time, the accounts receivable and accounts disbursements and other receipts. Department assumed that the task will payable in the format required by the Therefore, as discussed above, the be more time consuming for officers and final rule. Therefore, the Department Department continues to believe that employees of larger unions. For has included a relatively small amount unions will have adequate time to example, while the Department of additional recordkeeping and conform their accounting systems to the assumed that officers and employees of reporting burden hours associated with revised forms before the start of the first the smallest Form LM–2 filers (Tier 1, these schedules. reporting period for which they will be with annual receipts of less than For the new ‘‘other receipts’’ required to report on the new Form LM– $500,000) would spend 30 minutes a schedule, the Department estimates that 2 (no earlier than January 1, 2004). month during the year (approximately on average unions will take 10.3

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:10 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00065 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\09OCR2.SGM 09OCR2 58438 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations

additional hours (of nonrecurring download methodology; and train query reports; prepare a download recordkeeping and reporting burden) to personnel. Further, the Department also methodology; and train personnel. change accounting structures; develop, estimates that on average unions will The Department also estimates that on test, review, and document accounting take an additional (recurring) 6.0 hours average unions will take an additional software queries; design query reports; time to prepare the new schedules. This 2.1 (recurring) hours to prepare the new prepare a download methodology; and additional reporting burden is a net schedules. Since the final rule does not train personnel. Further, the Department estimate that includes a 50% decrease require unions to manufacture or report also estimates that on average unions in reporting burden that results from information for membership categories will take an additional (recurring) 0.6 moving from the current manual or ‘‘cut they do not keep, the Department has hours to prepare the new schedule. The and paste’’ method for the existing not estimated any additional additional reporting burden is a net ‘‘other disbursements,’’ ‘‘office and recordkeeping burden for this schedule. estimate that includes a 50% decrease administrative expense,’’ and For the revised Form LM–2, the in reporting burden that results from ‘‘contributions, gifts, and grants’’ Department estimates that unions will moving from the current manual or ‘‘cut schedules to an electronic data export take an average of two hours to obtain and paste’’ method for the existing capability on the revised form for the each electronic signature (two schedule to an electronic data export Tier 2 and Tier 3 filers. Moreover, signatures are needed). There is also a capability on the revised form for the OLMS e.LORS data indicates that charge of $45 to obtain each electronic Tier 2 and Tier 3 filers. Moreover, disbursements on these five schedules signature and a $5 processing fee. The OLMS e.LORS data indicates that ‘‘other account for just 23.2% of total Department also estimates that the receipts’’ represent only 8.8% of total disbursements and that the average union president and secretary-treasurer receipts and that the average amount amount that would have to be itemized will take an average of 4 additional that would have to be itemized on the on the schedules is $822,953, or hours (two hours each) to review and schedule is $309,999. Therefore, Form $164,591 per schedule. Therefore, Form sign the form on top of the 2.4 hours LM–2 filers would have to electronically LM–2 filers would have to electronically they already spend reviewing the report at most an average of just 62 other report at most an average of just 33 current form. The additional time for receipts per year (and probably far less disbursements per schedule per year the president and secretary-treasurer to since some receipts will be more than (and probably less since some review and sign the form declines to $5,000). The Department also estimates disbursements will be more than two hours the second year and one hour that on average unions will take an $5,000). the third year as they become more additional (recurring) 2.7 hours of familiar with the revised form. The Department also estimates that on recordkeeping burden. Currently, this Finally, the Department estimates that average unions will take an additional supporting schedule requires some 5% of Form LM–2 filers will submit a (recurring) 22.0 hours of recordkeeping detail (description and amount) for Continuing Hardship Exemption burden to record the name, address, and other receipts but does not require the Request in the first year and that it will date of disbursements. Currently, three date or name and address. The public take 1.0 hour to prepare this request. disbursement supporting schedules comments also suggest that 60% of the The Department further estimates that require some detail (description and national and international unions 3% of Form LM–2 filers will submit a amount) but do not require the date or already maintain written records for the hardship request in the second year and name and address. The public information required by the new ‘‘other that 1% will submit a request in the comments also suggest that many receipts’’ schedule. third year. The Department assumes that unions maintain records as part of their For the five new disbursement most, if not all, of the hardship normal business practice that reflect the schedules (representational activities; exemptions that will be requested will required detail for disbursements, but union administration; general overhead; come from the smaller tier 1 Form LM– that 10 to 40% of unions could not contributions, gifts and grants; and 2 filers. Therefore, the Department political activities and lobbying), the provide all of the detail required by the estimates that there will not be a Department estimates that on average Department’s proposal. reduction or increase in reporting unions will take 10.3 additional hours For the new membership schedule, burden hours aside from the additional (of nonrecurring recordkeeping and the Department estimates that on 1.0 hour to make the request since the reporting burden) to change accounting average unions will take 4.9 additional amount of time to ‘‘cut and paste’’ and structures; develop, test, review, and hours (of nonrecurring burden) to print the reports is not much different document accounting software queries; develop, test, review, and document on average than the time to ‘‘cut and design query reports; prepare a accounting software queries; design paste’’ and electronically submit.

VerDate jul<14>2003 18:45 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00066 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\09OCR2.SGM 09OCR2 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations 58439

The Department estimates the average hours per respondent in the first year respondent in the second year, and reporting and recordkeeping burden for (including non-recurring 536.0 hours per respondent in the third the revised Form LM–2 to be 710.1 implementation costs), 539.4 hours per year. The Department estimates the total

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:10 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00067 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\09OCR2.SGM 09OCR2 ER09OC03.003 58440 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations

annual burden hours for respondents for revised Form LM–2 to be $116.0 million Moreover, as explained above, the the revised Form LM–2 to be 3.4 million in the first year, $83.1 million in the Department believes that it is very hours in the first year, 2.6 million hours second year, and $82.5 million in the unlikely that small unions with in the second and third years. third year (see Table 5). These amounts $250,000 in annual receipts would incur The Department estimates the average include the total cost of the revised many of the costs incurred by the annual cost for the revised Form LM–2 Form LM–2; the cost of the changes typical Form LM–2 filer. Even the AFL– to be $24,271 per respondent in the first implemented in this final rule, as noted CIO, in commenting on the more year (including non-recurring above, is $79.9 million the first year (the burdensome proposed Form LM–2 implementation costs), $17,387 per difference between the combined costs estimated that unions with annual respondent in the second year, and of the revised Form LM–2 plus the new receipts of less than $500,000 would $17,262 per respondent in the third Form T–1 and the cost of the current incur an average cost of just $3,750 for year. The Department also estimates the Form LM–2). The average three-year the proposed changes. total annual cost to respondents for the cost of the final rule is $55.7 million.

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:10 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00068 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\09OCR2.SGM 09OCR2 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations 58441

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:10 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00069 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\09OCR2.SGM 09OCR2 ER09OC03.004 58442 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations

e. Form LM–3 and assumptions are based on the dollar cost estimate is also based on similarity of the Form LM–3 and Form total compensation costs and not hourly The Department also estimates that LM–2 recordkeeping and reporting wage rates. The total annual cost for all 11,356 local unions take an average requirements, the fewer number of respondents is estimated to be $39.0 104.0 hours to collect and report their schedules that need to be reported on million for Form LM–3 (see Table 6). It information on the current Form LM–3. the Form LM–3, as well as the relative should be noted that although it may In addition, the Department assumes differences in the size of the unions that appear that the Department has applied that all Form LM–3 filers will take an complete the two forms. inconsistent dollar costs per hour to the average 8.0 hours for accounting and 4.0 The Department has also updated the burden hour estimates, the dollar costs hours for legal review to complete the average annual cost of complying with per hour naturally differ between forms current form for an average total burden the current Form LM–3 recordkeeping because of the varying amounts of of 116.0 hours per respondent (see Table and reporting requirements to $3,277. accountant time, bookkeeping time, and 2). Further, the Department estimates Again, this figure includes estimates for the time of the union secretary-treasurer that 64.0 hours of the total is for consulting, accounting, legal, and and president associated with each recordkeeping burden and 52.0 hours is programming costs and is a weighted form, that yield different weighted for reporting burden. These estimates average across all respondents. The average costs per hour.

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:10 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00070 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\09OCR2.SGM 09OCR2 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations 58443

It should also be noted that by file Form LM–2 would only have to file 176 hours per year (116 hours for Form increasing the filing threshold for Form the less burdensome Form LM–3. Each LM–3 compared to the 292 hours that LM–2, 501 small unions who currently of these unions will save an average of they are expending to file the current

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:10 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00071 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\09OCR2.SGM 09OCR2 ER09OC03.005 58444 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations

Form LM–2) and altogether save 88,176 The Department estimates the burden develop, test, review, and document hours. In monetary savings, the required for preparing to complete the accounting software queries; design increased threshold amounts to an Form T–1 for all three tiers to be 2.4 query reports; prepare a download average savings of $5,104 per year, or a non-recurring hours to provide the new methodology; and train personnel for total $2.6 million per year. These Form T–1 requirements to the trust, 4.3 each of the schedules. Further, the savings accrue because unions with hours for reviewing the new form and Department also estimates that on annual receipts above $200,000 but less instructions, and 8.0 non-recurring (first average Form T–1 respondents will take than $250,000 will be able to file the year) hours for installing, testing, and 1.2 (recurring) hours to prepare, less burdensome and less costly Form reviewing the OLMS provided software. transmit/report, and report the new LM–3. Additionally, these unions will The time to read and review the form receipts schedule and 1.4 hours to not be required to file Form T–1 if they and instructions is estimated to decline report the new disbursements schedule. have a trust nor will they incur the to 2.0 hours the second year and 1.0 The Department also estimates that on increased costs related to the revised hour the third year as unions and trusts average Form T–1 respondents will take Form LM–2. become more familiar with the revised 8.3 hours (recurring) of recordkeeping form. (see Table 7) burden for each schedule to maintain f. New Form T–1 The Department estimates the average the additional information required by To estimate the burden hours and reporting burden required to complete the final rule. costs for the new Form T–1 three pages one and two of the Form T–1 for For the new Form T–1 disbursements important assumptions were made to each of the three tiers to be 6.1 hours to officers and employees of the trust and the average recordkeeping burden estimate the number of responses. First, schedule the Department estimates that associated with the items on pages one it was assumed that 15% of the 1,574 it will take respondents an average 2.8 and two to be 1.6 hours. These estimates tier 1 LM–2 filers with annual revenues hours (of nonrecurring burden) to are proportionally based on the of from $250,000 to $499,999.99 would develop, test, review, and document recordkeeping and reporting burden file one Form T–1. Second, it was accounting software queries; design estimate for the first two pages of the assumed that 35% of the 3,158 tier 2 query reports; prepare a download current Form LM–4, which are very Form LM–2 filers with annual revenues methodology; and train personnel. similar to the first two pages of the new of from $500,000 to $49.9 million would Further, the Department estimates it Form T–1. The first two pages of Form file an average of 2.6 Form T–1s. Third, will take on average 0.8 hours to LM–4 have 21 items (8 questions that it was assumed that 100% of the 46 tier identify the union, four yes/no prepare, export and transmit or report 3 Form LM–2 filers with annual questions, seven summary numbers for: the new schedule. No additional revenues of $50 million or more would Maximum amount of bonding, number recordkeeping burden is estimated for file an average of five T–1 reports each. of members, total assets, liabilities, the officer and employee disbursement Although 939 Form LM–2 filers report receipts, and disbursements, total schedule because the Department is not having a subsidiary, it is difficult to disbursements to officers, and a space requiring trusts to maintain detailed estimate how many more entities fall for additional information). The first time records over what is kept as normal within the broader definition of trusts or two pages of Form T–1 have 25 items business practice. funds to be reported under the final (14 questions that identify the union The Department also estimates that it rule. and trust, six yes/no questions, just four will take 2.0 hours for the Trust to For each of the three tiers, the summary numbers for total assets, review the Form T–1 and 1.0 hours for Department estimated burden hours for liabilities, receipts, and disbursements, this information to be sent to Form LM– the additional nonrecurring (first year) and a space for additional information). 2 filer. In addition, the Department recordkeeping and reporting For comparison, the first part of Form estimates that the union president and requirements, the recurring LM–3 (before the schedules) has 56 secretary-treasurer will take 4.0 hours to recordkeeping and reporting burden items with two statements on assets, review and sign the form. The time for hours, and a three year annual average liabilities, receipts, and disbursements. the president and secretary-treasurer to for the nonrecurring and recurring For the new receipt and disbursement review and sign the form declines to 2.0 burden hours similar to the way it schedules the Department estimates that hours the second year and 1.0 hour the estimated the burden hours for Form on average T–1 respondents will take third year as they become more familiar LM–2 filers (see previous discussion). 9.8 hours (of nonrecurring burden) to with the revised form.

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:10 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00072 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\09OCR2.SGM 09OCR2 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations 58445

The Department estimates the average third year. The Department estimates The cost estimates are based on wage- reporting and recordkeeping burden for the average annual cost for the new rate data obtained from the the new Form T–1 to be 71.7 hours per Form T–1 to be $1,986 per respondent Department’s Bureau of Labor Statistics respondent in the first year (including in the first year (including non-recurring (BLS) for personnel employed in service non-recurring implementation costs), implementation costs), $934 per industries (i.e., accountant, bookkeeper, 33.9 hours per respondent in the second respondent in the second year, and $838 etc.) and adjusted to be total year, and 30.4 hours per respondent in per respondent in the third year. compensation estimates based on the the third year (see Table 8). The BLS Employer Cost data. The estimates Department estimates the total annual The Department also estimates the used for salaries of labor organization burden hours for respondents for the total annual cost to respondents for the officers and employees are obtained new Form T–1 to be 199,000 hours in new Form T–1 to be $5.5 million in the from the annual financial reports filed the first year, 94,000 hours in the first year, $2.6 million in the second with OLMS and are also adjusted to be second year, and 84,000 hours in the year, and $2.3 million in the third year. total compensation estimates.

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:10 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00073 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\09OCR2.SGM 09OCR2 ER09OC03.006 58446 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:10 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00074 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\09OCR2.SGM 09OCR2 ER09OC03.007 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations 58447

h. Federal Costs Associated With Final K. Environmental Impact Assessment contributed during the reporting period Rule The Department has reviewed the by the labor organization or on the labor The annualized federal cost final rule in accordance with the organization’s behalf or as a result of a associated with revised Form LM–2 and requirements of the National negotiated agreement to which the labor the new Form T–1 is estimated to be Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of organization is a party. A separate report $7.9 million. This includes operational 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.), the shall be filed on Form T–1 for each such expenses such as equipment, overhead, regulations of the Council on trust within 90 days after the end of the and printing as well as salaries and Environmental Quality (40 U.S.C. part labor organization’s fiscal year in the benefits for the OLMS staff in the 1500), and the Department’s NEPA detail required by the instructions National Office and field offices that are procedures (29 CFR part 11). The final accompanying the form and constituting involved with reporting and disclosure rule will not have a significant impact a part thereof, and shall be signed by the activities. The estimate also includes the on the quality of the human president and treasurer, or annualized cost for redesigning the environment, and, thus, the Department corresponding principal officers, of the forms, developing and implementing has not conducted an environmental labor organization. No Form T–1 need the electronic software, and assessment or an environmental impact be filed for a trust if an annual financial implementing digital signature statement. report providing the same information capability. and a similar level of detail is filed with L. Executive Order 13211 (Actions another agency pursuant to federal or G. Executive Order 13045 (Protection of Concerning Regulations That state law, as specified in the Children From Environmental Health Significantly Affect Energy Supply, instructions accompanying Form T–1. Risks and Safety Risks) Distribution, or Use) In addition, an audit that meets the In accordance with Executive Order This final rule is not subject to criteria specified in the Instructions for 13045, the Department has evaluated Executive Order 13211, because it will Form T–1 may be substituted for all but the environmental safety and health not have a significant adverse effect on page 1 of the Form T–1. If, on the date effects of the final rule on children. The the supply, distribution, or use of for filing the annual financial report of Department has determined that the energy. such trust, such labor organization is in trusteeship, the labor organization that final rule will have no effect on List of Subjects in 29 CFR Parts 403 and children. has assumed trusteeship over such 408 subordinate labor organization shall file H. Executive Order 13175 (Consultation Labor unions, Reporting and such report as provided in § 408.5 of and Coordination With Indian Tribal recordkeeping requirements. this chapter. Governments) Text of Final Rule ■ 3. Section 403.5 is amended by: The Department has reviewed this ■ ■ In consideration of the foregoing, the a. In paragraph (a), removing the words final rule in accordance with Executive ‘‘and one copy’’ and removing the Order 13175, and has determined that it Department of Labor, Office of Labor- Management Standards, hereby amends commas preceding and following those does not have ‘‘tribal implications.’’ The words. final rule does not ‘‘have substantial parts 403 and 408 of title 29 of the Code ■ direct effects on one or more Indian of Federal Regulations as set forth below. b. In paragraph (b), removing the tribes, on the relationship between the words ‘‘and one copy’’ and removing the Federal government and Indian tribes, PART 403—LABOR ORGANIZATION commas preceding and following those or on the distribution of power and ANNUAL FINANCIAL REPORTS words. responsibilities between the Federal ■ 1. The authority citation for part 403 is ■ c. Adding a new paragraph (d) to read government and Indian tribes.’’ revised to read as follows: as follows: I. Executive Order 12630 (Governmental Authority: Secs. 202, 207, 208, 73 Stat. § 403.5 Terminal financial report. Actions and Interference With 525, 529 (29 U.S.C. 432, 437, 438); * * * * * Constitutionally Protected Property Secretary’s Order No. 4–2001, 66 FR 29656, May 31, 2001. (d) If a trust in which a labor Rights) organization with $250,000 or more in This final rule is not subject to § 403.2 [Amended] annual receipts is interested loses its Executive Order 12630, Governmental ■ 2. Section 403.2 is amended by: identity through merger, consolidation, Actions and Interference with a. Removing the words ‘‘together with or otherwise, the labor organization Constitutionally Protected Property a true copy thereof’’ at the end of shall, within 30 days after such loss, file Rights, because it does not involve paragraph (a) and removing the comma a terminal report on Form T–1, with the implementation of a policy with takings preceding those words. Office of Labor-Management Standards, implications. ■ b. Adding paragraph (d) to read as signed by the president and treasurer or corresponding principal officers of the J. Executive Order 12988 (Civil Justice follows: labor organization. For purposes of the Reform) § 403.2 Annual financial report. report required by this paragraph, the This final rule has been drafted and * * * * * period covered thereby shall be the reviewed in accordance with Executive (d) Every labor organization with portion of the trust’s fiscal year ending Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform, and annual receipts of $250,000 or more on the effective date of the loss of its will not unduly burden the Federal shall, except as otherwise provided, file reporting identity. court system. The final rule has been a report on Form T–1 for every trust in ■ 4. Section 403.8 is amended to: written so as to minimize litigation and which the labor organization is provide a clear legal standard for interested, as defined in section 3(l) of ■ a. Designate the existing text as affected conduct, and has been reviewed the Act, 29 U.S.C. 402(l), that has gross paragraph (a). carefully to eliminate drafting errors and annual receipts of $250,000 or more, ■ b. Add new paragraphs (b) and (c) to ambiguities. and to which $10,000 or more was read as follows:

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:10 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00075 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\09OCR2.SGM 09OCR2 58448 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations

§ 403.8 Dissemination and verification of or negotiating strategy or individuals § 408.5 [Amended] reports. paid by the labor organization to work ■ * * * * * in a non-union facility in order to assist 6. Section 408.5 is amended by: (b)(1) If a labor organization is the labor organization in organizing ■ a. Adding the words ‘‘and any Form T– required to file a report under this part employees, provided that such 1 reports’’ after the words ‘‘on behalf of using the Form LM–2 and indicates that individuals are not employees of the the subordinate labor organization the it has failed or refused to disclose labor organization who receive more annual financial report’’ and before the information required by the Form than $10,000 in the aggregate in the words ‘‘required by part 403 of this concerning any disbursement, or receipt reporting year from the union. chapter’’. not otherwise reported on Statement B, (3) This provision does not apply to ■ to an individual or entity in the amount disclosure that is otherwise prohibited b. Removing the words ‘‘together with of $5,000 or more, or any two or more by law or that would endanger the a true copy thereof’’ at the end of the disbursements, or receipts not otherwise health or safety of an individual. section and removing the comma reported on Statement B, to an (c) In all other cases, a union member preceding those words. individual or entity that, in the has the burden of establishing ‘‘just Signed in Washington, DC this 2 day of aggregate, amount to $5,000 or more, cause’’ for purposes of paragraph (a) of October, 2003. because disclosure of such information this section. may be adverse to the organization’s Victoria A. Lipnic, legitimate interests, then the failure or PART 408—LABOR ORGANIZATION Assistant Secretary for Employment refusal to disclose the information shall TRUSTEESHIP REPORTS Standards. be deemed ‘‘just cause’’ for purposes of Appendix paragraph (a) of this section. ■ 5. The authority citation for part 408 is (2) Disclosure may be adverse to a revised to read as follows: Note: This appendix, which will not labor organization’s legitimate interests Authority: Secs. 202, 207, 208, 73 Stat. appear in the Code of Federal Regulations, under this paragraph if disclosure 525, 529 (29 U.S.C. 432, 437, 438); contains the revised Form LM–2 and the new would reveal confidential information Secretary’s Order No. 4–2001, 66 FR 29656, Form T–1 and the instructions for these concerning the organization’s organizing May 31, 2001. forms.

