Pages 13889±14200 Vol. 60 3±15±95 No. 50 federal register March 15,1995 Wednesday issue. Dallas, TX,seeannouncementontheinsidecoverofthis For informationonbriefingsinWashington,DC,and Briefings onHowToUsetheFederalRegister 1 II Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995
SUBSCRIPTIONS AND COPIES
PUBLIC Subscriptions: Paper or fiche 202–512–1800 FEDERAL REGISTER Published daily, Monday through Friday, Assistance with public subscriptions 512–1806 (not published on Saturdays, Sundays, or on official holidays), by Online: the Office of the Federal Register, National Archives and Records Telnet swais.access.gpo.gov, login as newuser 2 III Contents Federal Register Vol. 60, No. 50 Wednesday, March 15, 1995 Administrative Conference of the United States Nevada, 13969 NOTICES Meetings: Commerce Department Governmental Processes and Regulation Committees, See Foreign-Trade Zones Board 13953– See International Trade Administration See National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry NOTICES Commodity Futures Trading Commission Meetings: RULES Scientific Counselors Board, 13999 Commodity Exchange Act: Risk assessment for holding company systems; correction, Agricultural Marketing Service 13901–13902 RULES Oranges and grapefruit grown in Texas, 13891–13893 Consolidated Farm Service Agency PROPOSED RULES PROPOSED RULES Grapes, table (European or Vinifera); grade standards, Program regulations: 13926–13928 Environmental program, 13928–13929 Agriculture Department Defense Department See Agricultural Marketing Service See Air Force Department See Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service PROPOSED RULES See Consolidated Farm Service Agency Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR): See Food and Consumer Service Contract financing, 14156–14170 See Forest Service Privacy Act; implementation, 13936–13937 NOTICES See Rural Business and Cooperative Development Service Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR): See Rural Housing and Community Development Service Agency information collection activities under OMB See Rural Utilities Service review, 14171 Air Force Department Drug Enforcement Administration NOTICES NOTICES Meetings: Applications, hearings, determinations, etc.: Scientific Advisory Board, 13969 Leslie, Robert A., M.D., 14004–14005 Malone, William W., M.D.; correction, 14058 Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service RULES Education Department Animal welfare: NOTICES Licensing and records; dealers, exhibitors, and auction Grants and cooperative agreements; availability, etc.: sales operators, 13893–13896 Job Training Partnership Act— Exportation and importation of animals and animal School-to-work opportunities; Indian program, 14136– products: 14154 Cattle imported in-bond for feeding and return to Mexico, 13896–13898 Employment and Training Administration Sheep and goats from Canada and Mexico, 13898–13900 NOTICES PROPOSED RULES Grants and cooperative agreements; availability, etc.: Exportation and importation of animals and animal Job Training Partnership Act— products: School-to-work opportunities; Indian program, 14136– African horse sickness; disease status change— 14154 United Arab Emirates, 13929–13930 Energy Department Antitrust Division See Federal Energy Regulatory Commission NOTICES NOTICES National cooperative research notifications: Atomic energy agreements; subsequent arrangements, Fieldbus Foundation, 14003 13969–13970 Portland Cement Association, 14003 Meetings: PowerOpen Association, Inc., 14003–14004 Environmental Management Site Specific Advisory SCM Glidco Organics, 14004 Board— X Consortium, Inc., 14004 Idaho National Engineering Laboratory, 13970–13971 Civil Rights Commission Environmental Protection Agency NOTICES RULES Meetings; State advisory committees: Air programs; State authority delegations: California, 13968 Utah, 13912–13914 IV Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Contents Air quality implementation plans; approval and Radio stations; table of assignments: promulgation; various States: Texas, 13918 Louisiana, 13908–13912 PROPOSED RULES Pesticides; tolerances in food, animal feeds, and raw Radio stations; table of assignments: agricultural commodities: Texas, 13947–13948 Avermectin B1 and delta-8,9-isomer, 13914–13915 NOTICES PROPOSED RULES Agency information collection activities under OMB Air pollution; standards of performance for new stationary review, 13984–13985 sources: Rulemaking proceedings; petitions filed, granted, denied, Medical waste incinerators; public hearing, 13937–13938 etc., 13985 Air programs; State authority delegations: Utah, 13938 Federal Emergency Management Agency Air quality implementation plans; approval and PROPOSED RULES promulgation; various States: Flood insurance program: Louisiana, 13937 Individual and family grant program; group flood Pesticides; tolerances in food, animal feeds, and raw insurance policy, 13945–13947 agricultural commodities: 2-[1-(Ethoxyimino)butyl]-5-[2-ethylthio)propyl]-3- Federal Energy Regulatory Commission hydroxy-2-cyclohexen-1-one, 13941–13943 NOTICES Paraquat, 13939–13941 Electric rate and corporate regulation filings: Triasulfuron, 13938–13939 Cincinnati Gas & Electric Co. et al., 13971–13972 Superfund program: Sunnyside Cogeneration Associates, 13975–13976 National oil and hazardous substances contingency Environmental statements; availability, etc.: plan— Tuolumne Utilities District, 13972 National priorities list update, 13944–13945 Natural gas certificate filings: NOTICES Southern Natural Gas Co. et al., 13972–13974 Air programs: Applications, hearings, determinations, etc.: Enhanced monitoring protocols, 13976–13977 Greeley Gas Co., 13974–13975 Dermal absorption studies of pesticides; guideline KN Interstate Gas Transmission Co., 13975 availability, 13977–13978 National Fuel Gas Supply Corp., 13975 Meetings: Williams Natural Gas Co., 13976 Environmental Policy and Technology National Advisory Council, 13978 Federal Maritime Commission Pesticide, food, and feed additive petitions: NOTICES Monsanto Co. et al., 13978–13979 Agreements filed, etc., 13985 Pesticide programs: Freight forwarder licenses: Voluntary reduced-risk pesticides initiative update; Maracargo Inc. et al., 13985 availability, 13979–13980 Pesticide registration, cancellation, etc.: Federal Reserve System Asahi Chemical Co., 13980 NOTICES Bear Country Products, 13980–13981 Agency information collection activities under OMB Church & Dwight Co., 13981–13982 review, 13985–13986 D-I-1-4, Inc., 13982 Meetings; Sunshine Act, 14057 Pesticides; emergency exemptions, etc.: Applications, hearings, determinations, etc.: Cypermethrin, etc., 13982–13984 Barber, Ralph Neal, 13986 Pesticides; temporary tolerances: Dauphin Deposit Corp. et al., 13986–13987 Northrup King Co. et al., 13984 Mellon Bank Corp. et al., 13987 Reports; availability, etc.: Norton Capital Corp. et al., 13987 Paper products recovered materials advisory notice, Norwest Corp., 13987–13988 14182–14191 Executive Office of the President Federal Trade Commission See Presidential Documents NOTICES See Trade Representative, Office of United States Prohibited trade practices: Schnuck Markets, Inc., 13988–13993 Federal Aviation Administration Schwegmann Giant Super Markets, Inc., 13993–13998 RULES Class D airspace, 13900–13901 Federal Transit Administration PROPOSED RULES RULES Class D and Class E airspace, 13931–13932 Buy America requirements; small purchases and purchases NOTICES with operating assistance (micro-purchases); waiver, Exemption petitions; summary and disposition, 14052– 14174–14176 14053 PROPOSED RULES Buy America requirements; small purchases and purchases Federal Communications Commission with operating assistance (micro-purchases); waiver, RULES 14178–14179 Personal communications services: Licenses in 2 GHz band (broadband PCS) and 900 MHz Financial Management Service band (narrowband PCS), 13915–13918 See Fiscal Service Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Contents V Fiscal Service Fresh cut roses from— RULES Colombia and Ecuador, 13958–13961 Marketable book-entry Treasury bills, notes, and bonds; sale Antidumping and countervailing duties: and issue, 13906–13907 Administrative review requests, 13955–13956 Countervailing duties: Fish and Wildlife Service Disposable pocket lighters from— PROPOSED RULES Thailand, 13961–13963 Endangered and threatened species: Findings on petitions, etc.— International Trade Commission Preble’s meadow jumping mouse, 13950–13952 NOTICES Migratory bird hunting: Import investigations: Migratory bird harvest information program, 14194– Facsimile machines and components, 14002 14196 Justice Department Food and Consumer Service See Antitrust Division NOTICES See Drug Enforcement Administration Child nutrition programs: RULES Free and reduced price meals or free-milk; income Inmate grievance procedures standards, 13902–13904 eligibility guidelines; correction, 14058 Labor Department Foreign-Trade Zones Board See Employment and Training Administration NOTICES See Pension and Welfare Benefits Administration Applications, hearings, determinations, etc.: Texas Land Management Bureau Tuboscope Vetco International, Inc.; steel tubular RULES products inspection and coating facility, 13955 Public land orders: New Mexico; correction, 13915 Forest Service NOTICES NOTICES Environmental statements; availability, etc.: Appealable decisions; legal notice: La Paz County Regional Landfill, AZ; expansion project, Pacific Southwest region, 13953–13955 14000–14001 Motor vehicle use restrictions: General Services Administration California, 14001 PROPOSED RULES Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR): National Aeronautics and Space Administration Contract financing, 14156–14170 PROPOSED RULES NOTICES Environmental statements; availability, etc.: Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR): Jamaica, New York; FDA regional office and laboratory, Contract financing, 14156–14170 NOTICES 13998–13999 Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR): Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR): Agency information collection activities under OMB Agency information collection activities under OMB review, 14171 review, 14171 Health and Human Services Department National Archives and Records Administration See Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry RULES See Health Resources and Services Administration Records management: See National Institutes of Health Micrographic records management; correction, 13908 Health Resources and Services Administration National Credit Union Administration NOTICES NOTICES Health education assistance loan (HEAL) program: Meetings; Sunshine Act, 14057 Defaulted borrowers; list, 14060–14133 National Highway Traffic Safety Administration Interior Department NOTICES See Fish and Wildlife Service Motor vehicle safety standards: See Land Management Bureau Nonconforming vehicles— See National Park Service Importation eligibility; determinations, 14053–14054 See Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement Office National Institutes of Health International Development Cooperation Agency NOTICES See Overseas Private Investment Corporation Meetings: Genome Research Review Committee, 13999 International Trade Administration National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, 13999–14000 NOTICES National Institute of Child Health and Human Antidumping: Development, 14000 Disposable pocket lighters from— National Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Thailand, 13956–13958 Disorders, 14000 VI Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Contents National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Public Health Service RULES See Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry Fishery conservation and management: See Health Resources and Services Administration Gulf of Mexico stone crab, 13918–13925 See National Institutes of Health NOTICES Grants and cooperative agreements; availability, etc.: Rural Business and Cooperative Development Service Chesapeake Bay stock assessments, 13963–13967 PROPOSED RULES Meetings: Program regulations: Caribbean Fishery Management Council, 13968 Environmental program, 13928–13929 South Atlantic Fishery Management Council, 13968 Rural Housing and Community Development Service National Park Service PROPOSED RULES NOTICES Program regulations: Environmental statements; availability, etc.: Environmental program, 13928–13929 Hamilton Grange National Memorial, NY, 14001 Grants and cooperative agreements; availability, etc.: Rural Utilities Service Preservation technology and training projects, 14001– PROPOSED RULES 14002 Program regulations: Meetings: Environmental program, 13928–13929 National Preservation Technology and Training Board, 14002 Securities and Exchange Commission NOTICES National Transportation Safety Board Agency information collection activities under OMB PROPOSED RULES review, 14041 Public aircraft accident reporting requirements, 13948– Self-regulatory organizations; proposed rule changes: 13950 Boston Stock Exchange, Inc., 14041–14042 Chicago Board Options Exchange, Inc., 14042–14043 Nuclear Regulatory Commission Philadelphia Stock Exchange, Inc., 14043–14044 NOTICES Applications, hearings, determinations, etc.: Meetings: Aetna Insurance Co. of America et al., 14044–14047 Cost beneficial licensing actions and technical First Trust Special Situations Trust et al., 14047–14048 specifications improvement program; workshop, ML Venture Partners II, L.P., et al., 14048–14050 14013–14015 Operating licenses, amendments; no significant hazards Selective Service System considerations; biweekly notices, 14015–14040 RULES Applications, hearings, determinations, etc.: Conscientious objectors classification; registrant processing Toledo Edison Co. et al., 14040 procedures, 13907–13908 Office of United States Trade Representative Sentencing Commission, United States See Trade Representative, Office of United States See United States Sentencing Commission Overseas Private Investment Corporation Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement Office NOTICES Meetings; Sunshine Act, 14057 PROPOSED RULES Permanent program and abandoned mine land reclamation Pension and Welfare Benefits Administration plan submissions: NOTICES Montana, 13932–13935 Employee benefit plans; prohibited transaction exemptions: Utah, 13935–13936 Boston Cement Masons Union Local No. 534 et al., 14005–14012 Toxic Substances and Disease Registry Agency See Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation RULES Trade Representative, Office of United States Single-employer and multiemployer plans: NOTICES Valuation of plan benefits, etc.— Meetings: Interest rates, etc., 13904–13906 Industry Policy Advisory Committee, 14040 Postal Rate Commission Transportation Department NOTICES See Federal Aviation Administration Visits to facilities, 14040–14041 See Federal Transit Administration See National Highway Traffic Safety Administration Presidential Documents NOTICES PROCLAMATIONS Meetings: Special observances: Centralization and computerization of dockets; Public Health Week, National (Proc. 6776), 13889 information request on policy statement, 14050– EXECUTIVE ORDERS 14052 Israel-United States Binational Industrial Research and Development Foundation; designation (EO 12956), Treasury Department 14199 See Fiscal Service Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Contents VII United States Sentencing Commission Part V NOTICES Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Sentencing guidelines and policy statements for Federal Administration, 14174–14176 courts, 14054–14055 Part VI Veterans Affairs Department Department of Transportation, Federal Transit NOTICES Administration, 14178–14179 Agency information collection activities under OMB review: Part VII VA MATIC change, 14055–14056 Environmental Protection Agency, 14182–14191 Privacy Act: Systems of records, 14056 Part VIII Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, 14194–14196 Separate Parts In This Issue Part IX The President, 14199 Part II Department of Health and Human Services, Health Resources and Services Administration, 14060–14133 Reader Aids Additional information, including a list of public laws, Part III telephone numbers, and finding aids, appears in the Reader Department of Labor, Employment and Training Aids section at the end of this issue. Administration, and Department of Education, 14136– 14154 Electronic Bulletin Board Part IV Free Electronic Bulletin Board service for Public Law Department of Defense, General Services Administration, numbers, Federal Register finding aids, and a list of and National Aeronautics and Space Administration, documents on public inspection is available on 202–275– 14156–14171 1538 or 275–0920. VIII Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Contents 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 49 CFR Proclamations: 661...... 14174 6776...... 13889 Proposed Rules: Executive Orders: 661...... 14178 12956...... 14199 800...... 13948 830...... 13948 7 CFR 831...... 13948 906...... 13891 50 CFR Proposed Rules: 654...... 13918 51...... 13926 1940...... 13928 Proposed Rules: 17...... 13950 9 CFR 20...... 14194 2...... 13893 91...... 13896 92 (2 documents) ...... 13896, 13898 Proposed Rules: 92...... 13929 14 CFR 71...... 13900 Proposed Rules: 71...... 13931 17 CFR 1...... 13901 28 CFR 40...... 13902 29 CFR 2619...... 13904 2676...... 13904 30 CFR Proposed Rules: 926...... 13932 944...... 13935 31 CFR 356...... 13906 32 CFR 1636...... 13907 Proposed Rules: 311...... 13936 36 CFR 1230...... 13908 40 CFR 52...... 13908 61...... 13912 180...... 13914 Proposed Rules: 52...... 13937 60...... 13937 61...... 13938 180 (3 documents) ...... 13938, 13939, 13941 300...... 13944 43 CFR Public Land Orders: 7124...... 13915 44 CFR Proposed Rules: 61...... 13945 206...... 13945 47 CFR 24...... 13915 73 (2 documents) ...... 13918 Proposed Rules: 73...... 13947 48 CFR Proposed Rules: 32...... 14156 52...... 14156 13889 Federal Register Presidential Documents Vol. 60, No. 50 Wednesday, March 15, 1995 Title 3— Proclamation 6776 of March 13, 1995 The President National Public Health Week, 1995 By the President of the United States of America A Proclamation A clean bill of health is one of life’s most precious gifts. But for many Americans, and for millions around the world, good health can seem almost a luxury. The AIDS epidemic, the prevalence of poor nutrition, unplanned pregnancies, and environmental degradation—these are just some of the pressing crises facing hardworking public health officials everywhere. While our society’s medical technology has advanced to a level unimaginable to the generations before, the crucial job of ensuring basic public health for all remains just beyond our reach. Now, more than ever, public health programs and services are needed so that we can ensure the best possible health for everyone. Providing safe living and working environments, developing methods to immunize popu- lations against infectious disease, maintaining good nutritional standards, and having good prenatal care for everyone are vital endeavors—and such primary and preventive measures can mean the difference between life and death. Every day, thousands of individuals across our country are working to build healthy communities, meet the needs of our diverse population, plan appropriate responses to natural disasters, educate individuals about work- place hazards, and encourage responsible behavior in all that we do. Their leadership is helping America to address one of humanity’s most essential concerns, and their service is building a safer, healthier future for all of our people. NOW, THEREFORE, I, WILLIAM J. CLINTON, President of the United States of America, by virtue of the authority vested in me by the Constitution and laws of the United States, do hereby proclaim the week of April 3 through April 9, 1995, as ‘‘National Public Health Week.’’ I call upon all Federal, State, and local public health agencies to join with appropriate private organizations and educational institutions in celebrating this occasion with activities to promote healthy lifestyles and to heighten awareness of the many benefits good health brings. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this thirteenth day of March, in the year of our Lord nineteen hundred and ninety-five, and of the Independence of the United States of America the two hundred and nineteenth. [FR Doc. 95–6524 œ– Filed 3-13-95; 2:28 pm] Billing code 3195–01–P 13891 Rules and Regulations Federal Register Vol. 60, No. 50 Wednesday, March 15, 1995 This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER Grande Valley in Texas, hereinafter and approximately 750 orange and contains regulatory documents having general referred to as the order. The agreement grapefruit producers in South Texas. applicability and legal effect, most of which and order are effective under the Small agricultural producers have been are keyed to and codified in the Code of Agricultural Marketing Agreement Act defined by the Small Business Federal Regulations, which is published under of 1937, as amended [7 U.S.C. 601–674], Administration [13 CFR 121.601] as 50 titles pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 1510. hereinafter referred to as the Act. those having annual receipts of less than The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by The Department of Agriculture $500,000, and small agricultural service the Superintendent of Documents. Prices of (Department) is issuing this rule in firms are defined as those whose annual new books are listed in the first FEDERAL conformance with Executive Order receipts are less than $5,000,000. The REGISTER issue of each week. 12866. majority of these handlers and This rule has been reviewed under producers may be classified as small Executive Order 12778, Civil Justice entities. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Reform. This rule is not intended to Section 906.40(d) of the order have retroactive effect. This rule will authorizes the Secretary to fix the size, Agricultural Marketing Service not preempt any State or local laws, weight, capacity, dimensions, or pack of 7 CFR Part 906 regulations, or policies, unless they the container or containers which may present an irreconcilable conflict with be used in the packaging, transportation, [Docket No. FV94±906±4FIR] this rule. sale, shipment, or other handling of The Act provides that administrative Texas oranges or grapefruit. Consistent Oranges and Grapefruit Grown in the proceedings must be exhausted before with this authority, § 906.340 of the Lower Rio Grande Valley in Texas; parties may file suit in court. Under order’s rules and regulations specifies Revision of Container and Container section 608c(15)(A) of the Act, any the containers that may be used by Pack Requirements and Rules and handler subject to an order may file Texas citrus handlers. These containers Regulations for Special Purpose with the Secretary a petition stating that include cardboard cartons; mesh, poly, Shipments the order, any provision of the order, or and vexar bags; and a number of master AGENCY: Agricultural Marketing Service, any obligation imposed in connection or bulk containers. Additionally, USDA. with the order is not in accordance with experimental containers may be ACTION: Final rule. law and requesting a modification of the approved by the Texas Valley Citrus order or to be exempted therefrom. Such Committee (committee), the agency SUMMARY: The Department of handler is afforded the opportunity for responsible for local administration of Agriculture (Department) is adopting as a hearing on the petition. After the the order. The handling of each lot of a final rule, with appropriate hearing, the Secretary would rule on the fruit in such test containers is subject to modifications, the provisions of an petition. The Act provides that the prior committee approval and is under interim final rule which revised district court of the United States in any the supervision of the committee. container requirements and added a district in which the handler is an The committee met on August 18, new container to those authorized for inhabitant, or has his or her principal 1994, and unanimously recommended use by handlers of Texas citrus. This place of business, has jurisdiction in that the container requirements be final rule continues a relaxation of pack equity to review the Secretary’s ruling revised. The recommended changes requirements by requiring containers to on the petition, provided a bill in equity were to (1) revise the inside dimension have at least one-third Texas citrus by is filed not later than 20 days after date specifications of two authorized master volume, rather than 50 percent citrus by of the entry of the ruling. containers; (2) eliminate certain count. This rule allows for more Pursuant to the requirements set forth restrictions on the packing of mesh or efficient use of containers and provides in the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA), poly bags; and (3) add a new fiberboard handlers with more flexibility in the Administrator of the Agricultural display bin to the list of approved packing mixed packs. Marketing Service (AMS) has containers. These changes were EFFECTIVE DATE: April 14, 1995. considered the economic impact of this included in an interim final rule which FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: rule on small entities. became effective December 9, 1994 [59 Charles L. Rush, Marketing Order The purpose of the RFA is to fit FR 63691]. Administration Branch, Fruit and regulatory actions to the scale of Two of the containers authorized for Vegetable Division, AMS, USDA, P.O. business subject to such actions in order use prior to issuance of the interim final Box 96456, Room 2523–S, Washington, that small businesses will not be unduly rule were (1) closed fiberboard cartons D.C. 20090–6456, telephone: (202) 720– or disproportionately burdened. with inside dimensions of 20 inches in 2431; or Belinda G. Garza, McAllen Marketing orders issued pursuant to the length by 131⁄4 inches in width by 93⁄4 Marketing Field Office, Fruit and Act, and rules issued thereunder, are to 103⁄4 inches in depth, and (2) Vegetable Division, AMS, USDA, 1313 unique in that they are brought about fiberboard cribs with dimensions of 46 East Hackberry, McAllen, Texas 78501; through group action of essentially inches in length by 38 inches width by telephone: (210) 682–2833. small entities acting on their own 24 inches high. These containers were SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This rule behalf. Thus, both statutes have small authorized, respectively, in is issued under Marketing Agreement entity orientation and compatibility. subparagraphs (iii) and (viii) of and Order No. 906 [7 CFR Part 906] There are approximately 15 handlers § 906.340(a)(1). They were used as regulating the handling of oranges and of oranges and grapefruit regulated master containers for shipping bags of grapefruit grown in the Lower Rio under the marketing order each season fruit or for shipping fruit in bulk. 13892 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Rules and Regulations In recent seasons, handlers have used fruit shipped in such containers receive the clarity of the handling regulations is experimental containers with different prior approval from the committee. by stating ‘‘grown in the production dimensions than those authorized under The interim final rule added area’’. While Ms. Barter’s request is not § 906.340(a). The use of these containers subparagraph (xi) to § 906.340(a)(1) to accepted, a change in the regulation for has been successful, and, thus, the authorize the use of this container. clarity will be incorporated. committee recommended that the Subparagraphs (ix), (x) and (xi) of The information collection dimensions specified for these two § 906.340(a)(1) are redesignated, requirements contained in the containers be revised to provide for respectively, as subparagraphs (x), (xi) referenced sections have been more flexibility in packing Texas citrus. and (xii). previously approved by the Office of Specifically, subparagraph (iii) of Section 906.42 authorizes the Management and Budget (OMB) under § 906.340(a)(1) was revised to specify Secretary to modify, suspend, or the provisions of 44 U.S.C. chapter 35 inside dimensions for closed fiberboard terminate regulations based upon and have been assigned OMB number containers of 20 inches in length by recommendations and information 0581–0068 for Texas oranges and 131⁄4 inches in width by 93⁄4 to 13 submitted by the committee, or other grapefruit. inches in depth. The revised available information pursuant to There is no reporting burden on dimensions for the fiberboard crib §§ 906.34, 906.40, 906.45, or any handlers of oranges and grapefruit who authorized by § 906.340(a)(1)(viii) are 46 combination thereof, in order to have been using experimental to 471⁄2 inches in length by 37 to 38 facilitate the handling of fruit. containers because no application is inches in width by 24 inches in depth. Consistent with § 906.42, § 906.120 of required. These revisions enable handlers to use the order’s rules and regulations Based on the above, the Administrator a wider variety of containers without provides that oranges and/or grapefruit of the AMS has determined that this having to receive prior committee mixed with other types of fruit may be action will not have a significant approval or to use such containers handled exempt from container and economic impact on a substantial under the committee’s supervision. pack regulations, subject to certain number of small entities. Section 906.340 authorizes a number conditions. One of those conditions After consideration of all relevant of mesh, poly, and vexar bags that may prior to issuance of the interim final matter presented, including the be used in packing Texas citrus, and, rule, was that the oranges and/or information and recommendations prior to issuance of the interim final grapefruit constitute at least 50 percent submitted by the committee and other rule specified the master containers that by count of the contents of any available information, it is hereby found can be used to ship these bags of fruit. container. The rule continues to allow that this rule as hereinafter set forth will For example, mesh type bags having a handlers to pack 1⁄3 Texas citrus by tend to effectuate the declared policy of capacity of 10 pounds of fruit could volume rather than 50 percent by count the Act. only be packed in closed fiberboard as authorized in § 906.120(c)(4)(ii). This cartons with inside dimensions of 20 change provided handlers with the List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 906 inches by 131⁄4 inches by 93⁄4 to 103⁄4 flexibility to pack a variety of products Grapefruit, Marketing agreements and inches. The committee recommended (e.g., pecans, jalapeno jelly, Washington Reporting and recordkeeping that such restrictions be eliminated to apples, avocadoes, etc.) in the mixed requirements. permit the industry to pack any packs. The committee recognized the For the reasons set forth in the authorized bag in any approved master need to specify that mixed packs preamble, 7 CFR Part 906 is amended as container. This revision provides contain at least 1⁄3 Texas citrus by follows: handlers with additional flexibility in volume. The committee believes that the packing oranges and grapefruit without change will allow the Texas citrus PART 906Ð[AMENDED] having to follow the procedures industry to improve producer returns. The Department’s opinion is that 1. The authority citation for 7 CFR governing the use of experimental Part 906 continues to read as follows: containers. This rule maintains the specifying ‘‘Texas’’ is redundant. As a revision to subparagraphs (iii), (iv), (vii), result the Department did not include Authority: 7 U.S.C. 601–674. (viii), (ix), and (x) of § 906.340(a)(1). The the term in the revision of committee’s recommendation that the § 906.120(c)(4)(ii). § 906.120 Fruit exempt from regulations. master containers utilized The interim final rule concerning this 2. Section 906.120(c)(4) is revised to experimentally during the past few action was published in the December 9, read as follows: seasons become permanent was 1994, Federal Register [59 FR 63691], * * * * * implemented in the interim final rule. with a 30-day comment period ending (c) * * * The committee’s recommendation for January 9, 1995. (4) Oranges and grapefruit grown in a new fiberboard display bin was added One comment was received from Ms. the production area may be handled to the list of approved containers and Darlene Barter, manager of the exempt from container and pack continues in effect. The new fiberboard committee. Ms. Barter suggested that the regulations issued pursuant to display bin is being successfully used revision to § 906.120(c)(4)(ii) in the § 906.40(d), under the following by the Florida citrus industry. The high- interim final rule should specify ‘‘Texas conditions: graphic bulk bin works as an in-store citrus.’’ The Department’s position is (i) Such oranges and/or grapefruit advertisement, increasing traffic and that the industry will be better served by grown in the production area are mixed volume movement in the produce stating ‘‘grown in the production area’’ with other types of fruit; department. Because the bin is vented, rather than stating ‘‘Texas citrus’’. This (ii) Such oranges and/or grapefruit the fruit holds up better during will encourage handlers to ship oranges grown in the production area constitute shipping. The bin can be shipped on and grapefruit grown in the Lower Rio at least one-third by volume of the pallets or ‘‘slip’’ boards. By adding these Grande Valley. While citrus is well contents of any container, and any such containers which were previously defined in the order, the Department container is not larger than a 7⁄10 bushel approved for experimental use to the agrees that there is a need for additional carton. permanent list of containers, there is no clarity in the order’s handling (iii) Such grapefruit grown in the longer a requirement that each lot of regulations. The best way to improve production area grade at least U.S. No. Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Rules and Regulations 13893 1, and such oranges grown in the under the Animal Welfare Act (7 U.S.C. dealers and exhibitors who are using a production area grade at least U.S. 2131, et seq.) (the Act). computerized recordkeeping system; a Combination (with not less than 60 On December 28, 1993, we published variance will not be granted for percent, by count, of the oranges in any in the Federal Register (58 FR 68559– alternative paper records. With regard to lot grading at least U.S. No.1). 68561, Docket No. 92–158–1) a proposal the complaint that the forms are * * * * * to amend the regulations to require that outdated, APHIS is currently developing Dated: March 9, 1995. an applicant for license renewal certify updated forms that reflect the Sharon Bomer Lauritsen, that, to the best of the applicant’s requirements of the regulations. The knowledge and belief, he or she is in Deputy Director, Fruit and Vegetable Division. updated forms will be distributed as compliance with the regulations and supplies of the existing forms are [FR Doc. 95–6368 Filed 3–14–95; 8:45 am] standards and agrees to continue to be depleted. BILLING CODE 3410±02±W in compliance upon issuance of a renewed license. In that same License Renewal document, we also proposed to amend Comment: The proposed certification Animal and Plant Health Inspection the regulations to require dealers and will be effective only if it supports Service exhibitors to use Veterinary Services APHIS in denying the license renewal 9 CFR Part 2 (VS) Form 18–5, ‘‘Record of Dogs and applications of facilities not in Cats on Hand,’’ and VS Form 18–6, compliance with the regulations and standards. Otherwise, the certification [Docket No. 92±158±2] ‘‘Record of Disposition of Dogs and Cats,’’ to make, keep, and maintain the will not encourage compliance any Animal Welfare; Licensing and information required by § 2.75(a)(1) of more than the statement that applicants Records the regulations. We also proposed to are currently required to sign. add Animal and Plant Health Inspection Response: The regulations in § 2.5 AGENCY: Animal and Plant Health Service (APHIS) form numbers in front state that a license will be renewed if, Inspection Service, USDA. of the VS form numbers that appear in before the expiration of the license, the ACTION: Final rule. several places in the regulations. licensee files an application for license We solicited comments concerning renewal, submits an annual report as SUMMARY: We are amending the Animal our proposal for a 60-day comment required by § 2.7, and pays the required Welfare regulations to require dealers, period ending February 28, 1994. We fees. There are no provisions in the exhibitors, and operators of auction received 11 comments by that date. The regulations for denying a license sales who apply for license renewal to comments were submitted by a renewal application as long as the certify that, to the best of their scientific society, animal breeders and licensee has complied with those knowledge and belief, they are in distributors, humane and animal rights requirements. However, as provided in compliance with the regulations before organizations, and private citizens. We § 2.1(f) of the regulations, a person who a renewal is issued. We are also carefully considered all of the fails to comply with any provision of amending the regulations to require comments we received. They are the Act or any provision of the dealers and exhibitors to use certain discussed below by topic. regulations and standards shall be liable forms to make, keep, and maintain the to having his or her license suspended Recordkeeping animal identification records required or revoked. by the regulations, unless a variance has Comment: The use of VS Forms 18– Comment: If a facility was in the been granted that would allow the use 5 and 18–6 should remain optional process of correcting a deficiency, it of a computerized recordkeeping system since many facilities have accurate and would be unable to certify that it is in that has been determined by the efficient computerized recordkeeping compliance with the regulations and Administrator to meet the requirements systems. The forms that APHIS proposes standards until the deficiency was of the regulations. These changes will to require are cumbersome, repetitive, completely corrected, which could take help ensure that applicants for license and outdated and they do not provide up to 30 days or even longer. Similarly, renewal are in compliance with the spaces for all the information that is it would be difficult for a licensee with regulations and that dealers and required by the regulations. more than one facility to be certain that exhibitors keep accurate and complete Response: We understand that many all his or her facilities were, at any given records, thus promoting compliance dealers and exhibitors, especially the time, in compliance with the regulations with the Animal Welfare Act. larger operations, may be using and standards. The delays that could computerized systems to make, keep, result from having to be certain that all EFFECTIVE DATE: April 14, 1995. and maintain the records required by the regulations and standards had been FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. § 2.75(a)(1) of the regulations. Because it satisfied could cause a facility to miss Debra E. Beasley, Senior Staff would be difficult for some dealers and its deadline for license renewal. Veterinarian, Animal and Plant Health exhibitors to switch over to a paper Response: If a licensee who had been Inspection Service, Regulatory system, we have added a provision to cited for a deficiency was actively Enforcement and Animal Care, Animal the regulations that will enable a dealer working to correct that deficiency, Care, 4700 River Road Unit 84, or exhibitor to apply for a variance from APHIS would be aware—or could be Riverdale, MD 20737–1234; (301) 734– the requirement to use VS Forms 18–5 informed—that the licensee was 7833. and 18–6. If APHIS determines that a addressing the problem and was making SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: dealer or exhibitor is maintaining a a good-faith effort to comply with the computerized recordkeeping system that regulations. Such a situation would be Background is adequate to keep the required no reason for a licensee to delay filing The Animal Welfare regulations information, a variance will be granted. a license renewal application. With contained in 9 CFR part 2 (referred to An appeal procedure is also included regard to the example of a licensee with below as the regulations) pertain to the for dealers or exhibitors who have had more than one facility, it is the administrative and institutional their request for a variance denied. The responsibility of a licensee, either responsibilities of regulated persons variance is an option only for those personally or through his or her 13894 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Rules and Regulations employees, to ensure that each facility paperwork burdens. As mentioned Addition of APHIS Form Numbers is maintained and operated in above, APHIS does not intend for the Three commenters mentioned our compliance with the regulations. If a certification to take the place of proposal to add APHIS form numbers in licensee is aware of a deficiency in one inspections. front of the VS form numbers that of his or her facilities, it is incumbent Comment: The proposed certification appear in several places in the upon the licensee to address the requirement should help encourage regulations. Each of those commenters deficiency in order to remain in compliance. However, to promote even supported the proposed change. compliance with the regulations. Having greater compliance, the certification responsibility for more than one facility Comments Outside the Scope of This should actually take the form of an is not an excuse for knowingly operating Rulemaking affidavit, signed by the applicant, in violation of the regulations and stating that the applicant has read the One commenter strongly supported standards. the mandatory use of VS forms, but Comment: Prior to 1979, APHIS Act, its amendments, and the applicable added that a photograph of each allowed license applicants to submit an regulations and standards in their individual dog or cat should be required affidavit stating that their premises, totality and understands their contents as part of the record. Similarly, another facilities, and equipment were in fully. Further, the applicant should commenter suggested that additional compliance with the regulations and verify that he or she is in compliance information be required, such as a standards, in lieu of an APHIS with, and will continue to comply with, second piece of identification, a inspection. However, in 1979, APHIS the Act and its implementing amended the regulations to remove the regulations and standards. The notarized verification of exempt status applicant affidavit method of applicant should have to have paid any and a signed statement, when ascertaining compliance because of outstanding fines levied by the USDA applicable, verifying that a random- misrepresentation and misuse of the for violations of the Act. Additionally, source animal was held for the method by some applicants. In light of the application should include a mandated period. However, the that experience, there does not appear to warning stating that, under 18 U.S.C. proposed rule did not propose any be any advantage to requiring license 1001, anyone making a false, fictitious, changes to the type of information that applicants to agree to comply with the or fraudulent statement on the dealers and exhibitors must keep as part regulations and standards. Therefore, if application could be subject to a fine of of the required animal identification APHIS finalizes its proposed $10,000 and 5 years in prison. records. Rather, we proposed that specific forms be used to record and certification requirement in § 2.2, the Response: We believe that an affidavit text of § 2.2 must contain a reference to maintain the information already would accomplish no more than the required by the regulations in the inspection provisions of § 2.3. signed statement currently required. Response: The proposed certification § 2.75(a)(1). Because of this, such Similarly, because APHIS already comments are outside the scope of the requirement was not presented as an supplies each applicant a copy of the alternative means of ascertaining proposed rule and no changes have been applicable regulations and standards, made in this final rule as a result of compliance or as a substitute for we do not believe that supplying a copy inspections. The certification those comments. Any such changes of the Act and its amendments would requirement will have no effect on the would have to be proposed as part of a add to an applicant’s knowledge of his provisions of § 2.3, which requires separate proposed rule. or her responsibilities, which are applicants for an initial license or Other commenters submitted spelled out in the regulations and license renewal to make their animals, comments concerning individual premises, facilities, vehicles, standards. Because a person who fails to identification of animals, the definitions equipment, other premises, and records comply with the Act or the regulations of Class A and B dealers, requiring the available for inspection so that an and standards is liable to having his or use of other forms, individually APHIS inspector may ascertain the her license suspended or revoked, it is notifying licensees of proposed rules applicant’s compliance with the in each licensee’s best interests to know and other regulatory actions, and the standards and regulations. what is required of him or her. We development of new forms. Again, such Comment: It is unclear how APHIS cannot, however, reasonably require a comments are outside the scope of the intends licensees to certify that they are person to swear that he or she has read proposed rule and, therefore, no in compliance. A simple statement the Act, its amendments, and the changes have been made in this final would be ineffective, and any applicable regulations and standards in rule as a result of those comments. Any documented statement would entail the their totality and understands their such changes would have to be use of lengthy forms, which impose a contents fully. With regard to denying proposed as part of a separate proposed significant additional paperwork burden renewals to persons with unpaid fines, rule. on licensees. Either way, new we stated above that the regulations Therefore, based on the rationale set regulations are no substitute for APHIS make no provision for the denial of a forth in the proposed rule and in this performing rigorous inspections. license renewal as long as the licensee document, we are adopting the Response: As described in the filed an application for license renewal provisions of the proposal as a final proposed rule, an applicant for license on time, submitted an annual report as rule, with the changes discussed in this renewal would certify that he or she is, required by § 2.7, and has paid the document. to the best of the applicant’s knowledge required fees. Other avenues are utilized and belief, in compliance with the by APHIS to collect unpaid fines. Miscellaneous regulations and standards and agrees to Finally, the commenter mentioned the As mentioned above, APHIS is continue to comply with the regulations penalties provided under 18 U.S.C. currently developing an updated and standards by signing the application 1001. Those penalties can be applied in version of VS Form 18–5, ‘‘Record of form, which will contain a statement to matters within the jurisdiction of Dogs and Cats on Hand.’’ The updated that effect. The certification will not APHIS, and we will post a warning to form includes new spaces for the necessitate the use of lengthy forms or that effect on the license renewal recording of information pertaining to the imposition of significant additional application form that we are developing. the acquisition of the dogs or cats Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Rules and Regulations 13895 covered by the form. To reflect the Health Inspection Service has acknowledge receipt of the regulations inclusion of the new spaces, VS Form determined that this action will not and standards and shall certify by 18–5 has been renamed ‘‘Record of have a significant economic impact on signing the application form that, to the Acquisition and Dogs and Cats on a substantial number of small entities. best of the applicant’s knowledge and Hand.’’ The two places in the belief, he or she is in compliance with Executive Order 12372 regulations where the title of VS Form the regulations and standards and agrees 18–5 is mentioned—in §§ 2.35(d)(1) and This program/activity is listed in the to continue to comply with the 2.75(a)(2)—have been amended in this Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance regulations and standards. document to reflect the title change. under No. 10.025 and is subject to We have slightly adjusted the Executive Order 12372, which requires § 2.5 [Amended] language of § 2.2(b) for the purpose of intergovernmental consultation with 3. In § 2.5, paragraph (b), the first greater clarity. State and local officials. (See 7 CFR part sentence is amended by adding the words ‘‘APHIS Form 7003/’’ Executive Order 12866 and Regulatory 3015, subpart V.) immediately before the words ‘‘VS Form Flexibility Act Executive Order 12778 18–3’’. This rule has been reviewed under This final rule has been reviewed Executive Order 12866. The rule has under Executive Order 12778, Civil § 2.35 [Amended] been determined to be not significant for Justice Reform. It is not intended to 4. In § 2.35, paragraph (d)(1) is the purpose of Executive Order 12866 have retroactive effect. This rule does amended by adding the words ‘‘APHIS and, therefore, has not been reviewed by not preempt any State or local laws, Form 7001/’’ immediately before the the Office of Management and Budget. regulations, or policies, unless they words ‘‘VS Form 18–1’’; by adding the We are amending the Animal Welfare present an irreconcilable conflict with words ‘‘Acquisition and’’ before the regulations to require applicants for this rule. The Act does not provide words ‘‘Dogs and Cats on Hand’’; and by license renewal to certify that they are administrative procedures which must adding the words ‘‘APHIS Form 7005/’’ in compliance with the regulations be exhausted prior to a judicial immediately before the words ‘‘VS Form before a renewal is issued. We are also challenge to the provisions of this rule. 18–5’’. amending the regulations to require 5. In § 2.35, paragraph (d)(2) is dealers and exhibitors to use certain Paperwork Reduction Act amended by adding the words ‘‘APHIS forms to make, keep, and maintain the In accordance with the Paperwork Form 7001/’’ immediately before the animal identification records required Reduction Act of 1980 (44 U.S.C. 3501 words ‘‘VS Form 18–1’’ and by adding by the regulations. These changes will et seq.), the information collection or the words ‘‘APHIS Form 7006/’’ help ensure that applicants for license recordkeeping requirements included in immediately before the words ‘‘VS Form renewal are in compliance with the this final rule have been submitted for 18–6’’. regulations and that dealers and approval to the Office of Management exhibitors keep accurate and complete and Budget. § 2.38 [Amended] records. We do not expect there to be an 6. In § 2.38, paragraph (h)(3) is economic impact on any entities, large List of Subjects in 9 CFR Part 2 amended by adding the words ‘‘APHIS or small, that will be affected by these Animal welfare, Pets, Reporting and Form 7001/’’ immediately before the changes in the regulations. recordkeeping requirements, Research. words ‘‘VS Form 18–1’’. Because all licensees are currently Accordingly, 9 CFR part 2 is amended 7. In § 2.38, paragraph (i)(3), the required to operate in compliance with as follows: beginning of the second sentence is the regulations, the requirement for amended by removing the words license renewal applicants to certify that PART 2ÐREGULATIONS ‘‘Veterinary Services’’ and adding the they are in compliance with the words ‘‘APHIS Form 7009/VS’’ in their regulations will have no effect in terms 1. The authority citation for part 2 place. of increased operational costs or continues to read as follows: 8. Section 2.75 is amended as follows: burdens. Similarly, requiring dealers Authority: 7 U.S.C. 2131–2159; 7 CFR 2.17, a. Paragraph (a)(2) is revised to read and exhibitors to use VS Form 18–5 and 2.51, and 371.2(g). as set forth below. VS Form 18–6 to make, keep, and 2. Section 2.2 is revised to read as b. In paragraph (a)(3), the words maintain the required animal follows: ‘‘APHIS Form 7001/’’ are added identification records will involve no immediately before the words ‘‘VS Form new costs or burdens. Dealers and § 2.2 Acknowledgment of regulations and 18–1’’, and the words ‘‘paragraph (a)(1) exhibitors are already required to keep standards. of this section and’’ are removed. the records, so they will not have to (a) Application for initial license. c. In paragraph (b)(2), the words gather or record any new information in APHIS will supply a copy of the ‘‘APHIS Form 7019/’’ are added order to complete the forms. The forms applicable regulations and standards to immediately before the words ‘‘VS Form are provided by APHIS to dealers and the applicant with each request for a 18–19’’, and the words ‘‘APHIS Form exhibitors free of charge, and we will license application. The applicant shall 7020/’’ are added immediately before not require any existing records to be acknowledge receipt of the regulations the words ‘‘VS Form 18–20’’. converted over to the new forms. and standards and agree to comply with Additionally, a dealer or exhibitor who them by signing the application form § 2.75 Records: Dealers and exhibitors. wished to do so could obtain a variance before a license will be issued. (a) * * * from the requirement to use the forms (b) Application for license renewal. (2) Each dealer and exhibitor shall use if the computerized recordkeeping APHIS will supply a copy of the Record of Acquisition and Dogs and system has been determined by the applicable regulations and standards to Cats on Hand (APHIS Form 7005/VS Administrator to meet the requirements the applicant for license renewal with Form 18–5) and Record of Disposition of of the regulations. each request for a license renewal. Dogs and Cats (APHIS Form 7006/VS Under these circumstances, the Before a license will be renewed, the Form 18–6) to make, keep, and maintain Administrator of the Animal and Plant applicant for license renewal shall the information required by paragraph 13896 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Rules and Regulations (a)(1) of this section: Provided, that if a 9 CFR Parts 91 and 92 through 92.435), referred to below as the dealer or exhibitor who uses a regulations, pertains to the importation [Docket No. 94±076±1] computerized recordkeeping system of ruminants. Sections 92.424 through believes that APHIS Form 7005/VS Cattle Imported In-Bond for Feeding 92.429 of the regulations contain Form 18–5 and APHIS Form 7006/VS and Return to Mexico specific provisions regarding the Form 18–6 are unsuitable for him or her importation of ruminants, including to make, keep, and maintain the AGENCY: Animal and Plant Health cattle, from Mexico. information required by paragraph (a)(1) Inspection Service, USDA. Before the effective date of this rule, § 92.427(e) of the regulations provided of this section, the dealer or exhibitor ACTION: Interim rule and request for for the temporary importation of cattle may request a variance from the comments. from Mexico into the United States requirement to use APHIS Form 7005/ SUMMARY: We are amending the animal under United States Customs bond for VS Form 18–5 and APHIS Form 7006/ exportation and importation regulations feeding and return to Mexico for VS Form 18–6. by removing provisions that allow the slaughter. Cattle imported under this in- (i) The request for a variance must temporary, in-bond importation of cattle bond program were exempt from some consist of a written statement describing from Mexico into the United States for requirements that applied to the why APHIS Form 7005/VS Form 18–5 feeding and return to Mexico for importation of other cattle from Mexico, and APHIS Form 7006/VS Form 18–6 slaughter. We are taking this action but were subject to additional are unsuitable for the dealer or exhibitor because the U.S. Customs Service, to restrictions during the time they were in to make, keep, and maintain the comply with provisions of the North the United States that did not apply to information required by paragraph (a)(1) American Free Trade Agreement, has other cattle imported from Mexico. discontinued its collection of duties and of this section, and a description of the Specifically, in-bond cattle from bonds on cattle imported into the Mexico could be imported without computerized recordkeeping system the United States from Mexico. Without a meeting the requirements of person would use in lieu of APHIS bond, we are unable to meaningfully § 92.427(c)(1) regarding herd tests for Form 7005/VS Form 18–5 and APHIS penalize importers who fail to return tuberculosis and without meeting the Form 7006/VS Form 18–6 to make, those cattle to Mexico. We believe, requirements of § 92.427(d)(1) regarding keep, and maintain the information therefore, that the current in-bond herd tests for brucellosis if the cattle required by paragraph (a)(1) of this program must be terminated to prevent were: (1) Moved directly by land from section. APHIS will advise the person as the dissemination into the United States the port of entry to an approved to the disposition of his or her request of animal diseases by in-bond cattle that quarantined feedlot; (2) removed from for a variance from the requirement to remain in the United States in violation the quarantined feedlot only to be use APHIS Form 7005/VS Form 18–5 of the regulations. moved directly to a Mexican port of and APHIS Form 7006/VS Form 18–6. DATES: Interim rule effective March 30, entry for return to Mexico for slaughter; (ii) A dealer or exhibitor whose 1995. Consideration will be given only and (3) moved only in trucks or railway request for a variance has been denied to comments received on or before May cars that had been sealed with a seal may request a hearing in accordance 15, 1995. applied by a U.S. Department of Agriculture inspector. with the applicable rules of practice for ADDRESSES: Please send an original and three copies of your comments to Additionally, in-bond cattle from the purpose of showing why the request Mexico could be imported without the APHIS, PPD, Regulatory Analysis and for a variance should not be denied. The official record of negative brucellosis Development, 4700 River Road Unit denial of the variance shall remain in test required by § 92.424(b) and without 118, Riverdale, MD 20737–1238. Please effect until the final legal decision has meeting the requirements of § 92.427(d) state that your comments refer to Docket been rendered. regarding brucellosis if the cattle were No. 94–076–1. Comments received may under 24 months of age and were * * * * * be inspected at USDA, room 1141, accompanied by a certificate stating that South Building, 14th Street and § 2.78 [Amended] the cattle had been vaccinated for Independence Avenue SW., brucellosis. 9. In § 2.78, paragraph (d) is amended Washington, DC, between 8 a.m. and by adding the words ‘‘APHIS Form The movement, quarantine, and 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, vaccination requirements discussed 7001/’’ immediately before the words except holidays. Persons wishing to above were designed to prevent the ‘‘VS Form 18–1’’. inspect comments are requested to call transmission of animal diseases from in- ahead on (202) 690–2817 to facilitate § 2.102 [Amended] bond Mexican cattle to other animals in entry into the comment reading room. the United States. However, if the 10. In § 2.102, paragraph (a)(3), the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. importer of the in-bond Mexican cattle beginning of the second sentence is David Vogt, Senior Staff Veterinarian, did not adhere to those requirements, amended by removing the words APHIS, Veterinary Services, Import/ there was a serious risk that those cattle, ‘‘Veterinary Services’’ and adding the Export Animals Staff, 4700 River Road which had not been tested for words ‘‘APHIS Form 7009/VS’’ in their Unit 39, Riverdale, MD 20737–1231; tuberculosis or brucellosis prior to place. (301) 734–8170. entering the United States, would Done in Washington, DC, this 9th day of SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: spread disease to domestic livestock. As March 1995. a means of ensuring that the in-bond Background Mexican cattle were maintained in Terry L. Medley, The regulations in 9 CFR part 92 accordance with the regulations while Acting Administrator, Animal and Plant prohibit or restrict the importation of in the United States and were actually Health Inspection Service. certain animals into the United States to returned to Mexico upon completion of [FR Doc. 95–6369 Filed 3–14–95; 8:45 am] prevent the introduction of their feeding period in the United BILLING CODE 3410±34±P communicable diseases of livestock and States, the regulations required that the poultry. Subpart D of part 92 (§§ 92.400 importer of the Mexican cattle post a Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Rules and Regulations 13897 bond with the U.S. Customs Service at movement restrictions of the in-bond Emergency Action the port of entry. The bond required by program were specifically designed to The Administrator of the Animal and the Customs Service could be as high as mitigate that increased disease risk, so Plant Health Inspection Service has three times the duty value of the cattle, it follows that cattle moved in violation determined that conditions exist that so it was clearly in an importer’s best of those quarantine and movement warrant publication of this interim rule interests to meet all the requirements of restrictions would present a greater than without prior opportunity for public the regulations. average disease risk. It has become comment. The recent steep devaluation However, on January 1, 1994, the U.S. evident that the posting of a bond is of the Mexican peso has created a strong Customs Service discontinued its necessary to ensure compliance with the economic incentive for importers of in- collection of duties and bonds on provisions of the in-bond program, but bond cattle from Mexico to send such imported Mexican cattle in order to APHIS has no statutory authority to comply with provisions of the North cattle to slaughter in the United States, institute a bond system similar to that rather than in Mexico as required by the American Free Trade Agreement. As a which had been administered by the consequence, importers no longer had to regulations. Because Customs has U.S. Customs Service at U.S. ports of discontinued collecting bonds, prompt post a bond when importing cattle from entry on the Mexican border prior to Mexico into the United States for action is necessary to prevent the January 1, 1994. Therefore, we believe dissemination into the United States of feeding and return to Mexico, although that it is necessary for us to terminate the Customs Service continued to track animal diseases by in-bond Mexican the in-bond program described in cattle that remain in the United States such cattle entering and leaving the § 92.427(e) in order to prevent the United States. The penalty for failing to in violation of the regulations. We are introduction into, and dissemination making this rule effective 15 days after return in-bond Mexican cattle to Mexico within, the United States of disease. upon completion of their feeding period its publication in the Federal Register to has been reduced to $400. Therefore, we are removing provide importers in the United States Since the Customs Service § 92.427(e), ‘‘Cattle imported in bond for and exporters in Mexico adequate notice discontinued its collection of bonds, the feeding and return to Mexico,’’ in its of this action in order to prevent undue Animal and Plant Health Inspection entirety. The termination of the in-bond stress on cattle already in transit from Service (APHIS) has monitored the in- program also entails the removal of five Mexico and undue hardship on the bond program to determine whether the references to the in-bond program that owners, importers, and exporters of program could remain viable despite the are found elsewhere in part 92 and in cattle from Mexico. lack of a posted bond. Recently, some the animal export regulations in 9 CFR Because prior notice and other public importers of cattle under the in-bond part 91. Specifically, we are amending: procedures with respect to this action program have indicated to APHIS that • Section 91.3(a) by removing a are impracticable and contrary to the they would be willing to accept the provision that exempts in-bond Mexican public interest under these conditions, $400 fine—a relatively insignificant cattle from the requirement that all we find good cause under 5 U.S.C. 553 amount when compared to the bond animals intended for exportation to to make this rule effective 15 days after that would have been forfeited before Mexico be accompanied from the State its publication in the Federal Register. the Customs Service discontinued of origin of the export movement to the We will consider comments that are collecting the bond—if the importers border of the United States by an origin received within 60 days of publication could move their cattle to slaughter or health certificate; of this rule in the Federal Register. other destinations in the United States After the comment period closes, we • Section 91.5 by removing a without returning the cattle to Mexico will publish another document in the provision that exempts in-bond Mexican for slaughter, as required under the in- Federal Register. It will include a cattle from certain pre-export health bond program’s regulations. Evidently, discussion of any comments we receive testing requirements; those importers believe that even with and any amendments we are making to the $400 fine, it would be more • Section 92.424(b) by removing a the rule as a result of the comments. provision that exempts in-bond Mexican profitable to sell their cattle in the Executive Order 12866 and Regulatory United States than in Mexico. In fact, cattle from the requirement for an Flexibility Act we are now aware of at least one case official record of brucellosis testing; in which an importer did remove his in- • Section 92.426(a) by removing a This rule has been reviewed under bond Mexican cattle from a quarantined provision requiring in-bond Mexican Executive Order 12866. The rule has feedlot and send the cattle to slaughter cattle to be inspected at the port of entry been determined to be not significant for in the United States. APHIS has the and found free from communicable purposes of Executive Order 12866 and, option of pursuing civil and criminal disease and fever tick infestation; and therefore, has not been reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget. action against an importer in such cases, • but we believe that there remains the Section 92.427(c)(2) by removing a This rule amends the animal strong possibility that importers will provision that exempts in-bond Mexican exportation and importation regulations choose to accept the risk of criminal and cattle from the M-branding requirement. by removing provisions regarding the civil action against them sometime in Miscellaneous temporary, in-bond importation of cattle the future in order to move their in- from Mexico into the United States for bond Mexican cattle to slaughter or As noted above, we are removing feeding and return to Mexico for other destinations in the United States. § 92.427(e) in its entirety, including slaughter. As stated above, in-bond Mexican footnote 10, which cites regulations of Several feedlots in the United States cattle were exempted from meeting the U.S. Customs Service concerning could be economically affected by this certain testing requirements for movement in bond. Therefore, to keep proposed change in the regulations, but tuberculosis and brucellosis; clearly, the footnotes in the subpart numbered we anticipate that the impact will be cattle that have not met those testing consecutively, we are amending minimal. In fiscal year 1993, requirements present a greater than §§ 92.430, 92.431, 92.433, 92.434, and approximately 61,000 Mexican cattle average risk of spreading disease to 92.435 by redesignating footnotes 11 were imported into the United States for domestic livestock. The quarantine and through 22 as footnotes 10 through 21. feeding and return to Mexico for 13898 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Rules and Regulations slaughter under U.S. Customs bond. Accordingly, 9 CFR parts 91 and 92 §§ 92.430 through 92.435 [Amended] They included 24,811 cattle imported are amended as follows: 9. In §§ 92.430 through 92.434, into Arizona, 3,878 into California, 69 footnotes 11 through 21 and their into New Mexico, and 32,059 into PART 91ÐINSPECTION AND references in the text are redesignated as Texas. APHIS estimates that as many as HANDLING OF LIVESTOCK FOR footnotes 10 through 20, respectively. EXPORTATION 18 different feedlots in Arizona, Done in Washington, DC, this 9th day of California, New Mexico, and Texas were 1. The authority citation for part 91 is March 1995. used for the feeding of in-bond Mexican Terry L. Medley, cattle during the height of in-bond revised to read as follows: Acting Administrator, Animal and Plant activity. Currently, there are about 10 Authority: 21 U.S.C. 105, 112, 113, 114a, Health Inspection Service. feedlots that have facilities for the 120, 121, 134b, 134f, 136, 136a, 612, 613, [FR Doc. 95–6371 Filed 3–14–95; 8:45 am] feeding of in-bond Mexican cattle, but 614, and 618; 46 U.S.C. 466a and 466b; 49 only about 5 of those feedlots have been U.S.C. 1509(d); 7 CFR 2.17, 2.51, and BILLING CODE 3410±34±P used recently to feed in-bond Mexican 371.2(d). cattle. § 91.3 [Amended] 9 CFR Part 92 The termination of the in-bond program is expected to have a negligible 2. In § 91.3, paragraph (a), the second [Docket No. 94±085±1] impact on feedlots in the United States. sentence is amended by removing the Most are large businesses (defined as words ‘‘, except cattle from Mexico Importation of Sheep and Goats From having more than $1.0 million in annual imported into the United States in bond Canada and Mexico for temporary feeding and return to gross receipts, according to Small AGENCY: Mexico,’’. Animal and Plant Health Business Administration size criteria) Inspection Service, USDA. and usually use only a small portion of § 91.5 [Amended] ACTION: Interim rule. the feedlot for in-bond Mexican cattle. The majority of the area in the feedlots 3. In § 91.5, the introductory text is SUMMARY: We are amending the is generally used to feed either other amended by removing the words ‘‘, regulations for importing sheep and imported Mexican cattle or domestic except cattle from Mexico imported into goats from Canada and Mexico to cattle. With the termination of the in- the United States in bond for temporary require that, with the exception of sheep bond program, we anticipate that any feeding and return to Mexico, except and goats imported through land border affected feedlots will use their entire cattle from Mexico imported into the ports for immediate slaughter, and areas to feed other imported Mexican United States in bond for temporary wethers imported through land border cattle or domestic cattle. feeding and return to Mexico,’’. ports, all sheep and goats imported into Under these circumstances, the the United States from Canada and Administrator of the Animal and Plant PART 92ÐIMPORTATION OF CERTAIN ANIMALS AND POULTRY AND Mexico be accompanied by an import Health Inspection Service has permit. This change is necessary to determined that this action will not CERTAIN ANIMAL AND POULTRY PRODUCTS; INSPECTION AND OTHER prevent the importation of sheep and have a significant economic impact on goats that may be affected with scrapie. a substantial number of small entities. REQUIREMENTS FOR CERTAIN MEANS OF CONVEYANCE AND DATES: Interim rule effective March 10, Executive Order 12778 SHIPPING CONTAINERS THEREON 1995. Consideration will be given only This rule has been reviewed under to comments received on or before May Executive Order 12778, Civil Justice 4. The authority citation for part 92 15, 1995. Reform. This rule: (1) Preempts all State continues to read as follows: ADDRESSES: Please send an original and and local laws and regulations that are Authority: 7 U.S.C. 1622; 19 U.S.C. 1306; three copies of your comments to inconsistent with this rule; (2) has no 21 U.S.C. 102–105, 111, 114a, 134a, 134b, Docket No. 94–085–1, Animal and Plant retroactive effect; and (3) does not 134c, 134d, 134f, 135, 136, and 136a; 31 Health Inspection Service, Policy and require administrative proceedings U.S.C. 9701; 7 CFR 2.17, 2.51, and 371.2(d). Program Development, Regulatory Analysis and Development, 4700 River before parties may file suit in court § 92.424 [Amended] challenging this rule. Road Unit 118, Riverdale, MD 20737– 5. In § 92.424, paragraph (b), the 1228. Please state that your comments Paperwork Reduction Act second sentence is amended by refer to Docket No. 94–085–1. This rule contains no information removing the words ‘‘pursuant to Comments received may be inspected at collection or recordkeeping § 92.427(e)(2), or’’. USDA, room 1141, South Building, 14th requirements under the Paperwork Street and Independence Avenue SW., § 92.426 [Amended] Reduction Act of 1980 (44 U.S.C. 3501 Washington, DC, between 8 a.m. and et seq.). 6. In § 92.426, paragraph (a), the first 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, sentence is amended by removing the except holidays. Persons wishing to List of Subjects words ‘‘or in bond for temporary entry inspect comments are requested to call 9 CFR Part 91 in accordance with § 92.427(e) of this ahead on (202) 690–2817 to facilitate Animal diseases, Animal welfare, part’’. entry into the comment reading room. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Exports, Livestock, Reporting and § 92.427 [Amended] Dr. recordkeeping requirements, Joyce Bowling, Staff Veterinarian, or Dr. Transportation. 7. In § 92.427, paragraph (c)(2), the Roger Perkins, Staff Veterinarian, first sentence is amended by removing Animal and Plant Health Inspection 9 CFR Part 92 the words ‘‘or in bond for temporary Service, Veterinary Services, National Animal diseases, Imports, Livestock, entry in accordance with § 92.427(e) of Center for Import and Export, 4700 Poultry and poultry products, this part’’. River Road Unit 38, Riverdale, MD Quarantine, Reporting and 8. In § 92.427, paragraph (e), 20737–1228. Telephone: (301) 734– recordkeeping requirements. including footnote 10, is removed. 8170. Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Rules and Regulations 13899 SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Mexico to be accompanied by an import We have been made aware that sheep Background permit. This is because sheep and goats, and goats impregnated with embryos with the exceptions explained below, from animals in countries affected with The regulations in 9 CFR part 92 that are imported from Canada or scrapie will be presented for (referred to below as ‘‘the regulations’’) Mexico through a land border port importation into the United States from govern the importation into the United could be infected with and transmit Canada in the next few days or weeks. States of live animals, including sheep scrapie to livestock in the United States. We will be unable to identify these and goats, to prevent those infected with The exceptions are sheep and goats animals because our regulations scrapie from transmitting the disease to imported for immediate slaughter and currently allow them to be imported livestock in the United States. wethers. into the United States without an import Scrapie is a progressive degenerative Sheep and goats, as well as other permit. disease of the central nervous system of ruminants imported from Canada and We are not aware of any similar sheep and goats. Scrapie occurs more Mexico for immediate slaughter must, animals to be presented for importation often in certain flocks and herds and under our regulations, be consigned from Mexico. However, a similar certain bloodlines, indicating that these from the port of entry to a recognized situation could occur at any time with animals may be genetically predisposed slaughtering establishment and be regard to sheep and goats from Mexico to become infected with or develop the slaughtered there within 2 weeks of because certain sheep and goats disease. Scrapie may also be transmitted importation (see § 92.400, the definition imported into the United States from by breeding and other physical contact of immediate slaughter, and §§ 92.420 Mexico through land border ports are between animals. and 92.429). Wethers are castrated male not required to have an import permit. The disease develops slowly, with an sheep or goats. They are incapable of If such a situation did occur, we would incubation period lasting up to 5 years. breeding and are imported for feeding probably have little or no notice, and The signs which then become manifest and subsequent slaughter. According to without a permit requirement we could may include nervousness, industry practice, wethers are kept in not identify animals from Mexico which incoordination, slight muscular tremors, confinement during feeding. Under could transmit scrapie to livestock in visible weight loss, lack of luster in the these circumstances, neither wethers the United States. animals’ wool, and itching. Affected nor sheep and goats imported for The only other sheep and goats which animals become debilitated and die. immediate slaughter from Canada or can be imported into the United States There is no diagnostic test for Mexico pose any significant threat of without a permit are certain ruminants confirming the presence of the disease transmitting scrapie to livestock in the moving from the British Virgin Islands in a live animal. Therefore, presence of United States. to the U.S. Virgin Islands for immediate the disease cannot be detected until an By requiring a permit for other sheep slaughter. Because these animals are animal becomes clinically ill. There is and goats intended for importation from moving to slaughter, they do not pose no known treatment for the disease. The Canada or Mexico through a land border any disease threat. impact of the disease in the United port, we will have an opportunity to Immediate action is therefore States could increase if spread of the review background information on the necessary to prevent the importation of disease is not controlled, or if incidence animals and determine whether the sheep and goats that may transmit of the disease increases. The regulations animal may be infected with scrapie, scrapie to U.S. livestock. Because prior are intended to prevent the importation which cannot be detected by visual notice and other public procedures with of animals that could transmit scrapie. inspection at the border. respect to this action are impracticable We are not exempting from our permit and contrary to the public interest under Import Permits requirements sheep and goats imported these conditions, we find good cause One way we have of ensuring that for immediate slaughter from countries under 5 U.S.C. 553 to make it effective sheep and goats intended for other than Canada or Mexico. Neither upon signature. We will consider importation into the United States are are we exempting from our permit comments that are received within 60 healthy is by reviewing background requirements wethers imported from days of publication of this rule in the information concerning the animals that countries other than Canada or Mexico. Federal Register. After the comment is supplied when an importer applies The exemption from our permit period closes, we will publish another for a permit to import the animals. The requirements for wethers and for sheep document in the Federal Register. It requirements for obtaining a permit to and goats for immediate slaughter are will include a discussion of any import sheep and goats and other only for those sheep and goats that are comments we receive and any ruminants are contained in § 92.404. imported from Canada and Mexico amendments we are making to the rule Before the effective date of this through a land border port, where as a result of the comments. interim rule, the regulations required inspectors can check the animals for that importers obtain an import permit disease and ectoparasites before the Executive Order 12866 and Regulatory for all sheep and goats intended for animals cross the border into the United Flexibility Act importation into the United States from States. This rule has been reviewed under any part of the world, except for certain In connection with the amendments Executive Order 12866. The rule has sheep and goats imported from Canada discussed above, we are adding a been determined to be not significant for or Mexico through land border ports, definition for wether to the definitions purposes of Executive Order 12866 and, and certain sheep and goats moved from in § 92.400, as follows: ‘‘A castrated therefore, has not been reviewed by the the British Virgin Islands to the U.S. male sheep or goat.’’ Office of Management and Budget. Virgin Islands for immediate slaughter. This rule requires an import permit These exceptions were contained in Effective Date for certain sheep and goats imported §§ 92.417(a), 92.424(a), and 92.422(a), The Administrator of the Animal and into the United States from Canada and respectively. Plant Health Inspection Service has Mexico through a land border port. With two exceptions, this interim rule determined that there is good cause for Between December of 1993 and requires all sheep and goats imported publishing this interim rule without December of 1994, 30,614 sheep and into the United States from Canada or prior opportunity for public comment. goats were imported from Canada 13900 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Rules and Regulations through a land border port; none were 2. Section 92.400 is amended by DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION imported from Mexico through a land adding a definition for Wether, in border port. Over 97 percent of these alphabetical order, to read as follows: Federal Aviation Administration sheep and goats were wethers or were imported for immediate slaughter. § 92.400 Definitions. 14 CFR Part 71 Wethers and sheep and goats imported * * * * * [Airspace Docket No. 95±AWP±4] through land border ports for immediate Wether. A castrated male sheep or Alteration of Class D Airspace; slaughter continue to be exempt from goat. the requirement for an import permit. Williams Air Force Base (AFB), AZ Based on these numbers, we expect that * * * * * AGENCY: only 3 percent of sheep and goats 3. Section 92.417 is amended as Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT. imported from Canada or Mexico follows: ACTION: Final rule. through land border ports will be a. In paragraph (a), the introductory required to be accompanied by an text is amended by adding, immediately SUMMARY: This action changes the name import permit under this rule. There is before the colon at the end of the text, of the Class D airspace area to Williams no fee for the import permit. the word: ‘‘is’’. Gateway, AZ. This alteration is Under these circumstances, the b. Paragraphs (a)(1) and (a)(2) are necessary due to the closure of Williams Administrator of the Animal and Plant redesignated as paragraphs (a)(3)(i) and AFB, AZ, and the renaming of the Health Inspection Service has airport to Williams Gateway Airport, determined that this action will not (a)(3)(ii), respectively; and new paragraphs (a)(1), (a)(2), and (a)(3) are AZ. This action reflects the name have a significant economic impact on change and title description of the Class added to read as follows: a substantial number of small entities. D airspace area to Williams Gateway, Executive Order 12778 § 92.417 Import permit and declaration for AZ. ruminants. EFFECTIVE DATE: 0901 UTC, May 25, This rule has been reviewed under (a) * * * 1995. Executive Order 12778, Civil Justice FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: (1) A wether; Reform. This rule: (1) Preempts all State Scott Speer, System Management and local laws and regulations that are (2) A sheep or goat imported for Specialist, System Management Branch, inconsistent with this rule; (2) has no immediate slaughter; or AWP–530, Air Traffic Division, retroactive effect; and (3) does not Western-Pacific Region, Federal require administrative proceedings (3) A ruminant other than a sheep or goat and that ruminant: Aviation Administration, 15000 before parties may file suit in court Aviation Boulevard, Lawndale, * * * * * challenging this rule. California 90261, telephone (310) 297– Paperwork Reduction Act 4. Section 92.424 is amended as 0010. follows: SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In accordance with the Paperwork a. In paragraph (a), the introductory Reduction Act of 1980 (44 U.S.C. 3501 text is amended by adding, immediately The Rule et seq.), the information collection or before the colon at the end of the text, This amendment to part 71 of the recordkeeping requirements included in the word ‘‘is’’. Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR this rule have been approved by the b. Paragraphs (a)(1), (a)(2), and (a)(3) part 71) changes the name of the Class Office of Management and Budget D airspace area at Williams AFB, AZ, to (OMB), and there are no new are redesignated as paragraphs (a)(3)(i), (a)(3)(ii), and (a)(3)(iii), respectively; the Class D airspace area at Williams requirements. The assigned OMB Gateway, AZ. This alteration is and new paragraphs (a)(1), (a)(2), and control number is 0579–0040. necessary due to the closure of the (a)(3) are added to read as follows: List of Subjects in 9 CFR Part 92 Williams AFB, AZ, and the renaming of § 92.424 Import permits and applications the airport to Williams Gateway Airport, Animal diseases, Imports, Livestock, for inspection of ruminants. AZ. This action reflects the name Poultry and poultry products, change and title description of the Class Quarantine, Reporting and (a) * * * D airspace area to Williams Gateway, recordkeeping requirements. (1) A wether; AZ. This action is editorial in nature. I Accordingly, 9 CFR part 92 is (2) A sheep or goat imported for find that notice and public procedure amended as follows: immediate slaughter; or under 5 U.S.C. 553(b) are unnecessary, because this action is a minor technical PART 92ÐIMPORTATION OF CERTAIN (3) A ruminant other than a sheep or amendment in which the public is not ANIMALS AND POULTRY AND goat and that ruminant: particularly interested. Class D airspace CERTAIN ANIMAL AND POULTRY * * * * * areas designations are published in PRODUCTS; INSPECTION AND OTHER Done in Washington, DC, this 10th day of paragraph 5000 of FAA Order 7500.9B REQUIREMENTS FOR CERTAIN March 1995. dated July 18, 1994, and effective MEANS OF CONVEYANCE AND Terry L. Medley, September 16, 1994, which is SHIPPING CONTAINERS THEREON Acting Administrator, Animal and Plant incorporated by reference in 14 CFR Health Inspection Service. 71.1. The Class D airspace designation 1. The authority citation for part 92 [FR Doc. 95–6372 Filed 3–14–95; 8:45 am] listed in this document will be continues to read as follows: published subsequently in this Order. BILLING CODE 3410±34±P Authority: 7 U.S.C. 1622; 19 U.S.C. 1306; The FAA has determined that this 21 U.S.C. 102–105, 111, 114a, 134a, 134b, regulation only involves an established 134c, 134d, 134f, 135, 136, and 136a; 31 body of technical regulations for which U.S.C. 9701; 7 CFR 2.17, 2.51, and 371.2(d). frequent and routine amendments are Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Rules and Regulations 13901 necessary to keep them operationally COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING information filed by FCMs with the current. It, therefore–(1) is not a COMMISSION Commission under the risk assessment ‘‘significant regulation action’’ under rules, and in particular the issue of Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a 17 CFR Part 1 whether risk assessment information ‘‘significant rule’’ under DOT should be made available to self- Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 Risk Assessment for Holding regulatory organizations, the FR 11034; February 26, 1970); and (3) Company Systems; Correction Commission stated that ‘‘[t]he does not warrant preparation of a AGENCY: Commodity Futures Trading Commission recognizes the sensitivity regulatory evaluation as the anticipated Commission. of certain information required to be impact is so minimal. Since this is a ACTION: Correction to final rules. reported under these rules [and] * ** routine matter that will not affect air plans to make the information reported traffic procedures and air navigation, it SUMMARY: This document contains a to it available only on an as-needed is certified that this rule will have a correction to the final rules which were basis, as determined in its sole significant economic impact on a published Wednesday, December 28, discretion.’’ 1 Because the inclusion of a substantial number of small entities 1994 (59 FR 66674). The rules requirement that FCMs file certain under the criteria of the Regulatory implemented the risk assessment information with their DSROs was not Flexibility Act. authority set forth in Section 4f(c) of the intended, the Commission is publishing Commodity Exchange Act and imposed this notice deleting from Rule 1.15(a)(1) List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71 reporting and recordkeeping and (a)(4) the references to a filing Airspace, Incorporation by reference, requirements for certain registered requirement with FCMs’ DSROs. Navigation (air). futures commission merchants (‘‘FCMs’’). Need for Correction Adoption of the Amendment EFFECTIVE DATE: March 15, 1995. As published, the final rules contain FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: errors which may prove to be In consideration of the foregoing, the Lawrence B. Patent, Associate Chief misleading and are in need of Federal Aviation Administration clarification. amends 14 CFR part 71 as follows: Counsel, or Lawrence T. Eckert, Attorney Adviser, Division of Trading List of Subjects in 17 CFR Part 1 PART 71Ð[AMENDED] and Markets, Commodity Futures Trading Commission, 2033 K Street Commodity futures consumer 1. The authority citation for 14 CFR N.W., Washington D.C. 20581. protection, Reporting and recordkeeping 71 continues to read as follows: Telephone (202) 254–8955. requirements. Authority: 49 U.S.C. app. 1348(a), 1354(a), SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Correction of Publication 1510; E.O. 10854, 24 FR 9565, 3 CFR, 1959– Background Accordingly, the publication on 1963 Comp., p. 389; 49 U.S.C. 106(g); 14 CFR December 28, 1994 of the final rules (59 On December 28, 1994, the 11.69. FR 66674) which were the subject of FR Commission published notice of the Doc. 94–31828, is corrected as follows: § 71.1 [Amended] adoption of Rules 1.14 and 1.15 to 2. The incorporation by reference in implement the risk assessment authority PART 1Ð[CORRECTED] 14 CFR 71.1 of the Federal Aviation set forth in Section 4f(c) of the Administration Order 7400.9B, Airspace Commodity Exchange Act. The rules On pages 66690 and 66691 paragraphs Designations and Reporting Points, generally require FCMs that are subject (a)(1) introductory text and (a)(4) of dated July 18, 1994, and effective to the rules to maintain and file with the § 1.15 are corrected to read as follows: September 16, 1994, is amended as Commission certain information concerning their financial activities and § 1.15 Risk assessment reporting follows: requirements for futures commission the activities of their material affiliates. merchants. Paragraph 5000 Class D Airspace Rule 1.15(a)(1) required that each (a) Reporting requirements with * * * * * FCM subject to the rule file copies of its organizational chart and financial, respect to information required to be AWP AZ D Williams Gateway, AZ [Revised] operational and risk management maintained by § 1.14. (1) Each futures Williams Gateway Airport, AZ policies, procedures and systems ‘‘with commission merchant registered with (Lat. 33°18′28′′ N, long. 111°39′19′′ W) the regional office with which it files the Commission pursuant to Section 4d That airspace extending upward from the periodic financial reports and with its of the Act, unless exempt pursuant to surface to and including 3,900 feet MSL designated self-regulatory organization paragraph (c) of this section, shall file within a 5-mile radius of the Williams ** *’’ Rule 1.15(a)(2), however, the following with the regional office Gateway Airport. This Class D airspace area required that an FCM’s consolidated with which it files periodic financial is effective during the specific dates and and consolidating financial statements reports by no later than April 30, 1995, times established in advance by a Notice to be filed only with ‘‘the regional office provided that in the case of a futures Airmen. The effective date and time will with which [the FCM] files periodic commission merchant whose thereafter be continuously published in the financial reports * * *’’ The inclusion registration becomes effective after Airport/Facility Director. of a filing requirement with the FCM’s December 31, 1994, such futures * * * * * designated self-regulatory organization commission merchant shall file the Issues in Los Angeles, California, on March (‘‘DSRO’’) in Rule 1.15(a)(1) was following within 60 calendar days after 3, 1995. inadvertent and is at odds with the the effective date of such registration, or Dennis T. Koehler, Commission’s intent as discussed in the by April 30, 1995, whichever comes Acting Manager, Air Traffic Division, preamble to the Federal Register release later: Western-Pacific Region. accompanying the risk assessment rules. * * * * * [FR Doc. 95–6380 Filed 3–14–95; 8:45 am] In discussing the degree of BILLING CODE 4910±13±M confidentiality to be afforded 1 59 FR 66674, 66687 (December 28, 1994). 13902 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Rules and Regulations (4) The reports required to be filed prisoners in federal district court under U.S.C. 553(d)(3). This rule is necessary pursuant to paragraphs (a)(1) and (a)(2) 42 U.S.C. 1983. That section allowed the to conform existing regulations to recent of this section shall be considered filed court, if appropriate and in the interests statutory amendments. Immediate when received by the regional office of of justice, to continue proceedings for a implementation will allow the Attorney the Commission with whom the futures period of 90 days in order to compel General to use without undue delay the commission files financial reports prisoners to exhaust local statutory ‘‘otherwise fair and effective’’ pursuant to § 1.10. administrative prison grievance standard in consideration of current * * * * * procedures. Exhaustion could not be applications by States or local Issued in Washington, D.C. on March 8, required unless the Attorney General jurisdictions for certification, and 1995, by the Commission. had certified or the court had consequently reduce regulatory burdens Jean A. Webb, determined that such administrative on these government entities. Secretary of the Commission. grievance procedure was in substantial The Attorney General has determined [FR Doc. 95–6212 Filed 3–14–95; 8:45 am] compliance with the minimum that this rule is not a significant standards promulgated by the Attorney BILLING CODE 6351±01±P regulatory action under Executive Order General pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 1997e(b). 12866, section 3(f), and accordingly this The Violent Crime Control and Law rule was not reviewed by the Office of Enforcement Act of 1994 (Pub. L. 103– DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE Management and Budget. This rule does 322) amended 42 U.S.C. 1997e. As not have federalism implications amended, 42 U.S.C. 1997e now allows Office of the Attorney General warranting the preparation of a the court to continue proceedings for up Federalism Assessment in accordance to 180 days. In addition, exhaustion 28 CFR Part 40 with section 6 of Executive Order may be required if the Attorney General 12612. The Attorney General, in [AG Order No. 1955±95] certifies or the court determines that the accordance with the Regulatory administrative grievance procedure in Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 605(b)), has Standards for Inmate Grievance question, even if it is not in compliance reviewed this regulation and by Procedures with the minimum standards approving it certifies that this regulation promulgated by the Attorney General, is AGENCY: Department of Justice. will not have a significant economic ‘‘otherwise fair and effective.’’ ACTION: Interim rule with request for impact on a substantial number of small comments. This interim rule accordingly revises § 40.11 in 28 CFR part 40 in order to entities. SUMMARY: This interim rule modifies the address the evaluation of an applicant’s List of Subjects in 28 CFR Part 40 standards for state prison inmate submission under the ‘‘otherwise fair grievance procedures to allow for and effective’’ standard as well as under Administrative practice and certification of a procedure which, if not the existing standards. Sections 40.14, procedure, Civil rights, Inmate in substantial compliance with 40.15, 40.16, 40.18 (a) and (b), 40.19(a), grievance procedures, Prisoners. minimum standards promulgated by the and 40.22 are amended to include Accordingly, by virtue of the Attorney General, nevertheless is found reference to determination that a authority vested in the Attorney General by the Attorney General to be otherwise grievance procedure is otherwise fair by law, including 5 U.S.C. 301, 28 fair and effective. This interim rule also and effective. U.S.C. 509, and 42 U.S.C. 1997e, part 40 adjusts the time limits for processing In addition, § 40.7(e) is amended to of Chapter I of title 28 of the Code of grievances to help ensure final specify that in all instances grievances Federal Regulations is amended as disposition within the period of time must be processed from initiation to follows: allowed for judicial continuance. These final disposition within 180 days, amendments are necessary to including any extensions. Formerly, PART 40ÐSTANDARDS FOR INMATE implement new statutory authority . paragraph (e) had required final GRIEVANCE PROCEDURES DATES: This interim rule is effective disposition within 90 days, excluding 1. The authority citation for part 40 March 15, 1995; comments must be any extension of time agreed to in continues to read as follows: submitted on or before May 15, 1995. writing by the grievant. This amendment is intended to provide ADDRESSES: Please submit comments to Authority: 42 U.S.C. 1997e. applicants the flexibility to set time Office of General Counsel, Bureau of limits for the final disposition of 2. In § 40.7, paragraph (e) is revised to Prisons, HOLC room 709, 320 First grievances within the extended period read as follows: Street NW., Washington, DC 20534. of time allowed under newly revised 42 § 40.7 Operation and decision. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: U.S.C. 1997e(a)(1). As revised, John Megathlin, Administrator, National paragraph (e) no longer requires written * * * * * Inmate Appeals, Federal Bureau of consent from the grievant for an (e) Fixed time limits. Responses shall Prisons, 320 First Street NW., extension of time on a response. be made within fixed time limits at each Washington, DC 20534, telephone (202) However, notification to the grievant of level of decision. Time limits may vary 514–6165. an extension of time for a response at between institutions, but expeditious SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: any stage of the process remains processing of grievances at each level of necessary in order to require exhaustion decision is essential to prevent Background of that stage. grievance from becoming moot. Unless In an effort to reduce unnecessary the grievant has been notified of an prisoner litigation, Congress enacted the Regulatory Process Matters extension of time for a response, Civil Rights of Institutionalized Persons The Department of Justice’s expiration of a time limit at any stage of Act (42 U.S.C. 1997). Section 7 of the implementation of this rule as an the process shall entitle the grievant to Act, 42 U.S.C. 1997e, adopted a interim rule, with provisions for post- move to the next stage of the process. In qualified exhaustion requirement for promulgation public comment, is based all instances grievances must be civil rights actions filed by state on the ‘‘good cause’’ exception of 5 processed from initiation to final Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Rules and Regulations 13903 disposition within 180 days, inclusive (5) Assurance of confidentiality. A longer fair and effective, and so notifies of any extensions. description of the steps taken to ensure the applicant in writing. * * * * * the confidentiality of records of 6. Section 40.16 is revised to read as 3. Section 40.11 is revised to read as individual use of or participation in the follows: follows: grievance procedure. (6) Evaluation. A description of the § 40.16 Denial of certification. § 40.11 Submissions by applicant. plans for periodic evaluation of the If the Attorney General finds that the (a) Written statement. An application grievance procedure, including grievance procedure is not in substantial for certification of a grievance procedure identification of the group, individuals compliance with the standards under the Act shall be submitted to the or individual who will conduct the promulgated herein or is no longer fair Office of the Attorney General, U.S. evaluation and identification of the and effective, the Attorney General shall Department of Justice, Main Justice person or entity not under the control of deny certification and inform the Building, Washington, DC 20530, and supervision of the institution who will applicant in writing of the area or areas shall include a written statement review the evaluation, together with two in which the grievance procedure or the describing the grievance procedure, a copies of the most recent evaluation, if application is deemed inadequate. 7. In § 40.18, paragraphs (a) and (b) brief description of the institution or one has been performed. are revised to read as follows: institutions covered by the procedure, (c) Fair and effective procedures. The and accompanying plans for or evidence Attorney General shall also certify a § 40.18 Suspension of certification. of implementation in each institution. grievance procedure under the Act, even (a) Reasonable belief of non- (b) Evidence of compliance with if the procedure is not in substantial compliance. If the Attorney General has established standards. An applicant compliance with the standards reasonable grounds to believe that a seeking certification of a grievance promulgated herein, if the Attorney previously certified grievance procedure procedure as being in substantial General determines that the procedure may no longer be in substantial compliance with the standards is otherwise fair and effective for the compliance with the minimum promulgated herein should submit consideration and disposition of standards or may no longer be fair and evidence of compliance with those grievances filed by inmates. If a effective, the Attorney General shall standards, including the following grievance procedure is not in substantial suspend certification. The suspension information: compliance with all standards herein, shall continue until such time as the (1) Instructional materials. A copy of the applicant shall identify the aspects deficiency is corrected, in which case the instructional materials for inmates in which the procedure is in substantial certification shall be reinstated, or until and employees regarding use of the compliance and those in which it is not, the Attorney General determines that grievance procedure together with a describe the other relevant features of substantial compliance no longer exists description of the manner in which the procedure, and explain why the or that the procedure is no longer fair such materials are distributed, a procedure is otherwise fair and and effective, in which case, except as description of the oral explanation of effective. provided in paragraph (b) of this the grievance procedure, including the 4. Section 40.14 is revised to read as section, the Attorney General shall circumstances under which it is follows: withdraw certification pursuant to delivered, and a description of the § 40.19 of this part. training, if any, provided to employees § 40.14 Conditional certification. (b) Defect may be readily remedied; and inmates in the skills necessary to If, in the judgment of the Attorney good faith effort. If the Attorney General operate the grievance procedure. General, a grievance procedure that has determines that a grievance procedure is (2) Form. A copy of the form used by been in existence less than one year is no longer in substantial compliance inmates to initiate a grievance and to at the time of application in substantial with the minimum standards or is no obtain review of the disposition of a compliance with the standards longer fair and effective, but has reason grievance. promulgated herein or is otherwise fair to believe that the defect may be readily (3) Information regarding past and effective, the Attorney General shall corrected and that good faith efforts are compliance. For a grievance procedure grant conditional certification for one underway to correct it, the Attorney that has operated for more than one year year or until the applicant satisfies the General may suspend certification until at the time of the application, the requirements of § 40.15, whichever the grievance procedure returns to applicant shall submit information period is shorter. compliance with the minimum regarding the number and types of 5. Section 40.15 is revised to read as standards or is otherwise fair and grievances filed over the preceding year, follows: effective. the disposition of the grievances with * * * * * sample responses from each level of § 40.15 Full certification. 8. In § 40.19, paragraph (a) is revised decision, the remedies granted, If, in the judgment of the Attorney to read as follows: evidence of compliance with time limits General, a grievance procedure that has at each level of decision, and a been in existence longer than one year § 40.19 Withdrawal of certification. description of the role of inmates and at the time of application is in (a) Finding of non-compliance. If the employees in the formulation, substantial compliance with the Attorney General finds that a grievance implementation, and operation of the standards promulgated herein or is procedure is no longer in substantial grievance procedure. otherwise fair and effective, the compliance with the minimum (4) Plan for collecting information. Attorney General shall grant full standards or is no longer otherwise fair For a grievance procedure that has certification. Such certification shall and effective, the Attorney General shall operated for less than one year at the remain in effect unless and until the withdraw certification, unless the time of the application, the applicant Attorney General finds reasonable cause Attorney General concludes that shall submit a plan for collecting the to believe that the grievance procedure suspension of certification under information described in paragraph is no longer in substantial compliance § 40.18(b) of this part is appropriate. (b)(3) of this section. with the minimum standards or is no * * * * * 13904 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Rules and Regulations 9. Section 40.22 is revised to read as assumptions to be used under the be used by the PBGC will be 5.75% for follows: Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation’s the period during which benefits are in regulations on Valuation of Plan pay status, 5.00% during the seven-year § 40.22 Significance of certification. Benefits in Single-Employer Plans (29 period directly preceding the benefit’s Certification of a grievance procedure CFR part 2619, the ‘‘single-employer placement in pay status, and 4.0% by the Attorney General shall signify regulation’’) and Valuation of Plan during any other years preceding the only that on the basis of the information Benefits and Plan Assets Following benefit’s placement in pay status The submitted, the Attorney General Mass Withdrawal (29 CFR part 2676, the above annuity interest assumptions believes the grievance procedure is in ‘‘multiemployer regulation’’). represent a decrease (from those in substantial compliance with the Part 2619 sets forth the methods for effect for March 1995) of .20 percent for minimum standards or is otherwise fair valuing plan benefits of terminating the first 20 years following the valuation and effective. Certification shall not single-employer plans covered under date are otherwise unchanged. The indicate approval of the use or title IV of the Employee Retirement lump sum interest assumptions application of the grievance procedure Income Security Act of 1974, as represent a decrease (from those in in a particular case. amended. Under ERISA section 4041(c), effect for March 1995) of .25 percent for Dated: March 3, 1995. all single-employer plans wishing to the period during which benefits are in Janet Reno, terminate in a distress termination must pay status and the seven years directly Attorney General. value guaranteed benefits and ‘‘benefit preceding that period; they are [FR Doc. 95–6287 Filed 3–14–95; 8:45 am] liabilities,’’ i.e., all benefits provided otherwise unchanged. under the plan as of the plan Generally, the interest rates and BILLING CODE 4410±01±M termination date, using the formulas set factors under these regulations are in forth in part 2619, subpart C. (Plans effect for at least one month. However, terminating in a standard termination the PBGC publishes its interest PENSION BENEFIT GUARANTY may, for purposes of the Standard assumptions each month regardless of CORPORATION Termination Notice filed with PBGC, whether they represent a change from 29 CFR Parts 2619 and 2676 use these formulas to value benefit the previous month’s assumptions. The liabilities, although this is not required.) assumptions normally will be published Valuation of Plan Benefits in Single- In addition, when the PBGC terminates in the Federal Register by the 15th of the Employer Plans; Valuation of Plan an underfunded plan involuntarily preceding month or as close to that date Benefits and Plan Assets Following pursuant to ERISA section 4042(a), it as circumstances permit. Mass Withdrawal; Amendments uses the subpart C formulas to The PBGC has determined that notice Adopting Additional PBGC Rates determine the amount of the plan’s and public comment on these underfunding. Part 2676 prescribes amendments are impracticable and AGENCY: Pension Benefit Guaranty rules for valuing benefits and certain contrary to the public interest. This Corporation. assets of multiemployer plans under finding is based on the need to ACTION: Final rule. sections 4219(c)(1)(D) and 4281(b) of determine and issue new interest rates ERISA. and factors promptly so that the rates SUMMARY: This final rule amends the Appendix B to part 2619 set forth the and factors can reflect, as accurately as Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation’s interest rates and actors under the possible, current market conditions. regulations on Valuation of Plan single-employer regulation. Appendix B Because of the need to provide Benefits in Single-Employer Plans and to part 2676 sets forth the interest rates immediate guidance for the valuation of Valuation of Plan Benefits and Plan and factors under the multiemployer benefits in single-employer plans whose Assets Following Mass Withdrawal. The regulation. Because these rates and termination dates fall during April 1995, former regulation contains the interest factors are intended to reflect current and in multiemployer plans that have assumptions that the PBGC uses to conditions in the financial and annuity undergone mass withdrawal and have value benefits under terminating single- markets, it is necessary to update the valuation dates during April 1995, the employer plans. The latter regulation rates and factors periodically. PBGC finds that good cause exists for contains the interest assumptions for The PBGC issues two sets of interest making the rates and factors set forth in valuations of multiemployer plans that rates and factors, one set to be used for this amendment effective less than 30 have undergone mass withdrawal. The the valuation of benefits to be paid as days after publication. amendments set out in this final rule annuities and one set for the valuation The PBGC has determined that this adopt the interest assumptions of benefits to be paid as lump sums. The action is not a ‘‘significant regulatory applicable to single-employer plans same assumptions apply to terminating action’’ under the criteria set forth in with termination dates in April 1995, single-employer plans and to Executive Order 12866, because it will and to multiemployer plans with multiemployer plans that have not have an annual effect on the valuation dates in April 1995. The effect undergone a mass withdrawal. This economy of $100 million or more or of these amendments is to advise the amendment adds to appendix B to parts adversely affect in a material way the public of the adoption of these 2619 and 2676 sets of interest rates and economy, a sector of the economy, assumptions. factors for valuing benefits in single- productivity, competition, jobs, the EFFECTIVE DATE: April 1, 1995. employer plans that have termination environment, pubic health or safety, or FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: dates during April 1995 and State, local, or tribal governments or Harold J. Ashner, Assistant General multiemployer plans that have communities; create a serious Counsel, Office of the General Counsel, undergone mass withdrawal and have inconsistency or otherwise interfere Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation, valuation dates during April 1995. with an action taken or planned by 1200 K Street, NW., Washington, DC For annuity benefits, the interests another agency; materially alter the 20005, 202–326–4024 (202–326–4179 rates will be 7.10% for the first 20 years budgetary impact of entitlements, for TTY and TDD). following the valuation date and 5.75% grants, user fees, or loan programs or the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This rule thereafter. For benefits to be paid as rights and obligations of recipients adopts the April 1995 interest lump sums, the interest assumptions to thereof; or raise novel legal or policy Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Rules and Regulations 13905 issues arising out of legal mandates, the PART 2619Ð[AMENDED] contributions upon death), the PBGC shall President’s priorities, or the principles employ the values of it set out in Table I 1. The authority citation for part 2619 set forth in Executive Order 12866. hereof as follows: continues to read as follows: (1) For benefits for which the participant Because no general notice of proposed or beneficiary is entitled to be in pay status Authority: 29 U.S.C. 1301(a), 1302(b)(3), on the valuation date, the immediate annuity rulemaking is required for this 1341, 1344, 1362. amendment, the Regulatory Flexibility rate shall apply. Act of 1980 does not apply. See 5 U.S.C. 2. In appendix B, Rate Set 18 is added (2) For benefits for which the deferral to Table I, and a new entry is added to period is y years (y is an integer and 0 TABLE I [Lump Sum Valuations] For plans with a valuation date Immediate Deferred annuities (percent) Rate set annuity rate On or after Before (percent) i1 i2 i3 n1 n2 ******* 18 4±1±95 5±1±95 5.75 5.00 4.00 4.00 7 8 Annuity Valuations factor used in valuing annuity benefits under generally as it) assumed to be in effect In determining the value of interest factors this subpart, the plan administrator shall use between specified anniversaries of a the values of it prescribed in Table II hereof. valuation date that occurs within that of the form v0 : n (as defined in The following table tabulates, for each calendar month; those anniversaries are § 2619.49(b)(1)) for purposes of applying the calendar month of valuation ending after the specified in the columns adjacent to the formulas set forth in § 2619.49 (b) through (i) effective date of this part, the interest rates rates. The last listed rate is assumed to be in and in determining the value of any interest (denoted by i1, i2, * * *, and referred to effect after the last listed anniversary date. TABLE II [Annuity Valuations] The values of it are: For valuation dates occurring in the monthÐ it for t = it for t = it for t = ******* April 1995 ...... 0710 1±20 .0575 >20 N/A N/A PART 2676Ð[AMENDED] Appendix B to Part 2676—Interest benefits payable as lump sum benefits as Rates Used to Value Lump Sums and follows: 3. The authority citation for part 2676 Annuities (1) For benefits for which the participant or beneficiary is entitled to be in pay status Lump Sum Valuations continues to read as follows: on the valuation date, the immediate annuity Authority: 29 U.S.C. 1302(b)(3), In determining the value of interest factors rate shall apply. 1399(c)(1)(D), 1441(b)(1). of the form v0 : n (as defined in (2) For benefits for which the deferral § 2676.13(b)(1)) for purposes of applying the period is y years (y is an integer and 0 interest rate i1 shall apply for the following (4) For benefits for which the deferral years, interest rate i2 shall apply for the n1 years; thereafter the immediate annuity period is y years (y is an integer and following n2 years, interest rate i1 shall apply rate shall apply. y>n1+n2), interest rate i3 shall apply from the for the following n1 years; thereafter the valuation date for a period of y¥n1¥n2 immediate annuity rate shall apply. TABLE I [Lump Sum Valuations] For plans with a valuation date Immediate Deferred annuities (percent) Rate set annuity rate On or after Before (percent) i i 2 i 3 n 1 n 2 ******* 18 4±1±95 5±1±95 5.75 5.00 4.00 4.00 7 8 Annuity Valuations used in valuing annuity benefits under this generally as i t) assumed to be in effect subpart, the plan administrator shall use the between specified anniversaries of a In determining the value of interest factors values of i t prescribed in the table below. valuation date that occurs within that of the form v0:n (as defined in § 2676.13(b)(1)) The following table tabulates, for each calendar month; those anniversaries are for purposes of applying the formulas set calendar month of valuation ending after the specified in the columns adjacent to the forth in § 2676.13 (b) through (i) and in effective date of this part, the interest rates rates. The last listed rate is assumed to be in determining the value of any interest factor (denoted by i 1, i 2, * * *, and referred to effect after the last listed anniversary date. TABLE II [Annuity Valuations] The values of i t are: For valuation dates occurring in the monthÐ i for t = i t for t = i t for t = ******* April 1995 ...... 0710 1±20 .0575 >20 N/A N/A Issued in Washington, DC, on this 8th day EFFECTIVE DATE: February 22, 1995. The dealer may obtain securities to of March 1995. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: fulfill such a guarantee either through Martin Slate, Michael W. Sunner, Deputy Assistant an auction bid or through the when- Executive Director, Pension Benefit Guaranty Commissioner, Office of Financing, issued market, or both. Corporation. Bureau of the Public Debt (202) 219– The Department views the guarantee [FR Doc. 95–6359 Filed 3–14–95; 8:45 am] 3350, or Margaret Marquette, Attorney- described above to be the equivalent of BILLING CODE 7708±01±M Adviser, Office of the Chief Counsel, a when-issued trade between the dealer Bureau of the Public Debt (202) 219– and its customer. Therefore, the 3320. Department has determined that, for DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 31 CFR purposes of Treasury’s auction rules, Part 356, also referred to as the uniform Fiscal Service any bid of the dealer to obtain securities offering circular, sets out the terms and to fulfill such a guarantee is a bid for the 31 CFR Part 356 conditions for the sale and issuance by dealer’s own account and not a bid for the Department of the Treasury to the a customer, as the term customer is Sale and Issue of Marketable Book- public of marketable Treasury bills, defined in the offering circular. This Entry Treasury Bills, Notes, and Bonds notes, and bonds. The final rule means that the recipient of the (Department of the Treasury Circular, contained herein amends §§ 356.2 and guarantee may not be listed as a Public Debt Series No. 1±93) 356.12 of the uniform offering circular. customer in connection with any bid to In § 356.2, the definition of the term fulfill the guarantee. Rather, the AGENCY: Bureau of the Public Debt, ‘‘bid’’ has been modified. The depository institution or dealer that has Fiscal Service, Department of the Department has become aware that Treasury. made the guarantee is considered the securities dealers may enter into bidder and must include such amount ACTION: Final rule. transactions whereby they effectively as part of its own bid. The guaranteeing ‘‘guarantee’’ the amount and price of SUMMARY: The Department of the entity may reflect the guaranteed securities their customers will receive Treasury (‘‘Department’’) is issuing in amount being included in its bid as a following a Treasury auction.1 The price final form an amendment to 31 CFR Part short position in calculating its net long guaranteed may be simply an agreed- 356, published as a final rule on January position. If the recipient of the upon price, or it may be a price fixed 5, 1993 (58 FR 412). This amendment guarantee for a specific security also in terms of an agreed-upon standard, clarifies the definition of the term ‘‘bid’’ bids for that same security in its own e.g., the weighted average auction price. and changes the required format for name either directly or through a submitter, it must treat the amount of competitive bids for Treasury notes and 1 The guarantee described herein is not intended bonds from two decimals to three to refer to a securities dealer submitting or any guarantee as a long position in decimals. forwarding a noncompetitive bid for a customer. calculating its net long position. Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Rules and Regulations 13907 The definition of the term ‘‘bid’’ in PART 356ÐSALE AND ISSUE OF FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: § 356.2 has been expanded to clarify MARKETABLE BOOK-ENTRY Henry N. Williams, General Counsel, that an offer to purchase a stated par TREASURY BILLS, NOTES, AND Selective Service System, 1515 Wilson amount of a security by a depository BONDS (DEPARTMENT OF THE Blvd., Arlington, VA 22209–2425. institution or dealer to fulfill a TREASURY CIRCULAR, PUBLIC DEBT Phone (703) 235–2050. guarantee as described above is a bid for SERIES NO. 1±93) Analysis of Comments the depository institution’s or dealer’s 1. The authority citation for Part 356 The proposed amendment to Selective own account and not a bid for a continues to read as follows: Service Regulations was published in customer. Authority: 5 U.S.C. 301; 31 U.S.C. 3102, et the Federal Register on December 28, In § 356.12, the requirement to seq. 1994 (59 FR 66839) for public comment. express a competitive bid with two 2. Section 356.2 is amended by No comment was received. decimals has been changed with regard revising the definition of ‘‘bid’’ to read The proposed regulation will become to Treasury notes and bonds. Prior to as follows: the final rule. the publication of this rule, a Executive Order 12866 competitive bid for a note or bond had § 356.2 Definitions. to show the yield bid, expressed with * * * * * In promulgating this regulation, I have two decimals. Effective with the Bid means an offer to purchase a adhered to the regulatory philosophy publication of this rule, such bids must stated par amount of securities, either and the applicable principles of show the yield bid, expressed with three competitively or noncompetitively, in regulation set forth in section 1 of decimals. The requirement for a an auction. An offer to purchase a stated Executive Order 12866, Regulatory competitive bid for a Treasury bill to par amount of securities submitted by a Planning and Review. This amendment has not been reviewed by the Office of show the discount rate bid, expressed depository institution or dealer to fulfill Management and Budget under that with two decimals, remains unchanged. a guarantee to sell a specified amount of securities at an agreed-upon price or a Executive order, as it is not deemed Further, the restriction against using ‘‘significant’’ thereunder. fractions still applies to bids for all price fixed in terms of an agreed-upon securities. standard is a bid of the depository Regulatory Flexibility Act institution or dealer and not a bid of a The change from two decimal places customer. I certify under the Regulatory to three decimal places for notes and Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. chapter 6) that * * * * * this rulemaking will not have a bonds is being made to encourage 3. Section 356.12 is amended by greater participation in Treasury significant economic impact on a revising paragraph (c)(1) to read as substantial number of small entities. auctions. follows: Paperwork Reduction Act Procedural Requirements § 356.12 Noncompetitive and competitive bidding. The Paperwork Reduction Act (44 This final rule does not meet the * * * * * U.S.C. chapter 35) does not apply criteria for a ‘‘significant regulatory because this rulemaking does not action’’ pursuant to Executive Order (c) * * * (1) Bid format. contain information collection 12866. (i) Treasury bills. A competitive bid requirements that require the approval Because this rule relates to public must show the discount rate bid, of the Office of Management and contracts and procedures for United expressed with two decimals. Fractions Budget. States securities, the notice, public may not be used. Certificate comment, and delayed effective date (ii) Treasury notes and bonds. A provisions of the Administrative competitive bid must show the yield Whereas, on December 28, 1994, the Director of Selective Service published Procedure Act are inapplicable, bid, expressed with three decimals. a Notice of Proposed Amendments of pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553(a)(2). Fractions may not be used. Selective Service Regulations at 59 FR As no notice of proposed rulemaking * * * * * 66839; and whereas such publication is required, the provisions of the [FR Doc. 95–6394 Filed 3–14–95; 8:45 am] complied with the publication Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601, BILLING CODE 4810±39±P requirement of section 13(b) of the et seq.) do not apply. Military Selective Service Act (50 App. There are no collections of U.S.C. 463(b)) in that more than 30 days SELECTIVE SERVICE SYSTEM information required by this final rule, have elapsed subsequent to such publication during which period and, therefore, the Paperwork Reduction 32 CFR Part 1636 Act does not apply. comments from the public (summarized Selective Service Regulations; above) have been received and List of Subjects in 31 CFR Part 356 Registrant Processing Procedures considered; and I certify that I have requested the view of officials named in Bonds, Federal Reserve System, AGENCY: Selective Service System. section 2(a) of Executive Order 11623 Government securities, Securities. ACTION: Final rule. and none of them has timely requested Dated: March 9, 1995. that the matter be referred to the SUMMARY: Procedures for the processing Gerald Murphy, President for decision. of registrants under the Military Now therefore by virtue of the Fiscal Assistant Secretary. Selective Service Act are amended to authority vested in me by the Military 31 CFR Chapter II, Subchapter B, Part assure greater fairness and efficiency in Selective Service Act, as amended (50 356, is hereby amended as follows: administration in the processing of App. U.S.C. section 451 et seq.) and registrants. Executive Order 11623 of October 12, EFFECTIVE DATE: March 15, 1995. 1971, the Selective Service Regulations 13908 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Rules and Regulations constituting a portion of Chapter XVI of temporary records, and clarified State to satisfy certain Federal Title 32 of the Code of Federal inspection provisions. The regulations requirements for an approvable Regulations, are hereby amended, as affected Federal agencies. nonattainment area (NAA) ozone State stated below. Implementation Plan (SIP) for the Baton Need for Corrections Rouge and Calcasieu Parish areas of List of Subjects in 32 CFR Part 1636 The final regulation intended to revise Louisiana. Armed Forces—draft. the title of the Part from DATES: This action will become effective Dated: March 7, 1995. ‘‘Micrographics’’ to ‘‘Micrographic on May 15, 1995, unless adverse or Records Management’’ to better reflect Gil Coronado, critical comments are received by April the subject matter; due to a technical Director of Selective Service. 14, 1995. If the effective date is delayed, drafting error, the change in title was timely notice will be published in the For the reasons set out in the not made although the final rule Federal Register. preamble, 32 CFR Part 1636 is amended displayed the revised title. In ADDRESSES: Copies of the documents as follows: § 1230.12(d)(1)(i), a typographical error relevant to this action are available for was made in the ANSI/AIIM standard public inspection during normal PART 1636ÐCLASSIFICATION OF referenced of aperture card formats. CONSCIENTIOUS OBJECTORS business hours at the following List of Subjects in 36 CFR Part 1230 locations. Interested persons wanting to 1. The authority citation for part 1636 examine these documents should make Archives and records, Incorporation continues to read as follows: an appointment with the appropriate by reference, Micrographics. Authority: Military Selective Service Act office at least 24 hours before the (50 App. U.S.C. 451 et seq.); E.O. 11623. PART 1230ÐMICROGRAPHICS visiting day. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2. In § 1636.8, paragraph (b) is revised Accordingly, 36 CFR 1230 is corrected Region 6, Air Programs Branch (6T– to read as follows: by making the following correcting A), 1445 Ross Avenue, suite 700, § 1636.8 Considerations relevant to amendments: Dallas, Texas 75202–2733. granting or denying a claim for 1. The authority citation for part 1230 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, classification as a conscientious objector. continues to read: Air and Radiation Docket and * * * * * Authority: 44 U.S.C. 2907, 3302, and 3312. Information Center, 401 M Street, SW., Washington, DC 20460. (b) The registrant’s stated convictions 2. The title of Part 1230 is revised to should be a matter of conscience. Louisiana Department of Environmental read: Quality, Air Quality Division, 7290 * * * * * Bluebonnet, Baton Rouge, Louisiana [FR Doc. 95–6288 Filed 3–14–95; 8:45 am] PART 1230ÐMICROGRAPHIC RECORDS MANAGEMENT 70810. BILLING CODE 8015±01±M FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: § 1230.12 [Corrected] Herbert R. Sherrow, Jr., Planning 3. In § 1230.12(d)(1)(i), in the fourth Section (6T–AP), Air Programs Branch, NATIONAL ARCHIVES AND RECORDS sentence, the phrase ‘‘ANSI/AIIM USEPA Region 6, 1445 Ross Avenue, ADMINISTRATION MS19–1987’’ is revised to read ‘‘ANSI/ Dallas, Texas 75202–2733, telephone AIIM MS32–1987’’. (214) 665–7237. 36 CFR Part 1230 Dated: March 9, 1995. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: [3095±AA22] Mary Ann Hadyka, Background Federal Register Liaison. Micrographic Records Management Under the 1990 Clean Air Act [FR Doc. 95–6360 Filed 3–14–95; 8:45 am] Amendments (CAAA), States have the AGENCY: National Archives and Records BILLING CODE 7515±01±M Administration. responsibility to inventory emissions contributing to NAAQS nonattainment, ACTION: Correcting amendments. to track these emissions over time, and ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION to ensure that control strategies are SUMMARY: This document contains AGENCY corrections to the final regulations being implemented that reduce which were published Wednesday, 40 CFR Part 52 emissions and move areas towards September 22, 1993 (58 FR 49195). The attainment. The CAAA require ozone regulations related to micrographic [LA±10±1±5937a; FRL±5172±2] nonattainment areas designated as records management including moderate, serious, severe, and extreme Approval and Promulgation of to submit a plan within three years of standards for microfilming records in 36 Implementation Plan: Louisiana 1990 CFR 1230.12(d)(1)(i). 1990 to reduce volatile organic Base Year Ozone Emissions compounds (VOC) emissions by 15 EFFECTIVE DATE: March 15, 1995. Inventories percent within six years after 1990. The FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: AGENCY: Environmental Protection baseline level of emissions, from which Mary Ann Hadyka or Nancy Allard on Agency (EPA). the 15 percent reduction is calculated, 301–713–6730. ACTION: Direct final rule. is determined by adjusting the base year SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: inventory to exclude biogenic emissions SUMMARY: The EPA today fully approves and to exclude certain emission Background the 1990 base year ozone emission reductions not creditable towards the 15 The final regulations that are the inventories submitted by Louisiana for percent. The 1990 base year emissions subject of these corrections established the purpose of bringing about the inventory is the primary inventory from Federal agency micrographic program attainment of the national ambient air which the periodic inventory, the responsibilities, revised micrographic quality standard (NAAQS) for ozone. Reasonable Further Progress projection standards, modified coverage of The inventories were submitted by the inventory, and the modeling inventory Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Rules and Regulations 13909 are derived. Further information on one of the actions that initiates the inventories were complete except for these inventories and their purpose can sanctions and Federal Implementation public hearings. The EPA determined be found in the ‘‘Emission Inventory Plan processes (see David Mobley that for inventories that were lacking Requirements for Ozone State memorandum, November 12, 1992).1 only public hearings a finding of Implementation Plans,’’ U.S. completeness would be made, Analysis of State Submission Environmental Protection Agency, contingent upon the State fulfilling the Office of Air Quality Planning and 1. Procedural Background public hearing requirement.4 The Standards, Research Triangle Park, The Act requires States to observe submittal was found to be complete North Carolina, March 1991. The base certain procedural requirements in contingent upon the State fulfilling the year inventory plays an important role developing emission inventory public hearing requirment, and a letter in modeling demonstrations for areas submissions to the EPA. Section dated January 15, 1993, was forwarded classified as moderate and above 110(a)(2) of the Act provides that each to the Governor indicating the outside transport regions. emission inventory submitted by a State completeness of the submittal and the The air quality planning requirements must be adopted after reasonable notice next steps to be taken in the review for marginal to extreme ozone and public hearing.2 Final approval of process. nonattainment areas are set out in the inventory will not occur until the The State of Louisiana subsequently section 182(a)–(e) of title I of the CAAA. State revises the inventory to address held public hearings on October 22, The EPA has issued a General Preamble public comments. Changes to the 1993, to entertain public comment on describing the EPA’s preliminary views inventory that impact the 15 percent the 1990 base year emission inventories. on how the EPA intends to review SIP reduction calculation and require a The State provided evidence to EPA revisions submitted under title I, revised control strategy will constitute a Region 6 that the public hearings were including requirements for the SIP revision. The EPA created a ‘‘de held and that the State responded to preparation of the 1990 base year minimis’’ exception to the public comments. EPA Region 6, EPA’s Office of Air inventory (see 57 FR 13502; April 16, hearing requirement for minor changes. Quality Planning and Standards 1992, and 57 FR 18070; April 28, 1992). The EPA defines ‘‘de minimis’’ for such (OAQPS) Emissions Inventory Branch Because the EPA is describing its purposes to be those in which the 15 interpretations here only in broad terms, (EIB), EPA’s Office of Mobile Sources percent reduction calculation and the the reader should refer to the General (OMS), and Midwest Research Institute, associated control strategy or the Preamble (57 FR 18070, Appendix B, contractor to EIB, reviewed the maintenance plan showing do not April 28, 1992) for a more detailed inventories. Comments were sent to change. States will aggregate all such discussion of the interpretations of title Louisiana, and the State responded with ‘‘de minimis’’ changes together when I advanced in today’s action and the a resubmittal. The resubmittal making the determination as to whether supporting rationale. underwent a second review. The Level the change constitutes a SIP revision. Those States containing ozone III review comments were sent to The State will need to make the change nonattainment areas classified as Louisiana on December 21, 1993. marginal to extreme are required under through a formal SIP revision process, The State addressed the final Level III section 182(a)(1) of the 1990 CAAA to in conjunction with the change to the 3 comments and submitted responses to submit a final, comprehensive, accurate, control measure or other SIP programs. Region 6 on January 28, 1994. The State and current inventory of actual ozone Section 110(a)(2) of the Act similarly submitted the final revised inventory to season, weekday emissions from all provides that each revision to an Region 6 on September 27, 1994. In sources by November 15, 1992. This implementation plan submitted by a addition, the State of Louisiana held inventory is for calendar year 1990 and State under the Act must be adopted by additional public hearings on the final is denoted as the base year inventory. It such State after reasonable notice and revised inventory on October 28, 1994, includes both anthropogenic and public hearing. to accept public comments. The State The State of Louisiana submitted the biogenic sources of VOC, nitrogen provided evidence to EPA Region 6 that 1990 base year inventories for Baton oxides (NOX), and carbon monoxide the public hearings were held and that Rouge (BTR) and Calcasieu Parish (CAL) (CO). The inventory is to address actual the State responded to comments. on November 16, 1992, as a SIP revision VOC, NOX, and CO emissions for the Region 6 compared the Louisiana area during a peak ozone season, which by cover letter from the Governor. The responses with the deficiencies noted in is generally comprised of the summer inventories were reviewed by the EPA the final Level III review and concluded months. All stationary point and area to determine completeness shortly after that Louisiana had adequately sources, as well as highway mobile their submittal, in accordance with the addressed the remaining deficiencies so sources within the nonattainment area, completeness criteria set out at 40 CFR that Region 6 was satisfied that are to be included in the compilation. part 51, appendix V (1991), as amended Louisiana had completed the Level III Available guidance for preparing by 57 FR 42216 (August 26, 1991). The criteria for the BTR and CAL ozone emission inventories is provided in the nonattainment areas. General Preamble (57 FR 13498, April 1 Memorandum from J. David Mobley, Chief, Emission Inventory Branch, to Air Branch Chiefs, 2. Emission Inventory Review 16, 1992). Region I–X, ‘‘Guidance on States’ Failure to Submit Emission inventories are first Ozone and CO SIP Inventories,’’ November 12, Section 110(k) of the Act sets out reviewed under the completeness 1992. provisions governing the EPA’s review criteria established under section 2 Also section 172(c)(7) of the Act requires that of base year emission inventory 110(k)(1) of the CAAA (56 FR 42216, plan provisions for nonattainment areas meet the submittals in order to determine applicable provisions of section 110(a)(2). August 26, 1991). According to section 3 Memorandum from John Calcagni, Director, Air approval or disapproval under section 110(k)(1)(C), if a submittal does not Quality Management Division, and William G. meet the completeness criteria, ‘‘the Laxton, Director, Technical Support Division, to 4 Memorandum from John Calcagni, Director, Air State shall be treated as not having Regional Air Division Directors, Region I–X, Quality Management Division, to Regional Air ‘‘Public Hearing Requirements for 1990 Base-Year Division Directors, Regions I–X, ‘‘State made the submission.’’ Under sections Emission Inventories for Ozone and Carbon Implementation Plan (SIP) Actions Submitted in 179(a)(1) and 110(c)(1), a finding by the Monoxide Nonattainment Areas,’’ September 29, Response to Clean Air Act (ACT) Deadlines,’’ EPA that a submittal is incomplete is 1992. October 28, 1992. 13910 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Rules and Regulations 182(a)(1) (see 57 FR 13565–13566, April 5. The area source inventory must be B. The following Is a Summary of the 16, 1992). The EPA is proposing to grant complete. Level III Review of the Louisiana 1990 approval of the Louisiana ozone base 6. The area source emissions must have been Base Year Submittal year emissions inventories based on the prepared or calculated according to the current EPA guidance. 1. The IPP and QA plan were submitted and Level I, II, and III review findings. This approved. The QA plan was implemented section outlines the review procedures 7. Biogenic emissions must have been prepared according to current EPA and documented in the submission. performed to determine if the base year guidance or another approved technique. 2. The documentation was adequate for the emission inventory is acceptable or is 8. The method (e.g., Highway Performance reviewer to determine the estimation disapproved. Monitoring System or a network procedures and data sources used to develop the inventory for all emission Today’s action describes the review transportation planning model) used to types. procedures associated with determining develop vehicle miles travelled (VMT) 3. The point source inventory was found to the acceptability of a 1990 base year estimates must follow EPA guidance, be complete. emission inventory, and discusses the which is detailed in the document, 4. The point source emissions were estimated levels of acceptance that can result from ‘‘Procedures for Emission Inventory according to EPA guidance. the findings of the review process. Preparation, Volume IV: Mobile Sources’’, 5. The area source inventory was found to be U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, complete. A. The Following Discussion Reviews Office of Mobile Sources and Office of Air the State Base Year SIP Inventory 6. The area source emissions were estimated Quality Planning and Standards, Ann according to EPA guidance. Approval Requirements Arbor, Michigan, and Research Triangle 7. The biogenic emissions were developed The Level I and II review process is Park, North Carolina, December 1992. from a consultant’s site-specific study of used to determine that all components 9. The MOBILE model (or EMFAC model for the BTR area and the emissions were of the base year inventory are present. California only) was correctly used to calculated using the EPA PC–BEIS model produce emission factors for each of the The review also evaluates the level of for the CAL area. vehicle classes. 8. The method used to develop VMT supporting documentation provided by 10. Nonroad mobile emissions were prepared estimates was adequately described and the State, and assesses whether the according to current EPA guidance for all documented. emissions were developed according to of the source categories. 9. The MOBILE model was used correctly. current EPA guidance. 10. The nonroad mobile emission estimates The Level III review process outlined The base year emission inventory will were correctly prepared according to below consists of 10 points that the be approved if it passes Levels I, II, and current EPA guidance or acceptable inventory must include. For a base year III of the review process. Detailed Level alternatives. emission inventory to be acceptable, it I and II review procedures can be found Documentation of the Region 6 must pass all of the following in the following document: ‘‘Quality evaluation, including details of the acceptance criteria: Review Guidelines for 1990 Base Year review procedure, is contained in a 1. An approved Inventory Preparation Plan Emission Inventories’’, U.S. memorandum (Attachment A) in the (IPP) was provided, and the Quality Environmental Protection Agency, Technical Support Document (TSD). A Assurance (QA) program contained in the Office of Air Quality Planning and general summary of the inventories is IPP was performed and its implementation Standards, Research Triangle Park, contained in Attachment B of the TSD. documented. North Carolina, July 27, 1992. Level III 2. Adequate documentation was provided review procedures are specified in a Final Action that enabled the reviewer to determine the memorandum from David Mobley and Louisiana has submitted complete emission estimation procedures and the G.T. Helms to the Regions, ‘‘1990 O3/CO inventories containing point, area, data sources used to develop the inventory. 3. The point source inventory must be SIP Emission Inventory Level III biogenic, on-road mobile, and non-road 5 complete. Acceptance Criteria’’, October 7, 1992, mobile source data, and accompanying 4. Point source emissions must have been and revised in a memorandum from documentation. Emissions from these prepared or calculated according to the John Seitz to the Regional Air Directors sources are presented in the following current EPA guidance. dated June 24, 1993.6 table: VOC [Ozone Seasonal Emissions in Tons Per Day] Point source Area source On-road mobile Non-road mobile NAA emissions emissions emissions emissions Biogenic Total emissions BTR 115.20 26.25 55.50 23.46 120.91 341.32 CAL 57.90 7.20 14.64 13.30 16.47 109.51 5 Memorandum from J. David Mobley, Chief, 6 Memorandum from John S. Seitz, Director, Emissions Inventory Branch, to Air Branch Chiefs, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, to Region I–X, ‘‘Final Emission Inventory Level III Regional Air Division Directors, Region I–X, Acceptance Criteria,’’ October 7, 1992. ‘‘Emission Inventory Issues,’’ June 24, 1993. Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Rules and Regulations 13911 NOX [Ozone Seasonal Emissions in Tons Per Day] Point source emis- Area source emis- On-road mobile Non-road mobile NAA sions sions emissions emissions Biogenic Total emissions BTR 234.68 0.78 71.70 38.40 NA 345.56 CAL 119.20 0.25 20.31 40.86 NA 180.62 CO [Ozone Seasonal Emissions in Tons Per Day] Point source emis- Area source emis- On-road mobile Non-road mobile NAA sions sions emissions emissions Biogenic Total emissions BTR 282.91 2.30 434.50 193.02 NA 912.73 CAL 42.10 0.50 117.35 75.03 NA 234.98 Based on Region 6’s review of the establishing a precedent for any future purposes of judicial review, nor does it inventories, Louisiana has satisfied all request for revision to any SIP. Each extend the time within which a petition of the EPA’s requirements for providing request for revision to the SIP shall be for judicial review may be filed, and a comprehensive, accurate, and current considered separately in light of specific shall not postpone the effectiveness of inventory of actual emissions in the technical, economic, and environmental such rule or action. This action may not ozone nonattainment areas. These factors, in relation to relevant statutory by challenged later in proceedings to inventories are complete and and regulatory requirements. enforce its requirements (see section approvable according to the criteria set Regulatory Flexibility 307(b)(2)). out in the November 12, 1992, The Office of Management and Budget memorandum from J. David Mobley, Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act, has exempted this action from review Chief Emission Inventory Branch, TSD 5 U.S.C. 600 et seq., the EPA must under Executive Order 12866. and G.T. Helms, Chief Ozone/Carbon prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis Monoxide Programs Branch, Air Quality assessing the impact of any proposed or List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 final rule on small entities (5 U.S.C 603 Management Division. Environmental protection, Air and 604). Alternatively, the EPA may In today’s final action, the EPA is pollution control, Carbon monoxide, certify that the rule will not have a fully approving the SIP 1990 base year Hydrocarbons, Intergovernmental significant economic impact on a ozone emission inventories submitted relations, Nitrogen dioxide, Reporting substantial number of small entities. by Louisiana to the EPA on September and recordkeeping requirements, Small entities include small businesses, 27, 1994, for the Baton Rouge and Volatile organic compounds. Calcasieu Parish nonattainment areas as small not-for-profit enterprises, and meeting the requirements of section government entities with jurisdiction Dated: March 3, 1995. 182(a)(1) of the Act. over populations of less than 50,000. Jane N. Saginaw, The EPA is publishing this action SIP approvals under section 110 and Regional Administrator. without prior proposal because the subchapter I, part D of the Clean Air Act Agency views this as a noncontroversial do not create any new requirements, but Part 52, chapter I, title 40 of the Code amendment and anticipates no adverse simply approve requirements that the of Federal Regulations is amended as comments. However, in a separate State is already imposing. Therefore, follows: document in this FR publication, the because the Federal SIP-approval does PART 52Ð[AMENDED] EPA is proposing to approve the SIP not impose any new requirements, I revision should adverse comments be certify that it does not have a significant 1. The authority citation for part 52 received. Thus, this action will be impact on small entities affected. continues to read as follows: Moreover, due to the nature of the effective on May 15, 1995 unless, by Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401–7671q. April 14, 1995 adverse or critical Federal-State relationship under the comments are received. CAA, preparation of a regulatory Subpart TÐLouisiana If the EPA receives such comments, flexibility analysis would constitute this action will be withdrawn before the Federal inquiry into the economic 2. Section 52.993 is added to read as effective date by publishing a reasonableness of State action. The CAA follows: subsequent notice which will withdraw forbids the EPA to base its actions the final action. All public comments concerning SIPs on such grounds. § 52.993 Emissions inventories. will then be addressed in a subsequent (Union Electric Co. v. U.S. E.P.A., 427 (a) The Governor of the State of final rule on this action serving as a U.S. 246, 256–66 (S. Ct. 1976); 42 U.S.C. Louisiana submitted the 1990 base year proposed rule. The EPA will not 7410 (a)(2)). emission inventories for the Baton institute a second comment period on Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, Rouge (BTR) and Calcasieu Parish (CAL) this action. Any parties interested in petitions for judicial review of this ozone nonattainment areas on commenting on this action should do so action must be filed in the United States November 16, 1992 as a revision to the at this time. If no comments are Court of Appeals for the appropriate State Implementation Plan (SIP). The received, the public is advised that this circuit by May 15, 1995. Filing a 1990 base year emission inventory action will be effective May 15, 1995. petition for reconsideration by the requirement of section 182(a)(1) of the Nothing in this action should be Administrator of this final rule does not Clean Air Act, as amended in 1990, has construed as permitting or allowing or affect the finality of this rule for the been satisfied for each of these areas. 13912 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Rules and Regulations (b) The inventories are for the ozone SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: interested in commenting on this action precursors which are volatile organic Background should do so at this time. compounds, nitrogen oxides, and Final Action carbon monoxide. The inventories cover Due to the unique nature of point, area, non-road mobile, on-road radionuclide materials, delegation of EPA has reviewed the pertinent mobile, and biogenic sources. authority to states to implement and statutes and regulations of the State of (c) The BTR nonattainment area is enforce a NESHAP program for Utah and the grant workplan classified as Serious and includes radionuclides has not been automatic. accomplishments and has determined Ascension, East Baton Rouge, Iberville, EPA’s regional offices have traditionally that the State of Utah meets all of the Livingston, Point Coupee, and West assumed the lead responsibility for statutory and regulatory requirements Baton Rouge Parishes; the CAL administering the radionuclides established by Section 112 of the Clean nonattainment area is classified as NESHAP. Because of the EPA Air Act as amended in 1990 for the Marginal and includes Calcasieu Parish. Administrator’s commitment to enable implementation and enforcement of the state and local governments, as partners, [FR Doc. 95–6299 Filed 3–14–95; 8:45 am] radionuclides NESHAP. Therefore to implement and enforce the pursuant to section 112(l) of the Clean BILLING CODE 6560±50±P requirements of the Clean Air Act as Air Act as amended in 1990, 42 U.S.C. amended in 1990 (CAA), EPA wishes to 7412(l), and 40 CFR 63.91, EPA hereby extend delegated authority for the 40 CFR Part 61 delegates its authority for the radionuclides program to the states. implementation and enforcement of the The State of Utah received financial [FRL±5169±9] following National Emission Standards assistance from EPA to develop the for Radionuclides for all sources Approval of Delegation of Authority; radiation expertise and experience in located, or to be located in the State of National Emission Standards for implementing and enforcing an effective Utah: Hazardous Air Pollutants; radionuclides NESHAP program. Under (1) National Emission Standards for Radionuclides; Utah a radionuclides NESHAP grant Radon Emissions from Underground workplan, the Department of AGENCY: Environmental Protection Environmental Quality, State of Utah, Uranium Mines (40 CFR part 61, subpart Agency (EPA). has developed an approvable program B), ACTION: Direct final rule. which includes the following regulatory (2) National Emission Standards for elements: emission limits, test methods, Radon Emissions from Department of SUMMARY: EPA is granting delegation of Energy Facilities (40 CFR part 61, authority to the State of Utah to reporting and monitoring requirements, enforcement authority, surveillance and subpart Q), implement and enforce five National (3) National Emission Standards for Emission Standards for Hazardous Air public notification procedures. Accordingly, the Governor of Utah Radon Emissions from Phosphogypsum Pollutants (NESHAP) for radionuclides. Stacks (40 CFR part 61, subpart R), The Governor of Utah requested submitted a letter, dated June 4, 1993, requesting delegation of authority to (4) National Emission Standards for delegation from EPA Region VIII in a Radon Emissions from the Disposal of letter dated June 4, 1993. EPA has implement and enforce the radionuclides NESHAP, 40 CFR part 61, Uranium Mill Tailings (40 CFR part 61, reviewed the application and has subpart T). Note that subpart T was reached a decision that the State of Utah subparts B, Q, R, T, and W. As required by 40 CFR 63.91(a)(2), the amended on July 15, 1994 (59 FR 36283) has satisfied all of the requirements EPA is seeking public comments for 30 and now only applies to unlicensed necessary to qualify for approval of days. The comments shall be submitted disposal sites that are under the control delegation. The effect of this action concurrently to the State of Utah and to of the Department of Energy. allows the State of Utah to implement EPA. The State of Utah can then submit (5) National Emission Standards for and enforce specific radionuclide a response to the comments to EPA. Radon emissions from Operating Mill NESHAP. EPA is approving the State of Utah’s Tailings (40 CFR part 61, subpart W). DATES: This action is effective May 15, request for delegation as a direct final Not all authorities for the NESHAP 1995 unless adverse comments are rule without prior proposal because can be delegated to the state. The EPA received by April 14, 1995. If the EPA views this as a noncontroversial Administrator retains authority to effective date is delayed due to action and anticipates no adverse implement those sections of the comments, timely notice will be comments. If no adverse comments are NESHAP that require approval of published in the Federal Register. received in response to this rule, this equivalency determinations and ADDRESSES: Written comments should Federal Register document will serve as alternative test methods, decision- be submitted to Patricia D. Hull, the final notice of the approval to making to ensure national consistency, Director, Air, Radiation & Toxics delegate the implementation and and EPA rulemaking to implement Division, Environmental Protection enforcement of this program. The including but not limited to the Agency, Region VIII, 999 18th Street, effective date will be 60 days from the following provisions of 40 CFR part 61: Suite 500, Denver, Colorado 80202– date of this publication and no further (1) 40 CFR 61.04(b), which pertains to 2466 and concurrently to Russell A. activity will be contemplated in relation permitting the submission of reports to Roberts, Director, Division of Air to this rule. If EPA receives adverse the state only, instead of EPA and the Quality, Department of Environmental comments, the direct final rule will be state, Quality, 1950 West North Temple, Salt withdrawn and all public comments (2) 40 CFR 61.12(d)(1), which pertains Lake City, Utah 84114–4820. A docket received will be addressed in a to permitting an alternative means of containing the State of Utah’s submittals subsequent final rule based on the emission limitation, are available for public inspection accompanying proposed rule which (3) 40 CFR 61.13(h)(1)(ii), which during normal business hours at the appears in the Proposed Rule Section of pertains to approval of the use of an above locations. this Federal Register. However, EPA alternative method of emission tests. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: T. will not institute a second comment As the radionuclides NESHAP are Scott Whitmore at (303) 293–1758. period on this action. Any parties updated, Utah should revise its rules Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Rules and Regulations 13913 and regulations accordingly and in a subpart I reporting began on March 31, PART 61ÐNATIONAL EMISSION timely manner. 