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:10 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00076 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\09OCR2.SGM 09OCR2 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations 58449

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:10 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00077 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\09OCR2.SGM 09OCR2 ER09OC03.008 58450 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:10 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00078 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\09OCR2.SGM 09OCR2 ER09OC03.009 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations 58451

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:10 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00079 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\09OCR2.SGM 09OCR2 ER09OC03.010 58452 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:10 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00080 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\09OCR2.SGM 09OCR2 ER09OC03.011 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations 58453

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:10 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00081 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\09OCR2.SGM 09OCR2 ER09OC03.012 58454 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:10 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00082 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\09OCR2.SGM 09OCR2 ER09OC03.013 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations 58455

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:10 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00083 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\09OCR2.SGM 09OCR2 ER09OC03.014 58456 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:10 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00084 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\09OCR2.SGM 09OCR2 ER09OC03.015 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations 58457

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:10 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00085 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\09OCR2.SGM 09OCR2 ER09OC03.016 58458 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:10 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00086 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\09OCR2.SGM 09OCR2 ER09OC03.017 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations 58459

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:10 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00087 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\09OCR2.SGM 09OCR2 ER09OC03.018 58460 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:10 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00088 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\09OCR2.SGM 09OCR2 ER09OC03.019 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations 58461

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:10 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00089 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\09OCR2.SGM 09OCR2 ER09OC03.020 58462 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:10 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00090 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\09OCR2.SGM 09OCR2 ER09OC03.021 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations 58463

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:10 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00091 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\09OCR2.SGM 09OCR2 ER09OC03.022 58464 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:10 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00092 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\09OCR2.SGM 09OCR2 ER09OC03.023 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations 58465

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:10 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00093 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\09OCR2.SGM 09OCR2 ER09OC03.024 58466 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:10 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00094 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\09OCR2.SGM 09OCR2 ER09OC03.025 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations 58467

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:10 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00095 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\09OCR2.SGM 09OCR2 ER09OC03.026 58468 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:10 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00096 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\09OCR2.SGM 09OCR2 ER09OC03.027 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations 58469

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:10 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00097 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\09OCR2.SGM 09OCR2 ER09OC03.028 58470 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:10 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00098 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\09OCR2.SGM 09OCR2 ER09OC03.029 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations 58471

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:10 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00099 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\09OCR2.SGM 09OCR2 ER09OC03.030 58472 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:10 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00100 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\09OCR2.SGM 09OCR2 ER09OC03.031 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations 58473

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:10 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00101 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\09OCR2.SGM 09OCR2 ER09OC03.032 58474 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:10 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00102 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\09OCR2.SGM 09OCR2 ER09OC03.033 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations 58475

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:10 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00103 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\09OCR2.SGM 09OCR2 ER09OC03.034 58476 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:10 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00104 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\09OCR2.SGM 09OCR2 ER09OC03.035 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations 58477

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:10 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00105 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\09OCR2.SGM 09OCR2 ER09OC03.036 58478 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:10 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00106 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\09OCR2.SGM 09OCR2 ER09OC03.037 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations 58479

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:10 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00107 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\09OCR2.SGM 09OCR2 ER09OC03.038 58480 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:10 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00108 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\09OCR2.SGM 09OCR2 ER09OC03.039 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations 58481

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:10 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00109 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\09OCR2.SGM 09OCR2 ER09OC03.040 58482 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:10 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00110 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\09OCR2.SGM 09OCR2 ER09OC03.041 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations 58483

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:10 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00111 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\09OCR2.SGM 09OCR2 ER09OC03.042 58484 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:10 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00112 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\09OCR2.SGM 09OCR2 ER09OC03.043 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations 58485

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:10 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00113 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\09OCR2.SGM 09OCR2 ER09OC03.044 58486 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:10 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00114 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\09OCR2.SGM 09OCR2 ER09OC03.045 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations 58487

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:10 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00115 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\09OCR2.SGM 09OCR2 ER09OC03.046 58488 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:10 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00116 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\09OCR2.SGM 09OCR2 ER09OC03.047 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations 58489

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:10 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00117 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\09OCR2.SGM 09OCR2 ER09OC03.048 58490 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:10 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00118 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\09OCR2.SGM 09OCR2 ER09OC03.049 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations 58491

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:10 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00119 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\09OCR2.SGM 09OCR2 ER09OC03.050 58492 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:10 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00120 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\09OCR2.SGM 09OCR2 ER09OC03.051 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations 58493

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:10 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00121 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\09OCR2.SGM 09OCR2 ER09OC03.052 58494 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:10 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00122 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\09OCR2.SGM 09OCR2 ER09OC03.053 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations 58495

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:10 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00123 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\09OCR2.SGM 09OCR2 ER09OC03.054 58496 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:10 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00124 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\09OCR2.SGM 09OCR2 ER09OC03.055 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations 58497

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:10 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00125 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\09OCR2.SGM 09OCR2 ER09OC03.056 58498 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:10 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00126 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\09OCR2.SGM 09OCR2 ER09OC03.057 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations 58499

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:10 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00127 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\09OCR2.SGM 09OCR2 ER09OC03.058 58500 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:10 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00128 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\09OCR2.SGM 09OCR2 ER09OC03.059 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations 58501

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:10 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00129 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\09OCR2.SGM 09OCR2 ER09OC03.060 58502 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:10 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00130 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\09OCR2.SGM 09OCR2 ER09OC03.061 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations 58503

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:10 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00131 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\09OCR2.SGM 09OCR2 ER09OC03.062 58504 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:10 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00132 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\09OCR2.SGM 09OCR2 ER09OC03.063 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations 58505

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:10 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00133 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\09OCR2.SGM 09OCR2 ER09OC03.064 58506 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:10 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00134 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\09OCR2.SGM 09OCR2 ER09OC03.065 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations 58507

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:10 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00135 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\09OCR2.SGM 09OCR2 ER09OC03.066 58508 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:10 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00136 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\09OCR2.SGM 09OCR2 ER09OC03.067 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations 58509

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:10 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00137 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\09OCR2.SGM 09OCR2 ER09OC03.068 58510 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:10 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00138 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\09OCR2.SGM 09OCR2 ER09OC03.069 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations 58511

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:10 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00139 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\09OCR2.SGM 09OCR2 ER09OC03.070 58512 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:10 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00140 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\09OCR2.SGM 09OCR2 ER09OC03.071 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations 58513

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:10 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00141 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\09OCR2.SGM 09OCR2 ER09OC03.072 58514 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:10 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00142 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\09OCR2.SGM 09OCR2 ER09OC03.073 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations 58515

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:10 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00143 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\09OCR2.SGM 09OCR2 ER09OC03.074 58516 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:10 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00144 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\09OCR2.SGM 09OCR2 ER09OC03.075 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations 58517

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:10 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00145 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\09OCR2.SGM 09OCR2 ER09OC03.076 58518 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations

VerDate jul<14>2003 18:45 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00146 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\09OCR2.SGM 09OCR2 ER09OC03.077 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations 58519

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:10 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00147 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\09OCR2.SGM 09OCR2 ER09OC03.078 58520 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:10 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00148 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\09OCR2.SGM 09OCR2 ER09OC03.079 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations 58521

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:10 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00149 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\09OCR2.SGM 09OCR2 ER09OC03.080 58522 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:10 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00150 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\09OCR2.SGM 09OCR2 ER09OC03.081 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations 58523

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:10 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00151 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\09OCR2.SGM 09OCR2 ER09OC03.082 58524 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:10 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00152 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\09OCR2.SGM 09OCR2 ER09OC03.083 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations 58525

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:10 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00153 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\09OCR2.SGM 09OCR2 ER09OC03.084 58526 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:10 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00154 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\09OCR2.SGM 09OCR2 ER09OC03.085 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations 58527

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:10 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00155 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\09OCR2.SGM 09OCR2 ER09OC03.086 58528 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:10 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00156 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\09OCR2.SGM 09OCR2 ER09OC03.087 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations 58529

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:10 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00157 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\09OCR2.SGM 09OCR2 ER09OC03.088 58530 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:10 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00158 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\09OCR2.SGM 09OCR2 ER09OC03.089 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations 58531

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:10 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00159 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\09OCR2.SGM 09OCR2 ER09OC03.090 58532 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:10 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00160 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\09OCR2.SGM 09OCR2 ER09OC03.091 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations 58533

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:10 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00161 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\09OCR2.SGM 09OCR2 ER09OC03.092 58534 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:10 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00162 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\09OCR2.SGM 09OCR2 ER09OC03.093 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations 58535

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:10 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00163 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\09OCR2.SGM 09OCR2 ER09OC03.094 58536 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:10 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00164 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\09OCR2.SGM 09OCR2 ER09OC03.095 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations 58537

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:10 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00165 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\09OCR2.SGM 09OCR2 ER09OC03.096 58538 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations

[FR Doc. 03–25487 Filed 10–8–03; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4510–CP–C

VerDate jul<14>2003 17:10 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00166 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\09OCR2.SGM 09OCR2 ER09OC03.097 Thursday, October 9, 2003

Part III

Department of Labor Employment and Training Administration

20 CFR Part 604 Unemployment Compensation—Trust Fund Integrity Rule; Birth and Adoption Unemployment Compensation; Removal of Regulations; Final Rule

VerDate jul<14>2003 20:10 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4717 Sfmt 4717 E:\FR\FM\09OCR3.SGM 09OCR3 58540 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR The preamble to the NPRM contained 4, 2002).) After thoroughly analyzing the a detailed explanation of the reasons for A&A requirement, the Department Employment and Training the removal of the BAA–UC regulations. concluded that ‘‘A&A tests involuntary Administration In order to adequately respond to unemployment due to a continuing lack comments, and to eliminate the need for of suitable work’’ and that the ‘‘BAA– 20 CFR Part 604 readers to refer to the NPRM for context, UC rule not only failed to recognize this, RIN 1205–AB33 much of the material in the NPRM is but is in fact contrary to the A&A repeated in this document. requirement.’’ (Id. at 72125.) Unemployment Compensation—Trust B. Background on BAA–UC C. Effect of Repeal Fund Integrity Rule; Birth and Adoption Unemployment Under BAA–UC, states were To date no state has elected to Compensation; Removal of permitted, as part of a voluntary participate in the BAA–UC experiment. Regulations experiment, to amend their state UC Therefore, terminating the experiment laws to provide partial wage will not result in any state withdrawing AGENCY: Employment and Training replacement for parents taking approved benefits it previously granted. The only Administration, Labor. leave, or otherwise leaving employment, effect of the removal of the regulations ACTION: Final rule. following the birth or placement for is that it arguably reduces state adoption of a child. In qualifying for flexibility because a state could no SUMMARY: The Department of Labor UC, the individual would not have to be longer elect to use its unemployment (Department) is issuing this final rule to able and available (A&A) for work in the fund to pay BAA–UC. The Department’s remove the Birth and Adoption sense traditionally used by the position on federal law requirements Unemployment Compensation (BAA– Department. Instead, parents of will revert to that in existence before UC) regulations. Those regulations newborns and newly-adopted children publication of the BAA–UC rule. Thus, permitted an experimental opportunity would be viewed as meeting the federal a state must require that to be eligible for states to provide, in the form of A&A requirements (as implemented for UC an individual must, among other unemployment compensation (UC), through state law) under the premise things, demonstrate current labor force partial wage replacement for parents that the parents’ long-term attachment attachment by meeting the A&A taking approved leave or otherwise to the workforce would be strengthened requirements. Each state remains free to leaving employment while caring for and promoted by the payment of UC, create a paid family leave-type program their newborns or newly-adopted which would provide some financial using state moneys from sources other children. support to accompany the introduction than the state’s unemployment taxes EFFECTIVE DATE: This final rule is of a new child into the family. deposited into its unemployment fund. As the Department noted during the effective November 10, 2003. D. Policy Reasons for Repeal FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: final rulemaking in 2000, the BAA–UC The UC program is designed to Gerard Hildebrand, Office of Workforce experiment was ‘‘a reversal of our provide temporary wage insurance for Security, ETA, U.S. Department of position taken in 1997,’’ when the individuals who are unemployed due to Labor, 200 Constitution Avenue, NW., Department advised a state that UC lack of suitable work. This would Room C–4518, Washington, DC 20210. could not be used in this manner. (65 generally not be the case for parents Telephone: (202) 693–3038 (voice) (this FR 37212 (June 13, 2000).) The BAA–UC who would avail themselves of BAA– is not a toll-free number); 1–800–326– experiment was described as ‘‘part of an UC. Such parents would be out of work 2577 (TDD); facsimile: (202) 693–2874; evolving interpretation of the federal because they both initiated their e-mail: [email protected]. A&A requirements that recognizes practical and economic realities.’’ (Id.) separation from the workforce and are SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Simply stated, the Department currently unavailable for work; they I. Introduction interpreted the A&A requirements in a would have effectively withdrawn from new and different way that emphasized the labor market for a period of time. To A. Overview the individual’s potential long-term the extent that BAA–UC is based on On June 13, 2000, the Department attachment to the workforce. BAA–UC labor force attachment, it is based on an published the BAA–UC Final Rule in was intended to test whether assumption of increased future the Federal Register at 65 FR 37210. individuals would be more attached to attachment to the labor force. The rule was codified at 20 CFR Part the workforce, even if their current Individuals who take approved leave 604. It implemented an experimental separation from the workforce was a when an employer is holding a job open opportunity for state agencies conscious decision on their part due to for them are not available for that work responsible for administering the personal and family reasons relating to or other suitable work. As a result, Federal-State UC program to provide the birth or adoption of a child. BAA–UC paid to these individuals partial wage replacement for parents Significantly, since the Department would be a payment for voluntarily taking approved leave, or otherwise made the BAA–UC experiment available taking time off work rather than leaving employment, following the birth in 2000, no state has elected to payment due to lack of suitable work. or placement for adoption of a child. On participate. As such, it would be paid leave, which December 4, 2002, the Department Following a review of the BAA–UC was not envisioned in the design of the published a Notice of Proposed Final Rule as part of a Department-wide UC program. Rulemaking (NPRM) proposing to review of all regulations, the We again note that no state has remove the BAA–UC regulations in the Department announced, in the NPRM, enacted BAA–UC legislation. The Federal Register. (67 FR 72122 that it proposed to remove the BAA–UC limited flexibility provided under BAA– (December 4, 2002).) The NPRM invited regulations because it had determined UC may be one factor. In 2002, the public to comment over a 60-day that ‘‘the BAA–UC experiment is poor California passed legislation (enacted period, ending February 3, 2003. policy and a misapplication of federal Senate Bill 1661; Chapter No. 901) that Comments were accepted by mail and UC law relating to the A&A contains features of BAA–UC, as well as electronic media. requirements.’’ (67 FR 72122 (December many features beyond the scope of

VerDate jul<14>2003 20:10 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\09OCR3.SGM 09OCR3 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations 58541

BAA–UC. Notably, it authorizes rapid decline in fund balances compensation. For example, the requirement payments beyond the scope of BAA–UC undercuts this argument and that compensation be paid through public to certain individuals who take time off emphasizes the need for states to employment offices, or the requirement that from work to care for a sick or injured preserve the integrity of their States make [certain information] available to agencies of the United States charged with child, spouse, parent or domestic unemployment funds for providing the administration of public works or partner as well as for foster care temporary income support to the assistance through public employment, are placements of a new child. The involuntarily unemployed. obviously without reasonable basis if applied California law does not use its to payments to disabled individuals. Many of E. Legal Reasons for Repeal unemployment fund as a funding the standards contained [in the experience source, but instead uses employee The Department and its predecessors rating provisions] are similarly without contributions to its Temporary (the Social Security Board and the reasonable basis if applied to a State law for Disability Insurance fund. Similarly, the Federal Security Agency) have the payment of disability compensation. interpreted and enforced federal A&A For these reasons, the Board is of the BAA–UC rule limits the types of opinion that the [UC titles of the SSA] are eligibility conditions that may be requirements since the inception of the applicable solely to State laws for the imposed on individuals. For example, federal-state UC program. Although no payment of compensation to individuals who the BAA–UC rule at 20 CFR 604.20 lists A&A requirements are explicitly stated are able to work and are unemployed by industry, employer size, or the in federal law, the Department and its reason of lack of work. [Emphasis added.] predecessors interpreted four provisions unemployment status of a family That involuntary unemployment due of federal UC law, contained in the member as unacceptable eligibility to lack of suitable work was the key test Social Security Act (SSA) and FUTA, as factors. is supported by the Congressional requiring that states condition the Other flexibility issues have also been Committee Reports: identified. For example, the Department payment of UC upon a claimant being expressed concern with a state bill that able to and available for work. Two of The essential idea in unemployment appeared to be close to enactment these provisions, at Section 3304(a)(4), compensation* * * is the accumulation of FUTA, and Section 303(a)(5), SSA, limit reserves in time of employment from which because it appeared to be inconsistent partial compensation may be paid to workers with Section 3304(a)(6)(A) of the withdrawals, with specific exceptions, who become unemployed and are unable to Federal Unemployment Tax Act from a state’s unemployment fund to the find work. * * * In normal times it will (FUTA). This bill would have made payment of ‘‘compensation.’’ Section enable most workers who lose their jobs to BAA–UC mandatory for all services 3306(h), FUTA, defines ‘‘compensation’’ tide themselves over, until they get back to performed in the state, except for as ‘‘cash benefits payable to individuals their old work or find other employment services performed for certain with respect to their unemployment.’’ without having to resort to relief. * * * [H. governmental and nonprofit entities that The A&A requirements provide a federal Rep. 615, 74th Cong. 1st Sess. 1935 Page 5.] could elect to participate. Because test of an individual’s continuing The essential idea in unemployment compensation is the creation of reserves Section 3304(a)(6)(A), FUTA, requires ‘‘unemployment.’’ (The meaning of during periods of employment from which that, with respect to these governmental ‘‘unemployment’’ in this statutory compensation is paid to workmen who lose and nonprofit services, UC must be paid framework is discussed below.) The their positions when employment slackens ‘‘in the same amount, on the same other two provisions, found in Section and who cannot find other work. terms, and subject to the same 3304(a)(1), FUTA, and Section 303(a)(2), Unemployment compensation differs from conditions’’ as UC payable on other SSA, require that compensation ‘‘be relief in that payments are made as a matter services performed under state law, the paid through public employment of right, not on a needs basis, but only while Department advised the state that this offices.’’ The requirement that UC be the worker is involuntarily unemployed. legislation, if enacted, would be * * * Payment of compensation is paid through the public employment conditioned upon continued involuntary inconsistent with FUTA. system (the purpose of which is to find unemployment. Beneficiaries must accept Finally, when the BAA–UC Final Rule people jobs) ties the payment of UC to suitable employment offered them or they was issued in 2000, state unemployment both an individual’s ability to work and lose their right to compensation. [S. Rep. 628, funds were in sounder financial availability for work. These A&A 74th Cong. 1st Sess. 1935 Page 11.] condition than today. Since the requirements serve, in effect, to limit UC For the great bulk of industrial workers publication of the rule, many states have eligibility. unemployment compensation will mean seen a drastic decline in their The basis for the federal A&A security during the period following unemployment fund balances, and most requirements was summarized in a unemployment while they are seeking states are below our recommended 1.00 another job, or are waiting to return to their March 11, 1939, letter from the Chair of old position. [Id. Page 12.] average high-cost multiple. (The average the Social Security Board to the high-cost multiple indicates how many Governor of California, concerning As illustrated by this history, the UC years of benefits a state has available whether the state could make payments program is designed to provide under a recessionary scenario. A rating with respect to temporary disability temporary wage insurance for of 1.00 indicates the state has one year’s from its unemployment fund: individuals who are unemployed due to worth of benefits on hand. The lack of suitable work. In order to be The entire legislative history [of the UC eligible for UC, an individual must be Department recommends a 1.00 high- titles of the original SSA] including the cost multiple as a reasonable margin of Report to the President of the Committee on able to accept suitable work if it is safety to ensure fund solvency in Economic Security, the report of the House offered, must be available to accept that periods of high unemployment.) Indeed, Committee on Ways and Means, the report of work and must not refuse suitable work at the time BAA–UC was created, one of the Senate Committee on Finance, and the if offered. In other words, an individual the policy arguments made for using a Congressional debates all indicate, either may not voluntarily make him/herself state’s unemployment fund for BAA–UC expressly or by implication, the unavailable for offered suitable work. was the claim that states had compensation contemplated under [these Rather, a fundamental premise of the titles] is compensation to individuals who ‘‘surpluses’’ in their unemployment are able to work but are unemployed by UC program is that benefits are only funds, which could be made reason of lack of work. Several provisions of available to individuals who are immediately available to implement a those titles are meaningful only if applied to involuntarily unemployed because there BAA–UC experiment. The sudden and State laws for the payment of such is no suitable work available to them.

VerDate jul<14>2003 20:10 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\09OCR3.SGM 09OCR3 58542 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations

The federal A&A requirements [Unemployment insurance] is not designed this preamble. All timely comments implement this design by testing to supplant, but rather to supplement the were considered and all correspondence whether the fact that an individual did public-works projects which must absorb the is included in the rulemaking record. not work for any week was involuntary bulk of persons who may be disinherited for Most commenters were individuals, long periods of time by private industry. including many who identified due to the unavailability of work. (Note * * * A provision in the present bill requires that the A&A test looks only to whether that the Federal tax rebate shall be used to themselves as human resource the unemployment is due to lack of encourage a close connection between State professionals. Comments were also work for each given week of benefits job-insurance laws and unemployment- received from employers; groups claimed. That is, it looks to why the exchange offices. This provision emphasizes representing employer interests; groups individual is unemployed for a given the fact that the [monetary] relief of existent representing the human resource week; it does not look to why the unemployment is but a subordinate phase of community; labor unions and groups individual was separated from the main task of providing work for all who representing various other interests. employment, except to the extent that are strong and willing. [79 Cong. Rec. 9284 (June 14, 1934).] B. Reasons for Repeal the individual may have not been A&A for the week of the separation.) Since Thus, Congress intended the UC (1) Need for Paid Family Leave system to be subordinate to the main the BAA–UC experiment did not Many commenters opposing removal task of getting people back to work, examine the federal A&A requirements of the rule argued that paid family leave which is, as noted above, implemented from this perspective, it permits the is needed because of financial barriers through the A&A requirements. BAA– payment of UC to individuals for whom to taking family leave. Some noted that UC is not consistent with this goal suitable work may exist, thus the final rule creating BAA–UC cited because it encourages parents to refuse contradicting the basic purpose of the research supporting this need and that available work. A&A requirements. the NPRM proposing removal did not Finally, as noted in the Social The legislative history quoted above refute this research. Some also noted Security Board’s letter, experience indicates that eligibility for UC is not that the NPRM did not refute research rating standards are meaningless if the based on the individual’s personal need, that paid family leave might have test of involuntary unemployment due except to the extent that his/her ‘‘need’’ positive effects on workforce to lack of work is not used. Experience is created by lack of suitable work. attachment. Others claimed the rating was originally established to BAA–UC, however, extended eligibility rulemaking would have a negative effect ensure an equitable distribution among for UC to parents based on on family life. employers of the cost of the system, and considerations of compelling personal This rulemaking does not address to encourage employers to stabilize their or family need regardless of whether whether paid family leave is needed or work forces. (‘‘Credits’’ will be provided there is a lack of suitable work. While desirable. Thus, there is no need to ‘‘in the form of lower contribution rates the idea of providing financial discuss the research discussed in the * * * to employers who have stabilized assistance to parents or families BAA–UC Final Rule. The purpose of their employment.’’ (S. Rep. 628, 74th experiencing birth or adoption may be this rulemaking is to address whether a Cong. 1st Sess. 1935 Page 14.)) BAA–UC admirable, it is not in keeping with the state’s unemployment fund is the contradicts the intent of experience fundamental limitation of paying UC appropriate vehicle to fund family leave rating because it allows payments based only to individuals who are payments. As will be discussed in the on an individual’s own actions without unemployed due to lack of suitable next section, the removal of the BAA– regard to an employer’s attempt to work. UC rule does not prohibit states from stabilize employment by offering The legislative history also establishes establishing paid family leave programs suitable work to its current and former a link between the public works nor does it prohibit integrating employees. Although experience rating programs in existence in 1935 and the administration of these programs into a was discussed in the BAA–UC final UC program that bears on the A&A state’s UC administrative infrastructure. rulemaking, that discussion did not requirements. As noted in the Social Because no state will be required to recognize that stabilization of Security Board’s contemporaneous repeal an existing BAA–UC program, employment is one of the primary interpretation, an SSA provision and because other avenues are available purposes of experience rating. (Section 303(a)(7)) requires that states to states for creating a paid leave make available to agencies of the United II. Responses to Comments program, the Department does not States charged with the administration believe the rule would preclude paid A. Overview of public works or assistance through family leave or have a negative effect on public employment, the name, address, About 6,200 pieces of correspondence family life. Rather, by preserving the ordinary occupation, and employment commenting on the NPRM were integrity of state unemployment funds, status of UC recipients. This submitted by the close of the comment this rule helps assure that adequate requirement is predicated upon the period on February 3, 2003. Roughly 74 funds will be available to benefit understanding that UC recipients must percent of the commenters favored workers unemployed due to lack of be out of work due to lack of available removal of the BAA–UC rule while the suitable work (and, as a result, the work. It would make no sense to refer remainder opposed removal. Some families of those workers) under the UC an individual, for whom work was commenters addressed areas beyond the program. available, to a public works program, scope of the NPRM, which was the which should be the employer of last removal of the BAA–UC regulation. (2) Flexibility resort. Senator Wagner, who introduced These commenters addressed such Many commenters opposing removal the SSA in the Senate, described the matters as reforms to the UC program, of the rule cited preservation of state relationship between the proposed UC including the eligibility of part-time flexibility as a reason for maintaining program and the government’s public workers and other expansions of the rule. Commenters opposing removal works programs (as well as public eligibility. Because these areas are argued that there is state interest in employment offices) as follows in the beyond the scope of the proposed flexible approaches, including BAA– floor debate on the SSA: rulemaking, they are not discussed in UC, as indicated by the number of

VerDate jul<14>2003 20:10 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\09OCR3.SGM 09OCR3 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations 58543