1994. STANDARDS FOR HAZARDOUS AIR EPA retains concurrent enforcement Effective May 15, 1995 all notices, POLLUTANTS authority. If at any time there is a reports, and other correspondence conflict between the state and federal required under subparts B, Q, R, T, and 1. The authority citation for part 61 regulations, the federal regulations must W should be sent to the State of Utah continues to read as follows: be applied if they are more stringent rather than to EPA Region VIII, Denver, Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7412. than the state regulations. Colorado. Note that the only NESHAP for radionuclides for which Utah did not List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 61 Subpart AÐGeneral Provisions request delegation and for which Utah Environmental protection, Air may presently have sources is 40 CFR 2. Section 61.04 is amended by pollution control, Intergovernmental revising paragraph (c) to read as follows: part 61, subpart I, National Emission relations, Radiation protection. Standards for Radionuclide Emissions Dated: February 23, 1995. § 61.04 Address. from Facilities Licensed by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and Federal Kerrigan Clough, * * * * * Facilities Not Covered by subpart H. Acting Regional Administrator, Region VIII. (c) * * * Subpart I was stayed by EPA. The stay For reasons set forth in the preamble, expired on November 15, 1992 and 40 CFR part 61 is amended as follows: REGION VIII.ÐDELEGATION STATUS OF NATIONAL EMISSION STANDARDS FOR HAZARDOUS AIR POLLUTANTS 1 Subpart CO MT 2 ND 2 SD 2 UT 2 WY AÐGeneral Provisions ...... (*) (*) (*) (*) (*) ...... BÐRadon Emissions from Underground Uranium Mines ...... (*) ...... CÐBeryllium ...... (*) (*) (*) ...... (*) ...... DÐBeryllium Rocket Motor Firing ...... (*) (*) (*) ...... (*) ...... EÐMercury ...... (*) (*) (*) ...... (*) ...... FÐVinyl Chloride ...... (*) (*) (*) ...... (*) ...... HÐEmissions of Radionuclides other than Radon from Department of Energy Facilities ...... IÐRadionuclide Emissions from Facilities Licensed by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and Federal Fa- cilities not covered by Subpart H ...... JÐEquipment Leaks (Fugitive Emission Sources) of Ben- zene ...... (*) (*) (*) ...... (*) ...... KÐRadionuclide Emissions from Elemental Phosphorus Plants ...... LÐBenzene Emissions from Coke By-Product Recovery Plants ...... (*) (*) ...... (*) ...... MÐAsbestos ...... (*) (*) (*) (*) (*) 3 (*) NÐInorganic Arsenic Emissions from Glass Manufactur- ing Plants ...... (*) (*) ...... (*) ...... OÐInorganic Arsenic Emissions from Primary Copper Smelters ...... (*) (*) ...... (*) ...... PÐInorganic Arsenic Emissions from Arsenic Trioxide and Metallic Arsenic Production Facilities ...... (*) (*) ...... (*) ...... QÐRadon Emissions from Department of Energy Facili- ties ...... (*) ...... RÐRadon Emission from Phosphogypsum Stacks ...... (*) ...... TÐRadon Emissions from the Disposal of Uranium Mill Tailings ...... (*) ...... VÐEquipment Leaks (Fugitive Emission Sources) ...... (*) (*) ...... (*) ...... WÐRadon Emissions from Operating Mill Tailings ...... (*) ...... YÐBenzene Emissions from Benzene Storage Vessels ...... (*) (*) ...... (*) ...... BBÐBenzene Emission from Benzene Transfer Oper- ations ...... (*) (*) ...... (*) ...... FFÐBenzene Waste Operations ...... (*) ...... (*) ...... (*) Indicates approval of delegation of subpart to state. 1 Authorities which may not be delegated include 40 CFR 61.04(b), 61.12(d)(1), 61.13(h)(1)(ii), 61.112(c), 61.164(a)(2), 61.164(a)(3), 61.172(b)(2)(ii)(B), 61.172(b)(2)(ii)(C), 61.174(a)(2), 61.174(a)(3), 61.242±1(c)(2), 61.244, and all authorities listed as not delegable in each sub- part under Delegation of Authority. 2 Indicates approval of National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants as part of the State Implementation Plan (SIP) with the ex- ception of the radionuclide NESHAP Subparts B, Q, R, T, W which were approved through Section 112(l) of the Clean Air Act. 3 Delegation only for asbestos demolition, renovation, spraying, manufacturing, and fabricating operations, insulating materials, waste disposal for demolition, renovation, spraying, manufacturing and fabricating operations, inactive waste disposal sites for manufacturing and fabricating op- erations, and operations that convert asbestos-containing waste material into nonasbestos (asbestos-free) material. 13914 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Rules and Regulations [FR Doc. 95–5976 Filed 3–14–95; 8:45 am] Hillsborough Rd., Three Bridges, NJ Generally speaking, the Agency has no BILLING CODE 6560±50±P 08887, had submitted a pesticide cause for concern if anticipated residues petition (PP 1F3973) to EPA requesting contribution for all published and that the Administrator, pursuant to proposed tolerances is less than the RfD. 40 CFR Part 180 section 408(d) of the Federal Food, Because of the developmental effects [PP 4F4373/R2113; FRL±4940±9] Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA), 21 seen in animal studies, the Agency used U.S.C. 346a(d), establish tolerances for the mouse teratology study (with a RIN 2070±AB78 residues of the pesticide abamectin NOEL of 0.06 mg/kg/day for (same as avermectin B1) and its delta-8, developmental toxicity for the delta-8,9 Pesticide Tolerance for Avermectin B1 9-isomer in or on the raw agricultural isomer) to assess acute dietary exposure and Its Delta-8,9-Isomer commodities (RAC) lettuce at 0.05 part and determine a margin of exposure per million (ppm) and almonds and AGENCY: (MOE) for the overall U.S. population Environmental Protection walnuts at 0.005 ppm. Agency (EPA). and certain subgroups. Since the In a letter dated June 9, 1994, Merck toxicological end-point pertains to ACTION: Final rule. Research Laboratories requested a developmental toxicity, the population separation of PP 1F3973 into two group of interest for this analysis is SUMMARY: This document establishes distinct petitions. Almonds and walnuts tolerances for residues of the insecticide women aged 13 and above, the subgroup were to be processed under PP 1F3973, which most closely approximates avermectin B1 and its delta-8,9-isomer and head lettuce was assigned a new in or on the raw agricultural commodity women of child-bearing age. The MOE petition number, PP 4F4373. No is calculated as the ratio of the NOEL to head lettuce. Merck Research comments were received on the notice Laboratories requested this regulation to the exposure. For this analysis, the of filing (56 FR 24189, May 29, 1991). Agency calculated the MOE for high- establish maximum permissible levels The data submitted in support of this for residues of the insecticide. end exposures for women ages 13 and tolerance and other relevant material above. The MOE for the high-end EFFECTIVE DATE: This regulation have been reviewed. The toxicological exposure is 200. Generally speaking, becomes effective March 15, 1995. and metabolism data and analytical MOEs greater than 100 for data derived methods for enforcement purposes ADDRESSES: Written objections and from animal studies are acceptable to considered in support of these hearing requests, identified by the the Agency. document control number, [PP 4F4373/ tolerances are discussed in detail in related documents published in the The metabolism of the chemical in R2113], may be submitted to: Hearing plants and livestock for this use is Clerk (1900), Environmental Protection Federal Registers of May 31, 1989 (54 FR 23209) for cottonseed and August 2, adequately understood. Any secondary Agency, Rm. M3708, 401 M St., SW., residues occurring in meat, meat Washington, DC 20460. A copy of any 1989 (54 FR 31836) for citrus. The Agency used a two-generation rat byproducts, or milk will be covered by objections and hearing requests filed existing tolerances for those with the Hearing Clerk should be reproduction study with an uncertainty factor of 300 to establish a Reference commodities. There is no reasonable identified by the document control expectation of finite residues in poultry number and submitted to: Public Dose (RfD). The 300-fold uncertainty factor was utilized for (1) inter- and and swine commodities; therefore, no Response and Program Resources tolerances are necessary at this time. Branch, Field Operations Division intra-species differences, (2) the extreme seriousness of pup death observed in Adequate analytical methodology (7506C), Office of Pesticide Programs, (HPLC-Fluorescence Methods) is Environmental Protection Agency, 401 the reproduction study, (3) maternal toxicity (lethality) no-observable-effect available for enforcement purposes. M St., SW., Washington, DC 20460. In Prior to publication in the Pesticide person, bring copy of objections and level (NOEL)(0.05 mg/kg/day), and (4) cleft palate in the mouse developmental Analytical Manual, Vol. II, the hearing requests to Rm. 1132, CM #2, enforcement methodology is being made 1921 Jefferson Davis Hwy., Arlington, toxicity study with isomer (NOEL = 0.06 mg/kg/day). Thus, based on a NOEL 0f available in the interim to anyone who VA 22202. Fees accompanying 0.12 mg/kg/day from the two-generation is interested in pesticide enforcement objections shall be labeled ‘‘Tolerance rat reproduction and an uncertainty when requested from: Calvin Furlow, Petition Fees’’ and forwarded to: EPA factor of 300, the RfD is 0.0004 mg/kg/ Public Reponse and Program Resource Headquarters Accounting Operations body weight (bwt)/day. Branch, Field Operations Division Branch, OPP (Tolerance Fees), P.O. Box A chronic dietary exposure/risk (7506C), Office of Pesticide Programs, 360277M, Pittsburgh, PA 15251. assessment has been performed for U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: By abamectin using the above RfD. 401 M St., SW., Washington, DC 20460. mail: George T. LaRocca, Product Available information on anticipated Office location and telephone number: Manager (PM) 13, Registration Division residues and 100% crop treated was Rm 1132, CM #2, 1921 Jefferson Davis (7505C), Office of Pesticide Programs, incorporated into the analysis to Hwy., Arlington, VA 22202, (703)-304- Environmental Protection Agency, 401 estimate the Anticipated Residue 5232. M St., SW., Washington, DC 20460. Contribution (ARC). The ARC is The tolerances established by Office location and telephone number: generally considered a more realistic amending 40 CFR part 180 will be Rm. 204, CM #2, 1921 Jefferson Davis estimate than an estimate based on adequate to cover residues in or on Hwy., Arlington, VA 22202, (703)-305- tolerance-level residues. The ARC from lettuce. There are currently no actions 6100; e-mail: established tolerances and the current pending against the continued [email protected]. action is estimated at 0.000022 mg/kg registration of this chemical. Based on SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: EPA bwt/day and utilizes 5.4 percent of the the information and data considered, issued a notice, published in the RfD for the U.S. population. The ARC the Agency has determined that the Federal Register of May 29, 1991 (56 FR for children, aged 1 to 6 years old, and tolerances established by amending 40 24189), which announced that Merck nonnursing infants (subgroups most CFR part 180 will protect the public Sharp & Dohme Research Laboratories, highly exposed) utilizes 13 and 18 health. Therefore, the tolerance is Division of Merck & Co., Inc., percent of the RfD, respectively. established as set forth below. Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Rules and Regulations 13915 Any person adversely affected by this that this rule is not ‘‘significant’’ and is DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR regulation may, within 30 days after therefore not subject to OMB review. Bureau of Land Management publication of this document in the Pursuant to the requirements of the Federal Register, file written objections Regulatory Flexibility Act (Pub. L. 96- to the regulation and may also request 43 CFR Public Land Order 7124 354, 94 Stat. 1164, 5 U.S.C. 601-612), a hearing on those objections. the Administrator has determined that [NM±930±1430±01; NMNM 88049] Objections and hearing requests must be filed with the Hearing Clerk, at the regulations establishing new tolerances Public Land Order No. 7067, address given above (40 CFR 178.20). A or raising tolerance levels or Correction; Withdrawal of National copy of the objections and/or hearing establishing exemptions from tolerance Forest System Land for Guadalupe requests filed with the Hearing Clerk requirements do not have a significant Canyon Zoological Botanical Area; should be submitted to the OPP docket economic impact on a substantial New Mexico for this rulemaking. The objections number of small entities. A certification submitted must specify the provisions statement to this effect was published in AGENCY: Bureau of Land Management, of the regulation deemed objectionable the Federal Register of May 4, 1981 (46 Interior. and the grounds for the objections (40 FR 24950). ACTION: Public land order. CFR 178.25). Each objection must be accompanied by the fee prescribed by List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180 SUMMARY: This order will correct an 40 CFR 180.33(i). If a hearing is error in the land description in Public Environmental protection, Land Order No. 7067. requested, the objections must include a Administrative practice and procedure, EFFECTIVE DATE: March 15, 1995. statement of the factual issue(s) on Agricultural commodities, Pesticides which a hearing is requested, the and pests, Reporting and recordkeeping FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: requestor’s contentions on such issues, requirements. Jeanette Espinosa, BLM New Mexico and a summary of any evidence relied State Office, P.O. Box 27115, Santa Fe, upon by the objector (40 CFR 178.27). A Dated: March 3, 1995. New Mexico 87502, 505–438–7597. request for a hearing will be granted if Stephen L. Johnson, By virtue of the authority vested in the Administrator determines that the the Secretary of the Interior by Section material submitted shows the following: Director, Registration Division, Office of 204 of the Federal Land Policy and Pesticide Programs. There is genuine and substantial issue Management Act of 1976, 43 U.S.C. of fact; there is a reasonable possibility Therefore, 40 CFR part 180 is 1714 (1988), it is ordered as follows: that available evidence identified by the amended as follows: The land description in Public Land requestor would, if established, resolve Order 7067, 59 FR 35859, July 14, 1994, one or more of such issues in favor of PART 180ÐAMENDED is hereby corrected as follows: the requestor, taking into account The third column, line 3, which reads uncontested claims or facts to the 1. The authority citation for part 180 ‘‘sec. 24, NE1⁄4NW1⁄4 and S1⁄2SE1⁄4;’’ is contrary; and resolution of the factual continues to read as follows: hereby corrected to read ‘‘sec. 24, issue(s) in the manner sought by the NE1⁄4SE1⁄4 and S1⁄2SE1⁄4;’’. requestor would be adequate to justify Authority: 21 U.S.C. 346a and 371. the action requested (40 CFR 178.32). Dated: March 2, 1995. 2. In § 180.449, by revising paragraph Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR Bob Armstrong, 51735, Oct. 4, 1993), the Agency must (b), to read as follows: Assistant Secretary of the Interior. [FR Doc. 95–6279 Filed 3–14–95; 8:45 am] determine whether the regulatory action § 180.449 Avermectin B1 and its delta-8,9- is ‘‘significant’’ and therefore subject to isomer; tolerances for residues. BILLING CODE 4310±FB±P all the requirements of the Executive * * * * * Order (i.e., Regulatory Impact Analysis, review by the Office of Management and (b) Tolerances are established for the FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS Budget (OMB)). Under section 3(f), the combined residues of the insecticide COMMISSION order defines ‘‘significant’’ as those avermectin B1 and its delta-8,9-isomer [a actions likely to lead to a rule (1) having mixture of avermectin containing 47 CFR Part 24 an annual effect on the economy of $100 greater than 80 percent avermectin B1a [GEN Docket No. 90±314, ET Docket No. million or more, or adversely and (5-O-demethyl avermectin A1a) and less 92±100, FCC 95±92] materially affecting a sector of the than 20 percent avermectin B1b (5-O- economy, productivity, competition, demethyl-25-di(1-methylpropyl)-25-(1- Personal Communications Service jobs, the environment, public health or methylethyl) avermectin A1a)] in or on AGENCY: safety, or State, local, or tribal the following commodities: Federal Communications governments or communities (also Commission. known as ‘‘economically significant’’); Parts per ACTION: Final rule; petition for (2) creating serious inconsistency or Commodity million reconsideration. otherwise interfering with an action taken or planned by another agency; (3) Celery ...... 0.05 SUMMARY: On March 3, 1995, the materially altering the budgetary Lettuce, head ...... 0.05 Commission released a Memorandum impacts of entitlement, grants, user fees, Strawberry ...... 0.02 Opinion and Order revising certain or loan programs; or (4) raising novel Tomatoes, fresh ...... 0.01 sections of its Rules governing the legal or policy issues arising out of legal Personal Communications Services mandates, the President’s priorities, or [FR Doc. 95–6416 Filed 3–14–95; 8:45 am] (PCS). The action in the instant Order the principles set forth in this Executive BILLING CODE 6560±50±F responds to petitions for reconsideration Order. filed by Morgan Stanley Partnerships on Pursuant to the terms of this September 6 and October 7, 1994 in the Executive Order, EPA has determined Commission’s broadband and 13916 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Rules and Regulations narrowband PCS proceedings. The investors’’ identifies a category of 4. In addition, the Commission Order refines and clarifies the investors that may be defined with some concludes that institutional investors Commission’s Rules concerning the precision. The Commission agrees with who held limited partnership interests ownership attribution of licenses in Morgan Stanley Partnerships that prior to the adoption date of this order view of the Commission’s decisions to institutional investors’ market activities shall be granted one year from that date use a multiplier when assessing indirect generally do not raise the type of to amend their limited partnership ownership interests. The rule ‘‘control’’ issues that led the agreements to comply with the amendments are intended to encourage Commission to adopt ‘‘bright line’’ PCS insulation rules. During this transition investment in PCS, particularly by attribution rules. Indeed, the period, affected licensees shall certify to institutional investors, and promote the Commission observes that it recently the Commission that the limited rapid deployment of such new services amended its rules in this regard to partners are not materially involved, in the public interest. further clarify the definition of directly or indirectly, in the EFFECTIVE DATE: March 15, 1995. institutional investor under the PCS management or operation of a PCS FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: rules and to promote such investors’ licensee. Jackie Chorney, Wireless opportunities to serve as an important 5. The Commission notes that it Telecommunications Bureau, (202) 418– source of funding for designated entity decided previously not to apply the 0600. PCS companies. The Commission finds multiplier rule to nationwide SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a that modifying the narrowband and narrowband PCS licenses granted under synopsis of the Commission’s broadband PCS attribution rules in light its pioneer preference rules prior to Memorandum Opinion and Order in of the request of Morgan Stanley August 16, 1994, or to nationwide GEN Docket No. 90–314, ET Docket No. Partnerships is consistent with the narrowband PCS licenses auctioned 92–100m, FCC 95–92, adopted March 2, Commission’s traditional policy and before August 16, 1994 (the date on 1995, and released March 3, 1995. The recent action regarding institutional which it adopted the narrowband PCS complete text of this Order is available investors. Moreover, the Commission multiplier rule). The Commission for inspection and copying during believes that these modifications will continues to believe that it would not be normal business hours in the FCC serve as an important means for equitable to apply the multiplier rule to Dockets Branch (Room 230), 1919 M encouraging increased passive those licensees. In keeping with that Street, N.W., Washington, D.C., and also investment in PCS. Accordingly, the rationale, however, the Commission may be purchased from the Commission states that it is amending clarifies that this exemption will expire Commission’s copy contractor, its PCS rules to: (1) exempt from with respect to a particular interest in a International Transcription Service, at attribution insulated limited partnership license if in the future that exempt (202) 857–3800, 2100 M Street, N.W., interests held by institutional investors, interest is transferred or assigned to Suite 140, Washington, D.C. 20037. subject to those investors certifying to another entity. the Commission that they are not Synopsis of Order materially involved directly or Ordering Clauses 1. The Commission’s PCS proceedings indirectly in the management or 6. It is Further Ordered That the are designed to promote four primary operation of the carrier activities of the petitions for reconsideration filed by goals: competitive delivery, a diverse partnership; and (2) increase from five Morgan Stanley on September 6 and array of services, rapid deployment, and to ten percent the level at which October 7, 1994, in our broadband and wide-area coverage. The Commission institutional investors’ PCS license narrowband PCS proceedings, notes that the ability of PCS entrants to ownership interests will be attributed. respectively, Are Granted to the extent attract capital is essential to achieving Consistent with this change, the discussed above. these goals. In essence, Morgan Stanley Commission is clarifying that for 7. Accordingly, It is Ordered that Part Partnerships argues in its petitions for purposes of the reporting requirements 24 of the Commission’s Rules Is reconsideration that the Commission’s of section 24.813 of its rules, Amended as specified below, And Will PCS attribution rules do not promote institutional investors are not Become Effective immediately upon this ability sufficiently. The considered attributable investors in an publication in the Federal Register. Commission states that while promoting applicant unless they hold an 8. This action is taken pursuant to PCS investment is an important public ownership interest of 10 percent or sections 4(i), 7(a), 302, 303(c), 303(f), interest component of its PCS policies, more in the applicant. The Commission 303(g), and 303(r) of the its attribution rules are designed is amending section 24.813(a)(2) to Communications Act of 1934, as principally to operate in conjunction require applicants to report ownership amended, 47 U.S.C. Sections 154(i), with ownership limits to maintain a interests held by institutional investors 157(a), 302, 303(c), 303(f), 303(g), and competitive PCS industry. The only if such ownership interests are 10 303(r). Commission expresses that the real percent or more. question, therefore, is whether treating 3. The Commission declines, List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 24 institutional investors differently under however, to adopt the single majority Communication common carriers, its PCS attribution rules will improve shareholder exception requested by Radio, Reporting and recordkeeping investment incentives without Morgan Stanley. The Commission requirements. undercutting those rules’ primary goal believes that such an exception is 47 CFR Part is amended as follows: of serving as anticompetitive safeguards. unnecessary to address the issues raised The Commission answers that question by Morgan Stanley regarding the PART 24ÐPERSONNEL affirmatively. application of the multiplier to indirect COMMUNICATIONS SERVICE 2. The Commission states that it has institutional investments and to enable long recognized a distinction between PCS applicants to attract capital from 1. The authority citation for Part 24 institutional investors and other institutional investors given the above- continues to read as follows: investors, and that this results, in part, described modifications to its Authority: 47 U.S.C. 154, 301, 302, 303, because the term ‘‘institutional attribution rules. 309 and 332, unless otherwise noted. Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Rules and Regulations 13917 2. Section 24.101 is revised to read as (iv) Empowering the general partner regarding day-to-day activities of the follows: to veto admissions of new general licensee; partners; (iv) Empowering the general partner § 24.101 Multiiple ownership restrictions. (v) Restricting the circumstances in to veto admissions of new general (a) Narrowband PCS licensees shall which the limited partners can remove partners; not have an ownership interest in more the general partner; (v) Restricting the circumstances in than three of the 26 channels listed in (vi) Prohibiting the limited partners which the limited partners can remove § 24.129 in any geographic area. For from providing services to the the general partner; purposes of this restriction, a partnership relating to the PCS holdings (vi) Prohibiting the limited partners narrowband PCS licensee is: of the licensee; and from providing services to the (1) Any institutional investor, as (vii) Stating that the limited partners partnership relating to the PCS holdings defined in § 24.720(h), with an may not become involved in the of the licensee; and ownership interest of ten or more management or operation of the (vii) Stating that the limited partners percent in a narrowband PCS license; licensee. See 47 CFR 73.3555 Note may not become involved in the and 2(g)(2); Memorandum of Opinion and management or operation of the (2) Any other person or entity with an Order in MM Docket 83–46, FCC 85–252 licensee. See 47 CFR 73.3555 Note ownership interest of five or more (released June 24, 1985), as modified on 2(g)(2); Memorandum of Opinion and percent in a narrowband PCS license. reconsideration in the Memorandum of Order in MM Docket 83–46, FCC 85–252 (b) In cases where a party had indirect Opinion and Order in MM Docket No. (released June 24, 1985), as modified on ownership, through an interest in an 83–46, FCC 86–410 (released November reconsideration in the Memorandum of interving entity (or entities) that has 28, 1986). Opinion and Order in MM Docket No. ownership in the narrowband license, (2) Institutional investors who held 83–46, FCC 86–410 (released November that indirect ownership shall be limited partnership interests prior to 28, 1986). attributable if the percentages of March 2, 1995 shall be granted one year (2) Institutional investors who held ownership at each level, multiplied from that date to amend their limited limited partnership interests prior to together, equal five or more percent partnership agreements to comply with March 2, 1995 shall be granted one year ownership of the narrowband PCS the insulation rules and so certify to the from that date to amend their limited license, except that if the ownership Commission. During this transition partnership agreements to comply with percentage for an interest in any link in period, the licensee in which an the insulation rules and so certify to the the chain exceeds 50 percent or institutional investor holds an interest Commission. During this transition represents actual control, it shall be shall also certify to the Commission that period, the licensee in which an treated as if it were a 100 percent the institutional investor limited institutional investor holds an interest interest. partner(s) are not materially involved, shall also certify to the Commission that Example: Party X has a non-controlling directly or indirectly, in the the institutional investor limited ownership interest of 25 percent in Company management or operation of the partner(s) are not materially involved, Y, which in turn has a non-controlling licensee. directly or indirectly, in the ownership interest of 10 percent in Company 3. In § 24.204, paragraph (d)(2)(viii) is Z, the narrowband PCS licensee. Party X’s management or operation of the redesignated as paragraph (d)(2)(viii)(A) licensee. effective ownership interest in Company Z is and new paragraph (d)(20(viii)(B) is Party X’s ownership interest in Company Y added to read as follows: * * * * * (25 percent) times Company Y’s ownership 4. Section 24.229 is amended by interest in Company Z (10 percent). § 24.204 Cellular eligibility. revising paragraph (c) to read as follows: Therefore, Party X’s effective ownership interest in Company Z is 2.5 percent, and is * * * * * § 24.229 Frequencies. not attributable. (d) * * * (2) * * * * * * * * (c) Notwithstanding paragraph (b) of (viii) * * * (c) PCS licenses shall not have an this section, the following interests shall (B) Notwithstanding paragraph ownership interest in frequency blocks not constitute attributable ownership (d)(2)(viii)(A) of this section, the that total more than 40 MHz and serve interests for purposes of paragraph (a) of following interests shall not constitute the same geographic area. For purposes this section: attributable ownership interests for of this section, PCS licensees are: (1) A limited partnership interest held purposes of § 24.229(c): (1) Any institutional investor, as by an institutional investor (as defined (1) A limited partnership interest held defined in Section 24.720(h), with an § 24.720(h)) where the limited partner is by an institutional investor (as defined ownership interest of 10 or more not materially involved, directly or Section 24.720(h)) where the limited percent in a broadband PCS license; and indirectly, in the management or partner is not materially involved, (2) Any other entities having an operation of the PCS holdings of the directly or indirectly, in the ownership interest of 5 or more percent partnership, and the licensee so management or operation of the PCS or other attributable ownership interest, certifies. The criteria which would holdings of the partnership, and the as defined in Section 24.204(d), in a assure adequate insulation for the licensee so certifies. The criteria which PCS license. purposes of this certification require: would assure adequate insulation for * * * * * (i) Prohibiting limited partners from the purposes of this certification 5. Section 24.813 is amended by acting as employees of the limited require: revising paragraph (a)(2) to read as partnership if responsibilities relate to (i) Prohibiting limited partners from follows: the carrier activities of the licensee; acting as employees of the limited (ii) Barring the limited partners from partnership if responsibilities relate to § 24.813 General application requirements. serving as independent contractors; the carrier activities of the licensee; (a) * * * (iii) Restricting communication (ii) Barring the limited partners from (2) A list of any party which holds a among limited partners and the general serving as independent contractors; five percent or more interest (or a ten partner regarding day-to-day activities (iii) Restricting communication among percent or more interest for institutional of the licensee; limited partners and the general partner investors as defined in § 24.720(h)) in 13918 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Rules and Regulations the applicant, or any entity in which a Federal Communications Commission. and West Longitude 102–01–50. five percent or more interest (or a ten Douglas W. Webbink, Mexican concurrence in each of the percent or more interest for institutional Chief, Policy and Rules Division, Mass Media allotments has been received because investors as defined in § 24.720(h)) is Bureau. Odessa and Los Ybanez are located held by another party which holds a five [FR Doc. 95–6335 Filed 3–14–95; 8:45 am] within 320 kilometers (199 miles) of the percent or more interest (or a ten BILLING CODE 6712±01±F U.S-Mexican border. percent or more interest for institutional List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 73 investors as defined in Section 24.720(h)) in the applicant. (e.g., If 47 CFR Part 73 Radio broadcasting. company A owns 5% of Company B (the [MM Docket No. 94±72; RM±8479] applicant) and 5% of Company C then PART 73Ð[AMENDED] Companies A and C must be listed on Radio Broadcasting Services; Odessa 1. The authority citation for Part 73 Company B’s application. and Los Ybanez, Texas continues to read as follows: * * * * * Federal Communications Commission. AGENCY: Federal Communications Authority: Secs. 303, 48 Stat., as amended, 1082; 47 U.S.C. 154, as amended. William F. Caton, Commission. Acting Secretary. ACTION: Final rule. § 73.202 [Amended] 2. Section 73.202(b), the Table of FM [FR Doc. 95–6488 Filed 3–14–95; 8:45 am] SUMMARY: The Commission, at the BILLING CODE 6712±01±M request of Ruben Velasquez, substitutes Allotments under Texas, is amended by Channel 300C1 for Channel 299C2 at removing Channel 299C2 and adding Odessa, Texas, and modifies the Channel 300C1 at Odessa and by 47 CFR Part 73 construction permit of Station removing Channel 300C2 and adding Channel 253C2 at Los Ybanez. [MM Docket No. 88±257, RM±6299] KADM(FM) to specify operation on the higher powered channel. To Federal Communications Commission. Radio Broadcasting Services; accommodate the upgrade at Odessa, John A Karousos, Kingsville and Ingleside, Texas the Commission also substitutes Chief, Allocations Branch, Policy and Rules Division, Mass Media Bureau. AGENCY: Federal Communications Channel 253C2 for Channel 300C2 at Commission. Los Ybanez, Texas, and modifies the [FR Doc. 95–6338 Filed 3–14–95; 8:45 am] license of Station KYMI(FM) to specify BILLING CODE 6712±01±F ACTION: Final rule; waiver of automatic the alternate Class C2 channel. See 59 stay. FR 35893, July 14, 1994, and SUMMARY: This document grants a Supplemental Information, infra. With DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE motion for waiver of automatic stay this action, this proceeding is filed by Kingsville Radio Company on terminated. National Oceanic and Atmospheric the effect of the substitution of Channel EFFECTIVE DATE: April 27, 1995. Administration 224C2 for Channel 224A at Kingsville, FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Pam 50 CFR Part 654 TX and the modification of its license Blumenthal, Mass Media Bureau, (202) for Station KNGV(FM) accordingly. See 418–2180. [Docket No. 950203034±5034±01; I.D. 092794B] Report and Order 57 FR 3952 (February SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a 3, 1992). This action is granted by the synopsis of the Commission’s Report RIN 0648±AG23 Commission without prejudice to any and Order, MM Docket No. 94–72, further action the Commission may take adopted March 1, 1995, and released Stone Crab Fishery of the Gulf of regarding the application for review in March 10, 1995. The full text of this Mexico; Amendment 5 MM Docket No. 88–257. Commission decision is available for AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries EFFECTIVE DATE: March 15, 1995. inspection and copying during normal Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: business hours in the FCC Reference Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Arthur D. Scrutchins, Mass Media Center (Room 239), 1919 M Street, NW, Commerce. Bureau, (202) 776–1660. Washington, D.C. The complete text of ACTION: Final rule. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a this decision may also be purchased synopsis of the Commission’s Order, from the Commission’s copy contractor, SUMMARY: NMFS issues this final rule to Memorandum Opinion and Order, MM ITS, Inc., (202) 857–3800, 2100 M implement Amendment 5 to the Fishery Docket No. 88–257, adopted March 3, Street, NW, Suite 140, Washington, D.C. Management Plan for the Stone Crab 1995 and released March 10, 1995. The 20037. Fishery of the Gulf of Mexico (FMP). full text of this Commission decision is Both channels can be allotted to the This rule establishes a temporary available for inspection and copying noted communities in compliance with moratorium, ending not later than June during normal business hours in the the Commission’s minimum distance 30, 1998, on the Federal registration of FCC Reference Center (Room 239), 1919 separation requirements. Channel 300C1 stone crab vessels. In addition, NMFS M Street, NW, Washington, D.C. The can be allotted to Odessa without the changes the regulations that implement complete text of this decision may also imposition of a site restriction. The the FMP to correct and clarify them, be purchased from the Commission’s coordinates for Channel 300C1 at conform them to current agency copy contractors, International Odessa, Texas, are North Latitude 31– standards, and enhance enforcement. Transcription Service, Inc., (202) 857– 51–30 and West Longitude 102–22–30. EFFECTIVE DATE: April 14, 1995. The 3800, 2100 M Street, NW, Suite 140, Channel 253C2 can be allotted to Los incorporation by reference of certain Washington, D.C. 20037. Ybanez at the transmitter site specified sections of the Florida Administrative in Station KYMI(FM)’s license. The Code is approved by the Director of the List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 73 coordinates for Channel 253C2 at Los Office of the Federal Register as of April Radio broadcasting. Ybanez are North Latitude 32–43–22 14, 1995. Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Rules and Regulations 13919 FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dated: March 8, 1995. Petersburg, FL 33702, telephone: 813– Peter J. Eldridge, 813–570–5305. Gary Matlock, 570–5301; or a designee. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The FMP Program Management Officer, National Stone crab means Menippe was prepared by the Gulf of Mexico Marine Fisheries Service. mercenaria, M. adina or the hybrid, M. adina X M. mercenaria, or a part Fishery Management Council (Council) For the reasons set out in the thereof. and is implemented by regulations at 50 preamble, 50 CFR part 654 is revised to CFR part 654 under the authority of the read as follows: § 654.3 Relation to other laws. Magnuson Fishery Conservation and (a) The relation of this part to other PART 654ÐSTONE CRAB FISHERY OF Management Act (Magnuson Act). laws is set forth in § 620.3 of this THE GULF OF MEXICO Detailed descriptions, backgrounds, chapter and paragraphs (b), (c), and (d) and rationales for the management Subpart AÐGeneral Measures of this section. measures in Amendment 5 and the Sec. (b) The regulations in this part are additional measures proposed by NMFS intended to be compatible with, and do were included in the preamble to the 654.1 Purpose and scope. 654.2 Definitions. not supersede, similar regulations in proposed rule (59 FR 55405, November 654.3 Relation to other laws. effect for the Everglades National Park 7, 1994) and are not repeated here. The 654.4 Permits and fees. [Reserved] (36 CFR 7.45). U.S. Coast Guard commented that they 654.5 Recordkeeping and reporting. (c) The regulations in this part are had reviewed Amendment 5 and the [Reserved] intended to be compatible with similar proposed rule and had identified no 654.6 Vessel and gear identification. regulations and statutes in effect in enforcement or safety concerns. No 654.7 Prohibitions. Florida’s waters. other comments on the amendment or 654.8 Facilitation of enforcement. (d) Under Amendment 5 to the the proposed rule were received. 654.9 Penalties. Fishery Management Plan for the Stone Accordingly, the proposed rule is Subpart BÐManagement Measures Crab Fishery of the Gulf of Mexico, adopted as final with three minor 654.20 Seasons. there is a temporary moratorium on the changes. The geographic scope of the 654.21 Harvest limitations. issuance by the Regional Director of regulations is clarified by providing in 654.22 Gear restrictions. Federal numbers and color codes to the definition of ‘‘management area’’ 654.23 Southwest Florida seasonal trawl mark vessels and gear in the stone crab appropriate latitude and longitude closure. fishery in the management area. The boundaries in lieu of ‘‘off the west coast 654.24 Shrimp/stone crab separation zones. moratorium will end not later than June of Florida and off the south side of the 654.25 Prevention of gear conflicts. 30, 1998. During the moratorium, Florida Keys.’’ An explanation of the 654.26 Adjustment of management measures. fishermen must obtain numbers and nature and duration of the moratorium 654.27 Specifically authorized activities. color codes from Florida. (See on the Federal registration of stone crab § 654.6(a).) vessels is added at § 654.3(d). A new Appendix A to Part 654—Figures section (§ 654.26) is added to specify the Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq. § 654.4 Permits and fees. [Reserved] management measures that may be Subpart AÐGeneral Measures § 654.5 Recordkeeping and reporting. established or modified under the [Reserved] framework procedure in Amendment 5. § 654.1 Purpose and scope. § 654.6 Vessel and gear identification. Classification (a) The purpose of this part is to (a) An owner or operator of a vessel The Director, Southeast Region, implement the Fishery Management that is used to harvest stone crabs by NMFS, determined that Amendment 5 Plan for the Stone Crab Fishery of the traps in the management area must is necessary for the conservation and Gulf of Mexico, prepared by the Gulf of comply with the vessel and gear management of the stone crab fishery Mexico Fishery Management Council identification requirements applicable and that it is consistent with the under the Magnuson Act. to the harvesting of stone crabs by traps national standards, other provisions of (b) This part governs conservation and in Florida’s waters in effect as of April the Magnuson Act, and other applicable management of stone crab and restricts 14, 1995, in Rule 2N–8.001 and Rule laws. the trawl fishery in the management 46–13.002(2) (e) and (f), Florida This final rule has been determined to area. Administrative Code. This be not significant for purposes of E.O. (c) ‘‘EEZ’’ refers to the EEZ in the incorporation by reference was 12866. management area, unless the context approved by the Director of the Office The Assistant General Counsel for clearly indicates otherwise. of the Federal Register in accordance Legislation and Regulation of the with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51. § 654.2 Definitions. Department of Commerce certified to Copies may be obtained from the the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the In addition to the definitions in the Florida Marine Fisheries Commission, Small Business Administration when Magnuson Act and in § 620.2 of this 2540 Executive Center Circle West, this rule was proposed that it would not chapter, the terms used in this part have Suite 106, Tallahassee, FL 32301; have a significant economic impact on the following meanings: telephone: 904–487–0554. Copies may a substantial number of small entities. Management area means the EEZ off be inspected at the office of the Regional The reasons were summarized in the the coast of Florida from a line Director; the Office of Fisheries preamble to the proposed rule (59 FR extending directly south from the Conservation and Management, NMFS, 55405, November 7, 1994). As a result, Alabama/Florida boundary (87°31′06′′ 1315 East-West Highway, Silver Spring, a regulatory flexibility analysis was not W. long.) to a line extending directly MD 20910; or the Office of the Federal prepared. east from the Dade/Monroe County, FL Register, 800 North Capitol Street, NW, boundary (25°20.4′ N. lat.). Suite 700, Washington, DC. List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 654 Regional Director means the Director, (b) A stone crab trap or buoy in the Fisheries, Fishing, Incorporation by Southeast Region, NMFS, 9721 EEZ that is not in compliance with the reference. Executive Center Drive N., St. gear identification requirements 13920 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Rules and Regulations specified in paragraph (a) of this section search, seizure, or disposition of seized (c) Possession of stone crab traps. A is illegal. Such trap or buoy, and any property in connection with stone crab trap may not be possessed in connecting lines, will be considered enforcement of the Magnuson Act. the management area from the end of unclaimed or abandoned property and the trap removal period, or an extension may be disposed of in any manner § 654.8 Facilitation of enforcement. thereto, to the beginning of the trap soak considered appropriate by the Assistant See § 620.8 of this chapter. period, as specified in paragraph (b) of Administrator or an authorized officer. § 654.9 Penalties. this section. A stone crab trap, float, or An owner of such trap or buoy remains rope in the management area during this subject to appropriate civil penalties. A See § 620.9 of this chapter. period will be considered unclaimed or stone crab trap will be presumed to be Subpart BÐManagement Measures abandoned property and may be the property of the most recently disposed of in any manner considered documented owner. § 654.20 Seasons. appropriate by the Assistant Administrator or an authorized officer. § 654.7 Prohibitions. (a) Closed season. No person may An owner of such trap, float, or rope In addition to the general prohibitions possess a stone crab in the management area from 12:01 a.m., local time, May 16, remains subject to appropriate civil specified in § 620.7 of this chapter, it is penalties. unlawful for any person to do any of the through 12 p.m. midnight, local time, following: October 14, each year. Holding a stone § 654.21 Harvest limitations. crab in a trap in the water during a soak (a) Falsify or fail to display and (a) Claw size. No person may remove maintain vessel and gear identification, period or during a removal period (see from a stone crab in or from the as required by § 654.6(a). paragraph (b) of this section), or during management area, or possess in the (b) Possess a stone crab in the any extension thereto, is not deemed management area during the period possession, provided that, if the trap is management area, a claw with a specified in § 654.20(a). removed from the water during such propodus measuring less than 2.75 (c) Possess a stone crab trap in the period, such crab is returned inches (7.0 cm), measured in a straight management area during the period immediately to the water with its claws line from the elbow to the tip of the specified in § 654.20(c). unharvested. lower immovable finger. The propodus (d) Remove from a stone crab in or (b) Placement of traps. (1) Prior to the is the largest section of the claw from the management area, or possess in fishing season. The period of October 5 assembly that has both a movable and the management area, a claw that is less through October 14 is established as a immovable finger and is located farthest than the minimum size limit specified trap soak period. A stone crab trap may from the body when the entire in § 654.21(a). be placed in the management area not appendage is extended. (See Appendix (e) Fail to return immediately to the earlier than 1 hour before sunrise on A, Figure 1, of this part.) water unharmed an egg-bearing stone October 5. (b) Egg-bearing stone crabs. An egg- crab, or strip eggs from or otherwise (2) After the fishing season. The bearing stone crab in or from the molest an egg-bearing stone crab; as period of May 16 through May 20 is management area must be returned specified in § 654.21(b). established as a trap removal period. A immediately to the water unharmed— (f) Hold a stone crab in or from the stone crab trap must be removed from without removal of a claw. An egg- management area aboard a vessel other the management area not later than 1 bearing stone crab may not be stripped than as specified in § 654.21(c). hour after sunset on May 20, unless an of its eggs or otherwise molested. (g) Use or possess in the management extension to the removal period is (c) Holding stone crabs. A live stone area a stone crab trap that does not have granted under paragraph (b)(2)(i) of this crab in or from the management area a biodegradable panel, as specified in section and the extension authorization may be held aboard a vessel until such § 654.22(a). is carried aboard the fishing vessel as time as a legal-sized claw is removed, (h) Pull or tend a stone crab trap in specified in paragraph (b)(2)(ii) of this provided it is held in a container that is the management area other than during section. shaded from direct sunlight and it is wet daylight hours, as specified in (i) An extension of the removal period with sea water as necessary to keep it in § 654.22(b). a damp condition. Containers holding (i) Willfully tend, open, pull, or may be granted by Florida in accordance stone crabs must be stacked in a manner otherwise molest another fisherman’s with Rule 46–13.002(2)(b), Florida trap, buoy, or line in the management Administrative Code, in effect as of that does not compress the crabs. A area, as specified in § 654.22(c). April 14, 1995. This incorporation by stone crab body from which a legal- (j) Trawl in a closed area or during a reference was approved by the Director sized claw has been removed must be closed season, as specified in §§ 654.23 of the Office of the Federal Register in returned to the sea before the vessel or 654.24, or as may be implemented accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 reaches shore or a port or dock. CFR part 51. Copies may be obtained under § 654.25(b). § 654.22 Gear restrictions. (k) Place a stone crab trap in a closed from the Florida Marine Fisheries area or during a closed season, as Commission, 2540 Executive Center (a) Biodegradable panels. A stone crab specified in § 654.24, or as may be Circle West, Suite 106, Tallahassee, FL trap used or possessed in the implemented under § 654.25(b). 32301; telephone: 904–487–0554. management area must have a panel (l) Interfere with fishing or obstruct or Copies may be inspected at the office of constructed of wood or cotton and damage fishing gear or the fishing vessel the Regional Director, or the Office of located on a side of the trap at least two of another, as specified in § 654.25(a). the Federal Register, 800 North Capitol slats above the bottom, or on the top of (m) Make any false statement, oral or Street, N.W., Suite 700, Washington, the trap, which, when removed, will written, to an authorized officer DC. leave an opening in the trap measuring concerning the taking, catching, (ii) The extension authorization must at least 2.5 inches by 5 inches (6.35 cm harvesting, landing, purchase, sale, be carried aboard the fishing vessel. The by 12.7 cm). possession, or transfer of stone crab. operator of a fishing vessel must present (b) Daylight hours. A stone crab trap (n) Interfere with, obstruct, delay, or the authorization for inspection upon in the management area may be pulled prevent by any means an investigation, request of an authorized officer. or tended during daylight hours only— Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Rules and Regulations 13921 that is, from 1 hour before sunrise to 1 connecting the following points (see the separation of shrimp trawling and hour after sunset. Appendix A, Figure 2, of this part): stone crab trapping. The zones are as (c) Gear belonging to others. No shown in Appendix A, Figure 3, of this North West fisherman may willfully tend, open, Point part. Although Zone II is entirely within Latitude Longitude Florida’s waters, it is included in this pull, or otherwise molest another section and Appendix A, Figure 3, of fisherman’s trap, buoy, or line in the B1 ...... 26°16′ 81°58.5′ this part for the convenience of C ...... 26°00′ 82°04′ management area without the prior fishermen. Restrictions that apply to written consent of that fisherman. D ...... 25°09′ 81°47.6′ E ...... 24°54.5′ 81°50.5′ Zone II and those parts of the other § 654.23 Southwest Florida seasonal trawl M1 ...... 24°49.3′ 81°46.4′ zones that are in Florida’s waters are closure. contained in Rule 46–38.001, Florida 1 On the seaward limit of Florida's waters. Administrative Code. Geographical From January 1 to 1 hour after sunset coordinates of the points referred to in (local time) May 20, each year, the area § 654.24 Shrimp/stone crab separation zones. this paragraph and shown in Appendix described in this section is closed to A, Figure 3, of this part are as follows trawling, including trawling for live Five zones are established in the (loran readings are unofficial and are bait. The area is that part of the management area and Florida’s waters included only for the convenience of management area shoreward of a line off Citrus and Hernando Counties for fishermen): Loran Chain 7980 Point North latitude West longitude WXYZ A ...... 28°59′30′′ 82°45′36′′ 14416.5 31409.4 45259.1 62895.3 B ...... 28°59′30′′ 83°00′10′′ 14396.0 31386.3 45376.8 63000.0 C ...... 28°26′01′′ 82°59′47′′ 14301.5 31205.9 45103.2 63000.0 D ...... 28°26′01′′ 82°56′54′′ 14307.0 31212.2 45080.0 62981.3 E ...... 28°41′39′′ 82°55′25′′ 14353.7 31300.2 45193.9 62970.0 F ...... 28°41′39′′ 82°56′09′′ 14352.4 31298.6 45199.4 62975.0 G ...... 28°48′56′′ 82°56′19′′ 14372.6 31337.2 45260.0 62975.0 H ...... 28°53′51′′ 82°51′19′′ 14393.9 31371.8 45260.0 62938.7 I ...... 28°54′43′′ 82°44′52′′ (1)(1)(1)(1) J ...... 28°51′09′′ 82°44′00′′ (2)(2)(2)(2) K ...... 28°50′59′′ 82°54′16′′ 14381.6 31351.8 45260.0 62960.0 L ...... 28°41′39′′ 82°53′56′′ 14356.2 31303.0 45181.7 62960.0 M ...... 28°41′39′′ 82°38′46′′ (3)(3)(3)(3) N ...... 28°41′39′′ 82°53′12′′ 14357.4 31304.4 45176.0 62955.0 O ...... 28°30′51′′ 82°55′11′′ 14323.7 31242.4 45104.9 62970.0 P ...... 28°40′00′′ 82°53′08′′ 14352.9 31295.7 45161.8 62955.0 Q ...... 28°40′00′′ 82°47′58′′ 14361.3 31305.4 45120.0 62920.0 R ...... 28°35′14′′ 82°47′47′′ 14348.6 31280.6 45080.0 62920.0 S ...... 28°30′51′′ 82°52'55'' 14327.7 31247.0 45086.6 62955.0 T ...... 28°27′46′′ 82°55′09′′ 14315.2 31225.8 45080.0 62970.0 U ...... 28°30′51′′ 82°52′09′′ 14329.1 31248.6 45080.0 62949.9 1 Crystal River Entrance Light 1A. 2 Long Pt. (southwest tip). 3 Shoreline. (a) Zone I is enclosed by rhumb lines EEZ during the periods October 5 considered unclaimed or abandoned connecting, in order, points A, B, C, D, through December 1, and April 2 property and may be disposed of in any T, E, F, G, H, I, and J, plus the shoreline through May 20, each year. manner considered appropriate by the between points A and J. It is unlawful (2) It is unlawful to trawl in that part Assistant Administrator or an to trawl in that part of Zone I that is in of Zone IV that is in the EEZ during the authorized officer. An owner of such the EEZ during the period October 5 period December 2 through April 1, trap, float, or rope remains subject to through May 20, each year. each year. appropriate civil penalties. A stone crab (b) Zone II is enclosed by rhumb lines (e) Zone V is enclosed by rhumb lines trap will be presumed to be the property connecting, in order, points J, I, H, K, L, connecting, in order, points F, G, K, L, of the most recently documented owner. and M, plus the shoreline between and F. § 654.25 Prevention of gear conflicts. points J and M. (1) It is unlawful to place a stone crab (c) Zone III is enclosed by rhumb lines trap in that part of Zone V that is in the (a) No person may knowingly place in connecting, in order, points P, Q, R, U, EEZ during the periods October 5 the management area any article, S, and P. It is unlawful to trawl in that through November 30, and March 16 including fishing gear, that interferes part of Zone III that is in the EEZ during through May 20, each year. with fishing or obstructs or damages the period October 5 through May 20, (2) It is unlawful to trawl in that part fishing gear or the fishing vessel of each year. of Zone V that it is in the EEZ during another; or knowingly use fishing gear (d) Zone IV is enclosed by rhumb the period December 1 through March in such a fashion that it obstructs or lines connecting, in order, points E, N, 15, each year. damages the fishing gear or fishing S, O, and E. (f) A stone crab trap, float, or rope in vessel of another. (1) It is unlawful to place a stone crab the management area during a period (b) In accordance with the procedures trap in that part of Zone IV that is in the not authorized by this section will be and limitations of the Fishery 13922 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Rules and Regulations Management Plan for the Stone Crab Fishery of the Gulf of Mexico, the Regional Director may modify or establish separation zones for shrimp trawling and the use of fixed gear as may be necessary and appropriate to prevent gear conflicts. Necessary prohibitions or restrictions will be published in the Federal Register. § 654.26 Adjustment of management measures. In accordance with the procedures and limitations of the fishery management plan for the Stone Crab Fishery of the Gulf of Mexico, the Regional Director may establish or modify the following management measures: Limitations on the number of traps that may be fished by each vessel; construction characteristics of traps; gear and vessel identification requirements; gear that may be used or prohibited in a directed fishery; bycatch levels in non-directed fisheries; seasons; soak/removal periods and requirements for traps; use, possession and handling of stone crabs aboard vessels; and minimum legal sizes. § 654.27 Specifically authorized activities. The Regional Director may authorize, for the acquisition of information and data, activities otherwise prohibited by the regulations in this part. Appendix A to Part 654—Figures Figure 1—Stone Crab Claw Figure 2—Southwest Florida Seasonal Trawl Closure Figure 3—Shrimp/Stone Crab Separation Zones BILLING CODE 3510±22±P Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Rules and Regulations 13923 13924 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Rules and Regulations Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Rules and Regulations 13925 [FR Doc. 95–6334 Filed 3–14–95; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510±22±C 13926 Proposed Rules Federal Register Vol. 60, No. 50 Wednesday, March 15, 1995 This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER (AMS) has determined that this action This proposed revision concerns only contains notices to the public of the proposed will not have a significant economic the institutional pack and not the issuance of rules and regulations. The impact on a substantial number of small ‘‘regular’’ fresh pack grades. Growers purpose of these notices is to give interested entities. This proposed rule for the and shippers of the institutional pack persons an opportunity to participate in the type table grape represented by the rule making prior to the adoption of the final revision of U.S. Standards for Grades of rules. Table Grapes (European or Vinifera California Grape and Tree Fruit League Type) will not impose substantial direct (CGTFL) have requested a revision to economic cost, recordkeeping, or the institutional grade only, to address DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE personnel workload changes on small a new market which is emerging that entities, and will not alter the market would utilize extremely small clusters Agricultural Marketing Service share or competitive position of these and/or bunches of grapes. According to entities relative to large businesses. the CGTFL, these buyers typically want 7 CFR Part 51 This proposed rule has been reviewed a smaller grouping of grapes than is [Docket Number FV±94±301] under Executive Order 12778, Civil allowed under the current two ounce Justice Reform. This action is not minimum bunch size requirement in the Table Grapes (European or Vinifera intended to have retroactive effect. This institutional grade. As an example, Type); Grade Standards proposed rule will not preempt any certain restaurant chains presently garnish some of their plates with AGENCY: Agricultural Marketing Service, State or local laws, regulations, or policies, unless they present an institutional pack grapes, but must cut USDA. the existing small bunches to even ACTION: Proposed rule. irreconcilable conflict with this rule. There are no administrative procedures smaller clusters of grapes (as little as two berries to a cluster) to fit their SUMMARY: This proposed rule would which must be exhausted prior to any revise the United States Standards for judicial challenge to the provisions of particular needs. Changing the Grades of Table Grapes (European or this rule. minimum bunch requirement on the U.S. No. 1 Institutional grade would Vinifera Type). The proposal would Agencies periodically review existing lower the present minimum bunch size allow the industry to develop contract regulations. An objective of the review specifications and otherwise use the as well as provide a separate tolerance is to ensure that the grade standards are for off-size bunches for the U.S. No. 1 U.S. grade to satisfy that growing serving their intended purpose, the segment of the restaurant and food Institutional grade only. It would also language is clear, and the standards are include a technical update which would service industry market that utilizes consistent with AMS policy and grapes as a garnish. correct the variety name ‘‘Superior authority. Seedless’’ to ‘‘Sugraone.’’ Therefore, this proposal would The United States Standards for change § 51.885 U.S. No. 1 Institutional DATES: Comments must be postmarked Grades of Table Grapes (European or to resemble § 51.884 (the format for U.S. or courier dated on or before May 15, Vinifera Type) was revised in April No. 1 table) except for the elimination 1995. 1991. This revision established a new of straggliness requirements and ADDRESSES: Interested parties are grade, U.S. No. 1 Institutional. This trimming away of defective berries for invited to submit written comments grade—used in sales to restaurant and bunches. The initial grade requirements concerning this proposal. Comments other food service concerns—provides will read as follows: ‘‘ ‘U.S. No. 1 must be sent to the Fresh Products for grape lots which have very small Institutional’ grapes must have no less Branch, Fruit and Vegetable Division, bunch sizes. In recent years, new than 95 percent of the containers in the Agricultural Marketing Service, U.S. marketing and packaging techniques lot legibly marked ‘Institutional Pack.’ Department of Agriculture, P.O. Box have developed very small, individual Further requirements for this grade 96456, Room 2056 South Building, consumer size servings of grapes. Under include grapes which consist of clusters Washington, D.C. 20090–6456. previous grade requirements these and/or bunches of well developed Comments should make reference to the ‘‘single serving’’ type grape bunches grapes of one variety, except when date and page number of this issue of were too small to meet any U.S. grade. designated as assorted varieties, which the Federal Register and will be made Therefore, the Department developed, at are at least fairly well colored, uniform available for public inspection in the the request of the table grape industry, in appearance when so specified in above office during regular business a separate grade reflecting today’s connection with the grade, and which hours. modern marketing and packaging meet the following requirements:’’ FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: methods for the growing food service As mentioned above, the Frank O’Sullivan, at the above address market while preserving the integrity of requirements will be the same as for or call (202) 720–2185. the ‘‘regular’’ fresh pack grades for U.S. No. 1 table except paragraph (b)(1) SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The grapes sold to consumers in ‘‘Not Straggly’’ and (g)(4) ‘‘Trimming Department of Agriculture (Department) supermarkets and other retail outlets. away of defective berries’’ will be is issuing this rule in conformance with Thus, grades for two different types of omitted. Also, paragraphs (h)(2) and Executive Order 12866. pack could be contained in one standard (h)(2)(i) will include size requirements Pursuant to the requirements set forth allowing the grades to share common for clusters and/or berries: in the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 characteristics while at the same time ‘‘(2) For clusters/bunches: U.S.C. 601 et. seq.), the Administrator of maintaining grades for two distinct (i) In this grade grapes shall consist of the Agricultural Marketing Service types (packs) of table grapes. at least a two berry cluster ranging to Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Proposed Rules 13927 clusters and/or bunches of grapes not Therefore, to maintain proper (f) Bunches not damaged by: greater than five ounces in weight. See conformity with these designations, the (1) Shot berries; § 51.913.’’ words ‘‘Superior Seedless’’ will be (2) Dried berries; The present § 51.913, Metric removed in these sections and will be (3) Other defective berries; Conversion Table, will be redesignated replaced with ‘‘Sugraone.’’ (4) Any other cause. § 51.914 and a new § 51.913 would be (g) Stems not damaged by: List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 51 (1) Freezing; added to define a cluster. Since grape Agricultural commodities, Food (2) Any other cause. bunches are normally thought of as a (h) Size: series of grapes attached to small lateral grades and standards, Fruits, Nuts, (1) For berries: Exclusive of shot stems which are in turn attached to a Reporting and recordkeeping berries and dried berries, 75 percent, by common main stem, the term bunch requirements, Vegetables. count, of the berries on each bunch shall does not seem entirely appropriate PART 51Ð[AMENDED] have the minimum diameters indicated when referring to two berries which for varieties as follows: share a common point of attachment. For reasons set forth in the preamble, (i) Thompson Seedless, Perlette, Therefore, for the purpose of the U.S. it is proposed that 7 CFR Part 51 be Delight, Beauty Seedless, Sugraone, No. 1 Institutional grade only, § 51.913 amended as follows: Flame Seedless and other seedless shall define a cluster as ‘‘two or more 1. The authority citation for 7 CFR varieties nine-sixteenths of an inch. berries sharing a common point of Part 51 continues to read as follows: (ii) Other varieties ten-sixteenths of an attachment.’’ Authority: 7 U.S.C. 1622, 1624. inch. In addition, Table Ia, Tolerances at (2) For clusters/bunches: Shipping Point for U.S. No. 1 § 51.882 [Amended] (i) In this grade grapes shall consist of Institutional Only, and Table IIa, 2. Section 51.882(i)(1)(ii) is amended at least a two berry cluster ranging to Tolerances En Route or at Destination by removing the words ‘‘Superior clusters and/or bunches of grapes not for U.S. No. 1 Institutional Only, would Seedless’’ and adding in its place greater than five ounces in weight. See be added. The CGTFL requested that a ‘‘Sugraone.’’ Section 51.913. separate tolerance of four percent be (ii) For tolerances see § 51.886. provided for offsize clusters or bunches § 51.884 [Amended] 5. Section 51.886 is amended by to maintain the integrity of the grade in 3. Section 51.884(i)(1)(i) is amended revising paragraph (b) and adding a new relation to size requirements. Presently, by removing the words ‘‘Superior paragraph (c) and Tables Ia and IIa to Tables I and II combine both the offsize Seedless’’ and adding in its place read as follows: and remaining grade requirements in ‘‘Sugraone.’’ § 51.886 Tolerances. 4. Section 51.885 is revised to read as one tolerance (eight percent for (a) * * * tolerances at shipping point, Table I, follows: (b) In order to allow for variations and 12 percent for tolerances en route § 51.885 U.S. No. 1 Institutional. incident to proper grading and handling or at destination, Table II). The in each of the foregoing grades except corresponding new tables, Table Ia and ‘‘U.S. No. 1 Institutional’’ grapes must have no less than 95 percent of the U.S. No. 1 Institutional, tolerances, by IIa for U.S. No. 1 Institutional grade weight, other than for maturity, are only, will maintain an eight and twelve containers in the lot legibly marked ‘‘Institutional Pack.’’ Further provided as set forth in Tables I and II percent tolerance, respectively, for of this section. remaining grade requirements but requirements for this grade include * * * * * would include a separate tolerance of grapes which consist of clusters and/or bunches of well developed grapes of one (c) In order to allow for variations four percent for offsize clusters or incident to proper grading and handling bunches. variety, except when designated as assorted varieties, which are at least in the U.S. No. 1 Institutional grade This proposed rule would also make only, tolerances, by weight, other than a technical change which is unrelated to fairly well colored, uniform in appearance when so specified in for maturity, are provided as set forth in the U.S. No. 1 Institutional grade. Tables Ia and IIa of this section. Presently, §§ 51.882(i)(1)(ii) and connection with the grade, and which meet the following requirements: 51.884(i)(1)(i) make reference to TABLE Ia.ÐTOLERANCES AT SHIPPING ‘‘Superior Seedless’’ as a varietal name. (a) Basic requirements for berries: (1) Mature; POINT FOR U.S. NO. 1 INSTITU- It has been brought to the attention of (2) Firm; TIONAL GRADE ONLY 1 the Department by representatives of (3) Firmly attached to capstem; [Percent] Sunworld International, Inc., California, (4) Not weak; that ‘‘Superior Seedless’’ is in fact, a (5) Not materially shriveled at U.S. No. registered trademark name and not the capstem; Factor 1 institu- varietal name. ‘‘Sugraone’’ according to (6) Not shattered; tional Sunworld, is the correct varietal name. (7) Not split or crushed; Research into this matter by the (8) Not wet. (A) For clusters/bunches failing to meet color requirements ...... 10 Department has shown that both the (b) Basic requirements for stems: Not International Union for the Protection of (B) For clusters/bunches failing to weak, or dry and brittle. meet requirements for minimum New Varieties of Plants (UPOV) and the (c) Berries free from: diameter of berries ...... 10 Office International de la Vigne et du (1) Decay; (C) For offsize clusters/bunches .... 4 Vin (OIV), the United States being a (2) Waterberry; (D) For clusters/bunches and ber- signatory of each, as well as the United (3) Sunburn. ries failing to meet the remaining Nations Economic Commission for (d) Stems free from: requirements for the grade ...... 8 Europe (ECE) have determined that (1) Mold; Including in (D): ‘‘Sugraone’’ is the actual varietal (2) Decay. (a) For Serious damage and, in- designation while ‘‘Superior Seedless’’ (e) Berries not damaged by: Any other cluding in (a) ...... 2 (i) For Decay ...... 1/2 of 1 represents a registered trademark. cause. 13928 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Proposed Rules TABLE IIa.ÐTOLERANCES EN ROUTE ACTION: Proposed rule. economic impact on a substantial OR AT DESTINATION FOR U.S. NO. 1 number of small entities since this SUMMARY: The Agencies propose to INSTITUTIONAL ONLY rulemaking action does not involve a revise their Environmental regulation. new or expanded program. Therefore a U.S. No. This action is necessary to streamline regulatory flexibility analysis was not Factor 1 institu- the environmental review process. The prepared. tional intended effect of this action is to provide guidance on sending individual Civil Justice Reform (A) For clusters/bunches failing to copies of notices to affected property meet color requirements ...... 10 owners when utility systems are This document has been reviewed in (B) For clusters/bunches failing to involved. accordance with Executive Order 12778. meet requirements for minimum It is the determination of the Agencies DATES: Comments must be received on diameter of berries ...... 10 that this action does not unduly burden (C) For offsize clusters/bunches .... 4 or before May 15, 1995. (D) For clusters/bunches and ber- the Federal Court System in that it ADDRESSES: Submit written comments meets all applicable standards provided ries failing to meet the remaining in duplicate to the office of the Chief, requirements for the grade ...... 12 in Section 2 of the Executive Order. Including in (D): Regulations Analysis and Control (a) For permanent defects ...... 8 Branch, Rural Economic and Environmental Impact Statement (b) For serious damage and, in- Community Development, U.S. cluding in (b) ...... 4 Department of Agriculture, Room 6348, This document has been reviewed in (i) For serious damage by per- South Agriculture Building, 14th Street accordance with 7 CFR part 1940, manent defects ...... 2 and Independence Avenue SW., subpart G, ‘‘Environmental Program.’’ (ii) For decay ...... 1 Washington, D.C. 20250–0700. The Agencies have determined that this action does not constitute a major 1 Shipping point, as used in these stand- FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Federal action significantly affecting the ards, means the point of origin of the shipment Donald O. Lander, Senior quality of the human environment, and in the producing area or at port of loading for Environmental Protection Specialist, ship stores or overseas shipment, or, in the in accordance with the National Environmental Support Branch, case of shipments from outside the continental Environmental Policy Act of 1969, Pub. United States, the port of entry into the United Program Support Staff, Rural Housing L. 91–190, an Environmental Impact States. and Community Development Service, Statement is not required. § 51.913 [Redesignated as § 51.914] U.S. Department of Agriculture, Room 6309, South Agriculture Building, 14th 6. In Part 51, Subpart—United States Paperwork Reduction Act Street and Independence Avenue SW., Standards for Grades of Table Grapes Washington, D.C. 20250–0700; The information collection (European or Vinifera Type), § 51.913 is telephone (202) 720–9619. requirements contained in this redesignated as § 51.914 and a new regulation have been approved by the § 51.913 is added to read as follows: SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Office of Management and Budget § 51.913 Clusters. Classification (OMB) under the provisions of 44 U.S.C. ‘‘Clusters’’ as used in these standards We are issuing this proposed rule in Chapter 35 and have been assigned in reference to the U.S. No. 1 conformance with Executive Order OMB control number 0575–0094 in Institutional grade only shall be defined 12866, and the Office of Management accordance with the Paperwork as two or more berries sharing a and Budget (OMB) has determined that Reduction Act of 1980 (44 U.S.C. 3507). common point of attachment. it is a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’. This proposed rule does not revise or impose any new information collection Dated: March 9, 1995. Intergovernmental Consultation or recordkeeping requirement from Lon Hatamiya, those imposed by OMB. Administrator. This rule affects the following Agency programs as listed in the Catalog of [FR Doc. 95–6367 Filed 3–14–95; 8:45 am] Background Federal Domestic Assistance (CFDA): BILLING CODE 3410±02±P 10.760—Water and Waste Disposal Systems Section 1940.331 describes the public for Rural Communities notice requirements for actions Rural Housing and Community 10.762—Solid Waste Management Grants undergoing an environmental review by 10.763—Emergency Community Water the Agencies. Development Service Assistance Grants 10.766—Community Facilities Loans In § 1940.331(b)(4) there has been Rural Business and Cooperative confusion about identifying the names Development Service 10.770—Water and Waste Disposal Loans and Grants (Section 306C) and mailing addresses of individual Rural Utilities Service Executive Order 12372 requires property owners who may be affected by a project when large areas of important Consolidated Farm Service Agency intergovernmental consultation with State and local officials. Of the FmHA land resources may be affected. This confusion has caused delays and added 7 CFR Part 1940 programs affected by this rule, the following are subject to the provisions expense in the preparation and review RIN 0575±AB66 of Executive Order 12372: 10.760, of Class I and Class II environmental assessments for those projects. Environmental Program 10.763, 10.766, and 10.770. The regulation is proposed to be AGENCIES: Rural Housing and Regulatory Flexibility Act revised to allow the State Community Development Service, Rural In compliance with the Regulatory Environmental Coordinator to select the Business and Cooperative Development Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601–602), the methods for notifying affected property Service, Rural Utilities Service, and undersigned has determined and owners, and to provide examples of Consolidated Farm Service Agency, certified by signature of this document some other methods that may be USDA. that this rule will not have a significant considered. Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Proposed Rules 13929 List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 1940 traverse floodplains, are advised of importation of horses to remove the Endangered and threatened wildlife, these proposed mitigation measures in a United Arab Emirates from the list of Environmental protection, Floodplains, preliminary notice, these property countries in which African horse National Wild and Scenic Rivers owners need not be sent copies of the sickness exists. We believe that the System, Natural resources, Recreation, final notice as long as the mitigation United Arab Emirates is free of African Water supply. measures in the final notice are horse sickness, and that restrictions on unchanged from the preliminary notice the importation of horses from the Accordingly, the Agencies propose to and no property owners raised United Arab Emirates to prevent the amend chapter XVIII, title 7, Code of objections or concerns over the spread of African horse sickness into the Federal Regulations as follows. proposed mitigation measures. United States are no longer necessary. (ii) With respect to utility systems, PART 1940ÐGENERAL This action would relieve unnecessary notification of affected property owners restrictions on the importation of horses 1. The authority citation for part 1940 will normally be achieved by from the United Arab Emirates. continues to read as follows: distributing an individual copy of the DATES: Consideration will be given only Authority: 7 U.S.C. 1989; 42 U.S.C. 1480; public notice. However, when the SEC to comments received on or before 5 U.S.C. 301; 7 CFR 2.23 and 2.70. determines that this method would March 30, 1995. result in an excessive burden on the ADDRESSES: Please send an original and Subpart GÐEnvironmental Program applicant, notification may be achieved three copies of your comments to by another method or a combination of 2. Section 1940.331 is amended by Docket No. 95–014–1, Animal and Plant methods tailored to the specific needs of Health Inspection Service, Policy and revising paragraph (b)(4) to read as the particular case. For example, in lieu follows: Program Development, Regulatory of being individually identified, affected Analysis and Development, 4700 River 1940.331 Public involvement. property owners may be notified by a Road Unit 118, Riverdale, MD 20737– mass mailing to all of the taxpayers in * * * * * 1228. Please state that your comments (b) * * * each of the taxing areas through which refer to Docket No. 95–014–1. (4) The public notice procedures for the system will pass. On the other hand, Comments received may be inspected at actions that will affect floodplains, if the system traverses coterminous USDA, room 1141, South Building, 14th wetlands, important farmland, prime taxing areas, with the smaller area not Street and Independence Avenue SW., rangelands, or prime forest lands are completely describing the service area Washington, DC, between 8 a.m. and contained in exhibit C of this subpart. of the utility system, affected property 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, These procedures apply to actions that owners might be notified by a mass except holidays. Persons wishing to require either an EIS, Class II mailing to the small taxing area plus inspect comments are requested to call assessment or Class I assessment. identifying the remaining affected ahead on (202) 690–2817 to facilitate However, whenever an action normally property owners to receive an entry into the comment reading room. classified as a categorical exclusion individual copy. The objective is to FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. requires a Class I assessment because of notify all property owners affected by John Cougill, Staff Veterinarian, Animal a potential impact to one of these the action and offer them an and Plant Health Inspection Service, important land resources, no public opportunity to comment on the action. Veterinary Services, National Center for notice procedures apply in the course of If affected property owners are not Import and Export, Import/Export completing the Class I assessment. individually notified, the SEC shall Products, 4700 River Road Unit 40, When applicable to an action, as document as part of the environmental Riverdale, MD 20737–1228. review file, why individual notification specified in exhibit C of this subpart, SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: these public notice procedures can is not being used and what other apply at two distinct stages. The first methods will be used to achieve the Background stage, a preliminary notice, is followed stated objective. The regulations in 9 CFR part 92 by a 30 day public review period, and * * * * * (referred to below as the regulations) applies to actions that may impact any Dated: February 27, 1995. state the provisions for the importation of the five important land resources. Michael V. Dunn, into the United States of specified The second stage, a final notice, is Acting Under Secretary for Rural Economic animals to prevent the introduction of followed by a fifteen-day public review and Community Development. various animal diseases, including period, and applies only to actions that [FR Doc. 95–6366 Filed 3–14–95; 8:45 am] African horse sickness (AHS). AHS, a will impact floodplains or wetlands. For BILLING CODE 3410±07±U fatal equine viral disease, is not known Class II actions, this final notice to exist in the United States. Section procedure must be combined with any 92.308(a)(2) of the regulations lists applicable finding of no significant Animal and Plant Health Inspection countries that the Animal and Plant environmental impact, which is Service Health Inspection Service (APHIS) considers affected with AHS, and sets described in paragraph (b)(3) of this 9 CFR Part 92 section. Individual copies of the forth specific requirements for horses preliminary and final notices will be [Docket No. 95±014±1] which are imported from those sent to the same parties that are required countries. APHIS requires horses to be sent a notice of a finding of no Horses From the United Arab intended for importation from any of the significant impact, as specified in Emirates; Change in Disease Status countries listed, including horses that paragraph (b)(3) of this section, with the AGENCY: Animal and Plant Health have stopped in or transited those following exceptions: Inspection Service, USDA. countries, to enter the United States (i) Whenever property owners affected ACTION: Proposed rule. only at the port of New York and be by proposed mitigation measures, such quarantined at the New York Animal as proposed hook-up restrictions on SUMMARY: We are proposing to amend Import Center in Newburgh, NY, for at portions of water or sewer lines that will the regulations concerning the least 60 days. 13930 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Proposed Rules The United Arab Emirates (UAE) has implement a final rule on an expedited Health Inspection Service has applied to the United States Department basis. Prompt implementation of a final determined that this action would not of Agriculture to be recognized as free rule would facilitate the importation of have a significant economic impact on from AHS. The UAE’s last diagnosed horses by removing unnecessary a substantial number of small entities. case of AHS was over 29 years ago. The quarantine restrictions. Removing the UAE has been testing horses for AHS. UAE from the list of AHS countries Executive Order 12778 Additionally, they have an active would significantly reduce the This proposed rule has been reviewed surveillance program to monitor for quarantine period for horses imported under Executive Order 12778, Civil AHS. from the UAE. Additionally, this APHIS has reviewed the proposal would allow more flexibility in Justice Reform. If this proposed rule is documentation submitted by the the ports used for the importation of adopted: (1) All State and local laws and Government of the UAE in support of its horses from the UAE, making the regulations that are inconsistent with request. APHIS officials also performed importation of horses from the UAE this rule will be preempted; (2) no on-site inspections of the UAE’s logistically easier. retroactive effect will be given to this surveillance program and veterinary rule; and (3) administrative proceedings infrastructure. APHIS officials reviewed Executive Order 12866 and Regulatory will not be required before parties may the qualifications of the UAE’s Flexibility Act file suit in court challenging this rule. veterinarians, microbiologists, and This proposed rule has been reviewed histopathologists. APHIS officials under Executive Order 12866. For this Paperwork Reduction Act inspected the virology, parasitology, and action, the Office of Management and This proposed rule contains no Budget has waived its review process bacteriology lab facilities at the Central information collection or recordkeeping required by Executive Order 12866. Veterinary Research Laboratory in requirements under the Paperwork Dubai. Additionally, APHIS officials The primary impact of this proposal Reduction Act of 1980 (44 U.S.C. 3501 evaluated the UAE’s import-export will be on U.S. importers of horses from practices, including airports, border the UAE. The horses imported from the et seq.). crossings, and quarantine facilities. The UAE tend to be higher-valued, purebred List of Subjects in 9 CFR Part 92 airports and border crossings are tightly horses. These horses are worth 10 to 20 controlled with adequate fencing and times more than the average price per Animal diseases, Imports, Livestock, other physical barriers to control entry horse from the rest of the world. Few, Poultry and poultry products, into the UAE. The APHIS officials if any, of these importers can be Quarantine, Reporting and conducting the on-site evaluation considered a small entity. These recordkeeping requirements. concluded that the veterinary importers will no longer be required to infrastructure, laboratory facilities, and quarantine horses from the UAE for 60 Accordingly, 9 CFR part 92 would be import-export practices are effective and days at the New York Animal Import amended as follows: contribute to the AHS-free status of the Center in Newburgh, NY. The proposed PART 92ÐIMPORTATION OF CERTAIN UAE. rule would allow horses from the UAE Based on the information discussed to be shipped to and quarantined at ANIMALS AND POULTRY AND above, we believe that the UAE qualifies ports designated in § 92.303, and would CERTAIN ANIMAL AND POULTRY for removal from the list of countries, in reduce the quarantine and testing period PRODUCTS; INSPECTION AND OTHER § 92.308(a)(2) of the regulations, which to an average of three days to meet REQUIREMENTS FOR CERTAIN APHIS considers affected with AHS. quarantine requirements specified in MEANS OF CONVEYANCE AND This proposed action would relieve § 92.308. SHIPPING CONTAINERS THEREON restrictions which require horses While no horses are reported in the imported from the UAE to enter the ‘‘Foreign Agricultural Trade of the 1. The authority citation for part 92 United States only at the port of New United States’’ as being imported would continue to read as follows: York and be quarantined at the New directly from the UAE, we believe that Authority: 7 U.S.C. 1622; 19 U.S.C. 1306; York Animal Import Center in each year an average of 10 to 20 horses 21 U.S.C. 102–105, 111, 114a, 134a, 134b, Newburgh, NY, for at least 60 days. This are imported indirectly from the UAE 134c, 134d, 134f, 135, 136, and 136a; 31 proposed action would allow horses through Europe. Removing the U.S.C. 9701; 7 CFR 2.17, 2.51, and 371.2(d). from the UAE to be shipped to and requirement for a 60-day quarantine at quarantined at ports designated in the New York Animal Import Center in § 92.308 [Amended] Newburgh, NY, for horses from the UAE § 92.303, and would reduce the 2. In § 92.308, paragraph (a)(2) would quarantine period to an average of 3 will make the importation of these be amended by removing ‘‘the United days to meet the quarantine and testing horses less expensive and logistically Arab Emirates,’’. requirements specified in § 92.308. easier. We anticipate that the number of horses imported from the UAE may Done in Washington, DC, this 9th day of Comment Period slightly increase. We estimate March 1995. The Administrator of the Animal and approximately 50 to 100 horses may be Terry L. Medley, Plant Health Inspection Service has imported per year, though some of these Acting Administrator, Animal and Plant determined that this rulemaking horses will only be temporarily Health Inspection Service. proceeding should be expedited by imported to the United States for [FR Doc. 95–6373 Filed 3–14–95; 8:45 am] allowing a 15-day comment period on particular events, and then transported this proposal. U.S importers have back to the UAE. With the very small BILLING CODE 3410±34±P requested that this rulemaking be number of horses imported from the completed in time to allow them to UAE, we anticipate the overall import horses from the UAE for this economic impact on businesses and year’s Kentucky Derby, to be held May individuals would be minimal. 6, 1995. The comment period would Under these circumstances, the allow the agency to promulgate and Administrator of the Animal and Plant Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Proposed Rules 13931 DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION environmental, and energy-related The FAA has determined that this aspects of the proposal. proposed regulation only involves Federal Aviation Administration Communications should identify the established body of technical airspace docket and be submitted in regulations for which frequent and 14 CFR Part 71 triplicate to the address listed above. routine amendments are necessary to [Airspace Docket No. 95±AWP±2] Commenters wishing the FAA to keep them operationally current. acknowledge receipt of their comments Therefore, this proposed regulation—(1) Proposed Amendment to Class E on this notice must submit with the is not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ Airspace; Luke Air Force Base (AFB), comments a self-addressed, stamped under Executive Order 12866; (2) is not AZ and Class D Airspace; Glendale, AZ postcard on which the following a ‘‘significant rule’’ under DOT statement is made. ‘‘Comments to Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 AGENCY: Federal Aviation Airspace Docket No. 95–AWP–2.’’ The FR 10034; February 26, 1979); and (3) Administration (FAA), DOT. postcard will be date/time stamped and does not warrant preparation of a ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking. returned to the commenter. All Regulatory Evaluation as the anticipated communications received on or before impact is so minimal. Since this is a SUMMARY: This notice proposes to the specified closing date for comments routine matter that will only affect air amend the Class E airspace area at Luke will be considered before taking action AFB, AZ, and Class D airspace at traffic procedures and air navigation, it on the proposed rule. The proposal is certified that this proposed rule will Glendale, AZ due to the relocation of contained in this notice may be changed the Luke AFB TACAN. The effect of this not have a significant economic impact in light of comments received. All on a substantial number of small entities proposal is to provide adequate Class E comments submitted will be available and Class D airspace for instrument under the criteria of the Regulatory for examination in the System Flexibility Act. flight rules (IFR) operations at Luke Management Branch, Air Traffic AFB, AZ, and Glendale, AZ. Division, 1500 Aviation Boulevard, List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71 DATES: Comments must be received on Lawndale, California 90261, both before Airspace, Incorporation by reference, or before April 17, 1995. and after the closing date for comments. Navigation (air). ADDRESSES: Send comments on the A report summarizing each substantive proposal in triplicate to: Federal public contact with FAA personnel The Proposed Amendment Aviation Administration, Attn: concerned with this rulemaking will be Accordingly, pursuant to the Manager, System Management Branch, filed in the docket. authority delegated to me, the Federal Aviation Administration proposes to AWP–530, Docket No. 95–AWP–2, Air Availability of NPRM Traffic Division, P.O. Box 92007, amend part 71 of the Federal Aviation Worldway Postal Center, Los Angeles, Any person may obtain a copy of this Regulations (14 CFR part 71) as follows: California, 90009. Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) The official docket may be examined by submitting a request to the Federal PART 71Ð[AMENDED] in the Office of the Assistant Chief Aviation Administration, System Management Branch, P.O. Box 92007, 1. The authority citation for part 71 Counsel, Western Pacific Region, continues to read as follows: Federal Aviation Administration, Room Worldway Postal Center, Los Angeles, 6007, 15000 Aviation Boulevard, California 90009. Communications must Authority: 49 U.S.C. app. 1348(a), 1354(a), 1510; E.O. 10854, 24 FR 9565, 3 CFR, 1959– Lawndale, California, 90261. identify the notice number of this NPRM. Persons interested in being 1963 Comp., p. 389; 49 U.S.C. 106(g); 14 CFR An informal docket may also be 11.69. examined during normal business hours placed on a mailing list for future at the Office of the Manager, System NPRM’s should also request a copy of § 71.1 [Amended] Management Branch, Air Traffic Advisory Circular No. 11–2A, which 2. The incorporation by reference in Division at the above address. describes the application procedures. 14 CFR 71.1 of the Federal Aviation FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: The Proposal Administration Order 7400.9B, Airspace Scott Speer, System Management The FAA is considering an Designations and Reporting Points, Specialist, System Management Branch, amendment to part 71 of the Federal dated July 18, 1994, and effective AWP–530, Air Traffic Division, Aviation Regulations (14 CFR part 71) to September 16, 1994, is amended as Western-Pacific Region, Federal modify the Class E airspace area at Luke follows: Aviation Administration, 15000 AFB, AZ, and Class D airspace area at Aviation Boulevard, Lawndale, Paragraph 6002 Class E Airspace Areas Glendale, AZ. The relocation of the Designated as a Surface Area for an Airport. California 90261, telephone (310) 297– Luke AFB TACAN has made this * * * * * 0010. proposal necessary. The intended effect SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: of this proposal is to provide adequate AWP AZ E2 Phoenix, Luke Air Force Base, Class E and Class D airspace for aircraft AZ [Revised] Comments Invited executing instrument approach Phoenix Luke Air Force Base, AZ Interested parties are invited to procedures at Luke AFB, AZ, and (Lat. 33°32′06′′ N, long. 112°22′59′′ W) participate in this proposed rulemaking Glendale, AZ. Class E and Class D Luke Air Force Base TACAN ° ′ ′′ ° ′ ′′ by submitting such written data, views, airspace designations are published in (Lat. 33 32 16 N, long. 112 22 49 W) or arguments as they may desire. paragraphs 6002 and 5000 of FAA Order That airspace extending upward from the Comments that provide the factual basis 7400.9B, dated July 1994, and effective surface to and including 3,600 feet MSL supporting the views and suggestions September 16, 1994, which is within a 4.4-mile radius of the Luke AFB and within 2 miles each side of the Luke TACAN presented are particularly helpful in incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 220° radial, extending from the 4.4-mile developing reasoned regulatory 71.1. The Class E and Class D airspace radius to 5.2 miles southwest of the Luke decisions on the proposal. Comments designations listed in this document TACAN, excluding that portion within the are specifically invited on the overall would be published subsequently in Glendale, AZ Class D airspace area. This regulatory, aeronautical, economic, this Order. Class E airspace area is effective during the 13932 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Proposed Rules specific dates and times established in and proposed amendment to that System (SPATS) No. MT–003–FOR). advance by a Notice to Airmen. The effective program are available for public Montana’s proposed amendment consist date and time will thereafter be continuously inspection, the comment period during of changes to the Montana program as published in the Airport/Facility Directory. which interested persons may submit required by 30 CFR 926.16; in response * * * * * written comments on the proposed to program deficiency letters from OSM Paragraph 5000 Class D Airspace amendment, and procedures that will be dated April 29, 1985, May 11, 1989, and * * * * * followed regarding the public hearing if March 29, 1990; and on its own one is requested. initiative. The Montana proposed AWP AZ D Glendale, AZ [Revised] DATES: Written comments must be amendment consists of changes to Title Glendale Municipal Airport, AZ 26, Chapter 4, Subchapters 3 through 12 ° ′ ′′ ° ′ ′′ received by 4:00 p.m., m.s.t. April 14, (Lat. 33 31 38 N, long. 112 17 42 W) 1995. If requested, a public hearing on of the State’s ARM. The proposed That airspace extending upward from the the proposed amendment will be held revisions and rule changes are located surface to including 3,100 feet MSL within a on April 10, 1995. Requests to present at: ARM 26.4.301, definitions; ARM 3-mile radius of the Glendale Municipal Airport excluding that portion west of a line oral testimony at the hearing must be 26.4.304, legal, financial, compliance beginning at lat. 33°29′00′′ N, long. received by 4:00 p.m., m.s.t. on March related information; ARM 26.4.304, 112°19′26′′ W; to lat. 33°29′29′′ N, long. 30, 1995. baseline information for environmental 112°19′29′′ W; to lat. 33°33′24′′ N, long. ADDRESSES: Written comments should resources; Arm 26.4.308, operation 112°18′04′′ W; to lat. 33°34′32′′ N, long. be mailed or hand delivered to Guy plans; ARM 26.314, plans for protection ° ′ ′′ 112 16 43 W. This class D airspace area is Padgett at the address listed below. of the hydrologic balance; ARM effective during the specific dates and times Copies of the Montana program, the 26.4.321, transportation facilities plans; established in advance by a Notice to Airmen. The effective date and time will proposed amendment, and all written ARM 26.4.304, review of applications; thereafter be continuously published in the comments received in response to this ARM 26.4.405, findings and notices of Airport/Facility Director. notice will be available for public decision; ARM 26.4.405A, * * * * * review at the addresses listed below improvidently issued permits general Issued in Los Angeles, California, on during normal business hours, Monday requirements; ARM 26.4.405B, March 3, 1995. through Friday, excluding holidays. improvidently issued permits: Dennis T. Koehler, Each requester may receive one free revocation; ARM 26.4.407, conditions of Acting Manager, Air Traffic Division, copy of the proposed amendment by permits; ARM 26.4.410, permit renewal; Western-Pacific Region. contacting OSM’s Casper Field Office. ARM 26.4.501A, final grading [FR Doc. 95–6381 Filed 3–14–95; 8:45 am] Guy Padgett, Director, Casper Field requirements; ARM 26.4.505, burial and BILLING CODE 4910±13±M Office, Office of Surface Mining treatment of waste materials; ARM Reclamation and Enforcement, 100 26.4.519A, thick overburden and excess East B Street, Room 2128, Casper, WY spoil; ARM 26.4.524, signs and markers; DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 82601–1918, Casper, WY 82601–1918, ARM 26.4.601, general requirements for Telephone: (307) 261–5776. road and railroad loop construction; Office of Surface Mining Reclamation Gary Amestoy, Administrator, Montana ARM 26.4.602, location of roads and and Enforcement Department of State Lands, railroad loops; ARM 26.4.603, Reclamation Division, Capitol Station, embankments; ARM 26.4.605, 30 CFR Part 926 1625 Eleventh Avenue, Helena, Hydrologic impacts of roads and Montana 59620, (406) 444–2074. railroad loops; ARM 26.4.623, blasting Montana Regulatory Program FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: schedules; ARM 26.4.633, water quality AGENCY: Office of Surface Mining Guy V. Padgett, Telephone: (307) 261– performance standards; ARM 26.4.634, Reclamation and Enforcement (OSM), 5776. reclamation of drainages; ARM 26.4.638, sediment control measures; ARM Interior. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 26.4.639, sedimentation ponds and ACTION: Proposed rule; public comment I. Background on the Montana Program period and opportunity for public other treatment facilities; ARM 26.4.642, hearing on proposed amendment. On April 1, 1980, the Secretary of the permanent and temporary Interior conditionally approved the impoundments; ARM 26.4.645, ground SUMMARY: OSM is announcing the Montana program as administered by water monitoring; ARM 26.4.646, receipt of a proposed amendment to the the Department of State Lands. General surface water monitoring; ARM Montana regulatory program background information on the Montana 26.4.702, redistribution and stockpiling (hereinafter, the ‘‘Montana program’’) program, including the Secretary’s of soil; ARM 26.4.711, establishment of under the Surface Mining Control and findings, the disposition of comments, vegetation; ARM 26.4.711, eradication Reclamation Act of 1977 (SMCRA). The and conditions of approval of the of rills and gullies; ARM 26.4.724, use proposed amendment consist of Montana program can be found in the of revegetation comparison standards; revisions to Title 26, Chapter 4, April 1, 1980, Federal Register (45 FR ARM 26.4.726, vegetation production, Subchapters 3 through 12 of the 21560). Subsequent actions concerning cover, diversity, density, and utility Administrative Rules of Montana Montana’s program and program requirements; ARM 26.4.821, alternate (ARM). The amendment is intended to amendments can be found at 30 CFR reclamation: submission of plan; ARM revise the Montana program to be 926.15 and 926.16. 26.4.825, alternate reclamation: consistent with the corresponding Alternate revegetation; ARM 26.4.924, Federal regulations, incorporate the II. Proposed Amendment disposal of underground development additional flexibility afforded by the By letters dated February 1, 1995, and waste: general requirements; ARM revised Federal regulations, clarify February 28, 1995, Montana submitted a 26.4.927, disposal of underground ambiguities, and improve operational proposed amendment to its program development waste: durable rock fills; efficiency pursuant to SMCRA (Administrative ARM 26.4.930, placement and disposal This document sets forth the times Record Nos. MT–12–01 and MT–12–05, of coal processing waste: special and locations that the Montana program State Program Amendment Tracking application requirements; ARM Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Proposed Rules 13933 26.4.923, disposal of coal processing —Revise ARM 26.4.407 to require —Revise ARM 26.4.642 to clarify when waste; ARM 26.4.1001, permit certain information from the inspection reports are needed for requirements; ARM 26.4.1001A, notice permittee when a cessation order has dams and embankments. of intent to prospect; ARM 26.4.1002, been issued. —Revise ARM 26.4.645 and .646 to information and monthly reports; ARM —Revise ARM 26.4.410 to clarify when require that sampling and water 26.4.1005, drill holes; ARM 26.4.1006, a permit need not be renewed. quality analysis be conducted in roads and other transportation facilities; —Revise ARM 26.4.501A to require that accordance with ‘‘Circular WOB–7, ARM 26.4.107, grading, soil salvage, grading and backfilling may not be Montana Numeric Water Quality storage, and redistribution; ARM more than four rather than two spoil Standards.’’ 