BAA–UC legislative proposals in the level of solvency. For example, one they relate to the A&A requirements. states. Several observed that ‘‘in 2002, commenter indicated that even though Generally, those favoring removal of the over 20 states had legislation introduced reserves have dropped from pre- rule supported the Department’s looking at this issue.’’ One commenter recession levels, the UC ‘‘funding analysis that these situations are argued that repeal would have a situation is exceptionally well materially different from the BAA–UC ‘‘chilling effect’’ on state legislatures’ positioned to handle the demand for experiment and could not be used as a attempts to create paid family leave benefits.’’ We believe our basis for supporting BAA–UC. while others asserted that the characterization of the fund balance Opponents of removing the rule argued Department made the BAA–UC situation is accurate. Indeed, arguments that these situations are approved experiment available only two years ago that the funds are well positioned can ‘‘exceptions’’ to the A&A requirement. and many states have just begun the be made only because Congress The preamble to the BAA–UC Final process of deciding whether to adopt it. distributed $8 billion to states to assist Rule noted that these four situations It was also observed that the approach in the payment of UC and for other affect individuals’ ability ‘‘to meet the taken in California (discussed above) is purposes, in recognition that fund levels stricter interpretations of the A&A not available in all states, while the UC were dropping. (Section 209 of Public requirements.’’ (65 FR 37213 (June 13, system offers a long-standing, stable Law 107–147, March 9, 2002.) This 2000).) Although that preamble also infrastructure available in all states. infusion of funds on average increased noted that none of these situations The only lack of flexibility that will state balances by about 20 percent at the ‘‘precisely parallels the payment of be caused by removal of the BAA–UC time of the distribution and cannot be BAA–UC, they do operate on the same rule, however, is that states will not be expected to recur in future downturns. premises: that situations exist in which able to use their unemployment fund Some commenters opposing removal it is important to allow a flexible moneys to pay workers who take of the BAA–UC rule objected to demonstration of availability and in approved leave, or otherwise leave including all states, even those with which attachment to the workforce can employment, following the birth or ‘‘abundant reserves,’’ in our solvency be demonstrated, and indeed placement for adoption of a child. States arguments. One commenter noted that strengthened, without requiring a can use other means of funding paid the Department could establish a current demonstration of availability.’’ leave programs. Protecting the integrity solvency standard as a condition of a (Id.) However, the preamble also noted of unemployment fund moneys against state adopting or implementing BAA– that ‘‘paying BAA–UC is a departure use for non-UC purposes was a major UC, and indicated that several from past interpretations.’’ (Id.) The area of concern for most commenters commenters on the NPRM proposing the preamble of the NPRM (67 FR 72124– supporting removal. Among other BAA–UC experiment had suggested 72125 (December 4, 2002)) noted that, things, these commenters characterized establishing such a standard. Other unlike BAA–UC, none of these BAA–UC as a ‘‘back door’’ expansion of commenters criticized the Department situations permit a voluntary the Family and Medical Leave Act for not taking action to stop state tax withdrawal from the workforce. Instead, (FMLA); as putting ‘‘at risk the safety cuts which they claim precipitated all of these situations require that an net for unemployed workers;’’ as solvency problems. However, as the individual initially be A&A for work. ‘‘illegal;’’ and a ‘‘misuse’’ of the UC Department noted in the final rule These situations represent a practical program. We agree that, as discussed creating the BAA–UC experiment, it has response to situations in which it does elsewhere, BAA–UC fundamentally ‘‘never interpreted Federal law to not seem sensible to apply a strict differs from UC. require ‘‘solvency’’’ of state application of A&A to an individual While we acknowledge that unemployment funds. (65 FR 37216 who is initially A&A for suitable work. California’s approach is limited to those (June 13, 2000).) Even if the Department In particular: states with temporary disability had authority to mandate a solvency • Illness. The interpretation programs, nothing in federal law standard, we believe it would be poor pertaining to illness applies only to prohibits a state from using the existing public policy to create a federal individuals who initially meet the A&A UC administrative infrastructure for standard that would require states to requirements, but who then become ill other programs, providing it properly deny specific types of benefits based on and who do not refuse suitable work. allocates the costs of administration fund balances. Until work is refused, the between the UC and non-UC programs. unemployment is due to lack of work, We also note that one commenter, citing (4) Whether Certain Situations Are which is what the A&A requirements state interest in paid leave, indicated the Exceptions to A&A are designed to test. The A&A innovation and flexibility that several Most commenters agreed with the requirements are preserved because the states have already demonstrated in Department’s position that BAA–UC is individual must initially demonstrate fashioning an ‘‘at-home infant care’’ inconsistent with the federal A&A availability before the illness and must program where ‘‘low-income working requirements. Some also argued that be held ineligible if s/he refuses suitable parents receive subsidies’’ from non-UC there is an ‘‘involuntariness’’ work offered during the illness. funds for caring for infants at home. requirement in federal UC law. Others • Jury Duty. The interpretation disagreed, stating that the Department pertaining to jury duty applies only to (3) Unemployment Fund Balances has allowed exceptions to A&A; that individuals who initially meet the A&A Most of the commenters supporting there are no specific A&A requirements requirements, but who are then called removal of the BAA–UC rule expressed in federal law; that Congress expressly for jury duty. The unemployment concern with the solvency of state rejected A&A requirements; and that continues to be due to a lack of work. unemployment funds. Several federal law contains no The A&A requirements are preserved commenters opposing removal ‘‘involuntariness’’ requirement (which because the individual must initially disagreed with our assessment of the is a basic underpinning of the federal demonstrate availability before being solvency of state funds, which is that A&A requirements). called for jury duty and because most states have seen a drastic decline Commenters addressed four attendance at jury duty may be taken as in fund balances and most states are situations—illness, jury duty, approved evidence that the individual would below the Department’s recommended training, and temporary lay-offs ‘‘as otherwise be available for work. Even if

VerDate jul<14>2003 20:10 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\09OCR3.SGM 09OCR3 58544 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations

the individual has a job, the individual lay-offs, BAA–UC did not require that looking for new workers; indeed, most would have to report for jury duty. the individual be available for at least employers will not hire individuals on • Approved training. Approved one job; an offer of suitable work could temporary lay-offs. training is limited to situations where be refused with no effect on eligibility. It does not follow that these situations the state, not the individual, determines (One commenter noted a provision of a support an argument that BAA–UC- that short-term training will improve an state’s law that ‘‘waived’’ availability for eligible individuals are A&A. In all of individual’s job prospects and is individuals on temporary lay-off. In the above situations an individual could appropriate and necessary. In other response, we note that, even under this be denied for failing to be A&A. Failure words, the state has determined that the provision, individuals must remain to attend jury duty or approved training training enhances the individual’s available for the job from which they will result in a denial for failure to be availability for work by making him/her were laid off.) These precedents differ A&A; failure by an ill individual to qualified for a wider range of jobs. The from BAA–UC in that they do not accept suitable employment or failure to Committee Report explaining this permit an individual to voluntarily accept recall from a temporary lay-off provision noted that Congress remove him/herself from being available will, at a minimum, result in a denial considered ‘‘training in occupational for suitable work for a given week. due to failure to be A&A. (We note that skills * * * so important to the BAA–UC, on the other hand, allowed states also impose a disqualification for employability of the individual’’ payment to parents who have initiated failure to accept suitable employment.) because ‘‘training is frequently their separation from the workforce and Conversely, under BAA–UC, an necessary for obtaining new whose personal situation, rather than individual could refuse work without employment.’’ S. Rep. 91–752 the lack of available suitable work, any effect on current eligibility. As one U.S.C.C.A.N. 3606, 3625 (1970). makes them unavailable for commenter supporting removal noted, Attendance at such training is accepted employment. the BAA–UC rule was ‘‘premised on the as evidence of availability for work. One commenter noted that extraordinary assertion that ‘‘able and Indeed, if the individual refuses individuals on temporary lay-off are available’’ somehow can be interpreted training, or fails to attend training, the ‘‘not ‘‘involuntarily [unemployed] due to mean ‘unavailable now but perhaps states must evaluate eligibility under to lack of work’’ since they voluntarily available in 3 months or later. * * * their A&A provisions. work in an industry that ‘‘only provides • This interpretation * * * contradicts Temporary lay-offs. An individual work part of the year’’ and that they are the plain meaning of the word on temporary lay-off must be available required to ‘‘accept work from a single ‘available’ by covering employed to work for the employer who laid-off employer, regardless of what workers who take leave from the individual as soon as the employer opportunities may otherwise exist for employment when the employer has again has work for the individual. While them in the job market.’’ Similarly, the work available but the worker cannot, or this requires an individual’s availability commenter noted work remains does not wish to work.’’ (Emphasis in for work with only one employer, it is available for those on jury duty. original.) nonetheless a test of whether the In response, we note that, as these unemployment is due to lack of suitable situations indicate, the Department has (5) Voluntary Leaving and Other work. been liberal and flexible in construing Situations As we noted above, unlike BAA–UC, A&A. Concerning temporary lay-offs, it (a) Voluntary Leaving none of these situations permit a is sufficient that the individual be voluntary withdrawal from the available for a single job opportunity. Some commenters opposing removal workforce. Unlike BAA–UC, all of these (Indeed, payment of UC to individuals of the rule argued that the Department situations contain some link to on temporary lay-off allows employers had approved other exceptions to the involuntary unemployment caused by a to preserve their skilled workforces, A&A requirement. These commenters lack of suitable work. which has been cited as one of the noted provisions of state UC laws that Also, as the Department noted in the purposes of the UC program.) For jury address voluntarily leaving a job to NPRM, none of these situations apply to duty, the Department believes it is escape domestic violence, to escape BAA–UC. Under BAA–UC, unlike the unreasonable to deny UC to an sexual harassment, to follow a spouse, illness exception, an offer of suitable individual, who has initially met the due to loss of child care, due to work could be refused with no effect on A&A requirement, because of a pregnancy or pregnancy-related eligibility. Unlike the illness and jury governmental compulsion to serve on a disability, and due to the individual’s duty exceptions, no initial jury. If suitable work was available prior illness. Others used these provisions as establishment of A&A was required to to the individual being called to serve proof that there is no ‘‘involuntariness’’ determine if the unemployment was on a jury, the individual would have requirement in federal law. Conversely, linked to a lack of suitable work despite been required to accept such work to some commenters favoring removal of the individual’s availability for work. meet the A&A requirement. Indeed, the rule argued that there is a specific Unlike approved training, BAA–UC did serving on a jury indicates an individual ‘‘involuntariness’’ requirement. not address a situation where an was otherwise available for work; even The examples addressing voluntary individual is attempting to remedy his individuals who are employed must by leaving are distinct from the A&A or her continuing unemployment; law serve on juries and employers must requirement. The A&A requirement, a indeed, BAA–UC addressed a situation permit them to serve. test of whether an individual is where a job is already available to the We also note that, as a practical unemployed due to lack of suitable parent. Also, for approved training, the matter, it makes little sense to require work, ‘‘looks only to whether the state must approve the training as individuals on temporary lay-off who unemployment is due to lack of work increasing the individual’s job intend to return to work with their for each given week of benefits claimed. prospects; no similar requirement former employers to be available for That is, it does not require that states existed for BAA–UC, with the result that work that they will leave when their old hold an individual ineligible based on increased attachment to the workforce job again becomes available. This the reason for separation from for any one individual is highly creates unreasonable expectations for employment, except to the extent that speculative. Finally, unlike temporary both the individual and the firms the individual may have not been A&A

VerDate jul<14>2003 20:10 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\09OCR3.SGM 09OCR3 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations 58545

for the particular week of the with federal law because those the original 1935 SSA and subsequent separation.’’ (67 FR 72124 (December 4, individuals are available for work. They enactments indicate a Congressional 2002).) There is, simply put, no federal are involuntarily unemployed due to expectation that individuals must be requirement that the initial separation lack of suitable work, which, in their A&A for suitable work as a condition of be involuntary for an individual to be case, is limited to part-time work. benefit eligibility. While the Department eligible for UC; however, the individual agrees that FUTA and SSA do not (6) Test Requires Changes in State Law must be A&A for suitable employment. explicitly set forth an A&A requirement, Indeed, in the early days of the UC Some commenters expressed concern the Department must, in its supervisory program, many state laws did not that our basis for A&A—to test whether role in the administration of these laws, contain any provision addressing an individual’s unemployment was make reasonable interpretations of the voluntary separations from involuntary due to lack of suitable requirements set forth therein. Not all of employment, but they all had provisions work—could result in states having to the statutory requirements are requiring an individual to be A&A for repeal several current provisions of state unambiguous. Thus, although a suitable work. law. For example, one commenter noted requirement may not be explicit, it may An example may help explain how that the Department ‘‘indicates its be implicit, especially when viewed in voluntary leaving provisions are distinct approval of exceptions [to the A&A the light of the legislative history. from the A&A requirements. If an requirement] such as temporary lay-offs, Further, although the states are free ‘‘to individual left work to care for an ill jury duty, and other situations that do provide more expansive coverage’’ than child, certain states will not disqualify not comply with the narrow rule the that contemplated in these federal laws, that individual for voluntarily leaving Department’’ articulated in the NPRM. they are nevertheless constrained by the employment. However, the individual These provisions of state law were requirements of this legislation as must still be A&A to be eligible for UC. discussed in sections (2) and (3) above interpreted by the Department. The If caring for the ill child prevents the as being consistent with the Department’s construction of an implicit individual from being available for a Department’s position on A&A. federal A&A requirement is reasonable new job, the individual will be held Therefore, the Department’s basis for based on the statutory language, the ineligible for not meeting the state’s A&A will not require any states to Social Security Board’s A&A requirements because the repeal such provisions. contemporaneous interpretation of this individual is not involuntarily (7) Legislative History language, the purpose of the UC unemployed due to lack of suitable program as set forth in the legislative work. However, after the child no longer Several commenters favoring removal history, and subsequent acts of needs care and the individual becomes agreed with the Department’s analysis Congress, discussed below. available for work, the individual may that the legislative history supports the In subsequent enactments, Congress immediately commence collecting UC. A&A requirements. Some commenters has acted several times to reaffirm that Thus, this voluntary leaving provision opposing removal noted that no specific UC is payable only to individuals who does not affect the requirement that the A&A requirements exist in federal law. are able and available for work. When individual must be A&A. One such commenter disagreed with our Congress first enacted a provision analysis of legislative history, noting requiring the reduction of UC due to (b) Other Situations that the ‘‘lack of a federal availability receipt of retirement pay, it explained One commenter noted a state law requirement is confirmed not only by that it was establishing a ‘‘uniform rule’’ provision relating to short-time the plain language of FUTA and SSA, to address the fact that some recipients compensation (more commonly known but by their legislative histories, which of these retirement payments ‘‘have as ‘‘worksharing’’) under which an show that [Congress] expressly declined actually withdrawn from the labor individual would not be denied UC ‘‘by to impose specific federal requirements force,’’ that is, are not A&A. (S. Rep No. reason of application of provisions for availability’’ and, further, that 1265, 94th Cong. 2d Sess. 22 (1976).) In relating to availability for work’’ as Congress could clearly display its 1993, Congress required that states refer evidence that exceptions to the A&A intention to create eligibility individuals likely to exhaust UC to requirement exist. (Under requirements as it did when it required reemployment services and deny UC to ‘‘worksharing,’’ an employer and its individuals claiming ‘‘extended and individuals who failed to participate in employees agree that the employees will emergency benefits to apply for and these services. (Sections 303(a)(10) and work a reduced work week in lieu of accept suitable work and to actively (j), SSA.) This reflected Congress’s having some employees totally laid-off.) engage in such work.’’ This commenter interest in helping UC claimants get In response, we note that worksharing is further noted that even if ‘‘widespread back to work, especially those expected expressly permitted by federal law as an involuntary unemployment’’ was the to have the hardest time returning to exception to the A&A requirements, and original impetus for UC provisions of work quickly, and its willingness to that, like temporary lay-offs, the the 1935 SSA, ‘‘nothing in federal [UC] deny UC to those individuals unwilling individual must still be available to law limits states’s ability to provide to take positive steps toward work for his/her employer. Section more expansive coverage.’’ In support of reemployment. Providing reemployment 401(d)(1)(C) of Public Law 102–318 this, the commenter also cited a 1936 services to individuals who are not able provides that, under worksharing, Social Security Board statement that ‘‘It or willing to accept employment (that is, individuals ‘‘are not required to meet is desirable that a State law should be who are not A&A) would waste the availability for work or work search at least as broad in its coverage as the resources on some while denying test requirements * * *, but are Federal act. * * * The State may, of reemployment services to others who required to be available for their normal course, go further and adopt a wider could benefit. workweek.’’ coverage.’’ Congress has also created several The same commenter noted a state Although several members of extensions of UC to address law that permits individuals with a Congress wrote in opposition to ‘‘widespread involuntary history of part-time work to limit their removing the BAA–UC rule, the unemployment’’ during economic availability to part-time work under Department’s extensive review of the downturns. In Public Law 91–373, it certain conditions. This is consistent legislative history and the provisions of created the permanent federal-state

VerDate jul<14>2003 20:10 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\09OCR3.SGM 09OCR3 58546 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations

extended benefit program (EB) to pay Unemployment Compensation Program. the absence of any congressional intent benefits ‘‘during periods of high The effect of these suspensions was that to condition eligibility for regular UI unemployment.’’ (H. Rep. No. 752, 91st state law eligibility requirements, benefits on claimants’ availability for Cong. 2d Sess. Page 6 (1970).) Indeed, including the state A&A requirements, work, as a matter of federal law.’’ one of the ‘‘triggers’’ for determining if were used for determining eligibility for As a general rule, we agree that where a high unemployment period exists is programs that were designed to Congress has not imposed specific the total unemployment rate, which ameliorate widespread involuntary requirements related to FUTA or SSA, includes only workers who have unemployment. In sum, the EB work states are free to operate and determine recently demonstrated their availability search provisions do not support the whether to impose their own by looking for work. Several temporary argument that there is no federal A&A requirements. However, the principle extensions have also been enacted requirement. that Congress intended to grant states during periods of high unemployment, We note that even Congressional freedom to design their UC systems in including the current Temporary prohibitions on the denial of UC assume areas in which it did not impose explicit Extended Unemployment Compensation that individuals must be available for requirements does not mean that the program. When Congress extended the work. When it passed a federal Department is precluded from making Emergency Unemployment prohibition on denying UC solely due to reasonable interpretations of the specific Compensation program in the early pregnancy, Congress noted that an requirements of FUTA and SSA. We 1990’s, it noted that ‘‘[m]any people individual must be ‘‘able to work * * * note that (1) the interpretation of an who have lost their jobs are spending and be available for employment’’ (H. ‘‘able and available’’ requirement was months, and months and months, Rep. No. 752, 91st Cong. 2d Sess. Page made contemporaneously with the sometimes a year or more seeking the 19 (1970)) and that pregnant workers passage of SSA by the first agency with next job.’’ (H. Rep. 268 103rd Cong. 1st must continue to meet the ‘‘availability responsibility for interpreting SSA; (2) Sess. Page 2 (1993).) The purpose for work and ability to work’’ the Department has consistently behind these programs was clearly to requirements. (Id. at 21.) interpreted FUTA and SSA to include a pay individuals unable to find Finally, we note that Congress federal A&A requirement; and (3) New employment because of economic indicated its expectation that an ‘‘able’’ York Tel. Co. does not discuss either a downturns. requirement existed for UC when it specific federal A&A requirement or its As noted above, one commenter permitted states to withdraw certain absence. Therefore, the conclusion that stated that special eligibility employee contributions from their the second commenter draws that the requirements exist for the EB program. unemployment funds for the payment of general language of New York Tel. Co. Specifically, an individual claiming EB ‘‘cash benefits with respect to their means that there is no federal A&A must conduct a sustained and disability.’’ (Current Sections requirement or that it is beyond the systematic search for suitable work and 3304(a)(4)(A), FUTA, and 303(a)(5), authority of the Department to construe must submit tangible proof of this work SSA.) Individuals who lose their jobs such a requirement is not a persuasive search. Although many commenters because of a disability, and who are position. appeared to believe that an active work unable to perform any work because of The language in New York Tel. Co., search is a federal requirement for such disability, are not unemployed due cited by the second commenter, was regular UC and/or is necessary to a lack of suitable work. They are used by the Court to discuss its prior component of availability, this is not the unemployed due to the disability. Thus, holding in Ohio Bureau of Employment case. Though an active work search is explicit statutory authority was Services v. Hodory, 431 U.S. 471, 482– one way for the individual to indicate necessary to permit payment to disabled 483 (1977). In Hodory, the Court availability, it is not the only way. An individuals from state unemployment affirmed Ohio’s denial of benefits to individual’s active registration with the funds. workers unemployed by labor disputes even if the unemployed workers were state’s employment service or the (8) Supreme Court Decisions individual’s use of union hiring halls or not strikers themselves. (Hodory, 431 private recruiting firms are all Two commenters cited New York Tel. U.S. at 482–83.) Hodory held that acceptable indications of availability Co. v. New York State Dep’t of Labor, benefits could thus be denied under absent an active work search by the 440 U.S. 519, 537 (1979). One certain circumstances even when a individual. Aside from the EB commenter noted that ‘‘[i]t is unclear worker is involuntarily unemployed. provisions, federal law does not require whether states have authority to use UI (Id.) New York Tel. Co. also involved the an active search for work and, as a [that is, UC] funds to provide family issue of workers involved in labor result, one state (Pennsylvania) does not leave absent a Department of Labor disputes. Unlike Ohio, New York require any work search for the regular regulation’’ and then cited New York permitted strikers to obtain UC after a UC program. Thus, the fact that Tel. Co. for the proposition that ‘‘states certain period of time had elapsed. 440 Congress required an active search for have broad discretion to legislate in the U.S. at 523. The Court recognized that work for the long-term unemployed is area of UI.’’ The other commenter citing New York’s law required all individuals unrelated to whether an A&A New York Tel. Co. noted that the U.S. seeking UC to be A&A, including requirement exists for the regular Supreme Court has treated the absence strikers, as demonstrated by the Court’s program. of ‘‘explicit prerequisites’’ for UC quote of that law, which required an We note that the work search eligibility ‘‘as a strong indication that individual’s ‘‘capability and readiness, requirement was not part of the original Congress did not intend to restrict the but inability to gain work.’’ (Id. at 523, 1970 enactment of the EB program, States’ freedom to legislate in this area’’ n.2, emphasis added.) Thus, although having been added in 1980. Also, and that ‘‘as the Supreme Court has the striking individual’s initial Congress completely suspended the EB noted, ‘when Congress wished to separation may be voluntary, his/her work search requirement in the early impose or forbid a condition for continued unemployment is 1990’s when it extended the Emergency compensation, it did so explicitly.’’’ involuntary, unlike BAA–UC where the Unemployment Compensation program. Therefore, this commenter argues, the individual is not available for any work. This EB requirement also is not omission of a specific availability In the course of its discussion of applicable to the Temporary Extended requirement in FUTA or SSA ‘‘reflects Hodory, the Court in New York Tel. Co.

VerDate jul<14>2003 20:10 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\09OCR3.SGM 09OCR3 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations 58547

emphasized that ‘‘the issue of public specifically mentioned in FUTA or the commenter noted, citing Section 2(b)(1) benefits for strikers became a matter of SSA, ‘‘is thus generally a necessary of FMLA, is ‘‘to balance the demands of express congressional concern in 1935 condition to eligibility for the workplace with the needs of during the hearings and debates on the compensation.’’ Athough Baker did not families, to promote the stability and Social Security Act’’ and that Congress specifically refer to the A&A economic security of families, and to left that matter specifically to the states. requirement, that requirement is the test promote national interests in preserving (Id. at 542.) The Court remarked that of ‘‘involuntary’’ unemployment under family integrity.’’ This commenter ‘‘[t]he drafters of the Act apparently the FUTA and the SSA. concluded, ‘‘Clearly, these are two concluded that such proposals [to In sum, while we agree with the entirely separate systems.’’ Concerning prohibit States from providing benefits commenter’s statement and the Court’s the Department’s rationale that BAA– to strikers] should be addressed to the observation that states are free to design UC might strengthen long-term individual state legislatures without their UC systems as they choose as long attachment to the workforce, another dictation from Washington.’’ (Id. at 542– as those systems meet federal commenter also noted that one ‘‘could 43.) requirements, we disagree with the argue that paid leave programs for any However, the Court also noted that commenter’s conclusion that this purpose permitted by the FMLA might not all matters concerning UC were left principle voids the A&A requirement. strengthen long-term attachment to the to the States. The Court recognized that As we have shown, the federal A&A workforce,’’ as might ‘‘any leave policy’’ ‘‘[f]rom the beginning * * * the Act has requirement is part of the foundation and raised the concern that ‘‘UC funds required a few specific requirements for that makes a UC system a true UC might be used not just for leave federal approval.’’ (Id. at 542.) The system, not a relief system. The programs, but for other social benefits Court explained that these requirements Department has the authority to such as health or pension benefits.’’ included those found in Section interpret what the test of continued Thus, most commenters did not view 3304(a)(5), FUTA, which provide, ‘‘involuntary’’ unemployment requires, the Department’s attempts in the among other things, that a ‘‘State may so long as its interpretation is based on original BAA–UC rulemaking to not deny compensation to an otherwise a reasonable construction of FUTA and distinguish between ‘‘paid leave’’ and qualified applicant because he had SSA. As discussed above, the BAA–UC as being sound. We agree. As refused to accept work as a Department and its predecessors have we noted above, for individuals who strikebreaker, or had refused to resign consistently interpreted federal law to were taking approved leave when an from a union as a condition of require that individuals must be A&A as employer is holding a job open for them, employment.’’ (Id.) The Court also noted a condition of receiving UC. BAA–UC would be a payment for that Section 3304(a)(5), FUTA, ‘‘from voluntarily taking time off work rather (9) Whether BAA–UC Is Paid Leave the start had provided’’ that than payment due to lack of suitable ‘‘compensation shall not be denied in In the BAA–UC Final Rule, the work. This makes the payment more in such State to any otherwise eligible Department addressed what were the nature of paid leave than UC. The individual for refusing to accept new termed ‘‘misconceptions’’ regarding payment is not made due to involuntary work under any of the following BAA–UC. The Department noted that unemployment due to lack of suitable conditions’’ and then listed the specific ‘‘[m]any respondents referred to BAA– work, but due to the individual’s conditions under which an otherwise UC as ‘paid FMLA’ leave or ‘paid family decision to take time off from an eligible individual could refuse to leave.’’’ The Department responded that existing job that is still available to the accept new work. ‘‘[a]lthough there may be many cases worker. The Court’s recognition of certain where parents of newborns and newly- universal UC requirements is further adopted children will be simultaneously (10) Justification for Changes in Position supported by its quotation from the eligible for BAA–UC and leave under Commenters also addressed the Senate Report: ‘‘Except for a few the FMLA, the two are legally unrelated soundness of the Department’s standards which are necessary to render to each other.’’ (65 FR 37212 (June 13, justification for changing its position, certain that the State unemployment 2000).) The Department also said that both in the BAA–UC final rule and the compensation laws are genuine BAA–UC is ‘‘not a new program.’’ (Id.) NPRM. One commenter opposing unemployment compensation acts and Although the Department did not ask removal argued, among other things, not merely relief measures, the States commenters to address this distinction, that repealing BAA–UC represents a are free to set up any unemployment the overwhelming majority did ‘‘radical shift in the agency’s position compensation system they wish * * *.’’ comment about FMLA and/or paid [that] undermines [its] credibility. (Id. at 543, n. 42.) Allowing payment of leave. As previously noted, many of ***’’ Some commenters supporting BAA–UC from unemployment funds those supporting removal of the rule removal took the opposite approach. would transform a ‘‘genuine described BAA–UC as a ‘‘back door’’ One, for example, argued that the unemployment compensation’’ program expansion of the FMLA, while many of rulemaking creating BAA–UC ‘‘failed to into relief measures for those who have those opposing removal cited the need justify the Department’s radical a job available and choose not to work for ‘‘paid family leave’’ and discussed departure from over 60 years of and, thus, New York Tel. Co. does not BAA–UC as though it were paid family precedent.’’ in any way support allowing a state to leave. In other words, despite the We agree that the original BAA–UC do so. Department’s explanation of differences rulemaking did not adequately justify a In a later case, the Court recognized between UC and paid leave, these reversal of the Department’s that there are limits on its broad commenters viewed BAA–UC as paid longstanding position. As previously statement about state discretion in New family leave. noted, the BAA–UC rule failed to York Tel. Co. In Baker v. General Motors As one commenter supporting discuss why an A&A test exists, which Corp., 478 U.S. 621, 633 (1986), the removal noted, the purpose of UC ‘‘is to is to test involuntary unemployment Court, citing Hodory and the Report of compensate a worker who becomes due to a continuing lack of suitable the Committee on Economic Security, temporarily unemployed when the work. Due to this failure, the BAA–UC recognized that involuntary employer no longer has suitable work rulemaking resulted in a misapplication unemployment, although nowhere available * * *’’ Family leave, the of federal law.