26.4.1009, diversions; ARM 26.4.1011, ridges behind the pit being worked. —Revise ARM 26.4.702 to require the hydrologic balance; ARM 26.4.1014, test —Revise 26.4.505 concerning waste determination of the physicochemical pits: application requirements, review disposal structure location, design nature of surficial spoil material in procedures, bonding and additional criteria, and inspection requirements. soil prior to redistribution and to performance standards; ARM 26.4.1116, —Revise 26.4.519A to delete the scarify soil to a minimum 12-inch bonding: criteria and schedule for requirement that all highwalls and depth when replaced. release of bond; ARM 26.4.1116A, depressions must be eliminated when —Revise ARM 26.4.711 to require reassertion of jurisdiction; ARM mining in thick overburden. consultation and approval by certain 26.4.1141, designation of lands —Revise ARM 26.4.524 to require State agencies concerning cover, unsuitable; ARM 26.4.1206, notices, identification of the mine safety and planting, and stocking of vegetation orders of abatement and cessation health administration number and on certain land uses. orders: issuance and service; and ARM contractor identification (if —Revise ARM 26.4.721 to require 26.4.1212, point system for civil applicable) on mine area access signs. treatment of rills and gullies under penalties and waivers. —Revise ARM 26.4.601 to require a certain conditions. Specifically, Montana proposes to: report that roads have been —Revise ARM 26.4.724 to delete special —Revise ARM 26.4.301 to add the constructed or reconstructed in success of revegetation considerations definitions of ‘‘Owned or controlled’’ accordance with the approved plan. on operations of less than 100 acres. —Revise ARM 26.4.726 to require ‘‘live’’ and ‘‘Waste disposal structure;’’ to —Revise ARM 26.4.602 to identify modify the definition of ‘‘Test pit;’’ vegetative cover. when stream fords can be used. —Revise ARM 26.4.821 to allow and to recodify the numbering of —Revise ARM 26.4.603 to remove the definitions affected by this action. technical standards derived from ability for a registered land surveyor historical data for comparison when —Revise ARM 26.4.303 to require new to design and certify embankments information on ownership and releasing bond for alternate and require all embankments to have revegetation areas. control, and status of violations in the a minimum seismic safety factor of permit application requirements. —Revise ARM 26.4.825 to specify what 1.2. performance standard criteria is to be —Revise ARM 26.4.304 to clarify —Revise ARM 26.4.605 to require that baseline informational needs used on special use pasture. all roads used to haul coal or spoil or —Revise ARM 26.4.924 to clarify the regarding groundwater and surface be retained in the post mining land water resources in the permit applicability for use of waste disposal use, must meet certain design criteria structures plus design criteria that application. for water-control structures. —Revise ARM 26.4.308 to require cross must be met. —Revise ARM 26.4.623 to allow the sections, design drawings, and other —Revise ARM 26.4.927 to require that department to impose more restrictive specifications for other support durable rock fills meet a minimum conditions when explosives are to be facilities. safety factor of 1.5, rather than this —Revise ARM 26.4.314 to provide a list detonated. minimum factor at the end of of considerations when summarizing —Revise ARM 26.4.633, to correct an construction. the probable hydrologic consequences incorporated cite regarding —Revise ARM 26.4.930 to provide of the proposed mining operation. revegetation performance design information and impoundment —Revise ARM 26.4.321 to demonstrate requirements as related to sediment operation, demonstration of that transportation facilities are in control through BTCA practices. compliance with performance compliance with performance —Revise ARM 26.4.634 to clarify standards, results and analysis of standards. drainage systems/drainage channel geotechnical investigations, stability —Revise ARM 26.4.404 to identify reclamation requirements and when analysis, and description under what situations the department detailed reclamation plans prior to assumptions/calculations of design would conditionally issued a permit. reclaiming a drainage channel is options and considerations in —Revise ARM 26.4.405 to require the required. selection of specific design applicant to provide any new —Revise ARM 26.4.638 to correct an parameters for coal processing waste information regarding ownership/ incorporated citation on revegetation impoundments. control and violations prior to making performance standards in relation to —Revise ARM 26.4.932 to clarify the a decision to approve the permit sedimentation control measures. inspection requirements for coal application. —Revise ARM 26.4.639 to allow for a processing waste disposal areas. —Provide new rule requirements at single spillway in the construction of —Revise ARM 26.4.1001 to clarify that ARM 26.4.405A to allow the sedimentation ponds, provide design a prospecting permit will be required department to consider, if it has criteria/size relationship when a when areas designated as unsuitable reason to believe, that a permit has spillway is not needed, require that a for mining are involved; that been improvidently issued. sediment pond constructed per 30 ethnological values, pits and disposal —Provide new rule requirements at CFR 77.216(a) must meet certain areas for extracted materials, and ARM 26.4.405B concerning spillway discharge standards, and roads/access routes must be revocation of an improvidently issued delete certain requirement before a identified; that the yearly prospecting permit. sedimentation pond can be removed. permit is subject to renewal, 13934 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Proposed Rules suspension, and revocation; and that 732.15. If the amendment is deemed IV. Procedural Determinations a copy of the permit must be available adequate, it will become part of the Executive Order 12866 for review by the department upon Montana program. request. This rule is exempted from review by —Provide new rule requirements at Written Comments the Office of Management and Budget ARM 26.4.1001 for filing of a notice Written comments should be specific, (OMB) under Executive Order 12866 of intent to prospect. pertain only to the issues proposed in (Regulatory Planning and Review). —Revise ARM 26.4.1002 to clarify this rulemaking, and include Executive Order 12778 informational requirements and report explanations in support of the requirements concerning prospecting commenter’s recommendations. The Department of the Interior has activities. Comments received after the time conducted the reviews required by —Revise ARM 26.4.1005 to specify indicated under DATES or at locations section 2 of Executive Order 12778 requirements for treatment of drill other than the Casper Field Office will (Civil Justice Reform) and has holes upon completion of exploration not necessarily be considered in the determined that, this rule meets the when circulation is not lost and detail final rulemaking or included in the applicable standards of subsection (a) description requirements for wells administrative record. and (b) of that section. However, these and drill holes that are to be retained standards are not applicable to the after exploration. Public Hearing actual language of State regulatory —Revise ARM 26.4.1006 to include Persons wishing to testify at the programs and program amendments consideration and performance public hearing should contact the since each such program is drafted and requirements for other transportation person listed under FOR FURTHER promulgated by a specific State, not by facilities involved in prospecting. INFORMATION CONTACT by 4:00 p.m., OSM. Under sections 503 and 505 of —Revise ARM 26.4.1007 to require that m.s.t. March 30, 1995. Any disabled SMCRA (30 U.S.C. 1253 and 1255) and excavations or embankments created individual who has need for a special the Federal regulations at 30 CFR during prospecting must be reclaimed accommodation to attend a public 730.11, 732.15, and 732.17(h)(1)), to the approximate original contour. hearing should contact the individual decisions on proposed State regulatory —Revise ARM 26.4.1009 to require that listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION programs and program amendments diversions needed in prospecting, CONTACT. The location and time of the submitted by the States must be based meet applicable performance hearing will be arranged with those solely on a determination of whether the standards at ARM 26.4.635 and .636. persons requesting the hearing. If no one submittal is consistent with SMCRA and —Revise ARM 26.4.10011 to require requests an opportunity to testify at the its implementing Federal regulations that the prevailing hydrologic balance public hearing, the hearing will not be and whether the other requirements of in prospecting be minimized in held. 30 CFR Parts 730, 731, and 732 have accordance with ARM 26.4.631 Filing of a written statement at the been met. through .634 and .638 through .651. time of the hearing is requested as it —Revise ARM 26.4.1014 to demonstrate National Environmental Policy Act will greatly assist the transcriber. that a test pit is necessary and include No environmental impact statement is Submission of written statements in such information as the name of the required for this rule since section advance of the hearing will allow OSM firm doing the testing, types of tests, 702(d) of SMCRA [30 U.S.C. 1292(d)] officials to prepare adequate responses amount of mineral needed, that provides that agency decisions on and appropriate questions. sufficient reserves are available for proposed State regulatory program future markets, and why other means The public hearing will continue on provisions do not constitute major of prospecting are not adequate to the specified date until all persons Federal actions within the meaning of determine feasibility. scheduled to comment have been heard. section 102(2)(C) of the National —Revise ARM 26.4.1116 to incorporate Persons in the audience who have not Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C. revegetation performance standards been scheduled to testify, and who wish 4332(2)(C)). that need to be met for bond release. to do so, will be heard following those Paperwork Reduction Act —Provide new rule at ARM 26.4.1116A who have been scheduled. The hearing to allow the department reassertion of will end after all persons scheduled to This rule does not contain jurisdiction. testify and persons present in the information collection requirements that —Revise ARM 26.4.1141 to correct the audience who wish to testify have been require approval by the Office of definition of ‘‘national’’ to ‘‘natural’’ heard. Management and Budget under the hazard lands. Public Meeting Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. —Revise ARM 26.4.1206 to require the 3507 et seq.). department to notify owners and If only one person requests an Regulatory Flexibility Act controllers that a cessation order or opportunity to testify at a hearing, a noncompliance notice has been public meeting, rather than a public The Department of the Interior has issued the mining operation. hearing, may be held. Persons wishing determined that this rule will not have —Revise ARM 26.4.1212 to clarify when to meet with OSM representatives to a significant economic impact on a a violation must be counted in the discuss the proposed amendment may substantial number of small entities ‘‘history of recent violations’’ review request a meeting by contacting the under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 during the assessment of penalties. person listed under FOR FURTHER U.S.C. 601 et seq.). The State submittal INFORMATION CONTACT. All such meetings that is the subject of this rule is based II. Public Comment Procedures will be open to the public and, if upon counterpart Federal regulations for In accordance with the provisions of possible, notices of meetings will be which an economic analysis was 30 CFR 732.17(h), OSM is seeking posted at the locations listed under prepared and certification made that comments on whether the proposed ADDRESSES. A written summary of each such regulations would not have a amendment satisfies the applicable meeting will be made a part of the significant economic effect upon a program approval criteria of 30 CFR administrative record. substantial number of small entities. Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Proposed Rules 13935 Accordingly, this rule will ensure that Surface Mining Reclamation and and insects, (4) reseeding and/or existing requirements previously Enforcement, 505 Marquette Avenue, replanting as a result of third-party promulgated by OSM will be NW., Suite 1200, Albuquerque, New interference or natural disasters, implemented by the State. In making the Mexico 87102 excluding climatic variation and determination as to whether this rule Utah Coal Regulatory Program, Division including vandalism which is not would have a significant economic of Oil, Gas, and Mining, 355 West caused by any lack of planning, design, impact, the Department relied upon the North Temple, 3 Triad Center, Suite or implementation of the mining and data and assumptions for the 350, Salt Lake City, Utah 84180–1203, reclamation plan, wildfires, earth counterpart Federal regulations. Telephone: (801) 538–5340. quakes, and mass movement originating List of Subjects in 30 CFR Part 926 FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: outside the disturbed area, (5) limited Thomas E. Ehmett, Telephone: (505) irrigation, and (6) limited repair of Intergovernmental relations, Surface 766–1486. highly erodible areas and rills and mining, Underground mining. gullies. Utah also proposes to revise its SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Dated: March 8, 1995. ‘‘Vegetation Information Guidelines’’ by Charles E. Sandberg, I. Background on the Utah Program adding Appendix C, a bibliography of Acting Assistant Director, Western Support On January 21, 1981, the Secretary of referenced publications supporting the Center. the Interior conditionally approved the proposed normal husbandry practices. [FR Doc. 95–6302 Filed 3–14–95; 8:45 am] Utah program. General background III. Public Comment Procedures BILLING CODE 4310±05±M information on the Utah program, In accordance with the provisions of including the Secretary’s findings, the 30 CFR 732.17(h), OSM is seeking disposition of comments, and the 30 CFR Part 944 comments on whether the proposed conditions of approval of the Utah amendment satisfies the applicable Utah Regulatory Program program can be found in the January 21, program approval criteria of 30 CFR 1981, Federal Register (46 FR 5899). 732.15. If the amendment is deemed AGENCY: Office of Surface Mining Subsequent actions concerning Utah’s adequate, it will become part of the Reclamation and Enforcement (OSM), program and program amendments can Utah program. Interior. be found at 30 CFR 944.15, 944.16, and ACTION: Proposed rule; public comment 944.30. 1. Written Comments period and opportunity for public II. Proposed Amendment Written comments should be specific, hearing on proposed amendment. pertain only to the issues proposed in By letter dated February 6, 1995, Utah this rulemaking, and include SUMMARY: OSM is announcing receipt of submitted a proposed amendment to its explanations in support of the a proposed amendment to the Utah program pursuant to SMCRA commenter’s recommendations. regulatory program (hereinafter, the (administrative record No. UT–1025). Comments received after the time ‘‘Utah program’’) under the Surface Utah submitted the proposed indicated under DATES or at locations Mining Control and Reclamation Act of amendment at its own initiative. Utah 1977 (SMCRA). The proposed other than the Albuquerque Field Office proposes to revise its Coal Mining Rules will not necessarily be considered in the amendment consists of revisions to at Utah Administrative (Utah Admin. rules pertaining to permit application final rulemaking or included in the R.) 645–301–321.100 and .200, 645– administrative record. requirements and normal husbandry 301–322.332, and 645–301–342.352, practices and Utah’s ‘‘Vegetation concerning permit application 2. Public Hearing Information Guidelines.’’ The requirements, and Utah Admin. R. 645– Persons wishing to testify at the amendment is intended to improve 301–357.300 through 365, concerning public hearing should contact the operational efficiency. normal husbandry practices. Utah also person listed under FOR FURTHER DATES: Written comments must be proposes to revise its ‘‘Vegetation INFORMATION CONTACT by 4:00 p.m., received by 4:00 p.m., m.d.t. April 14, Information Guidelines,’’ concerning a m.s.t. on March 30, 1995. Any disabled 1995. If requested, a public hearing on Bibliography of referenced publications individual who has need for a special the proposed amendment will be held for the proposed normal husbandry accommodation to attend a public on April 10, 1995. Requests to present practices. hearing should contact the individual oral testimony at the hearing must be Specifically, Utah proposes to revise listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION received by 4:00 p.m., m.s.t. on March Utah Admin. R. 645–301–321.100 and CONTACT. The location and time of the 30, 1995. .200, 645–301–322.332, and 645–301– hearing will be arranged with those ADDRESSES: Written comments should 342.352 by adding the terms ‘‘surface persons requesting the hearing. If no one be mailed or hand delivered to Thomas coal mining and reclamation activities’’ requests an opportunity to testify at the E. Ehmett at the address listed below. and/or ‘‘underground coal mining and public hearing, the hearing will not be Copies of the Utah program, the reclamation activities;’’ Utah Admin. R. held. proposed amendment, and all written 645–301–357.300 by deleting existing Filing of a written statement at the comments received in response to this general information concerning Utah’s time of the hearing is requested as it document will be available for public authority to approve selective will greatly assist the transcriber. review at the addresses listed below husbandry practices; and Utah Admin. Submission of written statements in during normal business hours, Monday R. 645–301–357.301 through .365 by advance of the hearing will allow OSM through Friday, excluding holidays. adding, as proposed normal husbandry officials to prepare adequate responses Each requester may receive one free practices, (1) Limited reseeding or and appropriate questions. copy of the proposed amendment by replanting of trees or shrubs, (2) The public hearing will continue on contacting OSM’s Albuquerque Field chemical, mechanical , and biological the specified date until all persons Office. weed control and associated scheduled to testify have been heard. Thomas E. Ehmett, Acting Director, revegetation, (3) control of pests Persons in the audience who have not Albuquerque Field Office, Office of including big game, small mammals, been scheduled to testify, and who wish 13936 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Proposed Rules to do so, will be heard following those 4. Paperwork Reduction Act Management Division, 1155 Defense who have been scheduled. The hearing This rule does not contain Pentagon, Washington, DC 20301–1155. will end after all persons scheduled to information collection requirements that FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. testify and persons present in the require approval by OMB under the Dan Cragg at (703) 695–0970. audience who wish to testify have been Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: heard. 3507 et seq.). Executive Order 12866 3. Public Meeting 5. Regulatory Flexibility Act The Director, Administration and If only one person requests an The Department of the Interior has Management, Office of the Secretary of opportunity to testify at a hearing, a determined that this rule will not have Defense has determined that this public meeting, rather than a public a significant economic impact on a proposed Privacy Act rule for the hearing, may be held. Persons wishing substantial number of small entities Department of Defense does not to meet with OSM representatives to under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 constitute ’significant regulatory action’. discuss the proposed amendment may U.S.C. 601 et seq.). The State submittal request a meeting by contacting the Analysis of the rule indicates that it that is the subject of this rule is based does not have an annual effect on the person listed under FOR FURTHER upon counterpart Federal regulations for economy of $100 million or more; does INFORMATION CONTACT. All such meetings which an economic analysis was will be open to the public and, if not create a serious inconsistency or prepared and certification made that possible, notices of meetings will be otherwise interfere with an action taken such regulations would not have a posted at the locations listed under or planned by another agency; does not significant economic effect upon a ADDRESSES. A written summary of each materially alter the budgetary impact of substantial number of small entities. meeting will be made a part of the entitlements, grants, user fees, or loan Accordingly, this rule will ensure that administrative record. programs or the rights and obligations of existing requirements previously recipients thereof; does not raise novel IV. Procedural Determinations promulgated by OSM will be legal or policy issues arising out of legal 1. Executive Order 12866 implemented by the State. In making the mandates, the President’s priorities, or determination as to whether this rule the principles set forth in Executive This rule is exempted from review by would have a significant economic Order 12866 (1993). the Office of Management and Budget impact, the Department relied upon the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (OMB) under Executive Order 12866 data and assumptions for the The Director, Administration and (Regulatory Planning and Review). counterpart Federal regulations. Management, Office of the Secretary of 2. Executive Order 12778 List of Subjects in 30 CFR Part 944 Defense certifies that this Privacy Act The Department of the Interior has Intergovernmental relations, Surface rule for the Department of Defense does conducted the reviews required by mining, Underground mining. not have significant economic impact on section 2 of Executive Order 12778 a substantial number of small entities (Civil Justice Reform) and has Dated: March 7, 1995. because it is concerned only with the determined that this rule meets the Charles E. Sandberg, administration of Privacy Act systems of applicable standards of subsections (a) Acting Assistant Director, Western Support records within the Department of and (b) of that section. However, these Center. Defense. standards are not applicable to the [FR Doc. 95–6301 Filed 3–14–95; 8:45 am] Paperwork Reduction Act BILLING CODE 4310±05±M actual language of State regulatory The Director, Administration and programs and program amendments Management, Office of the Secretary of since each such program is drafted and Defense certifies that this Privacy Act promulgated by a specific State, not by DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE proposed rule for the Department of OSM. Under sections 503 and 505 of Defense imposes no information SMCRA (30 U.S.C. 1253 and 1255) and Office of the Secretary requirements beyond the Department of the Federal regulations at 30 CFR Defense and that the information 730.11, 732.15, and 732.17(h)(10), 32 CFR Part 311 collected within the Department of decisions on proposed State regulatory Privacy Program Defense is necessary and consistent programs and program amendments with 5 U.S.C. 552a, known as the submitted by the States must be based AGENCY: Office of the Secretary, DOD. Privacy Act of 1974. solely on a determination of whether the ACTION: Proposed rule. submittal is consistent with SMCRA and The DoD General Counsel performs SUMMARY: its implementing Federal regulations The Office of the Secretary of suitability screening of individuals and whether the other requirements of Defense proposes to exempt a system of seeking, or who have been 30 CFR parts 730, 731, and 732 have records identified as DGC 16, entitled recommended for, non-career positions been met. Political Appointment Vetting Files. within the DoD. Confidentialilty is The DoD General Counsel performs needed to maintain the Government’s 3. National Environmental Policy Act suitability screening of individuals continued access to information from No environmental impact statement is seeking, or who have been persons who otherwise might refuse to required for this rule since section recommended for, non-career positions give it. During the screening process, 702(d) of SMCRA (30 U.S.C. 1292(d)) within the DoD. investigatory material is compiled for provides that agency decisions on EFFECTIVE DATE: Comments must be the purpose of determining the proposed State regulatory program received no later than May 15, 1995, to suitability of candidates for Schedule ‘C’ provisions do not constitute major be considered by the agency. positions, taking character, security and Federal actions within the meaning of ADDRESSES: Send comments to the OSD other personal suitability factors into section 102(2)(C) of the National Privacy Act Officer, Washington account. This exemption is limited to Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 Headquarter Services, Correspondence disclosures that would reveal the U.S.C. 4332(2)(C)). and Directives Division, Records identity of a confidential source. Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Proposed Rules 13937 List of Subjects in 32 CFR Part 311 Louisiana for the purpose of bringing Dated: March 3, 1995. about the attainment of the national Jane N. Saginaw, Privacy. ambient air quality standard (NAAQS) Regional Administrator. Accordingly, 32 CFR part 311 is for ozone. The inventories were [FR Doc. 95–6300 Filed 3–14–95; 8:45 am] amended as follows: submitted by the State to satisfy certain BILLING CODE 6560±50±P 1. The authority citation for 32 CFR Federal requirements for an approvable part 311 continues to read as follows: nonattainment area (NAA) ozone State Authority: Pub. L. 93–579, 88 Stat 1896 (5 Implementation Plan (SIP) for the Baton 40 CFR Part 60 U.S.C.552a). Rouge and Calcasieu Parish areas of [AD-FRL±5172±8] 2. Section 311.7, paragraph (c)(1) is Louisiana. added as follows: In the final rules section of this RIN 2060±AC62 Federal Register, the EPA is approving § 311.7 Procedures for exemptions. the State’s SIP revision as a direct final Standards of Performance for New * * * * * rule without prior proposal because the Stationary Sources and Emission c. Specific exemptions. * * * Agency views this as a noncontroversial Guidelines for Existing Sources: (1) System identifier and name--DGC amendment and anticipates no adverse Medical Waste Incinerators; Public 16, Political Appointment Vetting Files. comments. A detailed rationale for the Hearing Exemption. Portions of this system of approval is set forth in the direct final AGENCY: Environmental Protection records that fall within the provisions of rule. If no adverse comments are Agency. 5 U.S.C. 552a(k)(5) may be exempt from received in response to this proposed ACTION: Notice of public hearing. the following subsections (d)(1) through rule, no further activity is contemplated (d)(5). in relation to this rule. If the EPA SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Authority. 5 U.S.C. 552a(k)(5). receives adverse comments, the direct Agency (EPA) will hold a public hearing Reasons. From (d)(1) through (d)(5) final rule will be withdrawn, and all to allow interested parties the because the agency is required to protect public comments received will be opportunity to offer oral testimony on the confidentiality of sources who addressed in a subsequent final rule recently proposed air emission furnished information to the based on this proposed rule. The EPA standards and guidelines for medical Government under an expressed will not institute a second comment waste incinerators (MWI’s). promise of confidentiality or, prior to period on this action. Any parties DATES: Public Hearing. The public September 27, 1975, under an implied interested in commenting on this action hearing will be held on March 28, 1995, promise that the identity of the source should do so at this time. beginning at 9:00 a.m. Eastern Standard would be held in confidence. This DATES: Comments on this proposed rule Time. If necessary, the hearing will confidentiality is needed to maintain must be received in writing by April 14, continue on March 29, 1995 to allow all the Government’s continued access to 1995. parties the opportunity to speak. information from persons who Request to Speak at Hearing. Persons otherwise might refuse to give it. This ADDRESSES: Written comments on this wishing to present oral testimony at the exemption is limited to disclosures that action should be addressed to Mr. Guy public hearing must call Ms. Julia Latta would reveal the identity of a Donaldson, Acting Chief, Planning at (919) 541–5578 on or before March confidential source. Section, at the EPA Regional Office 22, 1995. * * * * * listed below. Copies of the documents relevant to this action are available for ADDRESSES: The public hearing will be Dated: March 7, 1995. public inspection during normal held at the Best Western Olde Colony business hours at the following Inn, 625 First Street, Alexandria, locations. The interested persons Virginia, telephone (703) 548–6300. L. M. Bynum, wanting to examine these documents Persons interested in attending the Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison should make an appointment with the hearing or wishing to present oral Officer, Department of Defense. appropriate office at least 24 hours testimony should notify Ms. Julia Latta, [FR Doc. 95–6422 Filed 03–14–95; 8:45 am] before the visiting day. Emission Standards Division (MD–13), BILLING CODE 5000±04±F U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina Region 6, Air Programs Branch (6T– 27711, telephone (919) 541–5578. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION A), 1445 Ross Avenue, Suite 700, Dallas, Texas 75202–2733. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. AGENCY Rick Copland at (919) 541–5265 or Mr. Louisiana Department of Environmental Fred Porter at (919) 541–5251, Emission 40 CFR Part 52 Quality, Air Quality Division, 7290 Standards Division (MD–13), U.S. EPA, Bluebonnet, Baton Rouge, Louisiana [LA±10±1±5937b; FRL±5172±3] Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 70810. 27711. Approval and Promulgation of FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On Implementation Plan: Louisiana 1990 Herbert R. Sherrow, Jr., Planning February 27, 1995 standards of Base Year Ozone Emissions Section (6T–AP), Air Programs Branch, performance limiting air pollution Inventories U.S. EPA Region 6, 1445 Ross Avenue, emissions from new MWI’s and Dallas, Texas 75202–2733, telephone AGENCY: Environmental Protection emission guidelines initiating State (214) 665–7237. Agency (EPA). action to reduce air pollution from ACTION: Proposed rule. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: See the existing MWI’s were proposed in the information provided in the Direct Final Federal Register (60 FR 10654). In the SUMMARY: The EPA is proposing to action of the same title which is located February 27 document, the EPA stated approve the 1990 base year ozone in the Rules Section of the Federal that a public hearing would be held in emission inventories submitted by Register. the Washington, D.C. area in mid- to 13938 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Proposed Rules late-March 1995. The purpose of the Suite 500, Denver, Colorado 80202– Jefferson Davis Hwy., Arlington, VA public hearing is to allow interested 2466 and concurrently to Russell A. 22202. parties an opportunity to offer oral Roberts, Director, Division of Air Information submitted as a comment testimony on the proposed standards Quality, Department of Environmental concerning this notice may be claimed and guidelines for MWI’s. The purpose Quality, 1950 West North Temple, Salt confidential by marking any part or all of this notice is to provide specific Lake City, Utah 84114–4820. Copies of of that information as ‘‘Confidential information regarding the date, time, State of Utah’s submittal are available Business Information’’ (CBI). and location of the public hearing. The for public inspection during normal Information so marked will not be hearing is open to the public. Seating business hours at the above locations. disclosed except in accordance with will be on a first-come, first-served FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: T. procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2. basis. Speakers are asked to limit their Scott Whitmore at (303) 293–1758. A copy of the comment that does not testimony to 15 minutes. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: See the contain CBI must be submitted for Dated: March 6, 1995. information provided in the final action inclusion in the public record. Information not marked confidential Mary D. Nichols, which is located in the final rules section of this Federal Register. may be disclosed publicly by EPA Assistant Administrator for Air and without prior notice. All written Radiation. List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 61 comments will be available for public [FR Doc. 95–6389 Filed 3–14–95; 8:45 am] Environmental protection, Air inspection in Rm. 1132 at the address BILLING CODE 6560±50±P pollution control, Intergovernmental given above, from 8 a.m. to 4 p.m., relations, Radiation protection. Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. 40 CFR Part 61 Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7412. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dated: February 23, 1995. By [FRL±5169±8] mail: Robert J. Taylor, Product Manager Kerrigan Clough, (PM) 25, Registration Division (7505C), Approval of Delegation of Authority; Acting Regional Administrator, Region VIII. Office of Pesticide Programs, National Emission Standards for [FR Doc. 95–5977 Filed 3–14–95; 8:45 am] Environmental Protection Agency, 401 Hazardous Air Pollutants; BILLING CODE 6560±50±P M St. SW., Washington, DC 20460. Radionuclides; Utah Office location and telephone number: AGENCY: Environmental Protection Rm. 241, CM #2, 1921 Jefferson Davis 40 CFR Part 180 Agency (EPA). Hwy., Arlington, VA 22202, (703)-305- ACTION: Proposed rule. [PP 8F3658/P605; FRL±4936±5] 6800. RIN 2070±AC18 SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In the SUMMARY: EPA proposes to grant Federal Register of March 13, 1992 (57 delegation of authority to the State of Pesticide Tolerances for Triasulfuron FR 8844), EPA issued a final rule which Utah to implement and enforce five established tolerances for residues of the National Emission Standards for AGENCY: Environmental Protection herbicide triasulfuron, [3-(6-methoxy-4- Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) for Agency (EPA). methyl-1,3,5-triazin-2-yl)-1-(2-(2- radionuclides. The Governor of Utah ACTION: Proposed rule. chloroethoxy)phenylsulfonyl)urea], in requested delegation from EPA Region or on barley and wheat grain at 0.02 VIII in a letter dated June 4, 1993. In the SUMMARY: EPA proposes to establish ppm; barley or wheat forage at 5.0 ppm; final rules section of this Federal permanent tolerances for residues of the barley and wheat straw at 20 ppm; meat, Register, EPA is approving the State of herbicide triasulfuron, [3-(6-methoxy-4- fat, and meat byproducts (excluding Utah’s request for delegation as a direct methyl-1,3,5-triazin-2-yl)-1-(2-(2- kidney) of cattle, goats, hogs, horses, final rule without prior proposal chloroethoxy)phenylsulfonyl)urea], in and sheep at 0.1 ppm; and milk at 0.02 because EPA views this as a or on barley and wheat grain at 0.02 part ppm, with an expiration date of March noncontroversial action and anticipates per million (ppm); barley and wheat 13, 1995. In the Federal Register of no adverse comments. EPA’s rationale straw at 2.0 ppm; barley and wheat August 31, 1994 (59 FR 44931), the for the approval is set forth in the direct forage at 5.0 ppm; meat, fat, and meat Agency issued a notice extending these final rule. If no adverse comments are byproducts (excluding kidney) of cattle, tolerances until March 13, 1996. These received in response to this proposed goats, hogs, horses, and sheep at 0.1 tolerances with an expiration date were rule, no further activity is contemplated ppm; kidney of cattle, goats, horses, and required by EPA to allow the peititioner, in relation to this rule. If EPA receives sheep at 0.2 ppm; and milk at 0.02 ppm. Ciba-Geigy Corp., to submit additional adverse comments, the direct final rule Ciba-Geigy has fulfilled certain testing data required for environmental fate and will be withdrawn and all public requirements, and EPA proposes to groundwater, and to allow the Agency comments received will be addressed in change to permanent tolerances the to complete the regulatory assessment of a subsequent final rule based on this current time-limited tolerances. EPA’s scientific findings. The petitioner proposed rule. EPA will not institute a DATES: Comments, identified by the has submitted all the required data. The second comment period on this action. document control number [PP 8F3658/ Agency has completed the regulatory Any parties interested in commenting P605], must be received on or before assessment of the data and determined on this action should do so at this time. April 14, 1995. that adequate work has been done to DATES: Comments on this proposed rule ADDRESSES: By mail, submit written fulfill these requirements. EPA is must be received in writing by April 14, comments to: Public Response and preparing to amend 40 CFR 180.459 to 1995. Program Resources Branch, Field establish permanent tolerances on the ADDRESSES: Written comments should Operations Division (7506C), Office of wheat, barley, and animal commodities. be submitted to Patricia D. Hull, Pesticide Programs, Environmental Based on the information cited above Director, Air, Radiation & Toxics Protection Agency, 401 M St., SW., and in the document establishing the Division, Environmental Protection Washington, DC 20460. In person, bring time-limited tolerances for triasulfuron Agency, Region VIII, 999 18th Street, comments to: Rm. 1132, CM #2, 1921 (57 FR 8844, March 13, 1992 and 59 FR Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Proposed Rules 13939 44931, August 31, 1994), EPA has Dated: February 15, 1995. SUMMARY: EPA proposes to establish determined that when used in Stephen L. Johnson, tolerances for residues of the desiccant, accordance with good agricultural defoliant, and herbicide paraquat in or Director, Registration Division, Office of on the raw agricultural commodities practice, this ingredient is useful and Pesticide Programs. that the tolerances will protect the lentils, lentil forage, and lentil hay. The public health. Therefore, EPA is Therefore, it is proposed that 40 CFR proposed regulation to establish proposing to establish permanent part 180 be amended as follows: maximum permissible levels for tolerances as set forth below. residues of the herbicide was requested PART 180Ð[AMENDED] Any person who has registered or in a petition submitted by the submitted an application for registration 1. The authority citation for part 180 Interregional Research Project No. 4 (IR- of a pesticide, under the Federal continues to read as follows: 4). DATES: Comments, identified by the Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Authority: 21 U.S.C. 346a and 371. Act (FIFRA) as amended, which document control number, [PP 4E4359/ contains any of the ingredients listed 2. By revising § 180.459, to read as P604], must be received on or before herein, may request within 30 days after follows: April 14, 1995. publication of this document in the § 180.459 Triasulfuron; tolerances for ADDRESSES: By mail, submit written Federal Register that this rulemaking residues. comments to: Public Response and Program Resources Branch, Field proposal be referred to an Advisory Tolerances are established for Operations Division (7506C), Office of Committee in accordance with section residues of the herbicide triasulfuron, Pesticide Programs, Environmental 408(e) of the Federal Food, Drug, and [3-(6-methoxy-4-methyl-1,3,5-triazin-2- Protection Agency, 401 M St., SW., Cosmetic Act. yl)-1-(2-(2- Washington, DC 20460. In person, bring Interested persons are invited to chloroethoxy)phenylsulfonyl)urea] in or comments to: Rm. 1132, CM #2, 1921 submit written comments on the on the following raw agricultural Jefferson Davis Hwy., Arlington, VA proposed regulation. Comments must commodities: 22202. bear a notation indicating the document Information submitted as a comment control number, [PP 8F3658/P605]. All Parts per Commodity million concerning this notice may be claimed written comments filed in response to confidential by marking any part or all this petition will be available in the Barley, forage ...... 5.0 of that information as ‘‘Confidential Public Response and Program Resources Barley, grain ...... 0.02 Business Information’’ (CBI). Branch, at the address given above, from Barley, straw ...... 2.0 Information so marked will not be 8 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through Cattle, fat ...... 0.1 disclosed except in accordance with Friday, except legal holidays. Cattle, kidney ...... 0.2 procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2. Cattle, mbyp (except kidney) .... 0.1 The Office of Management and Budget A copy of the comment that does not has exempted this rule from the Cattle, meat ...... 0.1 Goats, fat ...... 0.1 contain CBI must be submitted for requirements of section 3 of Executive Goats, kidney ...... 0.2 inclusion in the public record. Order 12866. Pursuant to the Goats, mbyp (except kidney) .... 0.1 Information not marked confidential requirements of the Regulatory Goats, meat ...... 0.1 may be disclosed publicly by EPA Flexibility Act (Pub. L. 96-354, 94 Stat. Hogs, fat ...... 0.1 without prior notice. All written 1164, 5 U.S.C. 601-612), the Hogs, kidney ...... 0.2 comments will be available for public Administrator has determined that Hogs, mbyp (except kidney) ..... 0.1 inspection in Rm. 1132 at the address regulations establishing exemptions Hogs, meat ...... 0.1 given above, from 8 a.m. to 4 p.m., Horses, fat ...... 0.1 from tolerance requirements do not have Monday through Friday, excluding legal a significant impact on a substantial Horses, kidney ...... 0.2 Horses, mbyp (except kidney) .. 0.1 holidays. number of small entities. A certification Horses, meat ...... 0.1 FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: By statement to this effect was published in Milk ...... 0.02 mail: Hoyt L. Jamerson, Registration the Federal Register of May 4, 1981 (46 Sheep, fat8 ...... 0.1 Division (7505W), Office of Pesticide FR 24950). Sheep, kidney ...... 0.2 Programs, Environmental Protection Pursuant to the requirements of the Sheep, mbyp (except kidney) ... 0.1 Agency, 401 M St. SW., Washington, DC Regulatory Flexibility Act (Pub. L. 96- Sheep, meat ...... 0.1 20460. Office location and telephone 354, 94 Stat. 1164, 5 U.S.C. 601-612), Wheat, forage ...... 5.0 Wheat, grain ...... 0.02 number: Sixth Floor, Crystal Station #1, the Administrator has determined that Wheat, straw ...... 2.0 2800 Jefferson Davis Hwy., Arlington, regulations establishing new tolerances VA 22202, (703)-308-8783. or raising tolerance levels or [FR Doc. 95–6417 Filed 3–14–95; 8:45 am] SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The establishing exemptions from tolerance BILLING CODE 6560±50±F Interregional Research Project No. 4 (IR- requirements do not have a significant 4), New Jersey Agricultural Experiment economic impact on a substantial Station, P.O. Box 231, Rutgers number of small entities. A certification 40 CFR Part 180 University, New Brunswick, NJ 08903, statement to this effect was published in has submitted pesticide petition (PP) the Federal Register of May 4, 1981 (46 [PP 4E4359/P604; FRL±4936±3] 4E4359 to EPA on behalf of the FR 24950). Agricultural Experiment Stations of RIN 2070±AC18 List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180 Idaho and Washington. This petition Pesticide Tolerance for Paraquat requests that the Administrator, Environmental protection, pursuant to section 408(e) of the Federal Administrative practice and procedure, AGENCY: Environmental Protection Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA), Agricultural commodities, Pesticides Agency (EPA). 21 U.S.C. 346a(e), amend 40 CFR and pests, Reporting and recordkeeping 180.205 by establishing tolerances for ACTION: Proposed rule. requirements. residues of paraquat (1,1’-dimethyl-4,4’- 13940 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Proposed Rules bipyridinium-ion) derived from increased potassium and glucose in and mouse carcinogenicity studies) and application of either the bis (methyl females; decreased absolute and/or further evaluated the tumors in the male sulfate) or the dichloride salt (both relative weights of heart (males and rats. Based on all the information, the calculated as the cation), in or on the females), liver and brain (females); and Agency concluded that there is no raw agricultural commodities lentils at increased absolute weights of kidneys evidence of carcinogenicity in male 0.3 part per million (ppm), lentil forage (males and females) at the highest dose Wistar rats at 12 mg/kg/day (HDT) and at 0.1 ppm, and lentil hay at 0.4 ppm. tested (HDT) (equivalent to 15 mg/kg/ female Wistar rats at 15 mg/kg/day. The The scientific data submitted in the day). There was no evidence of Agency concluded that there was at best petition and other relevant material carcinogenicity observed under the equivocal evidence of carcinogenicity in have been evaluated. The toxicological conditions of the study. male Fisher rats at 7.5 mg/kg/day and data considered in support of the 5. A developmental toxicity study in that this equivocal evidence was proposed tolerances include: rats given gavage dosages of 1, 5, and 10 associated with irritation due to topical 1. A 1-year feeding study in dogs fed mg paraquat ion/kg of body weight from exposure, and not with oral exposure. diets containing 0, 15, 30, and 50 ppm day 6 through day 15 of pregnancy with Paraquat was, therefore, placed in (equivalent to 0, 0.45, 0.93, and 1.51 NOEL’s for fetotoxic effects and Category E (not a human carcinogen). milligrams/kilogram (mg/kg) of body maternal toxicity of 1.0 mg/kg/day. The Because paraquat is a restricted-use weight (bwt) day with a no-observed- lowest effect level (LEL) was established pesticide and precautionary measures effect level (NOEL) of 15 ppm (0.45 mg/ at 5 mg/kg/day based on weight are required to protect applicators from kg/day) based on increased severity and reduction and slight retardation in the acute toxicity of the chemical, the extent of chronic pneumonitis in both ossification (fetotoxicty) and potential for carcinogenic effects by sexes, especially males, at the 30-ppm piloerection, weight loss, and hunched excessive (irritating) topical exposure is dose level. appearance (maternal toxicity). not a concern for applicators. 2. A 23-month chronic feeding/ 6. A developmental toxicity study in The reference dose (RfD) is carcinogenicity study in mice fed diets mice given gavage dosages of 1, 5, and established at 0.0045 mg/kg body containing 12.5, 37.5, and 100/125 ppm 10 mg/kg/day with no developmental weight/day based on a NOEL of 0.45 paraquat ion (the highest dose tested toxicity observed under the conditions mg/kg/day from the 1-year dog study (HDT) was increased from 100 to 125 of the study at any dosage level tested. and an uncertainity factor of 100. The ppm at week 36) with a systemic NOEL 7. A three-generation reproduction theoretical maximum residue of 12.5 ppm (equivalent to 1.87 mg/kg/ study with rats fed diets containing 25, contribution (TMRC) from existing uses day) based on renal tubular 75, and 150 ppm with a systemic NOEL of paraquat utilizes 42% of the RfD for degeneration in male mice, and weight of 25 ppm (equivalent to 1.25 mg/kg/ the general U.S. population, or 95.7% of loss and decreased food intake in female day) based on an increased incidence of the RfD for children, aged 1 to 6 years mice. There were no carcinogenic alveolar histiocytosis in the lungs of old (the population subgroup most effects observed under the conditions of male and female parents. There were no highly exposed). The proposed the study. reproductive effects observed under the tolerance for lentils would utilize 3. A 2-year chronic feeding/ conditions of the study. 0.008% of the RfD for the U.S. carcinogenicity study in Fischer rats fed 8. Paraquat was negative in 10 population, or 0.007% of the RfD for diets containing 0, 1.25, 3.75, and 7.5 mutagenicity studies (mostly gene children, aged 1 to 6 years. mg/kg/day with equivocal (uncertain) mutation and chromosome aberration The nature of the residue is evidence of carcinogenicity (squamous studies and one DNA damage/repair adequately understood for the purpose cell carcinomas) in the head region (ear, assay); weakly positive in four studies of these tolerances. An adequate nasal cavity, oral cavity, and skin) of (two gene mutation, one chromosome analytical method is available for male rats of the highest dose level aberration, and one DNA damage/repair enforcement purposes. The analytical group, and an approximate systemic assay); and positive in four studies (all method for enforcing these tolerances NOEL of 1.25 mg/kg/day based on DNA damage/repair assays). has been published in the Pesticide incidence of opacities, cataracts, and The Agency (Peer Review Committee) Analytical Manual, Vol. II (PAM II). Any nonneoplastic lung lesions (alveolar initially classified paraquat as a category secondary residues in milk, eggs, or macrophages and epithelialization and ‘‘C’’ carcinogen based on the significant meat of livestock and poultry will fall slight peribronchiolar lymphoid increase of squamous cell carcinomas in within existing tolerances for these hyperplasia). The squamous cell the head region of the high-dose males commodities. carcinomas were not associated with in the Fisher rat chronic feeding/ There are currently no actions oral exposure, but were the result of carcinogenicity study. Review of the pending against the continued topical exposure (through powdered study by an independent laboratory registration of this chemical. diet). concluded that those tumor sites should Based on the information and data 4. A 2-year chronic feeding/ not be combined; without the considered, the Agency has determined carcinogenicity study in Wistar rats fed combination, there were no statistically that the tolerances established by diets containing 6, 30, 100, and 300 significant tumor increases for any amending 40 CFR part 180 would ppm (paraquat dichloride) with a particular tumor type. Discussion and protect the public health. Therefore, it is systemic NOEL of 100 ppm (equivalent review by the Agency (Peer Review proposed that the tolerances be to 5 mg/kg/day) based on increased Committee) concluded that these tumor established as set forth below. mortality in males and females; sites normally should not be combined Any person who has registered or decreased erythrocytes, hemoglobin, when the exposure to the chemical is by submitted an application for registration and serum protein in males and females; the oral route and that these tumors are of a pesticide, under the Federal decreased hematocrit, glucose and likely the result of topical exposure to Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide corpuscular cholinesterase activity in paraquat contained in the powdered Act (FIFRA) as amended, which males; decreased leukocytes, albumin- diet (paraquat is a topical irritant), not contains any of the ingredients listed to-globulin ratio, and alkaline the result of exposure through the herein, may request within 30 days after phosphatase; increased gastrointestinal tract. The Agency publication of this document in the polymorphonucleocytes in males; considered two additional studies (rat Federal Register that this rulemaking Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Proposed Rules 13941 proposal be referred to an Advisory Dated: February 28, 1995. 2E4052, 2E4065, 2E4092, and 3E4162/ Committee in accordance with section Stephen L. Johnson, P602], must be received on or before April 14, 1995. 408(e) of the FFDCA. Director, Registration Division, Office of Interested persons are invited to Pesticide Programs. ADDRESSES: By mail, submit written submit written comments on the Therefore, it is proposed that 40 CFR comments to: Public Response and proposed regulation. Comments must part 180 be amended as follows: Program Resources Branch, Field bear a notation indicating the document Operations Division (7506C), Office of control number, [PP 4E4359/P604]. All PART 180Ð[AMENDED] Pesticide Programs, Environmental written comments filed in response to Protection Agency, 401 M St., SW., 1. The authority citation for part 180 this petition will be available in the Washington, DC 20460. In person, bring continues to read as follows: Public Response and Program Resources comments to: Rm. 1132, CM #2, 1921 Branch, at the address given above from Authority: 21 U.S.C. 346a and 371. Jefferson Davis Hwy., Arlington, VA 8 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through 2. In § 180.205, paragraph (a) is 22202. Friday, except legal holidays. amended in the table therein by adding Information submitted as a comment Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR and alphabetically inserting the raw concerning this notice may be claimed 51735, Oct. 4, 1993), the Agency must agricultural commodities lentils, lentil confidential by marking any part or all determine whether the regulatory action forage, and lentil hay, to read as follows: of that information as ‘‘Confidential is ‘‘significant’’ and therefore subject to Business Information’’ (CBI). § 180.205 Paraquat; tolerances for Information so marked will not be all the requirements of the Executive residues. Order (i.e., Regulatory Impact Analysis, disclosed except in accordance with (a) * * * procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2. review by the Office of Management and A copy of the comment that does not Budget (OMB)). Under section 3(f), the Commodity Parts per contain CBI must be submitted for order defines ‘‘significant’’ as those million inclusion in the public record. actions likely to lead to a rule (1) having Information not marked confidential an annual effect on the economy of $100 ***** may be disclosed publicly by EPA million or more, or adversely and Lentils ...... 0.3 without prior notice. All written materially affecting a sector of the Lentil, forage ...... 0.1 comments will be available for public economy, productivity, competition, Lentil, hay ...... 0.4 inspection in Rm. 1132 at the address jobs, the environment, public health or given above, from 8 a.m. to 4 p.m., safety, or State, local or tribal ***** Monday through Friday, excluding legal governments or communities (also holidays. known as ‘‘economically significant’’); * * * * * FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: (2) creating serious inconsistency or [FR Doc. 95–6418 Filed 3–14–95; 8:45 am] By mail: Hoyt L. Jamerson, Registration otherwise interfering with an action BILLING CODE 6560±50±F taken or planned by another agency; (3) Division (7505W), Office of Pesticide materially altering the budgetary Programs, Environmental Protection impacts of entitlement, grants, user fees, 40 CFR Part 180 Agency, 401 M St., SW., Washington, or loan programs; or (4) raising novel DC 20460. Office location and telephone [PP 0E3909, 2E4052, 2E4065, 2E4092, and number: Sixth Floor, Crystal Station #1, legal or policy issues arising out of legal 3E4162/P602; FRL±4936±1] mandates, the President’s priorities, or 2800 Jefferson Davis Hwy., Arlington, the principles set forth in this Executive RIN 2070±AC18 VA 22202, (703)-308-8783. Order. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Pesticide Tolerances for 2-[1- Interregional Research Project No. 4 (IR- Pursuant to the terms of this (Ethoxyimino)Butyl]-5-[2- 4), New Jersey Agricultural Experiment Executive Order, EPA has determined (Ethylthio)Propyl]-3-Hydroxy-2- Station, P.O. Box 231, Rutgers that this rule is not ‘‘significant’’ and is Cyclohexen-1-One therefore not subject to OMB review. University, New Brunswick, NJ 08903, AGENCY: Environmental Protection has submitted pesticide petitions (PP) Pursuant to the requirements of the Agency (EPA). 