VerDate jul<14>2003 20:10 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\09OCR3.SGM 09OCR3 58548 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations

Executive Order 12866 adversely affected in a material way by 20 CFR part 604. Given its brevity, it is The removal of 20 CFR part 604 is a having to dismantle such an not likely to lead to litigation resulting ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ within experiment. Finally, this action removes from drafting errors or ambiguities. a regulation and imposes no alternative the meaning of Section 3(f)(4) of Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of regulatory requirements. Executive Order 12866 because it raises 1995 novel legal or policy issues arising out Paperwork Reduction Act This regulatory action has been of legal mandates, the President’s This regulatory action contains no reviewed in accordance with the priorities, or the principles set forth in information collection requirements. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 the Executive Order. Accordingly, this (UMRA) (2 U.S.C. 1501 et seq.) and does final rule was submitted to, and Executive Order 13132 not include any unfunded federal reviewed by, the Office of Management We have reviewed this regulatory mandate. and Budget. action in accordance with Executive Before publication of the BAA–UC Order 13132 regarding federalism. This Regulatory Flexibility Act final rule (65 FR 37210 (June 13, 2000)), Executive Order requires agencies, This regulatory action will not have a the Department prepared a Regulatory when formulating and implementing significant economic impact on a Impact Analysis which estimated that policies that have federalism substantial number of small entities. the rule would result in annual costs implications, to the extent possible, to This action affects states and state ranging from zero to $196 million, refrain from limiting state policy agencies, which are not within the depending upon the number of states options, to consult with states before definition of ‘‘small entity’’ under 5 choosing to enact this voluntary taking any action which would restrict U.S.C. 601(6). Under 5 U.S.C. 605(b), the program. (To establish the upper end of states’ policy options, and to take such Secretary has certified to the Chief the cost range, the Regulatory Impact action only where there is clear Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Analysis grouped the states into size statutory and constitutional authority Business Administration to this effect. groups—large, medium and small—and and the presence of a problem of Accordingly, no regulatory flexibility used the extent of state enactment of national scope. The UC program is a analysis is required. five representative types of UC benefit matter of national scope, as evidenced Effect on Family Life expansions (alternative base period, by existing federal legislation, which unrestricted good cause for voluntary limits state flexibility in certain areas. We certify that this regulatory action quits, short-time compensation, As discussed above, the Department has has been assessed in accordance with dependents’ allowances, and the authority to interpret what the test Section 654 of Public Law 105–277, 112 supplemental (or ‘‘additional’’) benefits) of continued ‘‘involuntary’’ Stat. 2681, for its effect on family well- as an indicator of the likelihood of state unemployment requires, so long as its being. As discussed earlier in this enactment.) Since publication of the interpretation is based on a reasonable preamble, we conclude that this action BAA–UC final rule, no state enacted construction of FUTA and SSA. Policies would not adversely affect the well- BAA–UC, which means that no benefits with federalism implications are those being of the nation’s families. No state have been paid, nor administrative costs with substantial direct effects on the has enacted BAA–UC; consequently no expended. Removing the BAA–UC rule states, on the relationship between the families would experience a termination ends the possibility that BAA–UC and national government and the states, or of BAA–UC benefits. Though the rule its associated administrative costs will on the distribution of power and withdraws authorization for states to be paid out of state unemployment responsibilities among the various amend their UC laws to pay for such funds with the result that the estimated levels of government. benefits from the state’s unemployment costs would not be incurred. Therefore, Because this regulatory action would fund, paid family leave could be the removal of the rule results in no limit state policy options, by provided from other funding sources. costs or cost savings and potentially eliminating authority to pay for family This rule preserves the availability of prevents costs from being incurred in leave out of unemployment funds, we state unemployment funds for times the future. Because the Department consulted with organizations when workers, who may support expects the immediate economic impact representing state elected officials, who families, are unemployed due to lack of of removing the rule to involve no costs, did not object to removal of the BAA– work. this regulatory action is unlikely to have UC rule. an annual effect on the economy of $100 Congressional Review Act million or more and, consequently, is Executive Order 13175 Consistent with the Congressional not ‘‘economically significant’’ within This regulatory action does not have Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801, et seq., we the meaning of Section 3(f)(1) of that ‘‘substantial direct effects on one or will submit to Congress and the Executive Order. No commenter more Indian tribes, or the relationship Comptroller General of the United claimed that there were any costs between the Federal Government and States, a report regarding the issuance of associated with removing the BAA–UC Indian tribes, or on the distribution of this Final Rule prior to the effective date rule. power and responsibilities between the set forth at the outset of this document. Finally, we have evaluated this Federal Government and Indian tribes.’’ OMB has determined that this rule is regulatory action and find it consistent It affects primarily states and state not a ‘‘major rule’’ as defined by the with the regulatory philosophy and agencies. Congressional Review Act (Section 804 principles set forth in Executive Order of the Small Business Regulatory 12866. Though this action removes Executive Order 12988 Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996). It is authority for states to fund a form of This regulatory action has been not likely to result in an annual effect family leave from their unemployment drafted and reviewed in accordance on the economy of $100 million or funds, states continue to have flexibility with Executive Order 12988, Civil more; a major increase in costs or prices; to provide paid family leave from other Justice Reform, and will not unduly or significant adverse effects on funding sources. Further, because no burden the federal court system. The competition, employment, investment, state has enacted BAA–UC, no state is proposal, a mere one sentence, removes productivity, innovation, or the ability

VerDate jul<14>2003 20:10 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\09OCR3.SGM 09OCR3 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations 58549

of United States-based companies to List of Subjects in 20 CFR Part 604 U.S.C. 503(a)(2) and (5) and 1302(a); 26 compete with foreign-based companies Unemployment compensation. U.S.C. 3304(a)(1) and (4) and 3306(h); in domestic and export markets. Secretary’s Order No. 4–75 (40 FR Signed at Washington, DC on October 3, 18515); and Secretary’s Order No. 14–75 Catalogue of Federal Domestic 2003. (November 12, 1975), Chapter V, Title Assistance Number Emily Stover DeRocco, 20, Code of Federal Regulations, is Assistant Secretary of Labor. 20 CFR Part 604 is listed in the amended by removing part 604. Words of Issuance Catalogue of Federal Domestic [FR Doc. 03–25507 Filed 10–8–03; 8:45 am] ■ Assistance at No. 17.225, For the reasons set forth in this BILLING CODE 4510–30–P Unemployment Insurance. preamble, and under the authority of 42

VerDate jul<14>2003 20:10 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\09OCR3.SGM 09OCR3 Thursday, October 9, 2003

Part IV

Department of Agriculture Agricultural Marketing Service

7 CFR Part 1206 Mango Promotion, Research, and Information Order; Subpart B— Referendum Procedures; Referendum Order; Final Rule and Proposed Rule

VerDate jul<14>2003 20:51 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4717 Sfmt 4717 E:\FR\FM\09OCR4.SGM 09OCR4 58552 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Order 12866 and, therefore, has not the referendum. In addition, Section 518 been reviewed by the Office of of the Act provides for referenda to Agricultural Marketing Service Management and Budget (OMB). ascertain approval of an order to be conducted either prior to its going into Executive Order 12988 7 CFR Part 1206 effect or within three years after This rule has been reviewed under [Doc. # FV–02–708–FR] assessments first begin under an order. E.O. 12988, Civil Justice Reform. It is The Fresh Produce Association of the Mango Promotion, Research, and not intended to have retroactive effect. Americas (Association) has Information Order; Subpart B— Section 524 of the Act provides that recommended that the Department Referendum Procedures the Act shall not affect or preempt any conduct a referendum in which other Federal or State law authorizing approval of an order would be based on AGENCY: Agricultural Marketing Service, promotion or research relating to an a majority of the first handlers and Agriculture. agricultural commodity. importers voting. The Association also ACTION: Final rule. Under Section 519 of the Act, a has recommended that a referendum be person subject to an order may file a conducted prior to the proposed Order SUMMARY: This rule establishes petition with USDA stating that an going into effect. procedures which the Department of order, any provision of an order, or any This rule establishes the procedures Agriculture (USDA or the Department) obligation imposed in connection with under which first handlers and will use in conducting a referendum to an order, is not established in importers of mangos may vote on determine whether the issuance of the accordance with the law, and requesting whether they want a mango promotion, proposed Mango Promotion, Research, a modification of an order or an research, and information program to be and Information Order (Order) is exemption from an order. Any petition implemented. This action adds a new favored by first handlers and importers filed challenging an order, any subpart which establishes procedures to of mangos. The Order will be provision of an order, or any obligation conduct an initial and future referenda. implemented if it is approved by a imposed in connection with an order, The new subpart covers definitions, majority of the eligible first handlers shall be filed within two years after the voting instructions, use of subagents, and importers voting in the referendum. effective date of an order, provision or ballots, the referendum report, and These procedures will also be used for obligation subject to challenge in the confidentiality of information. any subsequent referendum under the petition. The petitioner will have the There are approximately 5 first Order, if it is approved in the initial opportunity for a hearing on the handlers and 55 importers of mangos referendum. The proposed Order is petition. Thereafter, USDA will issue a who would be subject to the program being published separately in this issue ruling on the petition. The Act provides and eligible to vote in the first of the Federal Register. This proposed that the district court of the United referendum. The Small Business program would be implemented under States for any district in which the Administration [13 CFR 121.201] the Commodity Promotion, Research, petitioner resides or conducts business defines small agricultural service firms and Information Act of 1996. shall be the jurisdiction to review a final as those having annual receipts of $5 EFFECTIVE DATE: November 10, 2003. ruling on the petition, if the petitioner million or less. First handlers and importers would be considered FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: files a complaint for that purpose not agricultural service firms. Using these Kathie M. Birdsell, RP, FV, AMS, later than 20 days after the date of entry criteria, most first handlers and USDA, Stop 0244, 1400 Independence of USDA’s final ruling. importers to be covered by the proposed Avenue, SW., Room 2535–8, Regulatory Flexibility Act program would be considered small Washington, DC 20250–0244; telephone In accordance with the Regulatory businesses. 202–720–4835, fax 202–205–2800, or Flexibility Act (RFA) [5 U.S.C. 601 et U.S. production of mangos is located [email protected]. seq.], the Agency is required to examine in California, Florida, Hawaii, and SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: A the impact of the proposed rule on small Puerto Rico, according to the most referendum will be conducted among entities. The purpose of the RFA is to recent U.S. Census of Agriculture eligible first handlers and importers of fit regulatory actions to the scale of (Census) which was in 1997. The mangos to determine whether they favor businesses subject to such action so that Census does not include California issuance of the proposed Mango small businesses will not be production because California has so Promotion, Research, and Information disproportionately burdened. few producers that publishing Order (Order) [7 CFR part 1206]. The The Act, which authorizes the production data would reveal program will be implemented if it is Department to consider industry confidential information. In 1997, approved by a majority of the first proposals for generic programs of production in Florida totaled 6.1 handlers and importers voting in the promotion, research, and information million pounds, Hawaii’s production referendum. The Order is authorized for agricultural commodities, became was 0.1 million pounds, and Puerto under the Commodity Promotion, effective on April 4, 1996. The Act Rico’s production as approximately 32.9 Research, and Information Act of 1996 provides for alternatives within the million pounds. For Florida and Hawaii (Act) [Pub. L. 104–127, 7 U.S.C. 7411– terms of a variety of provisions. combined, production fell from 16.6 7425]. It would cover domestic and Paragraph (e) of Section 518 of the Act million pounds in 1992 to 6.2 million imported mangos of the Mangifera provides three options for determining pounds in 1997. Census data are indica L. variety from the family of industry approval of a new research and published every five years. USDA does Anacardiaceae. A proposed Order is promotion program: (1) By a majority of not report the value of U.S. production. being published separately in this issue those voting; (2) by a majority of the Seven countries account for 99 of the Federal Register. volume of the agricultural commodity percent of the mangos imported into the voted in the referendum; or (3) by a United States. These countries and their Executive Order 12866 majority of those persons voting who share of the imports (from September 1, This rule has been determined to be also represent a majority of the volume 2000, through June 30, 2001) are: not significant for purposes of Executive of the agricultural commodity voted in Mexico (57 percent); Brazil (11 percent);

VerDate jul<14>2003 21:18 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\09OCR4.SGM 09OCR4 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations 58553

Ecuador (10 percent); Peru (10 percent); USDA offices across the country. USDA $5.00 or $1.00 per first handler and for Guatemala (7 percent); Haiti (3 percent); also considered electronic voting, but an estimated 55 importers would be and Costa Rica (1 percent). For the the use of computers is not universal. $55.00 or $1.00 per importer. period from September 1, 2000, through Conducting the referendum from one Background June 30, 2001, the United States central location by mail ballot would imported a total of 170,445 tons of also be more cost-effective and reliable. The Act, which became effective on mangos, valued at $106 million. In the USDA will provide easy access to April 4, 1996, authorizes the previous full season (September 1, 1999, information for potential voters through Department to establish a national through August 31, 2000), 253,591 tons, a toll-free telephone line and the research and promotion program valued at $141 million, were imported Internet. covering domestic and imported into the United States. There are no federal rules that mangos. The Association submitted an A preliminary estimate of per capita duplicate, overlap, or conflict with this entire proposed Order on June 29, 2001, consumption of mangos by USDA’s rule. and revisions to the proposal on Economic Research Service (ERS) was This Final Regulatory Flexibility November 1, 2001. The proposal was 1.80 pounds in 2000. Per capita Analysis has a conforming change to the published in the Federal Register on consumption has been trending Order’s Final Regulatory Flexibility August 26, 2002 [67 FR 54908]. A upwards for several decades. In 1979 Analysis. This change includes slightly revised proposal that will be per capita consumption was 0.21 production information from Puerto voted upon in the referendum is pounds, and in 1989 was 0.51 pounds. Rico to address a concern of one published in this issue of the Federal This rule provides the procedures commenter raised in a comment Register. under which first handlers and concerning the proposed Order’s Initial The proposed Order would provide importers of mangos may vote on Regulatory Flexibility Analysis. This for the development and financing of an whether they want the Order to be commenter noted that Puerto Rico is effective and coordinated program of implemented. In accordance with the covered by the Order as part of the promotion, research, and consumer and provisions of the Act, subsequent United States, but Puerto Rico’s industry information for mangos in the referenda may be conducted, and it is production was not included in the United States. The program would be anticipated that the proposed economic information on the mango funded by an assessment levied on first procedures would apply. There are industry. Therefore, information on handlers and importers (to be collected approximately 5 first handlers and 55 Puerto Rico was added to the analysis. by the Customs and Border Protection at importers who will be eligible to vote in time of entry into the United States) at the first referendum. First handlers and Paperwork Reduction Act an initial rate of 1⁄2 cent per pound. First importers of less than 500,000 pounds In accordance with the OMB handlers and importers of less than of mangos annually will be exempt from regulation [5 CFR 1320] which 500,000 pounds of mangos annually assessments and not eligible to vote in implements the Paperwork Reduction would be exempt from paying the referendum. Act of 1995 [44 U.S.C. Chapter 35], the assessments. In addition, exports of U.S. USDA will keep these individuals referendum ballot, which represents the informed throughout the program mangos would be exempt from information collection and assessments. implementation and referendum process recordkeeping requirements that will be to ensure that they are aware of and are The assessments would be used to imposed by this rule, has been approved pay for promotion, research, and able to participate in the program by OMB. implementation process. USDA will consumer and industry information; Title: National Research, Promotion, administration, maintenance, and also publicize information regarding the and Consumer Information Programs. referendum process so that trade functioning of the National Mango OMB Number: 0581–0209. Promotion Board; and expenses associations and related industry media Expiration Date of Approval: February can be kept informed. Further, the incurred by the Department in 28, 2006. implementing and administering the information will be available Type of Request: New information Order, including referendum costs. electronically. collection for research and promotion Section 1206 of the Act requires that Voting in the referendum is optional. programs. However, if first handlers and importers Abstract: The information collection a referendum be conducted among choose to vote, the burden of voting requirements in this request are eligible first handlers and importers of would be offset by the benefits of having essential to carry out the intent of the mangos to determine whether they favor the opportunity to vote on whether or Act. The burden associated with the implementation of the Order. not they want to be covered by the ballot is as follows: That section also requires the Order to program. Estimate of Burden: Public reporting be approved by a majority of the first The information collection burden for this collection of information handlers and importers voting. requirements contained in this rule are is estimated to average 0.5 hours per This final rule establishes the designed to minimize the burden on response for each first handler and procedures under which first handlers first handlers and importers. This rule importer. and importers of mangos may vote on provides for a ballot to be used by Respondents: First handlers and whether they want the mango eligible first handlers and importers to importers. promotion, research, and information vote in the referendum. The estimated Estimated Number of Respondents: program to be implemented. There are annual cost of providing the information 60. approximately 60 eligible voters. by an estimated 5 first handlers and for Estimated Number of Responses per This action adds a new subpart an estimated 55 importers would be Respondent: 1 every 5 years (0.2). establishing procedures to be used in $5.00 for all first handlers or $1.00 per Estimated Total Annual Burden on this and future referenda. This subpart first handler and $55.00 for all Respondents: 6.0 hours. covers definitions, voting, instructions, importers or $1.00 per importer. The estimated annual cost of use of subagents, ballots, the USDA considered requiring eligible providing the information by an referendum report, and confidentiality voters to vote in person at various estimated 5 first handlers would be of information.

VerDate jul<14>2003 20:51 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\09OCR4.SGM 09OCR4 58554 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations

Proposed referendum procedures PART 1206—MANGO PROMOTION, mangos that are identified in the were published in the Federal Register RESEARCH, AND INFORMATION Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the on August 26, 2002, [67 FR 54920], with United States by the numbers Subpart A [Reserved] a sixty-day comment period ending on 0804.50.4040 and 0804.50.6040, during October 25, 2002. Subpart B—Referendum Procedures. the representative period. Importation occurs when mangos originating outside One comment was received from a Sec. of the United States are released from producer. In addition to noting that the 1206.100 General. 1206.101 Definitions. custody by the Customs and Border Regulatory Flexibility Analysis did not 1206.102 Voting. Protection and introduced into the contain production information from 1206.103 Instructions. stream of commerce in the United Puerto Rico, the commenter argued that 1206.104 Subagents. States. Included are persons who hold 1206.105 Ballots. since the Order would be implemented title to foreign-produced mangos if it is approved by a majority of eligible 1206.106 Referendum report. 1206.107 Confidential information. immediately upon release by the first handlers and importers voting in 1206.108 OMB control number. Customs and Border Protection, as well the referendum, this would be as any persons who act on behalf of Authority: 7 U.S.C. 7411–7425. assessment without representation for others, as agents or brokers, to secure growers. The commenter expressed the Subpart A [Reserved] the release of mangos from the Customs view that growers would pay for and Border Protection when such program assessments in the form of Subpart B—Referendum Procedures. mangos are entered or withdrawn for lower returns, without any direct consumption in the United States. benefit. We disagree. Domestic § 1206.100 General. (e) Mangos means all fresh fruit of producers are not responsible for paying Referenda to determine whether Mangifera indica L. of the family assessments under the proposed eligible first handlers and importers of Anacardiaceae. program. Although it is possible that an mangos favor the issuance, amendment, (f) Order means the Mango Promotion, assessment may be passed back to suspension, or termination of the Mango Research, and Information Order. producers in some form, only importers Promotion, Research, and Information (g) Person means any individual, group of individuals, partnership, and first handlers of 500,000 or more Order shall be conducted in accordance with this subpart. corporation, association, cooperative, or pounds of mangos per calendar year any other legal entity. For the purpose would be responsible for paying § 1206.101 Definitions. of this definition, the term assessments and eligible to vote in a (a) Administrator means the ‘‘partnership’’ includes, but is not referendum. Domestic producers, Administrator of the Agricultural limited to: however, would be represented on the Marketing Service, with power to (1) A husband and a wife who have board, with two of the 18 voting redelegate, or any officer or employee of title to, or leasehold interest in, a mango positions. the U.S. Department of Agriculture to farm as tenants in common, joint The definitions of eligible first whom authority has been delegated or tenants, tenants by the entirety, or, may hereafter be delegated to act in the handler and eligible importer are under community property laws, as Administrator’s stead. modified in this final rule. The community property; and (b) Department means the U.S. (2) So-called ‘‘joint ventures’’ wherein definitions of first handlers and Department of Agriculture or any officer importer have been modified in the one or more parties to an agreement, or employee of the Department to whom informal or otherwise, contributed land proposed order rulemaking published authority has heretofore been delegated, separately in this issue of the Federal and others contributed capital, labor, or to whom authority may hereafter be management, or other services, or any Register. In that action, the definition of delegated, to act in the Secretary’s stead. variation of such contributions by two first handler was revised based upon a (c) Eligible first handler means any or more parties. comment received and was further person, (excluding a common or (h) Referendum agent or agent means clarified by the Department. As a result, contract carrier), receiving 500,000 or the individual or individuals designated an appropriate conforming change was more pounds of mangos from producers by the Department to conduct the made to the definition of importer in in a calendar year and who as owner, referendum. that rulemaking action. This final rule agent, or otherwise ships or causes (i) Representative period means the revises the definition of eligible first mangos to be shipped as specified in period designated by the Department. handler and eligible importer to this Order. This definition includes (j) United States or U.S. means conform to and reflect the changes that those engaged in the business of buying, collectively the 50 states, the District of appear in the order definitions. selling and/or offering for sale; Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto receiving; packing; grading; marketing; Rico, and the territories and possessions List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 1206 or distributing mangos in commercial of the United States. quantities. The term first handler Administrative practice and includes a producer who handles or § 1206.102 Voting. procedure, Advertising, Consumer markets mangos of the producer’s own (a) Each eligible first handler and information, Mangos, Marketing production. eligible importer of mangos shall be agreements, Promotion, Reporting and (d) Eligible importer means any entitled to cast only one ballot in the recordkeeping requirements. person importing 500,000 or more referendum. For the reasons set forth in the pounds of mangos into the United States (b) Proxy voting is not authorized, but preamble, Title 7, Chapter XI of the in a calendar year as a principal or as an officer or employee of an eligible Code of Federal Regulations is amended an agent, broker, or consignee of any corporate first handler or importer, or an person who produces or handles administrator, executor, or trustee or an as follows: mangos outside of the United States for eligible entity may cast a ballot on 1. Part 1206 is added to read as sale in the United States, and who is behalf of such entity. Any individual so follows: listed as the importer of record for such voting in a referendum shall certify that

VerDate jul<14>2003 20:51 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\09OCR4.SGM 09OCR4 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Rules and Regulations 58555

such individual is an officer or (2) By such other means as the agent the reasons therefore, the results of any employee of the eligible entity, or an may deem advisable. investigations made with respect administrator, executive, or trustee of an (d) Mail to eligible first handlers and thereto, and the disposition thereof. eligible entity and that such individual importers whose names and addresses Ballots invalid under this subpart shall has the authority to take such action. are known to the referendum agent, the not be counted. Upon request of the referendum agent, instructions on voting, a ballot, and a the individual shall submit adequate summary of the terms and conditions of § 1206.106 Referendum report. evidence of such authority. the proposed Order. No person who Except as otherwise directed, the (c) All ballots are to be cast by mail, claims to be eligible to vote shall be referendum agent shall prepare and as instructed by the Department. refused a ballot. submit to the Administrator a report on (e) At the end of the voting period, § 1206.103 Instructions. collect, open, number, and review the the results of the referendum, the The referendum agent shall conduct ballots and tabulate the results in the manner in which it was conducted, the the referendum, in the manner provided presence of an agent of a third party extent and kind of public notice given, in this subpart, under the supervision of authorized to monitor the referendum and other information pertinent to the the Administrator. The Administrator process. analysis of the referendum and its may prescribe additional instructions, (f) Prepare a report on the referendum. results. not inconsistent with the provisions of (g) Announce the results to the public. this subpart, to govern the procedure to § 1206.107 Confidential information. be followed by the referendum agent. § 1206.104 Subagents. The ballots and other information or Such agent shall: The referendum agent may appoint reports that reveal, or tend to reveal, the (a) Determine the period during any individual or individuals necessary vote of any person covered under the which ballots may be cast. or desirable to assist the agent in Order and the voter list shall be strictly (b) Provide ballots and related performing such agent’s functions of confidential and shall not be disclosed. material to be used in the referendum. this subpart. Each individual so The ballot shall provide for recording appointed may be authorized by the § 1206.108 OMB control number. essential information, including that agent to perform any or all of the needed for ascertaining whether the functions which, in the absence or such The control number assigned to the person voting, or on whose behalf the appointment, shall be performed by the information collection requirement in vote is cast, is an eligible voter. agent. this subpart by the Office of (c) Give reasonable public notice of Management and Budget pursuant to the the referendum: § 1206.105 Ballots. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, 44 (1) By utilizing available media or The referendum agent and subagents U.S.C. Chapter 35 is OMB control public information sources, without shall accept all ballots cast. However, if number 0581–0209. incurring advertising expense, to an agent or subagent deems that a ballot Dated: October 2, 2003. publicize the dates, places, method of should be challenged for any reason, the voting, eligibility requirements, and agent or subagent shall endorse above A.J. Yates, other pertinent information. Such their signature, on the ballot, a Administrator. sources of publicity may include, but statement to the effect that such ballot [FR Doc. 03–25456 Filed 10–8–03; 8:45 am] are not limited to, print and radio; and was challenged, by whom challenged, BILLING CODE 3410–02–U

VerDate jul<14>2003 20:51 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\09OCR4.SGM 09OCR4 58556 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Proposed Rules

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Commodity Promotion, Research, and respectively. Foreign producers would Information Act of 1996 (Act) (7 U.S.C. be nominated by foreign producer Agricultural Marketing Service 7411–7425; Public Law 104–127; 110 associations. The U.S. wholesalers and/ Stat. 1029), or any amendments thereto. or retailers would be nominated by the 7 CFR Part 1206 Prior Documents: A proposed rule Board. Two names must be submitted [Doc. # FV–02–707–PR2] was published in the Federal Register for each position. From the names on August 26, 2002 [67 FR 54908], with submitted, the Department will appoint RIN 0581–AC05 a 60-day comment period. In addition, the members. the USDA published a proposed rule on If the Mango Program Is Implemented Mango Promotion, Research, and the referendum procedures in the Information Order; Referendum Order and There Are Concerns About How It Federal Register on August 26, 2002 [67 Is Operating, Can the Program Be AGENCY: FR 54920], also with a 60-day comment Agricultural Marketing Service, Terminated? Agriculture. period. Yes. After the program is ACTION: Proposed rule and referendum Question and Answer Overview order. implemented, the Department will Why Is USDA Proposing a Program for conduct a referendum to determine SUMMARY: This proposed rule would Mangos? whether the mango industry continues establish an industry-funded promotion, to support the program: (1) Every 5 The Department received a proposal research, and information program for years after the program is in effect, (2) from the Association for this program. fresh mangos. The proposed program— at the request of the Board established The Department issued a proposed rule the Mango Promotion, Research, and under the proposed Order, or (3) when to obtain comments on the proposal and Information Order (Order)—was requested by 10 percent or more of first to obtain information on the potential submitted to the Department (the handlers and importers covered by the impact of the program on the mango Department or USDA) by the Fresh proposed Order. In addition, the industry before developing a final Produce Association of the Americas Department may conduct a referendum proposed program and conducting a (Association). Under the proposed at any time. If a majority of the first referendum on it. Order, first handlers and importers of handlers and importers voting in the 500,000 or more pounds of mangos What Is the Purpose of the Mango referendum do not favor continuation, would pay an assessment of 1⁄2 cent per Program? the program will be terminated. pound on domestic and imported The purpose of the program is to Executive Order 12866 mangos to the National Mango maintain, expand, and develop This proposed rule has been Promotion Board (Board). The Board domestic markets for fresh mangos. would be appointed by the Department determined to be not significant for to conduct a program of research and How Will the Mango Program Be purposes of Executive Order 12866 and, promotion, industry information, and Implemented? therefore, has not been reviewed by the consumer information needed for the A referendum will be conducted on Office of Management and Budget maintenance, expansion, and the proposed Order. The Order will be (OMB). development of domestic markets for implemented if it is approved by a Executive Order 12988 fresh mangos. The Order would be majority of the eligible voters in the This proposed rule has been reviewed implemented if it is approved by a referendum. majority of the eligible first handlers under Executive Order 12988, Civil and importers voting in a referendum. A When Will the Referendum Be Held? Justice Reform. It is not intended to separate final rule on referendum The voting period for the referendum have a retroactive effect. procedures is being published in this will be November 10, 2003 through Section 524 of the Act provides that issue of the Federal Register. November 28, 2003. the Act shall not affect or preempt any other Federal or State law authorizing DATES: To be eligible to vote, mango Who Will Be Covered by the Program? promotion or research relating to an importers and first handlers must have agricultural commodity. imported or handled 500,000 or more Domestic first handlers and importers of 500,000 or more pounds of mangos Under section 519 of the Act, a person pounds of mangos during the subject to the Order may file a petition representative period from January 1 per calendar year will pay assessments under the program. Domestic mangos with USDA stating that an order, any through December 31, 2002. The voting provision of an order, or any obligation period for the referendum will be from that are exported will not be assessed under the Order. imposed in connection with an order, is November 10, 2003 through November not established in accordance with the 28, 2003. Ballots must be received by Who Will Sit on the Board? law, and requesting a modification of an the referendum agents no later than the order or an exemption from an order. close of business, Eastern daylight- Under the proposal, there will be a 20-member Board consisting of eight Any petition filed challenging an order, standard time, November 28, 2003, to be any provision of an order, or any counted. U.S. importers, one U.S. first handler, two U.S. producers, seven foreign obligation imposed in connection with FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: producers, and two non-voting U.S. an order, shall be filed within two years Kathie M. Birdsell, Research and wholesalers and/or retailers of mangos. after the effective date of an order, Promotion Branch, FV, AMS, USDA, The chairperson shall reside in the provision or obligation subject to Stop 0244, 1400 Independence Avenue, United States. challenge in the petition. The petitioner SW., Room 2535–S, Washington, DC will have the opportunity for a hearing 20250–0244, telephone 888–720–9917 How Will Members of the Board Be on the petition. Thereafter, USDA will (toll free), fax 202–205–2800, e-mail Selected? issue a ruling on the petition. The Act [email protected]. The U.S. importers, first handlers, and provides that the district court of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This producers would be nominated by U.S. United States for any district in which proposed Order is issued under the importers, first handlers, and producers, the petitioner resides or conducts

VerDate jul<14>2003 21:02 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\09OCP2.SGM 09OCP2 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Proposed Rules 58557

business shall have jurisdiction to Protection (Customs) and to file reports year and exports of U.S. mangos would review a final ruling on the petition, if with the Board. First handlers and be exempt from assessments. The the petitioner files a complaint for that importers of less than 500,000 pounds program would also affect domestic and purpose not later than 20 days after the of mangos per calendar year and exports foreign mango producers, an association date of entry of USDA’s final ruling. of U.S. mangos would be exempt from of foreign mango producers, and assessment. While the proposed Order wholesalers and retailers. These entities Regulatory Flexibility Act would impose certain recordkeeping would serve on the Board or participate In accordance with the Regulatory requirements on first handlers and in the nomination process. Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 601 et importers, information required under The Small Business Administration seq.), USDA is required to examine the the proposed Order could be compiled [13 CFR 121.201] defines small impact of the proposed rule on small from records currently maintained and agricultural producers as those having entities. The purpose of the RFA is to would involve clerical or accounting annual receipts of $750,000 or less fit regulatory actions to the scale of skills. The forms require the minimum annually and small agricultural service businesses subject to such actions so information necessary to effectively firms as those having annual receipts of that small businesses will not be carry out the requirements of the $5 million or less. First handlers, disproportionately burdened. program, and their use is necessary to importers, wholesalers, and retailers The Act authorizes generic programs fulfill the intent of the Act. would be considered agricultural of promotion, research, and information An estimated 89 respondents would service firms. Using these criteria, most for agricultural commodities. Congress provide information to the Board. They producers, first handlers, and importers found that it is in the national public would be: 5 first handlers covered by would be considered small businesses interest and vital to the welfare of the the program, 3 exempt first handlers, 55 while wholesalers and retailers would agricultural economy of the United importers covered by the program, 3 not. The foreign producer association States to maintain and expand existing exempt importers, 4 domestic producer would consist of producers and would markets and develop new markets and nominees, 1 foreign producer reflect the size of these entities. uses for agricultural commodities organization, 14 foreign producer U.S. production of mangos is located through industry-funded, government- nominees, and 4 wholesaler and/or in California, Florida, Hawaii, and supervised, generic commodity retailer nominees. The estimated total Puerto Rico according to the most recent promotion programs. cost of providing information to the U.S. Census of Agriculture (Census) The Association submitted a proposal Board by all respondents would be which was in 1997. The Census does on June 29, 2001, for this program to: (1) $790.01. The estimated cost for all first not include California production Develop and finance an effective and handlers covered by the program would because California has so few producers coordinated program of research, be $336.66 or $67.33 per first handler that publishing production data would promotion, industry information, and covered by the program; $7.50 for all reveal confidential information. In 1997, consumer information regarding exempt first handlers or $2.50 per production in Florida totaled 6.1 mangos; (2) strengthen the position of exempt first handler; $393.34 for all million pounds, Hawaii’s production the mango industry in U.S. markets; and importers covered by the program or was 0.1 million pounds, and Puerto (3) maintain, develop, and expand $7.15 per importer covered by the Rico’s 1998 production was domestic markets for mangos. The program; $7.50 for all exempt importers approximately 32.9 million pounds. For Association submitted changes to their or $2.50 for each exempt importer; Florida and Hawaii combined, proposal on November 1, 2001. $13.34 for all domestic producers or production fell from 16.6 million First handlers and importers of $3.34 per domestic producer; $1.67 for pounds in 1992 to 6.2 million pounds mangos must approve the program in a the foreign producer organization; in 1997. Census data is published every referendum in advance of its $23.33 for all foreign producer five years. USDA does not report the implementation. These persons would nominees or $1.67 per foreign producer value of U.S. production. Although also serve on the proposed 20-member nominee; and $6.67 for the wholesaler domestic production accounts for only 8 Board. The Board would be composed and/or retailer nominees or $1.67 per percent of U.S. consumption of mangos, of eight U.S. importers, one U.S. first wholesaler and/or retailer nominee. we anticipate that any increase in handler, two U.S. producers, seven These totals have been estimated by demand for mangos resulting from this foreign producers, and two non-voting multiplying total burden hours program may lead to a corresponding wholesalers and/or retailers. If domestic requested by $10.00 per hour, a sum increase in domestic production. production increases, additional U.S. deemed to be reasonable should the Seven countries account for 99 first handlers would be added to the respondents be compensated for their percent of the mangos imported into the Board. The Board would administer the time. United Sates. These countries and their program under the Department’s The Department would oversee the share of the imports (from September 1, supervision. In addition, any person operation of the program. Every five 2000, through June 30, 2001) are: subject to the program may file with the years, the Department would conduct a Mexico (57 percent); Brazil (11 percent); Department a petition stating that the referendum to determine whether the Ecuador (10 percent); Peru (10 percent); Order or any provision of the Order is mango industry supports continuation Guatemala (7 percent); Haiti (3 percent); not in accordance with the law and of the program. In addition, the and Costa Rica (1 percent). For the requesting a modification of the Order Secretary may conduct a referendum at period from September 1, 2000, through or an exemption from the Order. any time, at the request of 10 percent or June 30, 2001, the United States Administrative proceedings were more of the first handlers and importers imported a total of 170,445 tons of discussed earlier in this proposed rule. required to pay assessments, or at the mangos, valued at $106 million. In the In this program, first handlers would request of the Board. previous full season (September 1, 1999, be required to pay assessments, file There are approximately 5 first through August 31, 2000), 253,591 tons, reports, and submit assessments to the handlers and 55 importers of mangos valued at $141 million, were imported Board. Importers would be required to that would be covered by the program. into the United States. A preliminary remit to the Board assessments not First handlers and importers of less than estimate of per capita consumption of collected by the Customs and Border 500,000 pounds of mangos per calendar mangos by USDA’s Economic Research

VerDate jul<14>2003 21:02 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\09OCP2.SGM 09OCP2 58558 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Proposed Rules

Service (ERS) was 1.8 pounds in 2000. considered by the Department, in corresponding increase in production. Per capita consumption has been consultation with the agricultural We continue to believe that this trending upwards for several decades. commodity industry involved, to be statement has merit. Another Per capita consumption was 0.21 appropriate. The Act authorizes the commenter noted that Puerto Rico is pounds in 1979 and 0.51 pounds in following types of board members: covered by the Order as part of the 1989. Producers, first handlers, others in the United States, but Puerto Rico’s The proposed Order would authorize marketing chain as appropriate, production was not included in the assessments on first handlers and on importers (if importers are subject to economic information on the mango importers (collected by Customs) of assessment), and members of the general industry. Therefore, information on mangos at a rate of 1⁄2 cent per pound. public. The Association’s proposal Puerto Rico was added to the analysis. This would generate about $2.5 million specified that the Board would consist Finally, one commenter noted that the to administer the program: About 8 of eight U.S. importers, one U.S. first 500,000 pound exemption for first percent from domestic production and handler, seven foreign producers, one handlers and importers would eliminate 92 percent from imports. First handlers public member, and two non-voting the regulatory burden on small packers and importers of less than 500,000 U.S. wholesalers and/or retailers of and importers and also would benefit pounds of mangos per year will be mangos. In reviewing the Association’s the program administratively. exempt. U.S. produced mangos that are proposal, the Department determined exported are also exempt. that an alternative composition of the Paperwork Reduction Act The cost of the assessment and Board would be more appropriate. In accordance with OMB regulations reporting requirements for first handlers Therefore, this proposed rule provides [5 CFR part 1320], which implement the and importers is likely to be offset by for the Board to consist of eight U.S. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 the benefit of increased demand for importers, one U.S. first handler, two U.S.C. Chapter 35), the information mangos in the United States. The U.S. producers, seven foreign producers, collection and recordkeeping Association’s goal for the program is to and two non-voting U.S. wholesalers requirements that may be imposed by increase consumption of mangos in the and/or retailers. this Order were submitted to OMB for United States by 30 percent after one Section 516 authorizes an order to review. Those requirements would year. In addition, U.S. consumers would provide for exemption of de minimis become effective only upon benefit from additional information quantities of an agricultural commodity; implementation of the Order if the regarding mangos. Another benefit to different payment and reporting referendum passes and after OMB first handlers and importers of mangos schedules; coverage of research, approval. would be that they could serve on the promotion, and information activities to Title: National Research, Promotion, Board and direct the Board’s programs. expand, improve, or make more efficient and Consumer Information Programs. Associations and related industry the marketing or use of an agricultural OMB Number for background form media would receive news releases and commodity in both domestic and (number 1 below): 0505–0001. other information regarding the foreign markets; provision for reserve Expiration date of approval: February implementation and referendum funds; provision for credits for generic 28, 2006. process. Furthermore, all information and branded activities; and assessment OMB Number for other information would be available electronically. of imports. The Board would develop guidelines In addition, section 518 of the Act collections: 0581–0209. for compliance with the program. The provides for referenda to ascertain Expiration Date of Approval: February Board would recommend changes in the approval of an order to be conducted 28, 2006. assessment rate, programs, plans, either prior to its going into effect or Type of Request: New information projects, budgets, and any rules and within 3 years after assessments first collection for research and promotion regulations that might be necessary for begin under the order. An order also programs. the administration of the program. The may provide for its approval in a Abstract: The information collection administrative expenses of the Board are referendum to be based upon: (1) requirements in the request are essential limited by the Act to no more than 15 Approval by a majority of those persons to carry out the intent of the Act. percent of its assessment income. voting; (2) persons voting for approval In addition, there will be the There are no federal or state programs who represent a majority of the volume additional burden on first handlers and that duplicate, overlap, or conflict with of the agricultural commodity; or (3) a importers voting in referenda. The this proposed rule. majority of those persons voting for referendum ballot, which represents the With regard to alternatives to this approval who also represent a majority information collection requirement proposed rule, the Act itself provides for of the volume of the agricultural relating to referenda, is addressed in a authority to tailor a program according commodity. proposed rule on referendum to the individual needs of an industry. This proposal includes provisions for procedures which is published A provision is made for permissive domestic market expansion and separately in this issue of the Federal terms in an order under section 516 of improvement, reserve funds, and an Register. the Act, and other sections provide for initial referendum to be conducted prior Under the proposed program, first alternatives. For example, section 514 of to the Order going into effect. Approval handlers would be required to pay the Act provides for orders applicable would be based upon a majority of the assessments and file reports with and to: (1) Producers; (2) first handlers and first handlers and importers of mangos submit assessments to the Board. While other persons in the marketing chain as represented by those voting in the the proposed Order would impose appropriate; and (3) importers (if referendum. certain recordkeeping requirements on imports are subject to assessment). We received comments on the initial first handlers, information required Section 515 of the Act provides for regulatory flexibility analysis. One under the proposed Order could be the establishment of a board to commenter questioned a statement in compiled from records currently administer a program established under the analysis that indicated that an maintained. Such records shall be the Act. This section states that the increase in demand for mangos resulting retained for at least two years beyond board will consist of members from this program may lead to a the marketing year of their applicability.

VerDate jul<14>2003 21:02 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\09OCP2.SGM 09OCP2 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Proposed Rules 58559

An estimated 89 respondents would the amount of work necessary to fill out (4) Monthly report by each first handler provide information to the Board. They the required reports. In addition, the of mangos would be: 5 first handlers covered by information to be included on these Estimate of Burden: Public reporting the program, 3 exempt first handlers, 55 forms is not available from other sources burden for this collection of information importers covered by the program, 3 because such information relates is estimated to average 0.5 hours per exempt importers, 4 domestic producer specifically to individual first handlers each first handler reporting on mangos nominees, 1 foreign producer who are subject to the provisions of the handled. organization, 14 foreign producer Act. The requirement to keep records for Respondents: First handlers. nominees, and 4 wholesaler and/or two years is consistent with normal Estimated number of Respondents: 5. retailer nominees. The estimated total industry practices. Estimated number of Responses per cost of providing information to the Therefore, there is no practical Respondent: 12. Board by all respondents would be method for collecting the required Estimated Total Annual Burden on $790.01. The estimated cost for all first information without the use of these Respondents: 30 hours. handlers covered by the program would forms. be $336.66 or $67.33 per first handler Information collection requirements (5) A requirement to maintain records covered by the program; $7.50 for all that are included in this proposal sufficient to verify reports submitted exempt first handlers or $2.50 per include: under the Order. exempt first handler; $393.34 for all Estimate of Burden: Public importers covered by the program or (1) A Background Information Form recordkeeping burden for keeping this $7.15 per importer covered by the (OMB Form 0505–0001). information is estimated to average 0.5 program; $7.50 for all exempt importers Estimate of Burden: Public reporting hours per recordkeeper maintaining or $2.50 for each exempt importer; for this collection of information is such records. $13.34 for all domestic producers or estimated to average 0.5 hours per Respondents: First handlers and $3.34 per domestic producer; $1.67 for response for each Board nominee. importers. the foreign producer organization; Respondents: First handlers, Estimated Number of Respondents: $23.33 for all foreign producer importers, domestic producers, foreign 60. nominees or $1.67 per foreign producer producers, and wholesalers and/or nominee; and $6.67 for the wholesaler Estimated Total Annual Burden of retailers. Respondents: 30 hours. and/or retailer nominees or $1.67 per Estimated number of Respondents: 40 wholesaler and/or retailer nominee. for initial nominations, 13 in Background These totals have been estimated by subsequent years. The Act authorizes the Department, multiplying total burden hours Estimated number of Responses per under a generic authority, to establish requested by $10.00 per hour, a sum Respondent: 1 every 3 years. (0.3) agricultural commodity research and deemed to be reasonable should the Estimated Total Annual Burden on promotion orders. The Act provides for respondents be compensated for their Respondents: 20 hours for the initial a number of optional provisions that time. nominations and 6.7 hours annually The proposed Order’s provisions have allow the tailoring of orders for different thereafter. been carefully reviewed, and every commodities. Section 516 of the Act effort has been made to minimize any (2) Voting in the nomination process provides permissive terms for orders, unnecessary recordkeeping costs or and other sections provide for Estimate of Burden: Public reporting requirements, including efforts to utilize alternatives. For example, section 514 of burden for this collection of information information already submitted under the Act provides for orders applicable is estimated to average 0.5 hours per other mango programs administered by to: (1) Producers; (2) first handlers and response. USDA. others in the marketing chain as The proposed forms would require Respondents: First handlers, appropriate; and (3) importers (if the minimum information necessary to importers, domestic producers, and a importers are subject to assessment). effectively carry out the requirements of foreign producer organization. Section 516 authorizes an order to the program, and their use is necessary Estimated number of Respondents: provide for exemption of de minimis to fulfill the intent of the Act. Such 65. quantities of an agricultural commodity; information can be supplied without Estimated Number of Responses per different payment and reporting data processing equipment or outside Respondent: 1 every 3 years. (0.3) schedules; coverage of research, technical expertise. In addition, there Estimated Total Annual Burden on promotion, and information activities to are no additional training requirements Respondents: 11 hours. expand, improve, or make more efficient the marketing or use of an agricultural for individuals filling out reports and (3) An exemption application for first commodity in both domestic and remitting assessments to the Board. The handlers and importers who will be foreign markets; provision for reserve forms would be simple, easy to exempt from assessments understand, and place as small a burden funds; provision for credits for generic as possible on the person required to file Estimate of Burden: Public reporting and branded activities; and assessment the information. burden for this collection of information of imports. In addition, section 518 of Collecting information monthly is estimated to average 0.25 hours per the Act provides for referenda to during the production season would response for each exempt first handler ascertain approval of an order to be coincide with normal industry business and importer. conducted either prior to its going into practices. Reporting, other than Respondents: Exempt First handlers effect or within 3 years after monthly, would impose an additional and importers. assessments first begin under an order. and unnecessary recordkeeping burden Estimated Number of Respondents: 6. An order also may provide for its on first handlers and importers. The Estimated Number of Responses per approval in a referendum based upon timing and frequency of collecting Respondent: 1. different voting patterns. Section 515 information are intended to meet the Estimated Total Annual Burden on provides for establishment of a board needs of the industry while minimizing Respondents: 1.5 hours. from among producers, first handlers