0E3909, 2E4052, 2E4065, 2E4092, and Regulatory Flexibility Act (Pub. L. 96- ACTION: Proposed rule. 3E4162 to EPA on behalf of the named 354, 94 Stat. 1164, 5 U.S.C. 601-612), Agricultural Experiment Stations. the Administrator has determined that SUMMARY: EPA proposes to establish These petitions request that the regulations establishing new tolerances time limited tolerances for the Administrator, pursuant to section or raising tolerance levels or combined residues of the herbicide 2-[1- 408(e) of the Federal Food, Drug, and establishing exemptions from tolerance (ethoxyimino)butyl]-5-[2- Cosmetic Act (FFDCA), 21 U.S.C. requirements do not have a significant (ethylthio)propyl]-3-hydroxy-2- 346a(e), amend 40 CFR 180.412 by economic impact on a substantial cyclohexen-1-one (also referred to in establishing time-limited tolerances for number of small entities. A certification this document as sethoxydim) and its combined residues of the herbicide 2-[1- statement to this effect was published in metabolites in or on various raw (ethoxyimino)butyl]-5-[2- the Federal Register of May 4, 1981 (46 agricultural commodities. The (ethylthio)propyl]-3-hydroxy-2- FR 24950). Interregional Research Project No. 4 (IR- cyclohexen-1-one) and its metabolites List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180 4) requested the proposed regulation to containing the 2-cyclohexen-1-one establish maximum permissible levels moiety (calculated as the herbicide) in Environmental protection, for residues of the herbicide. These or on certain raw agricultural Administrative practice and procedure, time-limited tolerances would expire on commodities as follows: Agricultural commodities, Pesticides December 31, 1996. 1. PP 0E3909. Petition submitted on and pests, Reporting and recordkeeping DATES: Comments, identified by the behalf of the Experimental Stations of requirements. document control number [PP 0E3909, Massachusetts, Washington, and 13942 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Proposed Rules Wisconsin proposing a tolerance for containing 0, 2, 6, and 18 mg/kg/day 9. Mutagenicity studies including: cranberry at 2.0 parts per million (ppm). with a systemic NOEL greater than or Ames assays were negative for gene 2. PP 2E4052. Petition submitted on equal to 18 mg/kg/day (highest dose mutation in Salmonella typhimurium behalf of the Experimental Stations of tested). There were no carcinogenic strains TA98, TA100, TA1535, and TA South Dakota and Washington effects observed under the conditions of 1537, with and without metabolic proposing tolerances for peppermint the study. This study was reviewed activity; a Chinese hamster bone and spearmint at 30 ppm. under current guidelines and was found marrow cytogenetic assay was negative 3. PP 2E4065. Petition submitted on to be unacceptable because the doses for structural chromosomal aberrations behalf of the Experimental Station of used were insufficient to induce a toxic at doses up to 5,000 mg/kg in Chinese Florida proposing a tolerance for endive response and an MTD was not achieved. hamster bone marrow cells in vivo; and at 2.0 ppm. The petitioner proposed that 5. A second chronic feeding/ recombinant assays and forward use of sethoxydim on endive be limited carcinogenic study with rats fed diets mutations tests in Bacillus subtilis, to Florida based on the geographical containing 0, 360, and 1,080 ppm Escherichia coli, and S. typhimurium representation of the residue data (equivalent to 18.2/23.0, and 55.9/71.8 were all negative for genotoxic effects at submitted. Additional residue data will mg/kg/day (males/females). The dose concentrations of greater than or equal be required to expand the area of usage. levels were too low to elicit a toxic to 100 percent. Persons seeking geographically broader response in the test animals and failed 10. In a rat metabolism study, registration should contact the Agency’s to achieve an MTD or define a lowest excretion was extremely rapid and Registration Division at the address effect level (LEL). Slight decreases in tissue accumulation was negligible. provided above. body weight in rats at the 1,080-ppm The reference dose (RFD) is calculated 4. PP 2E4092. Petition submitted on dose level, although not biologically at 0.09 mg/kg of body weight/day, based behalf of the Experimental Stations of significant, support a free-standing no- on a NOEL of 8.86 mg/kg/day from the California, Florida, Maryland, Michigan, observed-adverse-effect-level (NOAEL) 1-year feeding study in dogs and an New Jersey, North Carolina, and of 1,080 ppm (55.9/71.8 mg/kg/day uncertainty factor of 100. The Tennessee proposing a tolerance for (males/females)). There were no theoretical maximum residue carrot at 1.0 ppm. carcinogenic effects observed under the contribution (TMRC) from existing 5. PP 3E4162. Petition submitted on conditions of the study. tolerances for the overall U.S. behalf of the Experimental Stations of population is estimated at 0.031961 mg/ 6. A developmental toxicity study in Arkansas, Arizona, Michigan, North kg of body weight/day, or 36% of the rats fed dosages of 0, 50, 180, 650, and Carolina, Oklahoma, and Washington RfD. The proposed tolerances for 1,000 mg/kg/day with a maternal proposing a tolerance for asparagus at asparagus, carrot, cranberry, endive, NOAEL of 180 mg/kg/day and a 4.0 ppm. peppermint, and spearmint will maternal LEL of 650 mg/kg/day The scientific data submitted in the increase the TMRC by 0.000701 mg/kg petitions and other relevant material (irregular gait, decreased activity, of body weight/day and will utilize less have been evaluated. The toxicological excessive salivation, and anogenital than 1 percent of the RfD for the overall data considered in support of the staining); and a developmental NOAEL U.S. population. EPA estimates indicate proposed tolerances include: of 180 mg/kg/day, and a developmental that dietary exposure will not exceed 1. Several acute toxicology studies LEL of 650 mg/kg/day (21 to 22 percent the RfD for any population subgroup for place technical sethoxydim in acute decrease in fetal weights, filamentous which EPA has data. toxicity category IV for primary eye and tail, and lack of tail due to the absence These tolerances are proposed as dermal irritation and acute toxicity of sacral and/or caudal vertebrae, and time-limited tolerances since an category III for acute oral, dermal, and delayed ossification in the hyoids, acceptable carcinogenicity study is inhalation. The dermal sensitization - vertebral centrum and/or transverse needed in one rodent species. A repeat guinea pig study was waived because no processes, sternebrae and/or chronic feeding/carcinogenicity study in sensitization was seen in guinea pigs metatarsals, and pubes). rats is underway and is due to be dosed with the end-use product Poast 7. A developmental toxicity study in submitted to EPA in November of 1995. (18 percent a.i.). rabbits fed doses of 0, 80, 160, 320, and The Agency will reassess sethoxydim 2. A 1-year feeding study with dogs 400 mg/kg/day with a maternal NOEL of tolerances based on the outcome of the fed diets containing 0, 8.86/9.41, 17.5/ 320 mg/kg/day and a maternal LOEL of rat chronic feeding/carcinogenicity 19.9, and 110/129 milligrams (mg)/ 400 mg/kg/day (37% reduction in body study and, if appropriate, will establish kilogram (kg)/day (males/females) with weight gain without significant permanent tolerances for asparagus, a no-observed-effect-level (NOEL) of differences in group mean body weights carrot, cranberry, endive, peppermint 8.86/9.41 mg/kg/day (males/females) and decreased food consumption during and spearmint. In the interim, the based on equivocal anemia in male dogs dosing); and a developmental NOEL Agency concludes that there is little risk at the 17.5-mg/kg/day dose level. greater than 400 mg/kg/day (highest from establishment of the proposed 3. A 2-year chronic feeding/ dose tested). tolerances since available studies in rats carcinogenicity study with mice fed 8. A two-generation reproduction and mice indicate no carcinogenic diets containing 0, 40, 120, 360, and study with rats fed diets containing 0, effects, there are adequate data to 1,080 ppm (equivalent to 0, 6, 18, 54, 150, 600, and 3,000 ppm (approximately establish a RfD, existing tolerances and and 162 mg/kg/day) with a systemic 0, 7.5, 30, and 150 mg/kg/day) with no the proposed tolerances do not exceed NOEL of 120 ppm (18 mg/kg/day) based reproductive effects observed under the the RfD, and the proposed tolerances on non-neoplastic liver lesions in male conditions of the study. utilize less than 1 percent of the RfD. mice at the 360-ppm (54 mg/kg/day) Although the dose levels were The nature of the residue is dose level. There were no carcinogenic insufficient to elicit a toxic response, adequately understood, and adequate effects observed under the conditions of the Agency considers this study usable analytical methods are available for the study. The maximum tolerated dose for regulatory purposes and has enforcement purposes. Enforcement (MTD) was not achieved in female mice. established a free-standing NOEL of methods for sethoxydim are listed in the 4. A 2-year chronic feeding/ 3,000 ppm (approximately 150 mg/kg/ Pesticide Analytical Manual, Vol. II carcinogenic study with rats fed diets day). (PAM II). Enforcement methods have Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Proposed Rules 13943 also been submitted to the Food and Order (i.e., Regulatory Impact Analysis, § 180.412 2-[1-(Ethoxyimino)butyl]-5-[2- Drug Administration for publication in review by the Office of Management and (ethylthio)propyl]-3-hydroxy-2-cyclohexen- PAM II. Because of the long lead time Budget (OMB)). Under section 3(f), the 1-one; tolerances for residues. for publication of the analytical order defines ‘‘significant’’ as those (a) Tolerances are established for the methods in PAM II, the analytical actions likely to lead to a rule (1) having combined residues of the herbicide 2- methods are being made available in the an annual effect on the economy of $100 [1(ethoxyimino)butyl]-5-[2- interim to anyone interested in pesticide million or more, or adversely and (ethylthio)propyl]-3-hydroxy-2- enforcement when requested from: materially affecting a sector of the cyclohexen-1-one) and its metabolites Calvin Furlow, Public Response and economy, productivity, competition, containing the 2-cyclohexen-1-one Program Resources Branch, Field jobs, the environment, public health or moiety (calculated as the herbicide) in Operations Divisions (7506C), Office of safety, or State, local or tribal Pesticide Programs, Environmental governments or communities (also or on the following raw agricultural Protection Agency, 401 M St., SW., known as ‘‘economically significant’’); commodities: Washington, DC 20460. Office location (2) creating serious inconsistency or * * * * * and telephone number: Rm. 1132, CM otherwise interfering with an action (b) Tolerances with regional #2, 1921 Jefferson Davis Hwy., taken or planned by another agency; (3) registration, as defined in § 180.1(n), are Arlington, VA 22202, (703)-305-5937. materially altering the budgetary established for the combined residues of There is no reasonable expectation impacts of entitlement, grants, user fees, the herbicide 2-[1-(ethoxyimino) butyl]- that secondary residues will occur in or loan programs; or (4) raising novel milk, eggs or meat of livestock and 5-[2-(ethylthio)propyl]-3-hydroxy-2- legal or policy issues arising out of legal cyclohexen-1-one) and its metabolites poultry from the proposed uses of mandates, the President’s priorities, or containing the 2-cyclohexen-1-one sethoxydim on asparagus, cranberries, the principles set forth in this Executive moiety (calculated as the herbicide) in endive, and mint; there are no livestock Order. feed items associated with these or on the following raw agricultural commodities. Any secondary residues Pursuant to the terms of this commodities: Executive Order, EPA has determined occurring in meat, fat, meat byproducts * * * * * and milk of cattle, goats, hogs, horses that this rule is not ‘‘significant’’ and is (c) Time-limited tolerances to expire and sheep from the proposed use on therefore not subject to OMB review. carrots will be covered by existing Pursuant to the requirements of the December 31, 1996, are established for tolerances. There are no residues Regulatory Flexibility Act (Pub. L. 96- combined residues of the herbicide 2-[1- expected to occur in poultry meat, meat 354, 94 Stat. 1164, 5 U.S.C. 601-612), (ethoxyimino)butyl]-5-[2- byproducts, fat or eggs since carrots are the Administrator has determined that (ethylthio)propyl]-3-hydroxy-2- not considered a poultry feed item. regulations establishing new tolerances cyclohexen-1-one) and its metabolites Based on the information and data or raising tolerance levels or containing the 2-cyclohexen-1-one considered, the Agency has determined establishing exemptions from tolerance moiety (calculated as the herbicide) in that the tolerances established by requirements do not have a significant or on the following raw agricultural amending 40 CFR part 180 would economic impact on a substantial commodities: protect the public health. Therefore, it is number of small entities. A certification proposed that the tolerances be statement to this effect was published in Commodity Parts per established as set forth below. the Federal Register of May 4, 1981 (46 million Any person who has registered or FR 24950). submitted an application for registration Asparagus ...... 4.0 of a pesticide, under the Federal List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180 Carrot ...... 1.0 Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Cranberry ...... 2.0 Environmental protection, Act (FIFRA) as amended, which Peppermint ...... 30.0 Administrative practice and procedure, contains any of the ingredients listed Spearmint ...... 30.0 Agricultural commodities, Pesticides herein, may request within 30 days after and pests, Reporting and recordkeeping publication of this document in the (d) Time-limited tolerances to expire requirements. Federal Register that this rulemaking December 31, 1996, are established with proposal be referred to an Advisory Dated: February 28, 1995. regional registration, as defined in Committee in accordance with section Stephen L. Johnson, § 180.1(n), for combined residues of the 408(e) of the FFDCA. herbicide 2-[1-(ethoxyimino)butyl]-5-[2- Interested persons are invited to Director, Registration Division, Office of Pesticide Programs. (ethylthio)propyl]-3-hydroxy-2- submit written comments on the cyclohexen-1-one) and its metabolites proposed regulation. Comments must Therefore, it is proposed that 40 CFR containing the 2-cyclohexen-1-one bear a notation indicating the document part 180 be amended as follows: moiety (calculated as the herbicide) in control number, [PP 0E3909, 2E4052, or on the following raw agricultural 2E4065, 2E4092, and 3E4162/P602]. All PART 180Ð[AMENDED] commodities: written comments filed in response to these petitions will be available in the 1. The authority citation for part 180 Parts per Public Response and Program Resources continues to read as follows: Commodity million Branch, at the address given above from Authority: 21 U.S.C. 346a and 371. 8 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, except legal holidays. 2. In § 180.412, by revising the section Endive ...... 2.0 Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR heading and the introductory text of 51735, Oct. 4, 1993), the Agency must paragraphs (a) and (b) to correct the determine whether the regulatory action spelling of the chemical name and by [FR Doc. 95–6419 Filed 3–14–95; 8:45 am] is ‘‘significant’’ and therefore subject to adding new paragraphs (c) and (d), to BILLING CODE 6560±50±F all the requirements of the Executive read as follows: 13944 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Proposed Rules 40 CFR Part 300 Public Affairs, U.S. EPA, Region V, 77 (ii) All appropriate Fund-financed W. Jackson Blvd., Chicago, IL 60604, response under CERCLA has been [FRL±5171±8] (312) 353–6196. implemented, and no further response action by responsible parties is National Oil and Hazardous SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Substances Pollution Contingency appropriate; or Plan; National Priorities List Table of Contents (iii) The remedial investigation has I. Introduction shown that the release poses no AGENCY: Environmental Protection II. NPL Deletion Criteria significant threat to public health or the Agency. III. Deletion Procedures environment and, therefore, taking of ACTION: Notice of intent to delete the IV. Basis for Intended Site Deletion remedial measures is not appropriate. Dakhue Sanitary Landfill Site from the I. Introduction National Priorities List; request for III. Deletion Procedures comments. The U.S. Environmental Protection Upon determination that at least one Agency (EPA) Region V announces its of the criteria described in § 300.425(e) SUMMARY: The United States intent to delete the Dakhue Sanitary has been met, U.S. EPA may formally Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. Landfill Site from the National Priorities begin deletion procedures, that is if the EPA) Region V announces its intent to List (NPL), Appendix B to the National State has concurred with the intent to delete the Dakhue Sanitary Landfill Site Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution delete. This Federal Register notice, and from the National Priorities List (NPL) Contingency Plan, 40 CFR Part 300 a concurrent notice in the local and requests public comment on this (NCP), and requests comments on the newspaper in the vicinity of the Site, action. The NPL constitutes Appendix B deletion. The EPA identifies sites which announce the initiation of a 30-day of 40 CFR part 300 which is the appear to present a significant risk to comment period. The public is asked to National Oil and Hazardous Substances public health, welfare or the comment on U.S. EPA’s intention to Pollution Contingency Plan (NCP), environment, and maintains the NPL as delete the Site from the NPL. which EPA promulgated pursuant to the list of those sites. Sites on the NPL Documents in support of U.S. EPA’s Section 105 of the Comprehensive may be the subject of Superfund (Fund) decision to issue this notice are Environmental Response, Fund-financed remedial actions. included in the information repository Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 Pursuant to § 300.425(e)(3) of the NCP, and the deletion docket. (CERCLA) as amended. This action is any site deleted from the NPL remains Upon completion of the public being taken by U.S. EPA because it has eligible for additional Fund-financed comment period, the U.S. EPA will been determined that all Fund-financed remedial actions in the unlikely event evaluate comments received during the response actions under CERCLA have that conditions at the site warrant such comment period prior to reaching a final been implemented and EPA, in action. decision to delete the Site and the consultation with the State of The U.S. EPA will accept comments Regional Office will prepare a Minnesota, has determined that no on this proposal for thirty (30) days after Responsiveness Summary which further cleanup actions are necessary. publication of this notice in the Federal addresses comments received. The Moreover, EPA and the State have Register. public is welcome to contact the U.S. determined that remedial activities Section II of this notice explains the EPA Region V Office to obtain a copy of conducted at the Site to date have been criteria for deleting sites from the NPL. this Responsiveness Summary, if one is protective of public health, welfare, and Section III discusses procedures that prepared. If U.S. EPA determines the the environment. EPA is using for this action. Section IV discusses the history of this site and decision to delete the Site from the NPL DATES: Comments concerning the is appropriate after the public has had proposed deletion of the Site from the explains how the site meets the deletion criteria. an opportunity to comment, then the NPL must be postmarked no later than final Notice of Deletion will be April 14, 1995. Deletion of sites from the NPL does not itself create, alter, or revoke any published in the Federal Register. ADDRESSES: Comments may be mailed to individual’s rights or obligations. Gladys Beard (HSRM–6J) Associate IV. Basis for Intended Site Deletion Furthermore, deletion from the NPL Remedial Project Manager, Office of does not in any way alter EPA’s right to The Dakhue Sanitary Landfill is Superfund, U.S. EPA, Region V, 77 W. take enforcement actions, as located in Section 24 and 25 Township Jackson Blvd., Chicago, IL 60604. appropriate. The NPL is designed 113 North, Range 18 West, in Hampton Information on the Site is available at primarily for informational purposes Township, Dakota County, Minnesota. the local information repository located and to assist in Agency management. The Site encompasses approximately 80 at: Cannon Falls Public Library, 306 acres, of which 26 acres have been West Mill St., Cannon Falls, MN 55009. II. NPL Deletion Criteria actively landfilled. The landfill began Requests for comprehensive copies of The NCP establishes the criteria the operations in 1971 receiving mixed documents should be directed formally Agency uses to delete sites from the municipal and industrial solid waste. A to the appropriate Region V’s Docket NPL. In accordance with 40 CFR solid waste landfill permit was issued to Officer. The address for the Region V’s 300.425(e), sites may be deleted from the owner of the Site on October 1, Docket Officer is Jan Pfundheller (H–7J), the NPL where no further response is 1971. Dakhue Landfill operated until U.S. EPA, Region V, 77 W. Jackson appropriate. May 31, 1988, at which time waste Blvd., Chicago, IL 60604, (312) 353– In making this determination, EPA disposal activities ceased. Since 5821. will consider, in consultation with the opening, the landfill has been utilized FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: State, whether any of the following for the disposal of mixed municipal and Gladys Beard (HSRM–6J) Associate criteria have been met: commercial waste and small amounts of Project Manager, Office of Superfund, (i) Responsible parties or other industrial waste. The landfill was U.S. EPA, Region V, 77 W. Jackson persons have implemented all initially opened on a part-time basis Blvd., Chicago, IL 60604, (312) 886– appropriate response actions required; until 1973 when the landfill extended 7253; or Cheryl Allen (P–19J), Office of or its operation to six days per week. It is Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Proposed Rules 13945 estimated that 1,500,000 cubic yards of Sanitary Landfill which will prevent or Policy (GFIP) and the criteria for its waste were disposed of at this-site. minimize groundwater contamination implementation by the National Flood In a letter dated July 22, 1988, and risks associated with the exposure Insurance Program (NFIP) when Federal representatives of the landfill owner to the contaminated materials. The disaster assistance is provided under the stated that Dakhue Landfill, Inc. was major components of the selected Individual and Family Grant Program financially unable to undertake closure remedy for this operable unit include: after the President makes a disaster and postclosure activities required at Capping with a final cover system declaration. the landfill. On October 11, 1988, consisting of a gas control layer, a EFFECTIVE DATE: We invite your Dakhue Landfill, Inc. filed for Chapter barrier layer of low permeable material, comments which will be accepted until 11 bankruptcy. a drainage layer, topsoil cover and May 1, 1995. The Site was proposed for the NPL on vegetation. ADDRESSES: Please send comments to October 26, 1989 and finalized on The remedy for the second operable the Rules Docket Clerk, Office of the August 30, 1990 with a score of 42. unit includes the following components: General Counsel, Federal Emergency The U.S. EPA funded the MPCA to The institutional Controls contained in Management Agency, 500 C Street SW., conduct of Remedial Investigation (RI) Dakota County Ordinance No. 114 and room 840, Washington, DC 20472, and Feasibility Study (FS) activities. RI Minnesota Rules 4725.2000 and (facsimile) (202) 646–4536. work involves determining the nature 4725.4300 which restrict well FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: and extent of contamination and FS development. A long-term groundwater Charles M. Plaxico, Jr., Federal work involves developing and monitoring program to: (1) Ensure that Emergency Management Agency, evaluating remedial alternatives. contaminated groundwater is not During the course of those activities, migrating off-site (2) assess trends in Federal Insurance Administration, (202) U.S. EPA and MPCA decided to divide water quality in the Sand and Gravel 646–3422, (facsimile) (202) 646–3445; or the remedy for the Site into two units aquifer; (3) verify that the deep aquifer Laurence W. Zensinger in FEMA’s or discrete actions, referred to as is not affected; and (4) to provide Response and Recovery Directorate, ‘‘operable units’’ (OUs). They are as adequate protection to aquatic life in (202) 646–3642, (facsimile) (202) 646– follows: Judicial Ditch No. 1 from adverse effects 2730. OU One: Source control of resulting from possible discharge of SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Section contaminates from the landfill. contaminated groundwater. 411, Individual and Family Grant (IFG) OU Two: Contaminated groundwater Construction of the landfill cover Programs the Stafford Act (42 U.S.C. migration management. provided for in OU one was completed § 5178) authorizes the President to make A focused FS was completed in during the 1992 construction season. grants to States for the purpose of March, 1991 for the first OU and a Groundwater monitoring as provided in making grants to individuals or families Record of Decision (ROD) was issued on OU two was initiated and several adversely affected by a major disaster. June 28, 1991 outlining work necessary rounds of sampling have been This disaster assistance is provided to to address the source of the completed to date. eligible individuals or families who are contamination, the landfill itself. EPA, with concurrence of the State of unable to meet disaster-related An RI was completed for the second Minnesota, has determined that all necessary expenses or serious needs OU in August, 1992 and a FS was appropriate Fund-financed responses through insurance or other means of completed in December, 1992. A ROD under CERCLA at the Dakhue Sanitary assistance. The maximum grant amount was issued on June 30, 1992 outlining Landfill Site have been completed, and provided under the State-administered work necessary to address the migration no further Superfund response is IFG program is $12,600 in Fiscal Year of contaminated groundwater. appropriate in order to provide 1995, and is adjusted annually as the The objective of the remedial action protection of human health and the Consumer Price Index for All Urban initiated for the Dakhue Sanitary environment. Therefore, U.S. EPA Consumers changes. Landfill was to meet the overall goal of proposes to delete this Site from the In past presidentially declared major protecting human health and the NPL. disasters, IFG recipients were required environment. This objective will be Dated: March 1, 1995. to purchase and maintain ‘‘adequate achieved through the construction of the Valdas V. Adamkus, flood insurance’’ if they had flood landfill cover and maintaining a damage and were in a special flood Regional Administrator, U.S. EPA, Region V. groundwater monitoring system so that hazard area of a community in which the potential risks associated with the [FR Doc. 95–6270 Filed 3–14–95; 8:45 am] the sale of flood insurance was available Site are reduced. This will be BILLING CODE 6560±50±P under the NFIP. According to the accomplished through reducing the regulations published to carry out the infiltration of water into the landfill purposes of § 411(a), ‘‘adequate flood waste mass; reducing the build-up of FEDERAL EMERGENCY insurance’’ is defined as a flood combustible gases; and reducing the MANAGEMENT AGENCY insurance policy that provides coverage generation and discharge of landfill 44 CFR Parts 61 and 206 at least for the grant award, for which leachate and continued monitoring of the maximum in Fiscal Year 1995 is the Site will ensure the future RIN 3067±AC35 $12,600. A homeowner is able to apply effectiveness of the remedy. that amount to building or contents On June 28, 1991, a Record of National Flood Insurance Program; damage, or to both kinds of damage, Decision (ROD) which documented Group Flood Insurance Policy for whereas a renter can apply up to remedial actions for OU one (source Individual and Family Grant Program $12,600 solely for damage to contents. control) was signed. The first operable AGENCY: Federal Emergency Our experience has shown that many unit addresses the source of the Management Agency (FEMA). IFG recipients historically have not used contamination by containing the wastes ACTION: Proposed rule. the part of the grant award that was and contaminated soil on-site. The provided to them to purchase the function of this operable unit is to SUMMARY: This proposed rule would required flood insurance for that provide a final cover for the Dakhue establish a Group Flood Insurance intended purpose. These individuals 13946 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Proposed Rules frequently have been unable to obtain property in any subsequent flood the IFG program’s maximum grant adequate assistance from other means disasters. This maintenance provision amount then in effect. and have endured hardship as a result also applies to individuals who bought, NFIP’s Standard Flood Insurance of the disaster. Often they have such or otherwise had transferred to them, Policy (which would be made available low incomes that they cannot afford to any real estate for which the flood to grantees upon request) specifies a repay a loan, even if the interest rate is insurance maintenance requirement was number of restrictions and limitations. as low as four percent and the previously levied. While most exclusions pertain only to repayment schedule is spread over a To enable States to provide affordable certain items in the building, some of number of years. Therefore, FEMA policies to IFG recipients, FEMA the exclusions mean that there is no developed an NFIP Group Flood proposes to limit IFG assistance to coverage at all for the building or the Insurance Policy (GFIP) for IFG individuals and families with $200 or contents in the building. The coverage homeowners or renters who experience more of real or personal property exclusions would be specified in the flood damage, in an effort to assist these damage or loss. Assisting individuals Addendum that would accompany the individuals to protect themselves from with damage of less than $200 is not Certificate of Flood Insurance, which future flood losses and to comply with cost-effective. the NFIP would send to each IFG the purchase and maintenance For individuals who qualify for IFG grantee/policyholder. If a Certificate of requirements of the IFG program. By assistance, FEMA proposes that a fixed Flood Insurance is issued for a grantee using the GFIP concept, FEMA can premium amount, initially in the whose property is ineligible for GFIP achieve significant administrative amount of $200, will be added to the coverage, the NFIP, upon discovery of savings and can offer a premium rate for IFG awards (subject to the current grant such ineligibility, would notify the the 3-year GFIP that is approximately maximum) to cover the cost of the grantee that the Certificate is rescinded $50 more than the 1-year premium for grantee’s flood insurance coverage for and then refund the full premium costs a conventional Standard Flood the first 3 years. If the grantee has to the President’s Fund. The State’s 25% Insurance Policy for a property with the disaster needs that meet or exceed the share would then be forwarded to the insurance-rating characteristics that maximum grant amount, this fixed State. The State would then return the most of the properties that are premium amount shall be withheld $200 only to those grantees who anticipated to be covered under the from the grant and provided to the NFIP received maximum grant awards and GFIP have. to pay the premium, thus ensuring the had their premium costs deducted from On September 23, 1994, while FEMA grantee is provided with a policy. The those awards. was in the process of preparing policy coverage will be equivalent to the NFIRA requires a 30-day waiting regulations to implement the GFIP, the maximum IFG grant amount each fiscal period, with two specific exceptions, President signed Public Law 103–325, year. This amount is $12,600 in Fiscal before flood insurance coverage the Riegle Community Development and Year 1995 as mentioned earlier. becomes effective under the Standard Regulatory Improvement Act of 1994. The State IFG program staff would Flood Insurance Policy. Neither Title V of Pub. L. 103–325 reformed provide the NFIP with records of the exception applies to the GFIP. major portions of the National Flood individuals to be insured. The records, Therefore, to comply with the NFIRA, Insurance Act of 1968, and is cited as which the State would provide NFIP on GFIP coverage would become effective the National Flood Insurance Reform a weekly basis, would be accompanied on the 30th day following the date that Act of 1994 (NFIRA). Section 582 of by payments to cover the premium the records and premium payment are Pub. L. 103–325 states: amounts for each grantee/policyholder received by the NFIP from the State. ‘‘No Federal disaster relief assistance for the 3-year policy term. The NFIP made available in a flood disaster area would then issue a Certificate of Flood National Environmental Policy Act may be used to make a payment * ** Insurance to each insured. During the 3- This rule is categorically excluded to a person for repair, replacement, or year term of the coverage, the amount(s) from the requirements of 44 CFR Part restoration for damage to any personal, of coverage listed in the Certificate of 10, Environmental Consideration. No residential, or commercial property if Flood Insurance would be adjusted environmental impact assessment has that person at any time has received annually on October 1 to reflect changes been prepared. flood disaster assistance that was in the Consumer Price Index for All conditional on the person first having Urban Consumers. Executive Order 12866, Regulatory obtained flood insurance under Approximately 60 days before the end Planning and Review applicable Federal law and of the 3-year term of the GFIP, the NFIP This proposed rule is not a significant subsequently having failed to obtain and would notify the IFG grantee/policy- regulatory action within the meaning of maintain flood insurance as required holder of the procedures to follow for § 2(f) of E.O. 12866 of September 30, under applicable Federal law on such applying for a new flood insurance 1993, 58 FR 51735, but attempts to property.’’ policy and of the amount of coverage adhere to the regulatory principles set We interpret this section as a that the IFG grantee/policyholder must forth in E.O. 12866. The rule has not requirement in flood disasters for each obtain in order to comply with the flood been reviewed by the Office of grantee who receives Federal disaster insurance maintenance requirements Management and Budget under E.O. assistance for flood damage to property established under the NFIRA. For 12866. located in a special flood hazard area purposes of complying with the and who is required to purchase flood maintenance requirement, a ‘‘minimal Paperwork Reduction Act insurance (or had insurance purchased amount of flood insurance’’ means an FEMA requests that commenters for them) to maintain at least a amount equal to the IFG program’s address their concerns about any minimum amount of flood insurance on maximum grant amount in effect at the additional paperwork or recordkeeping the property forever, or until they move time the new policy is obtained. reporting burden this proposed rule may to another address. If flood insurance is Further, at the time of each subsequent place upon them. Comments on not maintained, then no Stafford Act renewal, the notification concerning the paperwork or recordkeeping issues assistance may be provided for IFG amount of coverage that must be including burden estimates (i.e., the under sec. 411(a) for real or personal maintained would be revised to reflect time it would take a State to research Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Proposed Rules 13947 and compile the information and send cost or the maximum amount of (iii) The State IFG program staff premium payments to the NFIP) may be insurance available under the National would provide the NFIP with records of addressed to the points of contact Flood Insurance Program. individuals who received an IFG award identified in the ‘‘For Further (2) Article 7—Deductibles does not and are, therefore, to be insured. Information Contact’’ section of this apply to the GFIP. The deductible is Grantees would not be covered if they proposed rule, and to Donald Arbuckle, $200 (applicable separately to any are determined to be ineligible for Office of Management and Budget, building loss and any contents loss) for coverage based on a number of Office of Information and Regulatory insured flood damage losses sustained exclusions established by the NFIP. Affairs, 3255 New Executive Office by the insured property in the course of Records of IFG grantees to be insured Building, Washington, DC 20503. any subsequent flooding event during shall be accompanied by payments to the policy term. No deductible shall cover the premium amounts for each Executive Order 12612, Federalism apply to Article 3 B.3. grantee for the 3-year policy term. The This rule involves no policies that (3) Article 9 E., Cancellation of Policy NFIP will then issue a Certificate of have federalism implications under E.O. By You, does not apply to the GFIP. Flood Insurance to each grantee. 12612, Federalism, dated October 26, (4) Article 9 G., Policy Renewal, does (iv) Once the grantee/policyholder 1987. not apply to the GFIP. receives the Certificate of Flood Insurance, the grantee should review the Executive Order 12778, Civil Justice PART 206ÐFEDERAL DISASTER list of the types of buildings that are Reform ASSISTANCE FOR DISASTERS ineligible for coverage. If the damaged DECLARED ON OR AFTER This rule meets the applicable building and its contents are ineligible, NOVEMBER 23, 1988 standards of § 2(b)(2) of E.O. 12778. the grantee must notify the NFIP in List of Subjects in 44 CFR Parts 61 and 3. The authority citation for Part 206 writing. The NFIP will then reimburse 206 is amended to read as follows: the State IFG program for the premium, so the IFG program can issue a check for Flood insurance; Disaster assistance. Authority: The Robert T. Stafford Disaster the premium amount to the grantee Accordingly, 44 CFR Parts 61 and 206 Relief and Emergency Assistance Act, 42 U.S.C. 5121 et seq.; 42 U.S.C. 4001 et seq.; when a premium amount was withheld are proposed to be amended as follows: Reorganization Plan No. 3 of 1978, 43 FR from a maximum grant award. (If the 41943, 3 CFR, 1978 Comp., p. 329; E.O. grantee wishes to refer to or review a PART 61ÐINSURANCE COVERAGE 12127 of Mar. 31, 1979, 44 FR 19367, 3 CFR, Standard Flood Insurance Policy, it will AND RATES 1979 Comp., p. 376. be made available by the NFIP upon request.) 1. The authority citation for Part 61 Subpart EÐIndividual and Family continues to read as follows: (Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance No. Grant Programs 83.100, ‘‘Flood Insurance’’; No. 83.516, Authority: 42 U.S.C. 4001 et seq.; ‘‘Disaster Assistance’’). Reorganization Plan No. 3 of 1978, 43 FR 4. Section 206.131(d)(1)(iii)(C)(2) is 41943, 3 CFR, 1978 Comp., p. 329; E.O. revised to read as follows: Dated: February 24, 1995. 12127 of Mar. 31, 1979, 44 FR 19367, 3 CFR, § 206.131 Individual and Family Grant Elaine A. McReynolds, 1979 Comp., p. 376. Programs. Administrator, Federal Insurance 2. Section 61.17 is added to read as * * * * * Administration. follows: (d) * * * Richard W. Krimm, § 61.17 Group Flood Insurance Policy (1) * * * Associate Director, Response and Recovery. (iii) * * * (a) A Group Flood Insurance Policy (C) * * * [FR Doc. 95–6361 Filed 3–14–95; 8:45 am] (GFIP) is a policy covering all (2) The National Flood Insurance BILLING CODE 6718±02±P individuals named by a State as Program (NFIP) regulations, at 44 CFR recipients under § 411 of the Stafford 61.17, establish the Group Flood Act (42 U.S.C. 5178) of an Individual Insurance Policy (GFIP), which is a FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS and Family Grant program award for policy that covers eligible individuals COMMISSION flood damage as a result of a named by a State as recipients under Presidential disaster declaration. The section 411 of the Stafford Act of an IFG 47 CFR Part 73 premium for the GFIP, initially, is a flat program award for flood damage as a [MM Docket No. 94±84, RM±8478] fee of $200 per policyholder. The result of a Presidential disaster amount of coverage would be equivalent declaration. Radio Broadcasting Services; Driscoll, to the maximum grant amount (i) IFG assistance will be provided to Gregory and Robstown, Texas established under § 411. Coverage under individuals or families with residential the GFIP would become effective on the or personal property damage or losses of AGENCY: Federal Communications 30th day following the date the NFIP $200 or more. Individuals with damage Commission receives the records and premium of $199 or less will not be eligible for ACTION: Proposed rule. payments from the State. IFG assistance. (b) The GFIP is the Standard Flood (ii) The premium for the GFIP is a SUMMARY: The Commission requests Insurance Policy Dwelling Form (a copy necessary expense within the meaning comments on the deletion of vacant of which is included in Appendix A(1) of this section. The State shall withhold Channel 283A at Gregory, Texas. The of this part), except that: this portion of the IFG award and deletion of Channel 283A at Gregory is (1) The GFIP provides coverage for provide it to the NFIP on behalf of necessary in order to accommodate the losses caused by land subsidence, sewer individuals and families who are proposed substitution of Channel 283C3 backup, or seepage of water without eligible for coverage. The coverage shall for Channel 286A at Robstown, Texas, regard to the requirement in paragraph be equivalent to the maximum grant the reallotment of Channel 283C3 from B.3. of Article 3 that the structure be amount established under § 411(f) of the Robstown to Driscoll, Texas, and the insured to 80 percent of its replacement Stafford Act. modification of Station KMIQ(FM)’s 13948 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Proposed Rules license to specify Driscoll as Station NATIONAL TRANSPORTATION Section 3(c) of the Act expands the KMIQ(FM)’s community of license. See SAFETY BOARD Safety Board’s statutory role in 59 FR 38950, August 1, 1994. investigating aircraft accidents to 49 CFR Parts 800, 830, and 831 include all ‘‘public’’ aircraft other than DATES: Comments must be filed on or those operated by the Armed Forces or before May 1, 1995, and reply comments Reporting of Public Aircraft Accidents by a United States intelligence agency. on or before May 16, 1995. AGENCY: National Transportation Safety Thus, with these two exceptions, ADDRESSES: Federal Communications Board. aircraft operated by Federal, State and local governments will, as of April 23, Commission, Washington, D.C. 20554. ACTION: Notice of proposed rule and 1995, be subject to Board jurisdiction for In addition to filing comments with the request for comments. FCC, interested parties should serve the the purposes of accident investigation in the U.S., in addition to any reporting petitioner, or its counsel or consultant, SUMMARY: The NTSB is proposing requirements. We propose in this as follows: Lee J. Peltzman, Esq., Shainis various revisions to its rules to proceeding to make changes to our & Peltzman, Suite 200, 2000 L Street, implement P.L. No. 103–411, which expands the scope of its jurisdiction to regulations, as necessary to reflect the Washington, D.C. 20036 (Counsel for Act. petitioner). include investigations of certain public aircraft accidents. The key question the Safety Board must answer is: when does an accident FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Pam DATES: Comments are invited by April ‘‘involve’’ an aircraft ‘‘operated by’’ the Blumenthal, Mass Media Bureau, (202) 14, 1995. 418–2180. Armed Forces or ‘‘intelligence agencies’’ ADDRESSES: An original and 2 copies of so as to qualify for the exception to our SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a any comments must be submitted to: public aircraft jurisdiction? As to what synopsis of the Commission’s Further Office of General Counsel, National organizations would be included in the Notice of Proposed Rule Making, MM Transportation Safety Board, 490 term ‘‘Armed Forces,’’ we consider the Docket No. 94–84, adopted March 1, L’Enfant Plaza East, SW., Washington, National Guard, and the Coast Guard, 1995, and released March 10, 1995. The DC 20594, Attention: Public Aircraft for example, to be within the definition, full text of this Commission decision is Rules. and propose to continue that practice. available for inspection and copying FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jane We construe the term ‘‘intelligence during normal business hours in the F. Mackall, (202) 382–6540. agency’’ strictly, and propose only to FCC’s Reference Center (Room 239), SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On apply it to those Federal agencies that 1919 M Street, NW, Washington, D.C. October 25, 1994, President Clinton are so named or categorized (for The complete text of this decision may signed H.R. 2440, the Independent example, in their enabling statutes). Safety Board Act Amendments of 1994. In defining the term ‘‘operated by,’’ also be purchased from the there is no issue of interpretation when Commission’s copy contractor, ITS, Inc., Codified as Public Law No. 103–411 (the Act), it is effective on April 23, the military is flying military-owned (202) 857–3800, 2100 M Street, NW, aircraft (assuming only one aircraft is Suite 140, Washington, D.C. 20037. 1995, and directly affects aircraft operated by and for Federal, State and involved in any accident/incident). Provisions of the Regulatory local governments. The core of the Such an accident would be outside our Flexibility Act of 1980 do not apply to legislation is amendments to the Federal jurisdiction. But, if the aircraft is not this proceeding. Aviation Act of 1958 to expand the actually owned and operated by the military, we have in the past used a Members of the public should note Federal Aviation Administration’s ‘‘single-flight’’ test for Federal use of that from the time a Notice of Proposed (FAA) safety regulation to previously exempt ‘‘public’’ aircraft, and the FAA otherwise private aircraft to determine Rule Making is issued until the matter whether the aircraft is civil or public is no longer subject to Commission is in the process of developing implementing rules and guidance. The and, thus, determine our jurisdiction. consideration or court review, all ex That is, if the Navy contracted for a Act, however, also changed the parte contacts are prohibited in civilian aircraft to transport troops, jurisdiction of the National Commission proceedings, such as this during the aircraft’s use for that purpose Transportation Safety Board (NTSB or one, which involve channel allotments. it might have been deemed a public Safety Board). See 47 CFR 1.1204(b) for rules aircraft and outside our mandatory Presently, jurisdiction of the Safety governing permissible ex parte contacts. jurisdiction—even though by inter- Board to investigate aircraft accidents agency agreement we might have For information regarding proper depends on whether the aircraft investigated an accident. After April 23, filing procedures for comments, see 47 involved are ‘‘civil’’ or ‘‘public.’’ An this matter is to be analyzed differently. CFR 1.415 and 1.420. aircraft is either one or the other. These Irrespective of the aircraft status as civil two terms are defined in the Federal List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 73 or public, we propose to interpret the Aviation Act of 1958, as amended, 49 statute as requiring that any such Radio broadcasting. U.S.C. 40102(a) (17) and (37). Until accident will be investigated by NTSB now, the Safety Board’s statutory Federal Communications Commission. unless the aircraft was actually operated investigation authority extended only to John A. Karousos, by Armed Forces personnel. civil aircraft, although accidents and The new definition of public aircraft Chief, Allocations Branch, Policy and Rules incidents involving certain public is complex, and has generated Division, Mass Media Bureau. aircraft are required to be reported to the considerable discussion and [FR Doc. 95–6339 Filed 3–14–95; 8:45 am] NTSB within 10 days. See 49 CFR interpretation concerning the scope and 1 BILLING CODE 6712±01±F 830.20. application of the civil/public aircraft division for the purposes of FAA safety 1 The Board has also investigated some public aircraft accidents under memoranda of regulation. The distinction between understanding with various Federal agencies and civil and public aircraft (as opposed to State and local governments. the distinction between military and Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Proposed Rules 13949 public aircraft), however, is no longer PART 800ÐORGANIZATION AND Independent Safety Board Act of 1974, as critical to our investigation authority— FUNCTIONS OF THE BOARD AND amended (49 U.S.C. 1101 et seq.). under the Act we now investigate all DELEGATIONS OF AUTHORITY 4a. Section 830.1 is proposed to be accidents in the U.S. other than those amended by revising the introductory involving aircraft operated by the 1. The authority citation for part 800 text and paragraphs (a) and (b) to read Armed Forces or intelligence agencies. is proposed to be revised to read as as follows: follows: Although we recognize that the civil/ § 830.1 Applicability. public distinction remains relevant to us Authority: Independent Safety Board Act This part contains rules pertaining to: for statistical and reporting purposes of 1974, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1101 et seq.); (a) Initial notification and later and in the case of jurisdiction over Federal Aviation Act of 1958, as amended (49 U.S.C. 40101 et seq.). reporting of aircraft incidents and accidents abroad, as International Civil accidents and certain other occurrences Aviation Authority agreements only 2. Section 800.3 is proposed to be in the operation of aircraft, wherever apply to civil aircraft, we see little amended by revising paragraph (a) to they occur, when they involve civil purpose at this point in adding read as follows: aircraft of the United States; when they ourselves to this debate. involve certain public aircraft, as § 800.3 Functions. Finally, those responsible for aircraft specified in this Part, wherever they (a) The primary function of the Safety now subject to our broadened occur; and when they involve foreign Board is to promote safety in investigation authority should also be civil aircraft where the events occur in transportation. The Safety Board is aware that the Board may investigate the United States, its territories, or its responsible for the investigation, possessions. occurences beyond those that involve determination of facts, conditions, and (b) Preservation of aircraft wreckage, serious injury or loss of an aircraft. For circumstances and the cause or probable mail, cargo, and records involving all example, any flight control system cause or causes of: all accidents civil and certain public aircraft failure or inflight fire is a reportable involving civil aircraft and certain accidents, as specified in this Part, in incident. Title 49 of the Code of Federal public aircraft; highway accidents the United States and its territories or Regulations, part 800, identifies all the including railroad grade-crossing possessions. instances we investigate and sets forth accidents, the investigation of which is * * * * * rules (at part 830) for notifying us of selected in cooperation with the States; 5. Section 830.2 is proposed to be what are termed ‘‘accidents or railroad accidents in which there is a amended by revising the definition of incidents.’’ 