VerDate jul<14>2003 21:02 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\09OCP2.SGM 09OCP2 58560 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Proposed Rules

and others in the marketing chain as proposed Order; or (2) at the request of of assessments on imports of the appropriate, and importers, if imports the Board established under the commodity covered by the program or are subject to assessment. proposed Order; or (3) at the request of on products containing that commodity, This proposed Order includes 10 percent or more of the number of at a rate comparable to the rate provisions for domestic market persons eligible to vote. The Association determined for the domestic agricultural expansion and improvement, reserve has requested that a referendum be commodity covered by the proposed funds, and an initial referendum to be conducted every five years to determine Order. The Association has proposed to conducted prior to the program going if first handlers and importers want the assess imports. into effect. Approval would be based program to continue. The assessment levied on upon a majority of the first handlers and In addition to these criteria, the Act domestically-produced and imported importers voting in the referendum. provides that the Department may mangos would be used to pay for The Association has requested the conduct a referendum at any time to promotion, research, and consumer and establishment of a Mango Promotion, determine whether the continuation, industry information as well as Research, and Information Order (Order) suspension, or termination of the administration, maintenance, and pursuant to the Act. The Act authorizes proposed Order or a provision of the functioning of the Board. Expenses the establishment and operation of proposed Order is favored by persons incurred by the Department in generic promotion programs which may eligible to vote. implementing and administering the include a combination of promotion, A national research and promotion proposed Order, including referenda research, industry information, and program for mangos would help the costs, also would be paid from consumer information activities funded industry to increase consumption of assessments. Sections 516(e)(1) and (2) by mandatory assessments. These mangos in the United States. of the Act state that an order may programs are designed to maintain and Worldwide, mangos rank first in provide for credits of assessments for expand markets and uses for terms of overall fruit consumption per generic and branded activities. The agricultural commodities. This proposal capita. In the United States, mango Association has elected not to propose would provide for the development and consumption currently ranked sixteenth credits for generic or branded activities. financing of an effective and at 1.8 pounds per capita in 2000, Therefore, the terms ‘‘generic activities’’ coordinated program of research, according to ERS. In contrast, bananas and ‘‘branded activities’’ are not defined promotion, and information for mangos. ranked number one in the United States in the proposed Order, and credits for The purpose of the program is to with a per capita consumption of 29.2 assessments would not be allowed. maintain, expand, and develop pounds. According to the Association, The Association’s initial proposal, domestic markets for fresh mangos. the low level of mango consumption is dated June 29, 2001, provided for the The program would not become due, in part, to lack of product assessments to be paid by producers and effective until approved in a referendum awareness. U.S. consumers are largely included no exemptions. Subsequently, conducted by USDA. Section 518 of the unfamiliar with the varieties of mangos, the Association sent a letter to the Act provides for USDA to: (1) Conduct their nutritional benefits, and how to Department to revise its proposal by an initial referendum, preceding a handle them. changing the U.S. producer assessment proposed Order’s effective date, among Except for a pilot project conducted to a U.S. first handler assessment and to persons who would pay assessments by the Association with voluntary exempt handlers and importers of less under the program; or (2) implement a contributions in 1999, mango promotion than 500,000 pounds of mangos per proposed Order, pending the conduct of has been virtually nonexistent in the calendar year and exports of U.S. a referendum, among persons subject to United States. There are no large mangos. These modifications reflected a assessments, within three years after industry members capable of promoting change in industry preferences for assessments first begin. the commodity independently. The program coverage. In accordance with section 518(e) of mango industry is fragmented. First handlers would be required to the Act, the results of the referendum Distribution is conducted by a large pay assessments to the Board and must be determined one of three ways: number of small importers receiving maintain records on all mangos (1) By a majority of those persons product from multiple countries of handled, including mangos produced by voting; (2) by persons voting for origin. This makes coordinated research a first handler. approval who represent a majority of the and promotion efforts extremely Assessments on imported mangos volume of the agricultural commodity; difficult in the absence of a national would be collected by Customs at the or (3) by a majority of those persons program. time of entry into the United States and voting for approval who also represent Average annual U.S. mango prices remitted to the Board. a majority of the volume of the have been declining since 1990. All information obtained from agricultural commodity. Increased supply accompanied by persons subject to this proposed Order The Association has recommended current demand levels will most likely as a result of recordkeeping and that the Department conduct a yield lower wholesale prices in the reporting requirements would be kept referendum in which approval of the future. confidential by all officers, employees, proposed Order would be based on a A national program would generate and agents of USDA and of the Board. majority of the eligible first handlers funds through mandatory assessments However, this information may be and importers voting in the referendum. on domestic and imported mangos to be disclosed only if the Department The Association has also recommended used to conduct research and market considers the information relevant, and that a referendum be conducted prior to development strategies such as sales the information is revealed in a judicial the proposed Order going into effect. promotion, publicity, public relations, proceeding or administrative hearing In accordance with the Act, USDA and advertising. Such a program would brought at the direction or on the would oversee the program’s operations. also provide centralized request of the Department or to which In addition, the Act requires the communications and facilitate better the Department or any officer of USDA Department to conduct subsequent distribution management for industry is a party. Other exceptions for referenda: (1) Not later than 7 years after members. Section 516(f) of the Act disclosure of confidential information assessments first begin under the allows an order to authorize the levying would include the issuance of general

VerDate jul<14>2003 21:02 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\09OCP2.SGM 09OCP2 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Proposed Rules 58561

statements based on reports or on statistics from the Department. If proposal. Recommendations that have information relating to a number of warranted, the Board will recommend to been adopted are discussed herein. persons subject to an order if the the Department that membership on the The opposing comments also raised statements do not identify the Board be altered to reflect any changes additional issues and concerns information furnished by any person or in geographical distribution of domestic regarding the proposed program. These the publication, by direction of the mango production and importation and commenters questioned the Department of the name of any person the quantity of domestic production and constitutionality of the program; offered violating an order and a statement of the imports. To help ensure equitable their own views of the impact of the particular provisions of an order representation of importers and first proposed program on the domestic violated by the person. handlers on the Board, additional first mango industry; discussed the state of The proposed Order provides for handlers may be added to the Board if the domestic mango industry and the USDA to conduct an initial referendum the quantity of domestic production comparative advantages and preceding the proposed Order’s effective increases to a level where first handlers disadvantages for U.S. mango growers in date. Therefore, approval of the would be entitled to an additional terms of regulatory requirements, ability proposed Order will be determined by member on the Board. Currently, each to export, costs of production and the a majority of the eligible first handlers importer member represents about 42.6 like; and questioned the make-up of the and importers voting in the referendum. million pounds of imported mangos, proposed board. Questions were raised The proposed Order also provides for and the first handler member represents as to program focus with regard to subsequent referenda to be conducted about 6.2 million pounds of domestic imports. Two of the commenters (1) every 5 years after the program is in mango production. referenced an agricultural economic effect; (2) at the request of the Board Board members will serve terms of study conducted in Florida, at the state established under the proposed Order; three years and be able to serve a level, to support their views. The or (3) when requested by 10 percent or maximum of two consecutive terms, commenters believe the proposed program would not benefit U.S. growers. more of first handlers and importers of except that the wholesaler/retailer mangos covered by the proposed Order. Two opponents concluded that the positions shall carry a term of one year. In addition, the Department may proposed program should not be Wholesaler and retailer members may conduct a referendum at any time. applied to domestic production serve three consecutive one-year terms. The Act requires that an order provide (producers) and that domestic When the Board is first established, the for the establishment of a board to production should be exempt from U.S. first handler, two U.S. importers, administer the program under USDA assessments. We disagree. We are of the one U.S. producer, and two foreign supervision. The Department modified view that this program is constitutional producers will be assigned initial terms the Association’s proposal by adding and consistent with the provisions of of four years; three U.S. importers, one two domestic producers and eliminating the Act and that the benefits of this the public member position to help U.S. producer, and two foreign program would outweigh program costs. ensure that the program will benefit the producers will be assigned initial terms In addition, a favorable comment also domestic mango industry. Therefore, the of three years; and three U.S. importers, supported one exemption for U.S. proposed Order provides for a 20- and three foreign producers will be producers based upon the volume of member Board consisting of eight U.S. assigned initial terms of two years. U.S. production. importers, one U.S. first handler, two Thereafter, these positions will carry a The commenters from Florida and U.S. producers, seven foreign producers, three-year term. Members serving initial Puerto Rico also expressed the belief and two non-voting wholesalers and/or terms of two or four years will be that the proposed mango program retailers. In addition, the Department eligible to serve a second term of three represents, for domestic producers, included a separate definition for years. Each term of office will end on taxation without representation. foreign producers. December 31, with new terms of office However, domestic producers are not To ensure fair and equitable beginning on January 1. responsible for paying assessments representation of the mango industry on Comments under the proposed program. Although the Board, the Act requires membership it is possible that the assessment will be on the Board to reflect the geographical The proposal was published in the passed back to the producers, only distribution of the production of mangos Federal Register on August 26, 2002 [67 importers and first handlers of fresh and the quantity or value of imports. We FR 54908], with a 60-day comment mangos would be responsible for paying anticipate that this program will assist period ending on October 25, 2002. In assessments into the program. Handlers domestic producers by increasing the addition, the USDA published a and importers of less than 500,000 demand for mangos. It is possible that proposed rule on the referendum pounds of mangos, per calendar year, domestic production will expand procedures in the Federal Register on are exempt from paying assessments. accordingly, in which case August 26, 2002 [67 FR 54920], with the Further, 92 percent of the assessment reapportioning of the Board would be same 60-day comment period. Twenty- funds would come from imported required under the Order. two comments from 21 persons or mangos. USDA recognized the interests Upon implementation of the proposed organizations were received by the of domestic producers by adding two Order and pursuant to the Act, at least deadline. Commenters included U.S. producers to the Board. These two once every five years, the Board will domestic packers, private farms, four members represent two of the 18 voting review the geographical distribution of foreign interests, and an American positions on the Board which represents production of mangos in the United produce association. Nineteen of the 22 11 percent of the seats on the Board. States, the geographical distribution of comments were in support of the In contrast, six other commenters the importation of mangos into the proposed program while three were stated that they supported USDA adding United States, the quantity of mangos opposed. Two comments were received domestic producer seats to the Board. In produced in the United States, and the late, however, they did not raise any addition, five of these commenters quantity of mangos imported into the issues different from those timely noted that they were also satisfied that United States. The review will be based received. Some of the favorable the proposal requires that, at least once on Board assessment records and comments recommended changes to the every five years, the Board would

VerDate jul<14>2003 21:02 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\09OCP2.SGM 09OCP2 58562 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Proposed Rules

review the geographic distribution and also expressed the view that a single of the Order requires that all varieties of production of mangos to ensure organization representing each mangos be treated equally. equitable Board composition and that exporting country would be more Two of the commenters who are additional U.S. first handlers would be feasible and practical than one opposed to the program expressed the added if domestic production increases. organization representing the interests belief that USDA should have notified One commenter who supported the of the producers of all exporting them when USDA received the proposal program requested that the definition of countries. This comment has merit and from the Association. USDA does not first handler in § 1206.6 be revised for we have eliminated the requirement that announce to the public when a proposal clarity. The commenter proposed a there be one foreign producer is received because, at that point, it is rewrite of the definition, including in organization from § 1206.31(g) of the not known whether the proposal will be the text the time frame of a calendar Order. This would provide flexibility in accepted by USDA. Notice to all year for the handling of 500,000 pounds the Order concerning foreign producer potentially affected parties is made by or more of mangos. Specifying the time organizations. publishing in the Federal Register the frame has merit. However, we believe This commenter also recommended initial proposed rule requesting that with one additional change, the that the Order be changed to allow the comments. In addition to that proposed definition of first handler is clear and government of an exporting country to rule, USDA issued a news release. consistent with the overall regulatory nominate foreign producer members if Further, fruit and vegetable industry provisions. A separate reference to there is no national producer trade paper and magazine coverage of retailer in the definition of first handler organization in that country. We the proposal from the development is not needed. All persons, including disagree with this comment. As stated stages, prior to the submission to USDA, retailers who meet the terms of the above, we have removed the limitation and to date has been extensive. definition of first handler as provided in on the number of foreign producer Therefore, the industry received § 1206.6 would be covered under the organizations. In countries where there substantial advance notice. provisions of the Mango Order. is currently no such organization, Finally, miscellaneous non- Accordingly, the reference is deleted. producers may create one in order to substantive changes are made by the Further, as a result of the time frame submit nominees for the foreign Department for clarity in the definition change to § 1206.6, an appropriate producer positions on the Board. This of Market and Marketing in § 1206.12 conforming change has been made to would be consistent with other national and § 1206.78 to update the OMB the definition of importer in § 1206.9. research and promotion programs control number. Another commenter expressed supervised by USDA. Another The proposed Order is summarized as support for the program and commenter recommended that each of follows: recommended that the definition of the seven major exporting countries be Sections 1206.1 through 1206.24 of foreign producer in § 1206.8 more represented on the Board. Section the proposed Order define certain terms, closely reflect the definition of domestic 1206.31(g) already provides that foreign such as mango, first handler and producers in § 1206.16 to ensure that producer member nominees be importer, which are used in the foreign producer members on the Board representative of the major countries proposed Order. The definitions of are actually producers of mangos and exporting mangos to the United States. eligible first handler and eligible not merely exporters of mangos to the Two of the commenters who importer were modified to improve United States. This comment has merit supported the Order stated that they clarity and be consistent with current and § 1206.8 is revised accordingly. would like a means of expressing their Agency rules. Three commenters in support of the views to the Board if they do not have Sections 1206.30 through 1206.37 program recommend that the term of a member on the Board. All Board include provisions relating to the Board. office for the wholesaler/retailer meetings will be open to the public, and These provisions cover establishment position be reduced from three years to any person will have the opportunity to and membership, nominations and one year. This would expose the Board contact the Board’s staff or members at appointments, term of office, vacancies, to a wider range of firms with marketing any time without making any changes to procedures, compensation and and consumer sales experience and the Order. Accordingly, no change to reimbursement, powers, duties and allow a broader base of wholesalers and the Order is made as a result of this prohibited activities of the Board, which retailers. This comment has merit. comment. is the governing body authorized to Accordingly, USDA has added a term One commenter who supported the administer the proposed Order through limitation for these positions of three, Order requested that USDA develop the implementation of programs, plans, one-year terms in § 1206.32. grade standards for mangos. The Board projects, budgets, and contracts to The same three commenters also will not have the authority to develop promote and disseminate information recommended a three-week voting grade standards, and this issue is best about mangos, subject to oversight of the period for the referendum instead of addressed to the USDA’s fruit and Department. four. Due to the relatively small number vegetable grading service. Therefore, Sections 1206.40 through 1206.43 of eligible voters in a referendum, this this comment is denied. cover budget review and approval; comment has been adopted and requires Another commenter who favored the financial statements; authorize the no change in the text of the Order. program requested that the Board’s collection of assessments; specify how Regarding the foreign producer promotional campaigns disseminate assessments would be used; specify who positions on the Board, one commenter variety-specific information on mangos. pays the assessment and how; stated support for the definition of The Board, once it is appointed and has exemptions; and authorize the foreign producer in the Order because a staff, will make decisions regarding imposition of a late-payment charge on the definition excludes persons who are the types of promotional campaigns it past-due assessments. solely exporters or brokers. The will conduct. This may include The Association recommends a commenter also stated that there is no dissemination of information on all proposed assessment rate of 1⁄2 cent per well recognized organization that different varieties of mangos. The Act pound for domestic mangos and represents the interests of producers in requires mangos of all origins be imported mangos. The assessment rate exporting countries. This commenter promoted generically and § 1206.50(d) will be reviewed and may be modified

VerDate jul<14>2003 21:02 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\09OCP2.SGM 09OCP2 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Proposed Rules 58563

with the approval of the Department, ballot by mail should call the following National Mango Promotion Board after the first referendum is conducted toll-free telephone number to receive a 1206.30 Establishment and membership. as stated in § 1206.71(b). Persons failing ballot: 1 (888) 720–9917. All ballots will 1206.31 Nominations and appointments. to remit total assessments due in a be subject to verification. Ballots must 1206.32 Term of office. timely manner may also be subject to be received by the referendum agents no 1206.33 Vacancies. actions under federal debt collection later than the close of business, Eastern 1206.34 Procedure. procedures as set forth in 7 CFR 3.1 daylight-standard time, November 28, 1206.35 Compensation and reimbursement. through 3.36 for all research and 1206.36 Powers and duties. 2003, to be counted. 1206.37 Prohibited activities. promotion programs administered by Kathie M. Birdsell and Margaret B. USDA [60 FR 12533, March 7, 1995]. Irby, Research and Promotion Branch, Expenses and Assessments Sections 1206.50 through 1206.52 Fruit and Vegetable Programs, 1206.40 Budget and expenses. address programs, plans, and projects; Agricultural Marketing Service, U.S. 1206.41 Financial statements. require the Board to periodically Department of Agriculture, Room 2535- 1206.42 Assessments. conduct an independent review of its S, Stop 0244, Washington, DC 20250– 1206.43 Exemptions. overall program; and address patents, 0244, are designated as the referendum Promotion, Research, and Information copyrights, trademarks, information, agents of the Department to conduct the 1206.50 Programs, plans, and projects. publications, and product formulations referendum. The Procedure for the 1206.51 Independent evaluation. developed through the use of Conduct of Referenda in connection 1206.52 Patents, copyrights, trademarks, assessment funds. with the Mango Promotion, Research, information, publications, and product Sections 1206.60 through 1206.62 and Information Order, 7 CFR formulations. concern reporting and recordkeeping 1206.100–1206.108, which is being Reports, Books, and Records requirements for persons subject to the published separately in this issue of the 1206.60 Reports. Order and protect the confidentiality of Federal Register, shall be used to 1206.61 Books and records. information from such books, records, conduct the referendum. 1206.62 Confidential treatment. or reports. Miscellaneous List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 1206 Sections 1206.70 through 1206.78 1206.70 Right of the Secretary. describe the rights of the Secretary of Administrative practice and 1206.71 Referenda. Agriculture (Secretary); address procedure, Advertising, Consumer 1206.72 Suspension and termination. referenda; authorize the Secretary to information, Mangos, Marketing 1206.73 Proceedings after termination. suspend or terminate the Order when agreements, Promotion, Reporting and 1206.74 Effect of termination or deemed appropriate; prescribe recordkeeping requirements. amendment. proceedings after suspension or For the reasons set forth in the 1206.75 Personal liability. termination; and address personal preamble, it is proposed that Title 7, 1206.76 Separability. liability, separability, amendments, and 1206.77 Amendments. Chapter XI of the Code of Federal 1206.78 OMB control number. the OMB control number. Regulations be amended as follows: In addition to adding a definition of 1. The authority citation for part 1206 Authority: 7 U.S.C. 7411–7425. foreign producer and changing the continues to read as follows: Subpart A—Mango Promotion, composition of the Board, the Authority: 7 U.S.C. 7411–7425. Department made minor changes to the Research, and Information Order Association’s proposal which do not 2. Subpart A is added Part 1206 to Definitions read as follows: materially affect the program. § 1206.1 Act. The Department has determined that this proposed Order is consistent with PART 1206—MANGO PROMOTION, Act means the Commodity Promotion, and will effectuate the purposes of the RESEARCH, AND INFORMATION Research, and Information Act of 1996 (7 U.S.C. 7411–7425; Public Law 104– Act. Subpart A—Mango Promotion, Research, For the proposed Order to become and Information Order Definitions 127; 110 Stat. 1029), or any amendments thereto. effective, it must be approved by a Sec. majority of the eligible importers and 1206.1 Act. § 1206.2 Board. first handlers voting in the referendum. 1206.2 Board. Board or National Mango Promotion Referendum Order 1206.3 Conflict of interest. 1206.4 Customs. Board means the administrative body It is hereby directed that a referendum 1206.5 Department. established pursuant to § 1206.30, or be conducted among eligible mango 1206.6 First handler. such other name as recommended by importers and first handlers to 1206.7 Fiscal period. the Board and approved by the determine whether they favor 1206.8 Foreign producer. Department. implementation of the Mango 1206.9 Importer. 1206.10 Information. § 1206.3 Conflict of interest. Promotion, Research, and Information 1206.11 Mangos. Order. 1206.12 Market or marketing. Conflict of interest means a situation The referendum shall be conducted 1206.13 Order. in which a member or employee of the from November 10, 2003 through 1206.14 Part and subpart. Board has a direct or indirect financial November 28, 2003. Ballots will be 1206.15 Person. interest in a person who performs a mailed to all known mango importers 1206.16 Producer. service for, or enters into a contract and first handlers on or before October 1206.17 Promotion. with, the Board for anything of 27, 2003. First handlers and importers 1206.18 Research. economic value. who handled or imported 500,000 1206.19 Retailer. 1206.20 Secretary. § 1206.4 Customs. pounds or more of fresh mangos, 1206.21 Suspend. respectively, from January 1 through 1206.22 Terminate. Customs means the Customs and December 31, 2002, are eligible to vote. 1206.23 United States. Border Protection of the U.S. Eligible voters who do not receive a 1206.24 Wholesaler. Department of Homeland Security.

VerDate jul<14>2003 21:02 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\09OCP2.SGM 09OCP2 58564 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Proposed Rules

§ 1206.5 Department. nutritional attributes, and care of marketability, production, product Department means the U.S. mangos; and development, or quality of mangos, Department of Agriculture or any officer (b) Industry information, which including research relating to or employee of the Department to whom means information and programs that nutritional value, cost of production, authority has heretofore been delegated, will lead to the development of new new product development, varietal or to whom authority may hereafter be markets, new marketing strategies, or development, nutritional value and delegated, to act in the Secretary’s stead. increased efficiency for the mango benefits, and marketing of mangos. industry, and activities to enhance the § 1206.6 First handler. image of the mango industry. § 1206.19 Retailer. First handler means any person, Retailer means a person engaged in (excluding a common or contract § 1206.11 Mangos. the business of selling mangos only to carrier), receiving 500,000 or more Mangos means all fresh fruit of consumers. pounds of mangos from producers in a Mangifera indica L. of the family § 1206.20 Secretary. calendar year and who as owner, agent, Anacardiaceae. Secretary means the Secretary of or otherwise ships or causes mangos to § 1206.12 Market or marketing. be shipped as specified in this Order. Agriculture of the United States. Marketing means the sale or other This definition includes those engaged § 1206.21 Suspend. in the business of buying, selling and/ disposition of mangos in the U.S. Suspend means to issue a rule under or offering for sale; receiving; packing; domestic market. To market means to section 553 of title 5, U.S.C., to grading; marketing; or distributing sell or otherwise dispose of mangos in temporarily prevent the operation of an mangos in commercial quantities. The interstate or intrastate channels of order or part thereof during a particular term first handler includes a producer commerce. period of time specified in the rule. who handles or markets mangos of the § 1206.13 Order. producer’s own production. Order means an order issued by the § 1206.22 Terminate. § 1206.7 Fiscal period. Department under section 514 of the Act Terminate means to issue a rule under that provides for a program of generic section 553 of title 5, U.S.C., to cancel Fiscal period means a calendar year promotion, research, and information permanently the operation of an order from January 1 through December 31, or regarding agricultural commodities or part thereof beginning on a certain such other period as recommended by authorized under the Act. date specified in the rule. the Board and approved by the Department. § 1206.14 Part and subpart. § 1206.23 United States. § 1206.8 Foreign producer. Part means the Mango Promotion, United States or U.S. means Research, and Information Order and all collectively the 50 states, the District of Foreign producer means any person rules, regulations, and supplemental Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto who is engaged in the production and orders issued pursuant to the Act and Rico, and the territories and possessions sale of mangos outside of the United the Order. The Order shall be a subpart of the United States. States and who owns, or shares the of such part. ownership and risk of loss of the crop § 1206.24 Wholesaler. for sale in the U.S. market or who is § 1206.15 Person. Wholesaler means any person engaged engaged, outside of the United States, in Person means any individual, group in the purchase, assembly, the business of producing, or causing to of individuals, partnership, corporation, transportation, storage, and distribution be produced, mangos beyond the association, cooperative, or any other of mangos for sale to other wholesalers, person’s own family use and having legal entity. retailers, and foodservice firms. value at first point of sale. § 1206.16 Producer. National Mango Promotion Board § 1206.9 Importer. Producer means any person who is § 1206.30 Establishment and membership. Importer means any person importing engaged in the production and sale of 500,000 or more pounds of mangos into mangos in the United States and who (a) Establishment of the National the United States in a calendar year as owns, or shares the ownership and risk Mango Promotion Board. There is a principal or as an agent, broker, or of loss of, the crop or a person who is hereby established a National Mango consignee of any person who produces engaged in the business of producing, or Promotion Board composed of eight or handles mangos outside of the United causing to be produced, mangos beyond importers, one first handler, two States for sale in the United States, and the person’s own family use and having domestic producers, seven foreign who is listed as the importer of record value at first point of sale. producers, and two non-voting for such mangos. wholesalers and/or retailers of mangos § 1206.17 Promotion. in the United States. The chairperson § 1206.10 Information. Promotion means any action taken to shall reside in the United States and the Information means information and present a favorable image of mangos to Board office shall also be located in the programs that are designed to develop the general public and the food industry United States. new markets, marketing strategies, for the purpose of improving the (b) Importer districts. The importer increase market efficiency, and competitive position of mangos and seats shall be allocated based on the activities that are designed to enhance stimulating the sale of mangos in the volume of mangos imported into the the image of mangos in the United United States. This includes paid Customs Districts identified by their States. These include: advertising and public relations. name and Code Number as defined in (a) Consumer information, which the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the means any action taken to provide § 1206.18 Research. United States. The initial allocation will information to, and broaden the Research means any type of test, be two seats for District I, three seats for understanding of, the general public study, or analysis designed to advance District II, two seats for District III, and regarding the consumption, use, the image, desirability, use, one seat for District IV.

VerDate jul<14>2003 21:02 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\09OCP2.SGM 09OCP2 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Proposed Rules 58565

(1) District I includes the Customs ballot which will be sent to all first years; and three importers and three Districts of Portland, ME (01), St. handlers for a vote. The nominee foreign producers will be assigned Albans, VT (02), Boston, MA (04), receiving the highest number of votes initial terms of two years. Thereafter, Providence, RI (05), Ogdensburg, NY and the nominee receiving the second each of these positions will carry a full (07), Buffalo, NY (09), New York City, highest number of votes shall be three-year term. Members serving initial NY (10), Philadelphia, PA (11), submitted to the Department as the first terms of two or four years will be Baltimore, MD (13), Norfolk, VA (14), handlers’ first and second choice eligible to serve a second term of three Charlotte, NC (15), Charleston, SC (16), nominees. years. Each term of office will end on Savannah, GA (17), Tampa, FL (18), San (e) Nominees to fill the importer December 31, with new terms of office Juan, PR (49), Virgin Islands of the positions on the Board shall be solicited beginning on January 1. United States (51), Miami, FL (52) and from all known importers of mangos. Washington, DC (54). The members from each district shall § 1206.33 Vacancies. (2) District II includes the Customs select the nominees for two positions on (a) In the event that any member of Districts of Mobile, AL (19), New the Board. Two nominees shall be the Board ceases to be a member of the Orleans, LA (20), Port Arthur, TX (21), submitted for each position. The category of members from which the Laredo, TX (23), Minneapolis, MN (35), nominees shall be placed on a ballot member was appointed to the Board, Duluth, MN (36), Milwaukee, WI (37), which will be sent to importers in the such position shall automatically Detroit, MI (38), Chicago, IL (39), districts for a vote. For each position, become vacant. Cleveland, OH (41), St. Louis, MO (45), the nominee receiving the highest (b) If a member of the Board Houston, TX (53), and Dallas-Fort number of votes and the nominee consistently refuses to perform the Worth, TX (55). receiving the second highest number of duties of a Board member, or if a (3) District III includes the Customs votes shall be submitted to the member of the Board engages in acts of Districts of El Paso, TX (24), Nogales, Department as the importers’ first and dishonesty or willful misconduct, the AZ (26), Great Falls, MT (33), and second choice nominees. Board may recommend to the Pembina, ND (34). (f) Nominees to fill the domestic Department that the member be (4) District IV includes the Customs producer member positions on the removed from office. If the Department Districts of San Diego, CA (25), Los Board shall be solicited from all known finds the recommendation of the Board Angeles, CA (27), San Francisco, CA domestic producers. The nominees shall shows adequate cause, the Department (28), Columbia-Snake, OR (29), Seattle, be placed on a ballot which will be sent shall remove such member from office. WA (30), Anchorage, AK (31), and to all domestic producers for a vote. The (c) Should any member position Honolulu, HI (32). nominee receiving the highest number become vacant, successors for the (c) Adjustment of membership. At of votes and the nominee receiving the unexpired term of the member shall be least once every five years, the Board second highest number of votes shall be appointed in the manner specified in will review the geographical submitted to the Department as the § 1206.31, except that nomination and distribution of production of mangos in producers’ first and second choice replacement shall not be required if the the United States, the geographical nominees. unexpired term is less than six months. distribution of the importation of (g) Nominees to fill the foreign mangos into the United States, the producer member positions on the § 1206.34 Procedure. quantity of mangos produced in the Board shall be solicited from (a) At a Board meeting, it will be United States, and the quantity of organizations of foreign mango considered a quorum when at least ten mangos imported into the United States. producers. Each organization shall voting members are present. The review will be based on Board submit two nominees for each position, (b) At the start of each fiscal period, assessment records and statistics from and the nominees shall be the Board will select a chairperson and the Department. If warranted, the Board representative of the major countries vice chairperson who will conduct will recommend to the Department that exporting mangos to the United States. meetings throughout that period. membership on the Board be altered to (h) The Board will nominate the (c) All Board members will be notified reflect any changes in geographical wholesaler and/or retailer members. at least 30 days in advance of all Board distribution of domestic mango (i) From the nominations, the and committee meetings unless an production and importation and the Department shall select the members of emergency meeting is declared. quantity of domestic production and the Board. (d) Each voting member of the Board will be entitled to one vote on any imports. To ensure equitable § 1206.32 Term of office. representation, additional first handlers matter put to the Board, and the motion The term of office for first handler, may be added to the Board to reflect will carry if supported by one vote more importer, domestic producer, and increases in domestic production. than 50 percent of the total votes foreign producer members of the Board represented by the Board members § 1206.31 Nominations and appointments. will be three years, and these members present. (a) Voting for first handler, importer, may serve a maximum of two (e) It will be considered a quorum at and domestic producer members will be consecutive three-year terms. The term a committee meeting when at least one made by mail ballot. of office for wholesaler/retailer members more than half of those assigned to the (b) There shall be two nominees for shall be one year, and these members committee are present. Committees may each position on the Board. may serve a maximum of three consist of individuals other than Board (c) Nominations for the initial Board consecutive one-year terms. When the members, and such individuals may will be handled by the Department. Board is first established, the first vote in committee meetings. Committee Subsequent nominations will be handler, two importers, one domestic members shall serve without handled by the Board’s staff. producer, and two foreign producers compensation but shall be reimbursed (d) Nominees to fill the first handler will be assigned initial terms of four for reasonable travel expenses, as member position on the Board shall be years; three importers, one domestic approved by the Board. solicited from all known first handlers. producer, and two foreign producers (f) In lieu of voting at a properly The nominees shall be placed on a will be assigned initial terms of three convened meeting and, when in the

VerDate jul<14>2003 21:02 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\09OCP2.SGM 09OCP2 58566 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Proposed Rules

opinion of the chairperson of the Board provide that: any person who enters into (l) To receive, investigate, and report such action is considered necessary, the a contract or agreement with the Board to the Department complaints of Board may take action if supported by shall develop and submit to the Board violations of the Order; one vote more than 50 percent of the a proposed activity; keep accurate (m) To recommend to the Department members by mail, telephone, electronic records of all of its transactions relating such amendments to the Order as the mail, facsimile, or any other means of to the contract or agreement; account for Board considers appropriate; and communication. In that event, all funds received and expended in (n) To work to achieve an effective, members must be notified and provided connection with the contract or continuous, and coordinated program of the opportunity to vote. Any action so agreement; make periodic reports to the promotion, research, consumer taken shall have the same force and Board of activities conducted under the information, evaluation, and industry effect as though such action had been contract or agreement; and, make such information designed to strengthen the taken at a properly convened meeting of other reports available as the Board or mango industry’s position in the U.S. the Board. All telephone votes shall be the Department considers relevant. domestic market; maintain and expand confirmed promptly in writing. All Furthermore, any contract or agreement existing markets and uses for mangos; votes shall be recorded in Board shall provide that: and to carry out programs, plans, and minutes. (1) The contractor or agreeing party projects designed to provide maximum (g) There shall be no voting by proxy. shall develop and submit to the Board benefits to the mango industry. (h) The chairperson shall be a voting a program, plan, or project together with § 1206.37 Prohibited activities. member and shall reside in the U.S. a budget or budgets that shall show the (i) The organization of the Board and The Board may not engage in, and estimated cost to be incurred for such shall prohibit the employees and agents the procedures for conducting meetings program, plan, or project; of the Board shall be in accordance with of the Board from engaging in: (2) The contractor or agreeing party (a) Any action that would be a conflict its bylaws, which shall be established shall keep accurate records of all its by the Board and approved by the of interest; and transactions and make periodic reports (b) Using funds collected by the Board Department. to the Board of activities conducted, under the Order to undertake any action § 1206.35 Compensation and submit accounting for funds received for the purpose of influencing reimbursement. and expended, and make such other legislation or governmental action or The members of the Board shall serve reports as the Department or the Board policy, by local, state, national, and without compensation but shall be may require; foreign governments, other than reimbursed for reasonable travel (3) The Department may audit the recommending to the Department expenses, as approved by the Board, records of the contracting or agreeing amendments to the Order. party periodically; and incurred by them in the performance of Expenses and Assessments their duties as Board members. (4) Any subcontractor who enters into a contract with a Board contractor and § 1206.40 Budget and expenses. § 1206.36 Powers and duties. who receives or otherwise uses funds (a) At least 60 days prior to the The Board shall have the following allocated by the Board shall be subject beginning of each calendar year, and as powers and duties: to the same provisions as the contractor. may be necessary thereafter, the Board (a) To administer the Order in (f) To prepare and submit for approval shall prepare and submit to the accordance with its terms and of the Department calendar year budgets Department a budget for the calendar conditions and to collect assessments; in accordance with § 1206.40; year covering its anticipated expenses (b) To develop and recommend to the (g) To maintain such records and and disbursements in administering this Department for approval such bylaws as books and prepare and submit such subpart. Each such budget shall include: may be necessary for the functioning of reports and records from time to time to (1) A statement of objectives and the Board, and such rules as may be the Department as the Department may strategy for each program, plan, or necessary to administer the Order, prescribe; to make appropriate project; including activities authorized to be accounting with respect to the receipt (2) A summary of anticipated revenue, carried out under the Order; and disbursement of all funds entrusted with comparative data or at least one (c) To meet, organize, and select from to it; and to keep records that accurately preceding year (except for the initial among the members of the Board a reflect the actions and transactions of budget); chairperson, other officers, committees, the Board; (3) A summary of proposed and subcommittees, as the Board expenditures for each program, plan, or determines appropriate; (h) To cause its books to be audited by a competent auditor at the end of project; and (d) To employ persons, other than the (4) Staff and administrative expense each calendar year and at such other members, as the Board considers breakdowns, with comparative data for times as the Department may request, necessary to assist the Board in carrying at least one preceding year (except for and to submit a report of the audit out its duties and to determine the the initial budget). compensation and specify the duties of directly to the Department; (b) Each budget shall provide such persons; (i) To give the Department the same adequate funds to defray its proposed (e) To develop programs, plans, and notice of Board and committee meetings expenditures and to provide for a projects, and enter into contracts or as is given to members in order that the reserve as set forth in this subpart. agreements, which must be approved by Department’s representative(s) may (c) Subject to this section, any the Department before becoming attend such meetings. amendment or addition to an approved effective, for the development and (j) To act as intermediary between the budget must be approved by the carrying out of programs or projects of Department and any first handler or Department, including shifting funds research, information, or promotion, importer; from one program, plan, or project to and the payment of costs thereof with (k) To furnish to the Department any another. Shifts of funds which do not funds collected pursuant to this subpart. information or records that the cause an increase in the Board’s Each contract or agreement shall Department may request; approved budget and which are

VerDate jul<14>2003 21:02 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\09OCP2.SGM 09OCP2 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Proposed Rules 58567

consistent with governing bylaws need report, year-to-date expenditures, and on the outstanding portion of any not have prior approval by the the unexpended budget. amount for which the person is liable. Department. (b) Each financial statement shall be The rate of interest shall be prescribed (d) The Board is authorized to incur submitted to the Department within 30 by the Department. such expenses, including provision for days after the end of the time period to (h) Persons failing to remit total a reserve, as the Department finds which it applies. assessments due in a timely manner reasonable and likely to be incurred by (c) The Board shall submit annually to may also be subject to actions under the Board for its maintenance and the Department an annual financial federal debt collection procedures. functioning, and to enable it to exercise statement within 90 days after the end (i) The Board may authorize other its powers and perform its duties in of the calendar year to which it applies. organizations to collect assessments on accordance with the provisions of this § 1206.42 Assessments. its behalf with the approval of the subpart. Such expenses shall be paid Department. from funds received by the Board. (a) The funds to cover the Board’s expenses shall be paid from assessments (e) With approval of the Department, § 1206.43 Exemptions. on first handlers and importers, the Board may borrow money for the donations from any person not subject payment of administrative expenses, (a) Any first handler or importer of to assessments under this Order, and subject to the same fiscal, budget, and less than 500,000 pounds of mangos per other funds available to the Board and audit controls as other funds of the calendar year may claim an exemption subject to the limitations contained Board. Any funds borrowed by the from the assessments required under therein. Board shall be expended only for § 1206.42. Mangos produced (b) The assessment rate shall be 1⁄2 startup costs and capital outlays and are domestically and exported from the cent per pound on all mangos. The limited to the first year of operation of United States may annually claim an assessment rate will be reviewed and the Board. exemption from the assessments may be modified by the Board with the required under § 1206.42. (f) The Board may accept voluntary approval of the Department, after the contributions, but these shall only be (b) A first handler or importer first referendum is conducted as stated desiring an exemption shall apply to the used to pay expenses incurred in the in § 1206.71(b). conduct of programs, plans, and Board, on a form provided by the Board, (c) Domestic mangos. First handlers of for a certificate of exemption. A first projects. Voluntary contributions shall domestic mangos are required to pay be free from any encumbrance by the handler shall certify that the first assessments on all mangos handled for handler will handle less than 500,000 donor, and the Board shall retain the U.S. market. This includes mangos complete control of their use. pounds of domestic mangos for the of the first handler’s own production. fiscal period for which the exemption is (g) The Board shall reimburse the (d) Imported mangos. Each importer claimed. An importer shall certify that Department for all expenses incurred by of mangos shall pay an assessment to the importer will import less than the Department in the implementation, the Board through Customs on mangos 500,000 pounds of mangos during the administration, and supervision of the imported for marketing in the United fiscal period for which the exemption is Order, including all referendum costs in States. claimed. connection with the Order. (1) The assessment rate for imported (h) The Board may not expend for mangos shall be the same or equivalent (c) Upon receipt of an application, the administration, maintenance, and to the rate for mangos produced in the Board shall determine whether an functioning of the Board in any calendar United States. exemption may be granted. The Board year an amount that exceeds 15 percent (2) The import assessment shall be then will issue, if deemed appropriate, of the assessments and other income uniformly applied to imported mangos a certificate of exemption to each person received by the Board for that calendar that are identified by the numbers who is eligible to receive one. It is the year. Reimbursements to the 0804.50.4040 and 0804.50.6040 in the responsibility of these persons to retain Department required under paragraph Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the a copy of the certificate of exemption. (g) of this section, are excluded from United States. (d) Importers who receive a certificate this limitation on spending. (3) The assessments due on imported of exemption shall be eligible for (i) The Board may establish an mangos shall be paid when they enter reimbursement of assessments collected operating monetary reserve and may or are withdrawn for consumption in by Customs. These importers shall carry over to subsequent fiscal periods the United States. apply to the Board for reimbursement of excess funds in any reserve so (e) Each person responsible for any assessments paid. No interest will established: Provided that the funds in remitting assessments under paragraph be paid on the assessments collected by the reserve do not exceed one fiscal (c) of this section shall remit the Customs. Requests for reimbursement period’s budget. Subject to approval by amounts due to the Board’s office on a shall be submitted to the Board within the Department, such reserve funds may monthly basis no later than the fifteenth 90 days of the last day of the calendar be used to defray any expenses day of the month following the month year the mangos were actually imported. authorized under this part. in which the mangos were marketed, in such manner as prescribed by the Board. (e) Any person who desires an § 1206.41 Financial statements. (f) A late payment charge shall be exemption from assessments for a (a) As requested by the Department, imposed on any person failing to remit subsequent calendar year shall reapply the Board shall prepare and submit to the Board the total amount for which to the Board, on a form provided by the financial statements to the Department the person is liable by the payment due Board, for a certificate of exemption. on a periodic basis. Each such financial date established under this section. The (f) The Board may require persons statement shall include, but not be amount of the late payment charge shall receiving an exemption from limited to, a balance sheet, income be prescribed by the Department. assessments to provide to the Board statement, and expense budget. The (g) An additional charge shall be reports on the disposition of exempt expense budget shall show expenditures imposed on any person subject to a late mangos and, in the case of importers, during the time period covered by the payment charge in the form of interest proof of payment of assessments.

VerDate jul<14>2003 21:02 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\09OCP2.SGM 09OCP2 58568 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Proposed Rules

Promotion, Research, and Information formulations developed through the use years beyond the fiscal period of their of funds received by the Board under applicability. § 1206.50 Programs, plans, and projects. this subpart shall be the property of the (a) The Board shall receive and U.S. Government, as represented by the § 1206.62 Confidential treatment. evaluate, or on its own initiative Board, and shall, along with any rents, All information obtained from books, develop, and submit to the Department royalties, residual payments, or other records, or reports under the Act and for approval any program, plan, or income from the rental, sales, leasing, this part shall be kept confidential by all project authorized under this subpart. franchising, or other uses of such persons, including all employees and Such programs, plans, or projects shall patents, copyrights, trademarks, former employees of the Board, all provide for: information, publications, or product officers and employees and former (1) The establishment, issuance, formulations, inure to the benefit of the officers and employees of contracting effectuation, and administration of Board; shall be considered income and subcontracting agencies or agreeing appropriate programs for promotion, subject to the same fiscal, budget, and parties having access to such research, and information, including audit controls as other funds of the information. Such information shall not producer and consumer information, Board; and may be licensed subject to be available to Board members, first with respect to mangos; and handlers, or importers. Only those (2) The establishment and conduct of approval by the Department. Upon termination of this subpart, § 1206.73 persons having a specific need for such research with respect to: the use, information to effectively administer the nutritional value and benefits, sale, shall apply to determine disposition of all such property. provisions of this subpart shall have distribution, and marketing of mangos access to such information. Only such in the United States; the creation of new Reports, Books, and Records information so obtained as the Secretary products thereof, to the end that the § 1206.60 Reports. deems relevant shall be disclosed by marketing and use of mangos in the them, and then only in a judicial (a) Each first handler will be required United States may be encouraged, proceeding or administrative hearing to provide to the Board periodically expanded, improved, or made more brought at the direction, or on the such information as may be required by acceptable; and to advance the image, request, of the Secretary, or to which the the Board, with the approval of the desirability, or quality of mangos in the Secretary or any officer of the United Department, which may include but not United States. States is a party, and involving this (b) No program, plan, or project shall be limited to the following: subpart. Nothing in this section shall be be implemented prior to its approval by (1) Number of pounds of domestic deemed to prohibit: mangos handled; the Department. Once a program, plan, (a) The issuance of general statements (2) Number of pounds of domestic or project is so approved, the Board based upon the reports of the number of mangos on which an assessment was shall take appropriate steps to persons subject to this subpart or paid; implement it. statistical data collected therefrom, (c) Each program, plan, or project (3) Name and address of the which statements do not identify the implemented under this subpart shall be producers from whom the first handler information furnished by any person; reviewed or evaluated periodically by has received mangos; and the Board to ensure that it contributes (4) Date that assessment payments (b) The publication, by direction of to an effective program of promotion, were made on each pound of domestic the Secretary, of the name of any person research, or information. If it is found by mangos handled; who has been adjudged to have violated the Board that any such program, plan, (5) Number of pounds of domestic this part, together with a statement of or project does not contribute to an mangos exported; the particular provisions of this part effective program of promotion, (6) The first handler’s tax violated by such person. research, or information, then the Board identification number; shall terminate such program, plan, or (b) Each importer may be required to Miscellaneous project. provide to the Board periodically such (d) No program, plan, or project information as may be required by the § 1206.70 Right of the Secretary. including advertising shall be false or Board, with the approval of the All fiscal matters, programs, plans, or misleading or disparaging to another Department, which may include but not projects, rules or regulations, reports, or agricultural commodity. Mangos of all be limited to the following: other substantive actions proposed and origins shall be treated equally. (1) Number of pounds of mangos prepared by the Board shall be imported; submitted to the Secretary for approval. § 1206.51 Independent evaluation. (2) Number of pounds of mangos on The Board shall, not less often than which an assessment was paid; § 1206.71 Referenda. every five years, authorize and fund, (3) Name, address, and tax (a) Initial Referendum. The Order from funds otherwise available to the identification number of the importer; shall not become effective unless: Board, an independent evaluation of the and (1) The Department determines that effectiveness of the Order and other (4) Date that assessment payments the Order is consistent with and will programs conducted by the Board were made on each pound imported. effectuate the purposes of the Act; and (2) The Order is approved by a pursuant to the Act. The Board shall § 1206.61 Books and records. submit to the Department, and make majority of the first handlers and Each first handler and importer shall available to the public, the results of importers voting, who, during a maintain and make available for each periodic independent evaluation representative period determined by the inspection by the Department such conducted under this paragraph. Department, have been engaged in the books and records as are necessary to handling or importation of mangos. § 1206.52 Patents, copyrights, trademarks, carry out the provisions of this part, any (b) Subsequent referenda. Every five information, publications, and product regulations issued under this part, years, the Department shall hold a formulations. including such records as are necessary referendum to determine whether first Patents, copyrights, trademarks, to verify any reports required. Such handlers and importers of mangos favor information, publications, and product records shall be retained for at least two the continuation of the Order. The

VerDate jul<14>2003 21:02 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\09OCP2.SGM 09OCP2 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Proposed Rules 58569

Order shall continue if it is favored by Department to serve as trustees for the arisen or which may thereafter arise in a majority of the first handlers and purpose of liquidating the affairs of the connection with any provision of this importers voting who, during a Board. Such persons, upon designation part; or representative period determined by the by the Department, shall become (b) Release or extinguish any violation Department, have been engaged in the trustees of all of the funds and property of this part; or handling or importation of mangos. The then in the possession or under control (c) Affect or impair any rights or Department will also conduct a of the Board, including claims for any remedies of the United States, or of the referendum if 10 percent or more of all funds unpaid or property not delivered, Department, or of any other persons non-exempt, first handlers and or any other claim existing at the time with respect to any such violation. importers of mangos request the of such termination. Department to hold a referendum. In (b) The said trustees shall: § 1206.75 Personal liability. addition, the Department may hold a (1) Continue in such capacity until No member or employee of the Board referendum at any time. discharged by the Department; shall be held personally responsible, (2) Carry out the obligations of the either individually or jointly with § 1206.72 Suspension and termination. Board under any contracts or others, in any way whatsoever, to any (a) The Department shall suspend or agreements entered into pursuant to the person for errors in judgment, mistakes, terminate this part or subpart or a Order; or other acts, either of commission or provision thereof if the Department (3) From time to time, account for all omission, as such member or employee, finds that the subpart or a provision receipts and disbursements and deliver except for acts of dishonesty or willful thereof obstructs or does not tend to all property on hand, together with all misconduct. effectuate the purposes of the Act, or if books and records of the Board and the the Department determines that this trustees, to such person or persons as § 1206.76 Separability. subpart or a provision thereof is not the Department may direct; and If any provision of this subpart is favored by persons voting in a (4) Upon request of the Department, declared invalid or the applicability referendum conducted pursuant to the execute such assignments or other thereof to any person or circumstances Act. instruments necessary and appropriate is held invalid, the validity of the (b) The Department shall suspend or to vest in such persons title and right to remainder of this subpart or the terminate this subpart at the end of the all funds, property and claims vested in applicability thereof to other persons or marketing year whenever the the Board or the trustees pursuant to the circumstances shall not be affected Department determines that its Order. thereby. suspension or termination is approved (c) Any person to whom funds, or favored by a majority of the first property or claims have been transferred § 1206.77 Amendments. handlers and importers voting who, or delivered pursuant to the Order shall Amendments to this subpart may be during a representative period be subject to the same obligations proposed from time to time by the Board determined by the Department, have imposed upon the Board and upon the or by any interested person affected by been engaged in the handling or trustees. the provisions of the Act, including the importation of mangos. (d) Any residual funds not required to Department. (c) If, as a result of a referendum the defray the necessary expenses of Department determines that this subpart liquidation shall be turned over to the § 1206.78 OMB control number. is not approved, the Department shall: Department to be disposed of, to the The control numbers assigned to the (1) Not later than 180 days after extent practical, to one or more mango information collection requirements of making the determination, suspend or industry organizations in the interest of this part by the Office of Management terminate, as the case may be, collection continuing mango promotion, research, and Budget pursuant to the Paperwork of assessments under this subpart; and and information programs. Reduction Act of 1995, 44 U.S.C. (2) As soon as practical, suspend or chapter 35, are OMB control number terminate, as the case may be, activities § 1206.74 Effect of termination or 0505–0001 and OMB control number under this subpart in an orderly amendment. 0581–0209. manner. Unless otherwise expressly provided by the Department, the termination or Dated: October 2, 2003. § 1206.73 Proceedings after termination. amendment of this part or any subpart A.J. Yates, (a) Upon the termination of this thereof, shall not: Administrator. subpart, the Board shall recommend not (a) Affect or waive any right, duty, [FR Doc. 03–25457 Filed 10–8–03; 8:45 am] more than five of its members to the obligation or liability which shall have BILLING CODE 3410–02–P

VerDate jul<14>2003 21:02 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\09OCP2.SGM 09OCP2 Thursday, October 9, 2003

Part V

The President Proclamation 7716—Child Health Day, 2003

VerDate jul<14>2003 21:08 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4717 Sfmt 4717 E:\FR\FM\09OCD0.SGM 09OCD0 VerDate jul<14>2003 21:08 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4717 Sfmt 4717 E:\FR\FM\09OCD0.SGM 09OCD0 58573

Federal Register Presidential Documents Vol. 68, No. 196

Thursday, October 9, 2003

Title 3— Proclamation 7716 of October 6, 2003

The President Child Health Day, 2003

By the President of the United States of America

Parents, teachers, and mentors play a critical role in helping children learn to make healthy choices in life. On Child Health Day, we emphasize our commitment to teaching our children the benefits of good health. The safety and well-being of our children is a priority shared by all Ameri- cans. As children grow and develop, they face many risks and dangers. Through the HealthierUS Initiative and the President’s Challenge, my Admin- istration is working to help children learn the benefits of a healthy body and mind. Across our country, parents and caregivers can play a vital part in creating a more healthy America by teaching children good nutrition and important safety procedures. We can all help young Americans improve their health by encouraging them to eat healthy foods and to get regular exercise. Good nutrition can improve students’ ability to concentrate and help them succeed in the classroom. Families must encourage our young people to avoid harmful activities. Families can also protect their children by ensuring that they are immunized against preventable diseases and making sure that homes, day care centers, and schools have been checked for potential hazards. Parents can help prevent accidents and injuries by securing infants, toddlers, and small children in child safety seats and booster seats, checking consumer safety warnings, and making sure young people wear protective gear during recreational activities. By teaching our children to make safe, healthy decisions, families and all Americans can help our young people reach their full potential, become responsible leaders in their communities, and make our Nation better. The Congress, by a joint resolution approved May 18, 1928, as amended (36 U.S.C. 105), has called for the designation of the first Monday in October as ‘‘Child Health Day’’ and has requested the President to issue a proclamation in observance of this day. NOW, THEREFORE, I, GEORGE W. BUSH, President of the United States of America, do hereby proclaim Monday, October 6, 2003, as Child Health Day. I call upon families, schools, child health professionals, communities, and governments to help all our children discover the rewards of good health and wellness.

VerDate jul<14>2003 21:08 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4705 Sfmt 4790 E:\FR\FM\09OCD0.SGM 09OCD0 58574 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Presidential Documents

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this sixth day of October, in the year of our Lord two thousand three, and of the Independence of the United States of America the two hundred and twenty-eighth. W

[FR Doc. 03–25879 Filed 10–8–03; 11:27 am] Billing code 3195–01–P

VerDate jul<14>2003 21:08 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4705 Sfmt 4790 E:\FR\FM\09OCD0.SGM 09OCD0 i

Reader Aids Federal Register Vol. 68, No. 196 Thursday, October 9, 2003

CUSTOMER SERVICE AND INFORMATION CFR PARTS AFFECTED DURING OCTOBER

Federal Register/Code of Federal Regulations At the end of each month, the Office of the Federal Register General Information, indexes and other finding 202–741–6000 publishes separately a List of CFR Sections Affected (LSA), which aids lists parts and sections affected by documents published since Laws 741–6000 the revision date of each title. 208...... 56568 Presidential Documents 3 CFR 225...... 56568 Executive orders and proclamations 741–6000 Proclamations: 325...... 56568 The United States Government Manual 741–6000 7710...... 56521 567...... 56568 7711...... 58251 Other Services 701...... 56586 7712...... 58253 708a...... 56589 741–6020 Electronic and on-line services (voice) 7713...... 58255 741...... 56586 Privacy Act Compilation 741–6064 7714...... 58257 Public Laws Update Service (numbers, dates, etc.) 741–6043 7715...... 58259 13 CFR TTY for the deaf-and-hard-of-hearing 741–6086 7716...... 58573 120...... 56553, 57960 Administrative Orders: Presidential 14 CFR ELECTRONIC RESEARCH Determinations: 23...... 58009 World Wide Web No. 2003–40 ...... 57319 39 ...... 57337, 57339, 57343, No. 2003–41 ...... 58261 Full text of the daily Federal Register, CFR and other publications 57346, 57609, 57611, 58263, is located at: http://www.access.gpo.gov/nara 5 CFR 58265, 58268, 58271, 58273 71...... 57347, 58011 Federal Register information and research tools, including Public 575...... 56665 97...... 57347, 57349 Inspection List, indexes, and links to GPO Access are located at: 890...... 56523 Proposed Rules: http://www.archives.gov/federallregister/ 892...... 56523, 56525 25...... 58042 E-mail 7 CFR 39 ...... 56591, 56594, 56596, 56598, 56792, 56794, 56796, FEDREGTOC-L (Federal Register Table of Contents LISTSERV) is 301...... 56529 56799, 56801, 57392, 57394, an open e-mail service that provides subscribers with a digital 930...... 57321 57639, 58044, 58046, 58050, form of the Federal Register Table of Contents. The digital form 956...... 57324 58283, 58285, 58287, 58289, of the Federal Register Table of Contents includes HTML and 993...... 57783 58291 PDF links to the full text of each document. 1206...... 58552 1220...... 57326 73...... 58052 To join or leave, go to http://listserv.access.gpo.gov and select Online mailing list archives, FEDREGTOC-L, Join or leave the list Proposed Rules: 15 CFR (or change settings); then follow the instructions. 58...... 57382 1206...... 58556 303...... 56555 PENS (Public Law Electronic Notification Service) is an e-mail service that notifies subscribers of recently enacted laws. 9 CFR 16 CFR 1000...... 57799 To subscribe, go to http://listserv.gsa.gov/archives/publaws-l.html 113...... 57607 and select Join or leave the list (or change settings); then follow Proposed Rules: 17 CFR the instructions. 113...... 57638 230...... 57760 FEDREGTOC-L and PENS are mailing lists only. We cannot 10 CFR 239...... 57760 respond to specific inquiries. 30...... 57327 270...... 57760 Reference questions. Send questions and comments about the 40...... 57327 274...... 57760 Federal Register system to: [email protected] 70...... 57327 275...... 56692 279...... 56692 The Federal Register staff cannot interpret specific documents or 72...... 57785 regulations. Proposed Rules: Proposed Rules: 52...... 57383 239...... 58226 72...... 57839 274...... 58226 FEDERAL REGISTER PAGES AND DATE, SEPTEMBER 275...... 58226 12 CFR 56521–56764...... 1 19 CFR 56765–57318...... 2 3...... 56530 204...... 57788 12...... 58371 57319–57606...... 3 208...... 56530 Proposed Rules: 57607–57782...... 6 225...... 56530 191...... 56804 57783–58008...... 7 325...... 56530 58009–58260...... 8 559...... 57790 20 CFR 58261–58574...... 9 562...... 57790 604...... 58540 563...... 57790 567...... 56530 21 CFR 702...... 56537 172...... 57799, 57957 704...... 56537 347...... 58273 712...... 56537 520...... 57351 723...... 56537 522...... 56765 742...... 56537 529...... 57613 Proposed Rules: 1300...... 57799 3...... 56568 1309...... 57799

VerDate jul 14 2003 22:52 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4712 Sfmt 4712 E:\FR\FM\09OCCU.LOC 09OCCU ii Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Reader Aids

1310...... 57799 37 CFR 228...... 58295 31...... 56686 Proposed Rules: 2...... 56556 239...... 57855 32...... 56669, 56682 1...... 56600 260...... 57814 258...... 57855 34...... 56676 261...... 56603 35...... 56676 356...... 57642 Proposed Rules: 300...... 57855 36...... 56676 201...... 58054 22 CFR 52 ...... 56669, 56682, 56684, 41 CFR 120...... 57352 38 CFR 56685 101–6...... 56560 202...... 56560 Proposed Rules: 101–8...... 57730 213...... 56560 24 CFR 17...... 56876 226...... 56561 598...... 57604 36...... 58293 42 CFR 237...... 56563 599...... 57604 412...... 57732 252...... 56560, 56561 982...... 57804 39 CFR 413...... 57732 1817...... 57629 Proposed Rules: 111...... 56557, 58273 Proposed Rules: 203...... 58006 224...... 56557 44 CFR 16...... 56613 230...... 57372 65...... 57625 39...... 56613 25 CFR 261...... 56557 67...... 57825, 57828 Proposed Rules: 262...... 56557 Proposed Rules: 514...... 58053 263...... 56557 67...... 57856 49 CFR 264...... 56557 171...... 57629 47 CFR 26 CFR 265...... 56557 172...... 57629 1...... 56556 266...... 56557 24...... 57828 173...... 57629 267...... 56557 52...... 56781 175...... 57629 27 CFR 268...... 56557 64...... 56764 176...... 57629 73...... 57829 177...... 57629 Proposed Rules: 40 CFR 9...... 57840, 57845 Proposed Rules: 178...... 57629 52...... 58019, 58276 73 ...... 56810, 56811, 57861 179...... 57629 29 CFR 62...... 57518 1503...... 58281 63...... 58172 48 CFR 403...... 58374 80...... 56776, 57815 Ch. 1...... 56668, 56689 408...... 58374 81...... 57820 1...... 56669 50 CFR 30 CFR 239...... 57824 2 ...... 56669, 56676, 56681 17...... 56564, 57829 258...... 57824 4 ...... 56669, 56676, 56679 21...... 58022 935...... 57352 Proposed Rules: 5...... 56676 32...... 57308 938...... 56765, 57805 30...... 57850 6...... 56676 622...... 57375 Proposed Rules: 31...... 57850 7...... 56676 635...... 56783 917...... 57398 33...... 57850 8...... 56688 648...... 58037, 58281 35...... 57850 9...... 56676 660...... 57379 33 CFR 40...... 57850 10...... 56676, 56681 679 ...... 56788, 57381, 57634, 100...... 58011, 58013 52...... 58055, 58295 12 ...... 56676, 56681, 56682 57636, 57837, 58037, 58038 110...... 58015 70...... 58055 13...... 56669, 56681 697...... 56789 117 ...... 57356, 57614, 58018 71...... 58055 14...... 56676 Proposed Rules: 165 ...... 57358, 57366, 57368, 80...... 56805, 57851 19...... 56676, 56681 17...... 57643, 57646 57370, 57616, 58015 82...... 56809 22...... 56676 300...... 58296 334...... 57624 141...... 58057 24...... 56688 402...... 58298 Proposed Rules: 142...... 58057 25 ...... 56676, 56681, 56684, 622...... 57400 334...... 57642 143...... 58057 56685 648...... 56811

VerDate jul 14 2003 22:52 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4712 Sfmt 4712 E:\FR\FM\09OCCU.LOC 09OCCU Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Reader Aids iii

REMINDERS Pacific cod; comments promulgation; various Pre- and postmarketing The items in this list were due by 10-16-03; States: safety reporting editorially compiled as an aid published 10-6-03 [FR California; comments due by requirements; comments to Federal Register users. 03-25265] 10-16-03; published 9-16- due by 10-14-03; Inclusion or exclusion from Caribbean, Gulf, and South 03 [FR 03-23593] published 6-18-03 [FR 03- this list has no legal Atlantic fisheries— Illinois; comments due by 15341] significance. Gulf of Mexico shrimp; 10-15-03; published 9-15- Human drugs: comments due by 10- 03 [FR 03-23268] External analgesic products 14-03; published 8-14- Indiana; comments due by (OTC); administrative RULES GOING INTO 03 [FR 03-20681] 10-16-03; published 9-16- record and tentative final EFFECT OCTOBER 9, West Coast States and 03 [FR 03-23592] monograph; comments 2003 Western Pacific Kansas; comments due by due by 10-15-03; fisheries— 10-16-03; published 9-16- published 7-17-03 [FR 03- 03 [FR 03-23590] 17934] FEDERAL Pacific Coast groundfish; Missouri; comments due by COMMUNICATIONS comments due by 10- HOMELAND SECURITY 10-16-03; published 9-16- COMMISSION 17-03; published 8-18- DEPARTMENT 03 [FR 03-23591] Television stations; table of 03 [FR 03-21069] Coast Guard Meetings: North Carolina; comments Drawbridge operations: assignments: due by 10-15-03; Louisiana; comments due by Michigan; published 8-28-03 New England Fishery published 9-15-03 [FR 03- Management Council; 10-17-03; published 8-18- HOMELAND SECURITY 23266] comments due by 10-15- 03 [FR 03-21088] DEPARTMENT Wisconsin; comments due 03; published 8-19-03 [FR Ports and waterways safety: by 10-16-03; published 9- Coast Guard 03-21206] Cape Fear River Bridge, Drawbridge operations: 16-03 [FR 03-23426] ENERGY DEPARTMENT Pesticides; tolerances in food, NC; security zone; Washington; published 9-9- Federal Energy Regulatory animal feeds, and raw comments due by 10-14- 03 Commission agricultural commodities: 03; published 7-15-03 [FR 03-17836] HOMELAND SECURITY Electric rate and corporate Hydramethylnon; comments DEPARTMENT regulation filings: due by 10-14-03; INTERIOR DEPARTMENT Transportation Security Virginia Electric & Power published 8-13-03 [FR 03- Fish and Wildlife Service Administration Co. et al.; Open for 20432] Endangered and threatened Organization, functions, and comments until further Tralkoxydim; comments due species: authority delegations: notice; published 10-1-03 by 10-14-03; published 8- Critical habitat Agency transition to [FR 03-24818] 13-03 [FR 03-20433] designations— Homeland Security ENVIRONMENTAL Water pollution; effluent Mussels in Mobile River Department PROTECTION AGENCY guidelines for point source Basin, AL; comments categories: Correction; published 10- Air pollution control: due by 10-14-03; Meat and poultry products published 8-14-03 [FR 9-03 State operating permit processing facilities; 03-20729] TRANSPORTATION programs— comments due by 10-14- DEPARTMENT Iowa; comments due by INTERIOR DEPARTMENT 03; published 9-29-03 [FR National Park Service Federal Aviation 10-16-03; published 9- 03-24770] 16-03 [FR 03-23585] Special regulations: Administration FEDERAL Yellowstone and Grant Airworthiness directives: State operating permits COMMUNICATIONS Teton National Parks and programs— COMMISSION Pratt & Whitney; published John D. Rockefeller, Jr. Iowa; comments due by Common carrier services: 10-9-03 Memorial Parkway, WY; 10-16-03; published 9- Satellite communications— 16-03 [FR 03-23584] winter visitation and Satellite and earth station recreational use COMMENTS DUE NEXT North Dakota; comments license procedures; management; comments WEEK due by 10-17-03; electronic filings due by 10-14-03; published 9-17-03 [FR requirements; comments published 8-27-03 [FR 03- AGRICULTURE 03-23751] due by 10-14-03; 21332] DEPARTMENT North Dakota; comments published 9-12-03 [FR JUSTICE DEPARTMENT Agricultural Marketing due by 10-17-03; 03-23315] Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, Service published 9-17-03 [FR HEALTH AND HUMAN and Explosives Bureau Milk marketing orders: 03-23752] SERVICES DEPARTMENT Air programs; approval and Centers for Medicare & Safe Explosives Act; Pacific Northwest et al.; implementation: comments due by 10-17- promulgation; State plans Medicaid Services Delivery of explosive 03; published 8-18-03 [FR for designated facilities and Medicare: materials by common or 03-20689] pollutants: Claims; electronic contract carrier; comments Various States; comments submission; comments Nectarines and peaches due by 10-14-03; due by 10-17-03; due by 10-14-03; grown in— published 9-11-03 [FR 03- published 9-17-03 [FR 03- published 8-15-03 [FR 03- California; comments due by 23093] 23749] 20955] 10-14-03; published 8-15- LABOR DEPARTMENT 03 [FR 03-20875] Air programs; approval and Part B drugs; payment promulgation; State plans reform; comments due by Acquisition regulations; COMMERCE DEPARTMENT for designated facilities and 10-14-03; published 8-20- revision; comments due by National Oceanic and pollutants: 03 [FR 03-21308] 10-14-03; published 8-15-03 Atmospheric Administration Various States; comments HEALTH AND HUMAN [FR 03-20095] Fishery conservation and due by 10-17-03; SERVICES DEPARTMENT LABOR DEPARTMENT management: published 9-17-03 [FR 03- Food and Drug Mine Safety and Health Alaska; fisheries of 23750] Administration Administration Exclusive Economic Air quality implementation Human drugs and biological Metal and nonmetal mine Zone— plans; approval and products: safety and health:

VerDate jul 14 2003 22:52 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4712 Sfmt 4711 E:\FR\FM\09OCCU.LOC 09OCCU iv Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 196 / Thursday, October 9, 2003 / Reader Aids

Underground mines— Stepchildren; entitlement requirements; comments Register but may be ordered Diesel particulate matter and termination due by 10-14-03; in ‘‘slip law’’ (individual exposure of miners; requirements; comments published 8-15-03 [FR pamphlet) form from the comments due by 10- due by 10-14-03; 03-20888] Superintendent of Documents, 14-03; published 8-14- published 8-12-03 [FR TREASURY DEPARTMENT U.S. Government Printing 03 [FR 03-20190] 03-20490] Foreign Assets Control Office, Washington, DC 20402 Diesel particulate matter STATE DEPARTMENT Office (phone, 202–512–1808). The text will also be made exposure of miners; Visas; immigrant Trading with the Enemy Act; available on the Internet from comments due by 10- documentation: implementation: GPO Access at http:// 14-03; published 8-26- Diversity Visa Program; Civil penalties hearing 03 [FR 03-21886] www.access.gpo.gov/nara/ diversity Immigrant status; regulations; comments nara005.html. Some laws may NATIONAL AERONAUTICS electronic petition; due by 10-14-03; not yet be available. AND SPACE comments due by 10-17- published 9-11-03 [FR 03- ADMINISTRATION 03; published 8-18-03 [FR 22969] H.R. 659/P.L. 108–91 Grant and Cooperative 03-21071] TREASURY DEPARTMENT Hospital Mortgage Insurance Agreement Handbook: TENNESSEE VALLEY Internal Revenue Service Act of 2003 (Oct. 3, 2003; NASA Center, facility, AUTHORITY Employment taxes and 117 Stat. 1158) computer system, or Agency information collection collection of income tax at technical information activities; proposals, source: H.R. 978/P.L. 108–92 access; investigative submissions, and approvals; Federal unemployment tax To amend chapter 84 of title requirements; comments comments due by 10-14-03; deposits; de minimis 5, United States Code, to due by 10-14-03; published 8-27-03 [FR 03- threshold; comments due provide that certain Federal published 8-15-03 [FR 03- 21868] by 10-15-03; published 7- annuity computations are 20921] TRANSPORTATION 17-03 [FR 03-18042] adjusted by 1 percentage Photographs and illustrations DEPARTMENT Income taxes: point relating to periods of in reports or publications; Federal Aviation Tax-exempt bonds; remedial receiving disability payments, public acknowledgements; Administration actions; comments due by and for other purposes. (Oct. comments due by 10-14- 3, 2003; 117 Stat. 1160) Airworthiness directives: 10-14-03; published 7-21- 03; published 8-15-03 [FR 03 [FR 03-18327] 03-20920] Boeing; comments due by S. 111/P.L. 108–93 10-14-03; published 8-27- Tax attributes reduction due To direct the Secretary of the NUCLEAR REGULATORY 03 [FR 03-21873] to discharge of COMMISSION Interior to conduct a special Dassault; comments due by indebtedness; cross- resource study to determine Byproduct material; domestic 10-14-03; published 9-19- reference; comments due the national significance of the licensing: 03 [FR 03-23937] by 10-16-03; published 7- Miami Circle site in the State 18-03 [FR 03-18146] Portable gauges; security Learjet; comments due by of Florida as well as the requirements; comments 10-14-03; published 8-12- TREASURY DEPARTMENT suitability and feasibility of its due by 10-15-03; 03 [FR 03-20238] Alcohol and Tobacco Tax inclusion in the National Park published 8-1-03 [FR 03- and Trade Bureau System as part of Biscayne 19588] McDonnell Douglas; comments due by 10-14- Alcohol; viticultural area National Park, and for other PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT 03; published 8-27-03 [FR designations: purposes. (Oct. 3, 2003; 117 OFFICE 03-21874] Dundee Hills, OR; Stat. 1161) Acquisition regulations: Pratt & Whitney Canada; comments due by 10-14- S. 233/P.L. 108–94 Federal Employees Health 03; published 8-15-03 [FR comments due by 10-14- Coltsville Study Act of 2003 Benefits Program— 03-20914] 03; published 8-14-03 [FR (Oct. 3, 2003; 117 Stat. 1163) Large provider 03-20484] VETERANS AFFAIRS agreements, Rolls-Royce Corp.; DEPARTMENT S. 278/P.L. 108–95 subcontracts, and comments due by 10-14- Board of Veterans’ Appeals: Mount Naomi Wilderness miscellaneous changes; 03; published 8-13-03 [FR Appeals regulations and Boundary Adjustment Act (Oct. comments due by 10- 03-20573] rules of practice— 3, 2003; 117 Stat. 1165) 14-03; published 8-15- VOR Federal airways; Grounds of clear and Last List October 3, 2003 03 [FR 03-20857] comments due by 10-14-03; unmistakable error SECURITIES AND published 8-28-03 [FR 03- decisions; comments EXCHANGE COMMISSION 22042] due by 10-14-03; Securities: TRANSPORTATION published 9-12-03 [FR Public Laws Electronic Depository shares evidenced DEPARTMENT 03-23260] Notification Service by American depositary Federal Motor Carrier Safety (PENS) receipts; Form F-6 use; Administration LIST OF PUBLIC LAWS eligibility requirements; Motor carrier safety standards: comments due by 10-17- PENS is a free electronic mail Longer combination vehicle This is a continuing list of 03; published 9-17-03 [FR notification service of newly operators; minimum public bills from the current 03-23737] enacted public laws. To training requirements and session of Congress which subscribe, go to http:// Insider lending prohibition; driver-instructor have become Federal laws. It listserv.gsa.gov/archives/ foreign bank exemption; requirements; comments may be used in conjunction publaws-l.html comments due by 10-17- due by 10-14-03; with ‘‘PLUS’’ (Public Laws 03; published 9-17-03 [FR Update Service) on 202–741– published 8-12-03 [FR 03- Note: This service is strictly 03-23655] 20368] 6043. This list is also available online at http:// for E-mail notification of new SOCIAL SECURITY Special training laws. The text of laws is not ADMINISTRATION requirements— www.nara.gov/fedreg/ plawcurr.html. available through this service. Social security benefits: Entry-level comercial PENS cannot respond to Federal old-age, survivors, motor vehicle operators; The text of laws is not specific inquiries sent to this and disability insurance— minimum training published in the Federal address.

VerDate jul 14 2003 22:52 Oct 08, 2003 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4712 Sfmt 4711 E:\FR\FM\09OCCU.LOC 09OCCU