2 fatality, substantial property damage, or ‘‘public aircraft’’ to read as follows: which involve a passenger train; Accordingly, 49 CFR parts 800, 830, § 830.2 Definitions. and 831 are proposed to be amended as pipeline accidents in which there is a fatality or substantial property damage; * * * * * set forth below. We invite comments on Public aircraft means an aircraft used our interpretations and proposed rule and major marine casualties and marine accidents involving a public and non- only for the United States Government, changes, as well as suggestions for other public vessel or involving Coast Guard or an aircraft owned and operated possible rule changes needed or useful functions. The Safety Board makes (except for commercial purposes) or to accommodate our expanded exclusively leased for at least 90 3 transportation safety recommendations jurisdiction. to Federal, State, and local agencies and continuous days by a government other List of Subjects in 49 CFR Part 800 private organizations to reduce the than the United States Government, likelihood of recurrence of including a State, the District of Authority delegations—Government transportation accidents. It initiates and Columbia, a territory or possession of agencies, Organization and functions— conducts safety studies and special the United States, or a political Government agencies. investigations on matters pertaining to subdivision of that government. ‘‘Public safety in transportation, assesses aircraft’’ does not include a government- 49 CFR Part 830 techniques and methods of accident owned aircraft transporting property for commercial purposes and does not Aviation safety, Reporting and investigation, evaluates the effectiveness include a government-owned aircraft recordkeeping requirements. of transportation safety consciousness and efficacy in preventing accidents of transporting passengers other than: 49 CFR Part 831 other Government agencies, and Transporting (for other than commercial evaluates the adequacy of safeguards purposes) crewmembers or other Aviation safety, Highway safety, and procedures concerning the persons aboard the aircraft whose Investigations, Marine safety, Pipeline transportation of hazardous materials. presence is required to perform, or is safety, Railroad safety. * * * * * associated with the performance of, a governmental function such as 2 In light of our expanded investigatory role for PART 830ÐNOTIFICATION AND firefighting, search and rescue, law public aircraft, the reporting requirement heretofore REPORTING OF AIRCRAFT enforcement, aeronautical research, or included in § 830.20 is superseded by the § 830.5 biological or geological resource and § 830.15 rules. Thus, one of our proposals is to ACCIDENTS OR INCIDENTS AND eliminate part 830 subpart E, § 830.20. OVERDUE AIRCRAFT, AND management; or transporting (for other 3 Readers may notice that various provisions PRESERVATION OF AIRCRAFT than commercial purposes) persons subject to the proposals in this notice require other WRECKAGE, MAIL, CARGO, AND aboard the aircraft if the aircraft is changes to reflect current organization at the Safety RECORDS operated by the Armed Forces or an Board (e.g., § 800.2) or recent legislative change intelligence agency of the United States. (e.g., § 800.3 to reflect provisions of P.L. No. 102– 4. The authority citation for part 830 Notwithstanding any limitation relating 345, the FAA Civil Penalty Administrative is proposed to be revised to read as to use of the aircraft for commercial Assessment Act of 1992). Other rulemakings will follows: shortly be conducted to update provisions, as purposes, an aircraft shall be considered necessary. This proceeding proposes only the Authority: Federal Aviation Act of 1958, as to be a public aircraft without regard to changes needed to implement P.L. No. 103–411. amended (49 U.S.C. 40101 et seq.), and the whether it is operated by a unit of 13950 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Proposed Rules government on behalf of another unit of Independent Safety Board Act of 1974, as finding for a petition to list the Preble’s government pursuant to a cost amended (49 U.S.C. 1101 et seq.). meadow jumping mouse (Zapus reimbursement agreement, if the unit of 10. Section 831.2 is proposed to be hudsonius preblei) under the government on whose behalf the amended by revising paragraph (a)(1) to Endangered Species Act of 1973, as operation is conducted certifies to the read as follows: amended. The Service finds that there is Administrator of the Federal Aviation substantial information to indicate that Administration that the operation was § 831.2 Responsibility of Board. listing the species may be warranted. necessary to respond to a significant and (a) Aviation. (1) The Board is DATES: The finding announced in this imminent threat to life or property responsible for the organization, document was approved on February (including natural resources) and that conduct and control of all accident 27, 1994. To be considered in the 12- no service by a private operator was investigations within the United States, month finding for this petition, reasonably available to meet the threat. its territories and possessions, where the information and comments should be * * * * * accident involves civil aircraft and submitted to the Service by May 15, 6. Section 830.5 is proposed to be certain public aircraft (as specified in 1995. amended by revising the introductory § 830.5 of this chapter), including an ADDRESSES: Information, questions, or text to read as follows: accident investigation involving civil or comments concerning this petition public aircraft on the one hand and an § 830.5 Immediate notification. finding may be sent to the Field Armed Forces or intelligence agency Supervisor, U.S. Fish and Wildlife The operator of any civil aircraft, or aircraft on the other hand. It is also Service, 730 Simms Street, Room 290, any public aircraft not operated by the responsible for investigating accidents Golden, Colorado 80401. The petition, Armed Forces or an intelligence agency that occur outside the United States, finding, supporting data, and comments of the United States, or any foreign and which involve civil aircraft and are available for public inspection by aircraft shall immediately, and by the certain public aircraft, when the appointment during normal business most expeditious means available, accident is not in the territory of another hours at the above office. notify the nearest National state (i.e., in international waters). Transportation Safety Board (Board) FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: field office 1 when: * * * * * 11. Section 831.9 is proposed to be LeRoy W. Carlson (see ADDRESSES) (303/ * * * * * amended to revise paragraph (b) to read 231–5280). 7. Section 830.15 is proposed to be as follows: amended by revising paragraph (a) to SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: read as follows: § 831.9 Authority of Board Background Representatives. § 830.15 Reports and statements to be Section 4(b)(3)(A) of the Endangered filed. * * * * * Species Act (Act) of 1973, as amended (a) Reports. The operator of a civil, (b) Aviation. Any employee of the (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.), requires that the public (as specified in § 830.5), or Board, upon presenting appropriate U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) foreign aircraft shall file a report on credentials, is authorized to examine make a finding on whether a petition to and test to the extent necessary any civil Board Form 6120.1⁄2 (OMB No. 3147– list, delist, or reclassify a species 0001) 2 within 10 days after an accident, or public aircraft, aircraft engine, presents substantial scientific or or after 7 days if an overdue aircraft is propeller, appliance, or property aboard commercial information to demonstrate still missing. A report on an incident for such aircraft involved in an accident in that the petitioned action may be which immediate notification is air commerce. warranted. To the maximum extent required by § 830.5(a) shall be filed only * * * * * practicable, this finding is to be made as requested by an authorized Issued in Washington, D.C. on this 8th day within 90 days of the receipt of the representative of the Board. of March, 1995. petition, and a notice regarding the * * * * * Jim Hall, finding is to be published promptly in Chairman. the Federal Register. If the finding is Subpart E [Removed] [FR Doc. 95–6216 Filed 3–14–95; 8:45 am] that substantial information was BILLING CODE 7533±01±P presented, the Service also is required to 8. Subpart E of part 830 is proposed commence a review of the status of the to be removed. involved species if one has not already PART 831ÐACCIDENT/INCIDENT DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR been initiated by the Service. The INVESTIGATION PROCEDURES Service initiated a status review for Fish and Wildlife Service Preble’s meadow jumping mouse (Zapus 9. The authority citation for part 831 hudsonius preblei) when it categorized is proposed to be revised to read as 50 CFR Part 17 the species as a category 2 candidate follows: species in the 1985 Animal Notice of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife Review (50 FR 37958). This notice Authority: Federal Aviation Act of 1958, as and Plants: 90-Day Finding for a amended (49 U.S.C. 40101 et seq.), and the meets the requirement for the 90-day Petition to List the Preble's Meadow finding made earlier on the petition as Jumping Mouse as Threatened or 1 The Board field offices are listed under U.S. discussed below. Endangered Government in the telephone directories of the A petition dated August 9, 1994, was following cities: Anchorage, AK, Atlanta, GA, West Chicago, IL, Denver, CO, Arlington, TX, Gardena AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, received by the Service from the (Los Angeles), CA, Miami, FL, Parsippany, NJ Interior. Biodiversity Legal Foundation on (metropolitan New York, NY), Seattle, WA, and ACTION: Notice of 90-day petition August 16, 1994. The petition requests Washington, DC. the Service to list Preble’s meadow 2 Forms are available from the Board field offices finding. (see footnote 1), from Board headquarters in jumping mouse as endangered or Washington, DC, and from the Federal Aviation SUMMARY: The U.S. Fish and Wildlife threatened throughout its range and to Administration Flight Standards District Offices. Service (Service) announces a 90-day designate critical habitat within a Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Proposed Rules 13951 reasonable amount of time following the Listing Factors C. Disease or predation. listing. The following are the five listing Knowledgeable mammalogists (D. The petitioner submitted information criteria as set forth in section 4(a)(1) of Armstrong, pers. comm. 1994; F. that Preble’s meadow jumping mouse the Act and regulations (50 CFR Part Harrington, pers. comm. 1994) do not populations in Colorado and Wyoming 424) promulgated to implement the believe that an epizootic disease caused are imperiled by ongoing and increasing listing provisions of the Act and their the demise of the subspecies. urban, industrial, agricultural, ranching, applicability to the current status of Competition from nonnative rodents and recreational development; wetland Preble’s meadow jumping mouse. (i.e., the Norway rat, Rattus norvegicus; and riparian habitat destruction and/or A. The present or threatened and house mouse, Mus Musculus) and conversion; and inadequacy or lack of destruction, modification, or predation by domestic pets (dogs and governmental protection for the curtailment of its habitat or range. The cats) might also be reasons for this subspecies and its habitats. main cause for Preble’s meadow mouse’s disappearance. Both of these jumping mouse’s decline is directly or nonnative rodents have been recently The Preble’s meadow jumping mouse trapped during small mammal surveys indirectly linked to habitat alteration. is a small rodent in the family from relatively undisturbed riparian The habitat alteration includes Zapodidae. The coloration and the skull habitats. characteristics of the Preble’s meadow widespread destruction and/or D. The inadequacy of existing jumping mouse were described by modification of wet meadows and regulatory mechanisms. Since 1990, the Krutzsch (1954). riparian corridors and indirect Colorado Division of Wildlife (Division) hydrological impacts by anthropogenic has classified Preble’s meadow jumping Krutzsch (1954), Quimby (1951), and structures, including—biking/hiking Armstrong (1972) concur that this mouse as a ‘‘nongame’’ subspecies and trails; riprap and other bank a ‘‘species of special concern’’. This species dwells mostly in low stabilization structures and activities; undergrowth consisting of grasses, forbs, designation protects the species by road and bridge construction; urban, denying permits for the take of the or both; in open wet meadows and industrial, commercial, agricultural, and riparian corridors near forests species (J. Sheppard, Colorado Division ranching development; and sand and of Wildlife, pers. comm. 1994). In 1992, (coniferous and deciduous hardwoods); gravel mining operations. Gravel mining or where tall shrubs and low trees the Wyoming Game and Fish operations continue to expand as Department (Department) classified the provide adequate cover. It prefers housing and road construction activities lowlands with medium to high moisture species Zapus hudsonius as a nongame increase, and these mines are located species under the Wyoming Game and over dry uplands. However, current within wetlands, wet meadows, and research at Rocky Flats (M. Bakeman Fish Commission Chapter LII. This riparian habitats. designation protects the species from and F. Harrington, pers. comm. 1994) The Front Range region in Colorado indicates that the dryer upland habitats take and requires a special permit for has changed from a predominantly the purposes of scientific collection. are preferred to construct their winter prairie habitat intermixed with wet hibernaculums whereas moist lowlands However, this designation does not meadows and intermittent streams and protect the species from incidental are utilized during the spring and gulches to a more agricultural and urban summer months when the Preble’s taking or from actions that may harm setting with its associated housing, the species in order to protect public meadow jumping mouse is most active recreational, commercial, and industrial and reproducing. health. Furthermore, protection by both development. These developments have States is limited to the mouse, itself, and Local mammalogists believe that the brought about profound changes in the measures to protect the habitat are not Preble’s meadow jumping mouse has hydrology of the streams along the Front included. never been common, but the apparent Range. With urbanization has come the E. Other natural or manmade factors extirpation of this species from expansion of park areas and forestation. affecting its continued existence. The previously occupied habitats in With park and open space development introduction of nonnative grasses Wyoming and Colorado and the has come the expansion of hiking and associated with the recent urbanization difficulties finding it in apparently biking trails along and crossing riparian of Colorado’s Front Range may also have adequate habitats may be indicative of habitats that have caused further contributed to the demise of Preble’s a precipitous decline in populations of fragmentation of this mouse’s habitats. jumping mouse by the replacement of the Preble’s meadow jumping mouse (D. Grazing has been identified by some indigenous grasses which this species is Armstrong, University of Colorado, pers. researchers as one of the leading causes dependent upon. These introduced comm. 1992) throughout its range. for its decline (F. Harrington, pers. grasses have less nutritional food value Current information indicates that comm. 1994), but there is little scientific (F. Harrington, pers. comm. 1994). Preble’s meadow jumping mouse is information to adequately show a The use of pesticides and herbicides restricted to only two known relationship between moderate grazing have increased with the urbanization populations in Colorado and apparently and population declines of this mouse. and agricultural development of the none in Wyoming. It is unclear if two Reservoir impoundments could also Front Range. These chemicals could be other populations in Colorado still exist. impact this mouse by inundating contaminating this mouse’s food sources Known populations in Colorado are individuals and/or its habitats. and could cause direct poisoning of the located at the Department of Energy’s B. Overutilization for commercial, species, itself. Rock Flats Plant in northern Jefferson recreational, scientific, or educational County and adjacent City of Boulder purposes. Preble’s meadow jumping Finding Open Space land in southern Boulder mouse has no known commercial or The Service has reviewed the petition County. A specimen tentatively recreational value. Scientific and and accompanying documentation on identified as a Preble’s meadow jumping educational collecting was not the status of Preble’s jumping mouse mouse was captured in 1994 at the Air widespread over the past century. and information concerning potential Force Academy in El Paso County (C. Overutilization apparently did not threats to the species. On the basis of Pague, Colorado Natural Heritage contribute to population declines of this the best scientific and commercial Program, pers. comm. 1994). mouse population. information available, the Service 13952 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Proposed Rules concludes that substantial information References Cited Authority exists to indicate that the requested Armstrong, D.M. 1972. Distribution of The authority for this action is the action may be warranted. The Service mammals in Colorado. University of believes that habitat destruction and Kansas, Museum of Natural History Endangered Species Act of 1973, as modification are the main cause for the Monograph 3:1–415. amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.). species decline. Krutzsch, P.H. 1954. North American List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 17 The petitioner requested that the jumping mice (genus Zapus). Univ. critical habitat also be designated. If the Kansas Publ., Mus. Natural History Endangered and threatened Species, 12-month finding determines that the 7:349–472. Quimby, D.C. 1951. The life history and Exports, Imports, Reporting and petitioned action to list Preble’s recordkeeping requirements, and jumping mouse is warranted, then the ecology of the jumping mouse, Zapus hudsonius. Ecological Monographs Transportation. Act requires that designation of critical 21:61–95. Dated: February 27, 1995. habitat be addressed in a subsequent Whitaker, J.O. 1972. Zapus hudsonius. proposed rule. Mammalian Species 11:1–7. Mollie H. Beattie, The Service’s 90-day finding contains Director, Fish and Wildlife Service. Author more detailed information regarding the [FR Doc. 95–6332 Filed 3–14–95; 8:45 am] above decisions. A copy can be obtained The primary author of this document BILLING CODE 4310±55±M from the Service’s Colorado Field Office is Jose´ Bernardo Garza (See ADDRESSES (see ADDRESSES above). section). 13953 Notices Federal Register Vol. 60, No. 50 Wednesday, March 15, 1995 This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER self-enforcement, or self-implementation, as a FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: contains documents other than rules or regulatory alternative to direct enforcement. Sue Danner, Regional Appeals proposed rules that are applicable to the This draft report follows an earlier study by Coordinator, Pacific Southwest Region, public. Notices of hearings and investigations, Professor Michael, which led to 630 Sansome Street, San Francisco, CA Recommendation 94–1, The Use of Audited committee meetings, agency decisions and 94111, phone: (415) 705–2553. rulings, delegations of authority, filing of Self-Regulation as a Regulatory Technique, petitions and applications and agency adopted by the Administrative Conference in SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On statements of organization and functions are June 1994. The Committee on Regulation will November 4, 1993, 36 CFR Parts 215 examples of documents appearing in this also discuss a new draft report, by Professor and 217 were published requiring section. Ann C. Hodges of the T.C. Williams School publication of legal notice of decisions of Law, University of Richmond, concerning subject to appeal. Sections 215.5 and Dispute Resolution under the Americans 217.5 require notice published in the with Disabilities Act. ADMINISTRATIVE CONFERENCE OF Federal Register advising the public of THE UNITED STATES Attendance is open to the interested public, but limited to the space available. the principal newspapers to be utilized Persons wishing to attend should call the for publishing legal notices. This Committee on Governmental newspaper publication of notices of Processes; Committee on Regulation Office of the Chairman of the Administrative Conference at least one day before the decisions is in addition to direct notice ACTION: Notice of public meetings. meeting. The committee chair, if he deems it to those who have requested notice in appropriate, may permit members of the writing and to those known to be SUMMARY: Pursuant to the Federal public to present oral statements at a interested and affected by a specific Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. No. committee meeting. Any member of the decision. 92–463), notice is hereby given of public may file a written statement with the The legal notice is to identify the committee before, during, or after the meetings of the Committee on decision by title and subject matter; the Governmental Processes and the meeting. Minutes of each meeting will be available upon request. date of the decision; the name and title Committee on Regulation of the Dated: March 10, 1995. of the official making the decision; and Administrative Conference of the how to obtain copies of the decision. In Jeffrey S. Lubbers, United States. addition, the notice is to state the date Research Director. Agency: Committee on Governmental the appeal period begins is the day Processes. [FR Doc. 95–6461 Filed 3–14–95; 8:45 am] following publication of the notice. Dates: Thursday, March 23, 1995, at 2:00 BILLING CODE 6110±01±W In addition to the principal p.m. newspaper listed for each unit, some Location: Office of the Chairman, Forest Supervisors and District Rangers Administrative Conference of the United DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE States, Suite 500, 2120 L Street, NW., have listed newspapers providing additional notice of their decisions. The Washington, DC (Library, 5th Floor). Forest Service For Further Information: Deborah S. timeframe for appeal shall be based on Laufer, Office of the Chairman, Newspapers Used for Publication of the date of publication of the notice in Administrative Conference of the United Legal Notice of Appealable Decisions the first (principal) newspaper listed for States, 2120 L Street, NW., Suite 500, each unit. Washington, DC 20037. Telephone: (202) for Pacific Southwest Region, California The newspapers to be used are as 254–7020. follows: Agency: Committee on Regulation. AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA. Date: Wednesday, March 22, 1995, at 10:00 Angeles National Forest a.m. ACTION: Notice. Location: Office of Steptoe & Johnson, 1330 Angeles Forest Supervisor decisions: Connecticut Avenue, NW., Washington, DC, SUMMARY: This notice lists the Los Angeles Times, Los Angeles, 4th Floor Conference Room. newspapers that will be used by all California For Further Information: David M. Pritzker, ranger districts, forests, and the Arroyo-Seco District Ranger decisions: Office of the Chairman, Administrative Regional Office of the Pacific Southwest Pasadena Star News, Pasadena, Conference of the United States, 2120 L Region to publish legal notice of all California Street, NW., Suite 500, Washington, DC decisions subject to appeal under 36 Newspaper providing additional 20037. Telephone: (202) 254–7020. CFR 215 and 217. The intended effect of notice of Arroyo-Seco decisions: Supplementary Information: The this action is to inform interested Committee on Governmental Processes will Daily News, Los Angeles, California meet to continue discussion of when federal members of the public which Mount Baldy District Ranger decisions: government lawyers and other government newspapers will be used to publish Inland Valley Daily Bulletin, Ontario, employees may participate in public service legal notices of decisions, thereby California activities. There are possible restrictions in allowing them to receive constructive Newspaper providing additional conflict of interest statutes, and both notice of a decision, to provide clear notice of Mount Baldy decisions: government-wide and agency specific evidence of timely notice, and to San Gabriel Valley Tribune, West regulations governing employee participation achieve consistency in administering Covina, California in outside activities, ethics laws, and the use the appeals process. of government property. Saugus District Ranger decisions: The Committee on Regulation will meet to DATES: Publication of legal notices in Daily News, Los Angeles, California continue discussion of a draft report by the listed newspapers will begin with Tujunga District Ranger decisions: Professor Douglas C. Michael of the decisions subject to appeal that are Daily News, Los Angeles, California University of Kentucky College of Law on made on or after January 1, 1995. Valyermo District Ranger decisions: 13954 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices Antelope Valley Press, Palmdale, California Modoc National Forest California Scott River District Ranger decisions: Modoc Forest Supervisor decisions: Siskiyou Daily News, Yreka, Cleveland National Forest Modoc County Record, Alturas, California Modoc County, California Cleveland Forest Supervisor decisions: Ukonom District Ranger decisions: Big Valley District Ranger decisions: San Diego Union, San Diego, Siskiyou Daily News, Yreka, Modoc County Record, Alturas, California California Modoc County, California Descanso District Ranger decisions: Lake Tahoe Basin Devil’s Garden District Ranger San Diego Union, San Diego, decisions: California Lake Tahoe Basin Forest Supervisor Modoc County Record, Alturas, Palomar District Ranger decisions: decisions: Modoc County, California San Diego Union, San Diego, Tahoe Daily Tribune, So. Lake Tahoe, Doublehead District Ranger decisions California Ed Dorado County, California Modoc County Record, Alturas, Newspaper providing additional Lassen National Forest Modoc County, California notice of Palomar decisions: Newspaper providing additional Riverside Press-Enterprise, Riverside, Lassen Forest Supervisor decisions: notice of Doublehead decisions: California Lassen County Times, Susanville, Herald News, Klamath Falls, Oregon Trabuco District Ranger decisions: Lassen County, California Warner Mountain District Ranger Orange County Register, Santa Ana, Almanor District Ranger decisions: decisions: California Chester Progressive, Plumas County, Modoc County Record, Alturas, Riverside Press-Enterprise, Riverside, California Modoc County, California California Eagle Lake District Ranger decisions: Lassen County Times, Susanville, Plumas National Forest Eldorado National Forest Lassen County, California Plumas Forest Supervisor decisions: Eldorado Forest Supervisor decisions: Hat Creek District Range decisions: Feather River Bulletin, Quincy, Mountain Democrat, Placerville, Intermountain News, Burney, Shasta California California County, California Beckwourth District Ranger decisions: Amador District Ranger decisions: Newspaper providing additional Portola Reporter, Portola, California Mountain Democrat, Placerville, notice of Hat Creek decisions: Greenville District Ranger decisions: California Mountain Echo, Fall River Mills, Indian Valley Record, Greenville, Georgetown District Ranger decisions: Shasta County, California California Mountain Democrat, Placerville, La Porte District Ranger decisions: Los Padres National Forest California Oroville Mercury Register, Oroville, Pacific District Ranger decisions: Los Padres Forest Supervisor decisions: California Mountain Democrat, Placerville, Santa Barbara News Press, Santa Milford District Ranger decisions: California Barbara, California Lassen County Times, Susanville, Placerville District Ranger decisions: Ojai District Ranger decisions: Lassen County, California Mountain Democrat, Placerville, Star Free Press, Ventura, California Oroville District Ranger decisions: Oroville Mercury Register, Oroville, California Monterey District Ranger decisions: Salinas Californian, Monterey, California Inyo National Forest California Quincy District Ranger decisions: Feather River Bulletin, Quincy, Inyo Forest Supervisor decisions: Mount Pinos District Ranger decisions: California Inyo Register, Bishop, California The Bakersfield Californian, Kern, Mammoth District Ranger decisions: California San Bernardino National Forest Inyo Register, Bishop, California Santa Barbara District Ranger decisions: San Bernardino Forest Supervisor Mono Lake District Ranger decisions: Santa Barbara News Press, Santa decisions: Inyo Register, Bishop, California Barbara, California San Bernardino Sun, San Bernardino, Mount Whitney District Ranger Santa Lucia District Ranger decisions: California decisions: Telegram Tribune, San Luis Obispo, Arrowhead District Ranger decisions: Inyo Register, Bishop, California California Mountain News, Blue Jay, California White Mountain District Ranger Mendocino National Forest Big Bear District Ranger decisions: decisions: Big Bear Life and Grizzly, Big Bear, Inyo Register, Bishop, California Mendocino Forest Supervisor decisions: California Chico Enterprise-Record, Chico, Klamath National Forest Cajon District Ranger decisions: California San Bernardino Sun, San Bernardino, Klamath Forest Supervisor decisions: Corning District Ranger decisions: California Siskiyou Daily News, Yreka, Chico Enterprise-Record, Chico, San Gorgonio District Ranger decisions: California California Yucaipa News Mirror, Yucaipa, Happy Camp District Ranger decisions: Covelo District Ranger decisions: California Siskiyou Daily News, Yreka, Ukiah Daily Journal, Ukiah, California San Jacinto District Ranger decisions: California Stonyford District Ranger decisions: Idyllwild Town Crier, Idyllwild, Goosenest District Ranger decisions: Chico Enterprise-Record, Chico, California Siskiyou Daily News, Yreka, California California Upper Lake District Ranger decisions: Sequoia National Forest Oak Knoll District Ranger decisions: Ukiah Daily Journal, Ukiah, California Sequoia Forest Supervisor decisions: Siskiyou Daily News, Yreka, Chico Tree Improvement Center Porterville Recorder, Porterville, California Director decisions: California Salmon River District Ranger decisions: Chico Enterprise-Record, Chico, Cannell Meadow District Ranger Siskiyou Daily News, Yreka, California decisions: Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices 13955 Porterville Recorder, Porterville, The Union Democrat, Sonora, Texas. It was formally filed on February California California 8, 1995. Greenhorn District Ranger decisions: Calaveras District Ranger decisions: The FTZ Board approved subzone Porterville Recorder, Porterville, The Union Democrat, Sonora, status for the Tuboscope steel tubular California California products inspection and coating facility Hot Springs District Ranger decisions: Groveland District Ranger decisions: in Harris County, Texas, in 1992 Porterville Recorder, Porterville, The Union Democrat, Sonora, (Subzone 84I; Board Order 609; 57 FR California California 57729; 12/7/92). The approval was Hume Lake District Ranger decisions: Mi-Wok District Ranger decisions: subject to a restriction that allowed the Porterville Recorder, Porterville, The Union Democrat, Sonora, use of zone procedures for export California California activity only. Tule River Ranger District decisions: Summit District Ranger decisions: Tuboscope is now requesting that the Porterville Recorder, Porterville, The Union Democrat, Sonora, export-only restriction be modified so California California that Customs duties can be deferred while the company conducts activity for Tahoe National Forest Shasta-Trinity National Forest the domestic market under zone Shasta-Trinity National Forest Tahoe Forest Supervisor decisions: procedures. The modified restriction decisions: Grass Valley Union, Grass Valley, would require the company to elect Record Searchlight, Redding, Shasta California privileged foreign status on all County, California Downieville District Ranger decisions: merchandise admitted to the subzone. Big Bar District Ranger decisions: Mountain Messenger, Downieville, While the change would not result in Record Searchlight, Redding, Shasta California significant new Customs savings, it County, California Foresthill District Ranger decisions: would allow the company to operate the Hayfork District Ranger decisions: Auburn Journal, Auburn, California plant under a single inventory control Record Searchlight, Redding, Shasta Nevada City District Ranger decisions: system that meets Customs County, California Grass Valley Union, Grass Valley, requirements. The request indicated that McCloud District Ranger decisions: California the use of zone procedures as proposed Record Searchlight, Redding, Shasta Sierraville District Ranger decisions: would help the facility maintain its County, California Mountain Messenger, Downieville, international competitiveness. Mount Shasta District Ranger decisions: California Public comment on the proposal is Record Searchlight, Redding, Shasta Newspapers providing additional invited from interested parties. County, California notice of Sierraville decisions: Submissions (original and 3 copies) Shasta Lake District Ranger decisions: Sierra Booster, Loyalton, California shall be addressed to the Board’s Record Searchlight, Redding, Shasta Portola Recorder, Portola, California Executive Secretary at the address County, California Truckee District Ranger decisions: below. The closing period for their Weaverville District Ranger decisions: Sierra Sun, Truckee, Nevada County, receipt is May 1, 1995. Record Searchlight, Redding, Shasta California A copy of the application and County, California Newspaper providing additional accompanying exhibits will be available Yolla Bolla District Ranger decisions: notice of Truckee decisions: for public inspection at the following Record Searchlight, Redding, Shasta Tahoe World, Tahoe City, Placer location: Office of the Executive County, California County, California Secretary, Foreign-Trade Zones Board, U.S. Department of Commerce, Room Sierra National Forest Dated: March 8, 1995. James A. Lawrence, 3716, 14th and Pennsylvania Avenue, Sierra Forest Supervisor decisions: Deputy Regional Forester. NW., Washington, DC 20230. Fresno Bee, Fresno, California Dated: March 6, 1995. Kings River District Ranger decisions: [FR Doc. 95–6317 Filed 3–14–95; 8:45 am] John J. Da Ponte, Jr., Fresno Bee, Fresno, California BILLING CODE 3410±02±M Pineridge District Ranger decisions: Executive Secretary. Fresno Bee, Fresno, California [FR Doc. 95–6388 Filed 3–14–95; 8:45 am] Mariposa District Ranger decisions: DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE BILLING CODE 3510±DS±P Fresno Bee, Fresno, California [Docket A(32b1)±1±95 Minarets District Ranger decisions: International Trade Administration Fresno Bee, Fresno, California Foreign-Trade Zones Board; Foreign- Six Rivers National Forest Trade Zone 84ÐHouston, Texas; Initiation of Antidumping and Tuboscope Vetco International, Inc., Countervailing Duty Administrative Six Rivers Forest Supervisor decisions: (Steel Tubular Products), Harris Reviews Times Standard, Eureka, California County, Texas; Request for Gasquet District Ranger decisions: Modification of Restriction AGENCY: Import Administration, Del Norte Triplicate, Crescent City, International Trade Administration, California A request has been submitted to the Department of Commerce. Lower Trinity District Ranger decisions: Foreign-Trade Zones Board (the Board) ACTION: Notice of initiation of The Kourier, Willow Creek, California by the Port of Houston Authority, antidumping and countervailing duty Mad River District Ranger decisions: grantee of FTZ 84, pursuant to administrative reviews. Times Standard, Eureka, California § 400.32(b)(1) of the Board’s regulations Orleans District Ranger decisions: for modification of the export-only SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce The Kourier, Willow Creek, California restriction in FTZ Board Order 609 (the Department) has received requests authorizing Subzone 84I at the to conduct administrative reviews of Stanislaus National Forest Tuboscope Vetco International, Inc. various antidumping and countervailing Stanislaus Forest Supervisor decisions: (Tuboscope) plant in Harris County, duty orders and findings with February 13956 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices anniversary dates. In accordance with Washington, DC 20230, telephone: (202) orders and findings with February the Commerce Regulations, we are 482–4737. anniversary dates. initiating those administrative reviews. SUPPLEMENTATY INFORMATION: Initiation of Reviews EFFECTIVE DATE: March 15, 1995. Background In accordance with sections 19 CFR FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 353.22(c) and 355.22(c), we are The Department has received timely initiating administrative reviews of the Holly A. Kuga, Office of Antidumping requests, in accordance with 19 CFR following antidumping and Compliance, Import Administration, 353.22(a) and 355.22(a) (1994), for countervailing duty orders and findings. International Trade Administration, administrative reviews of various We intend to issue the final results of U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th antidumping and countervailing duty these reviews not later than February Street and Constitution Avenue NW., 29, 1996. Period to be reviewed Antidumping duty proceedings India: Forged Stainless Steel Flanges: A±533±809 Akai Impex Ltd...... 02/09/94±01/31/95 Japan: Mechanical Transfer Presses: A±588±810 Aida Engineering, Ltd., Hitachi Zosen Corporation, Ishikawajima-Harima Heavy Industries Co., Ltd., Komatsu, Ltd., Kurimoto, Ltd ...... 02/01/94±01/31/95 The People's Republic of China: Axes/Adzes; Bars/Wedges; Hammers/Sledges; and Picks/Mattocks: A±570±803 Fujian Machinery & Equipment Import & Export Corporation (FMEC), Henan Machinery Import & Export Co., Shandong Machinery Import & Export Corporation (SMC), Tianjin Machinery Import & Export Co ...... 02/01/94±01/31/95 All other exporters of axes/adzes, bars/wedges, hammers/sledges, or picks/mattocks from the People's Republic of China are conditionally covered by this review The People's Republic of China: Natural Paint Brushes: A±570±501 Yixing Sanai Brush Making Co. Ltd., Eastar B.F. (Thailand) Company Ltd., Hebei Animal By-Products I/E Corp., China National Metals & Minerals I/E Corp., Zhenjiang Trading Corp., Inner Mongolia Autonomous Region Light Industrial Products I/E Corp., China National Native Produce and Animal By-Products I/E Corp ...... 02/01/94±01/31/95 All other exporters of paint brushes from the People's Republic of China are conditionally covered by this review Countervailing duty proceedings Peru: Cotton Yarn, C±333±002 ...... 01/01/94±12/31/94 Interested parties must submit EFFECTIVE DATE: March 15, 1995. circumstances allegation is filed later applications for disclosure under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: than 20 days before the scheduled date administrative protective orders in David R. Boyland, Office of of the preliminary determination, we accordance with 19 CFR 353.34(b) and Countervailing Investigations, Import must issue our preliminary 355.34(b). Administration, International Trade determination no later than 30 days These initiations and this notice are Administration, U.S. Department of after the allegation is filed. in accordance with section 751(a) of the Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (19 Section 733(e)(1) of the Act provides Avenue, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20230; that the Department will preliminarily U.S.C. 1675(a)) and 19 CFR 353.22(c)(1) telephone (202) 482–4198. and 355.22(c)(1). determine that critical circumstances Preliminary Negative Determination exist if we determine that there is a Dated: March 8, 1995. of Critical Circumstances: The reasonable basis to believe or suspect: Joseph A. Spetrini, Department of Commerce (the (A)(i) There is a history of dumping in Deputy Assistant Secretary for Compliance. ‘‘Department’’) published its preliminary determination of sales at the United States or elsewhere of the [FR Doc. 95–6395 Filed 3–14–95; 8:45 am] class or kind of merchandise which is BILLING CODE 3510±DS±M less than fair value in this investigation on October 24, 1994 (59 FR 53414). On the subject of the investigation, or (ii) February 1, 1995, petitioner alleged that the person by whom, or for whose [A±549±810] critical circumstances exist with respect account, the merchandise was imported to imports of the subject merchandise. knew or should have known that the Notice of Preliminary Negative exporter was selling the merchandise Determination of Critical On February 10, 1995, we received data from Thai Merry Co., Ltd. (‘‘Thai which is the subject of the investigation Circumstances: Disposable Pocket at less than its fair value, and Lighters From Thailand Merry’’), the respondent in this investigation, on U.S. shipment to the (B) there have been massive imports AGENCY: International Trade United States. of the class or kind of merchandise Administration, Import Administration, In accordance with 19 CFR which is the subject of the investigation Department of Commerce. 353.16(b)(2)(ii), when a critical over a relatively short period. Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices 13957 History of Dumping: To support the least three months later. The has been examined most closely by the claim that the first prong of the statutory Department considers this period Department. Based on an examination of requirement is met, petitioner cited the because it is the period immediately past imports from Thailand, the highest European Community’s November 19, prior to a preliminary determination in volume of imports prior to the post- 1991, imposition of antidumping duties which exporters of the subject petition period occurred in August on gas-fueled, non-refillable pocket flint merchandise could take advantage of 1993. May 1994’s volume of shipments lighters from the People’s Republic of the knowledge of the dumping was the only month during the post- China, Japan, Korea, and Thailand investigation to increase exports to the petition period in which the level of (Council Regulation (EEC) No. 3433/91). United States without being subject to shipments went outside the range Therefore, because petitioner antidumping duties (see, Final established in August 1993. Hence, the established a history of dumping of the Determination of Sales at Less Than surge in shipments that occurred in May subject merchandise, we are not Fair Value of Certain Internal- represented a unique ‘‘spike’’ in the required to consider whether the Combustion, Industrial Forklift Trucks trend of shipments. importer knew or should have known from Japan, (53 FR 12552, April 15, Also, the information provided to the that the exporter was selling the subject 1988)). For purposes of this final Department shows that this dramatic merchandise at less than fair value. determination we are using as our increase in shipments was not Massive Imports: Because we have comparison period five months prior to sustained. If respondent was attempting preliminarily determined that the first and five months subsequent to the to take advantage of the knowledge of an statutory criterion is met for finding initiation of this investigation. antidumping investigation to export critical circumstances, we must Based on Thai Merry’s shipment data, prior to suspension of liquidation, we consider whether imports of the imports increased by an amount greater would expect the increase in shipment merchandise have been massive over a than 15 percent between the pre- and to be sustained up until the preliminary relatively short period in accordance post-petition periods. determination. This did not occur. with 19 CFR 353.16(f) and (g). Seasonality: We found no evidence of Finally, a significant percentage of the 19 CFR 353.16(f) and 353.16(g) directs seasonality, pursuant to section May 1994 shipments consisted of the Department to look at the following 353.16(1)(ii) of the Department’s standard lighters which were to be factors to determine whether imports regulations. banned pursuant to the July 1994 CPSC have been massive over a relatively Share of Domestic Consumption: regulation. (Note: the CPSC gave notice short period of time: (1) The volume and Based on the information supplied in of the impending ban on July 12, 1993. value of the imports; (2) seasonal trends the critical circumstances allegation, Thus, respondent was aware of the (if applicable); and (3) the share of Thai Merry’s market share of domestic CPSC ban one year prior to its effective domestic consumption accounted for by consumption (i.e., total imports from date. Additionally, orders shipped in the imports. Thailand as a percentage of total May 1994 would arrive in the United When examining volume and value domestic consumption) between the States in June 1994; i.e., prior to the data, the Department typically compares pre- and post-petition periods did not CPSC ban.) Based on this information, it the export volume for equal periods change by an amount greater than three is reasonable to assume that the CPSC immediately preceding and following percentage points. (See, the February 27, regulation drove the sharp increase in the filing of the petition (see, 1995 memorandum to Susan H. imports between the pre- and post- Preliminary Affirmative Determination Kuhbach, Director of Countervailing petition periods, as opposed to the of Critical Circumstances: Certain Cased Investigations from David R. Boyland, possible suspension of liquidation. Pencils From the People’s Republic of Case Analyst for a full discussion of this Conclusion: Based on (1) an China, (59 FR 44128 (August 26, 1994)). issue.) evaluation of apparent domestic Under 19 CFR 353.16(f)(2), unless Other Factors: Respondent argues that consumption during the pre- and post- imports of the subject merchandise have the increase in shipment was in petition period, as calculated by increased by at least 15 percent, we will response to a Consumer Product Safety petitioner, (2) Thai Merry’s share of not consider the imports to have been Commission (‘‘CPSC’’) regulation which domestic consumption during the pre- ‘‘massive.’’ came into effect on July 12, 1994, and and post-petition periods, (3) the Because a determination of critical was not an attempt to circumvent a shipment data provided by respondent circumstances should be based on potential antidumping duty order. as compared to previous periods, and company-specific shipment information Respondent also argues that section (4) consideration of the circumstances (see, Final Determination of Sales at 353.16(f)(2) and past precedent allow surrounding the large increase in Less Than Fair Value: Certain Hot- the Department to consider the impact shipment in May 1994, we preliminarily Rolled Carbon Steel Flat Products, of the CPSC regulation on imports in determine that critical circumstances do Certain Cold-Rolled Carbon Steel Flat determining whether they were massive. not exist. (A more detailed analysis of Products, and Certain Cut-to-Length Respondent cites a DOC position the critical circumstances allegation is Carbon Steel Plate from Belgium, 58 FR comment in Antidumping Duties: Final contained in the February 27, 1995 37083 (July 9, 1993)), we requested that Rule which states that the 15 percent memorandum to Susan H. Kuhbach, Thai Merry provide shipment test is ‘‘not intended to limit the Director, Office of Countervailing information for the period from Department’s discretion or Investigations from David R. Boyland, December 1, 1993 through April 30, responsibility to consider in each case Case Analyst.) 1994 (‘‘pre-petition’’ period) and May 1, the factors relevant to a decision ITC Notification: In accordance with 1994 through September 30, 1994 regarding whether imports are section 733(f) of the Act, we have (‘‘post-petition’’ period). Pursuant to ‘massive’ ’’ (see, Final Rule, 54 FR notified the ITC of our determination. section 353.16(g) of the Department’s 12742, 12751 (March 28, 1989)). Public Comment: Since this antidumping regulations, in making With respect to the increase in determination is being made subsequent critical circumstances determination, shipment between the pre- and post- to the due dates for public comment as the Department normally considers the petition periods, and the circumstances published in our notice of preliminary period beginning on the first day of the that surround it, May 1994 is the month determination of sales at less than fair month of the initiation and ending at within the post-petition period which value, we will accept written comments 13958 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices limited to this preliminary determinations that fresh cut roses from Prisma determination on critical circumstances Colombia and Ecuador were being sold Issue 1: Prisma argues that the if they are submitted to the Assistant at less than fair value (60 FR 6980, computer program used to calculate its Secretary for Import Administration no 7019). Subsequent to the final margin contained an error which later than March 6, 1995 determinations, we received timely incorrectly computed the per-unit This determination is published ministerial error allegations from certain commission for all U.S. sales pursuant to section 733(f) of the Act. respondents in the Colombian and observations. Stating that the Dated: March 3, 1995. Ecuadorian investigations pursuant to Department intended to calculate a U.S. Susan G. Esserman, 19 CFR 353.28. Section 751(f) of the Act commission for ten specific U.S. sales Assistant Secretary for Import defines a ‘‘ministerial error’’ to be an observations, Prisma asserts that the Administration. error ‘‘in addition, subtraction or other program mistakenly caused every U.S. [FR Doc. 95–6402 Filed 3–14–95; 8:45 am] arithmetic function, clerical error sales commission to be recalculated. In resulting from inaccurate copying, BILLING CODE 3510±DS±P addition, Prisma claims that there is duplication, or the like, and any other also a typographical error in the type of unintentional error which the calculation of commissions for one sales [A±301±801 and A±331±801] Secretary considers ministerial.’’ Below observation. is a discussion of the alleged errors that We agree with Prisma that these are Amended Final Determinations of we determined to be ministerial errors ministerial errors, and have revised the Sales at Less Than Fair Value: Fresh as defined by section 751(f) of the Act. computer program accordingly. Cut Roses From Colombia and These, and the alleged errors that the Issue 2: With respect to inventory Ecuador Department determined not to be carrying costs, Prisma notes that it AGENCY: Import Administration, ministerial in nature, are detailed included the period normally covered International Trade Administration, further in the Decision Memoranda from by inventory carrying cost in its Department of Commerce. Gary Taverman to Barbara R. Stafford, imputed credit calculation. As such, EFFECTIVE DATE: March 15, 1995. dated March 3, 1995, which is on file in Prisma argues that the Department FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: the Import Administration Central double-counted this expense by James Maeder or James Terpstra, Office Records Unit, Room B–099 of the Main calculating a separate inventory carrying of Antidumping Investigations, Import Commerce Building. cost. Petitioner maintains that the Department imputed inventory carrying Administration, International Trade Colombia Administration, U.S. Department of cost for seven days as best information Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution On February 7 and 8, respondents available (BIA) for those respondents Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230; Rosex Group, Prisma Group, Agricola that failed to provide the data, and telephone: (202) 482–3330 or (202) 482– Bojaca, Grupo Sabana, Flores Mocari, argues that because Prisma did not 3965, respectively. Caicedo Group, Grupo Intercontinental, submit the data in the requested form, and Grupo Papagayo, alleged that the it cannot now argue double-counting to Amendments to the Final Department made ministerial errors in circumvent the application of BIA. Determinations its final determination and requested We agree with Prisma. We used BIA We are amending the final that the Department correct these errors. for inventory carrying cost for those determinations of sales at less than fair Petitioner provided comments on these respondents who had related parties in value of fresh cut roses from Colombia allegations on February 14, 1995. the United States and did not report and Ecuador to reflect the correction of inventory carrying costs on their ministerial errors made in the margin Rosex Group exporter’s sales price (ESP) sales. calculations in these determinations. However, because Prisma does not have Issue 1: Rosex Group states that the a related party in the United States, we Because corrections of ministerial errors Department made a ministerial error in for one company in the Colombian incorrectly calculated inventory the calculation of its per unit credit carrying costs. Therefore, we have investigation results in its exclusion expense. Rosex Group stated that it from any potential antidumping order, adjusted for this ministerial error. changed its reported interest rate in its Issue 3: Prisma contends that the we are issuing this notice prior to the December 5, 1994, sales listing from a final determination of the U.S. Department’s inflation adjustment dollar-denominated rate to a peso- computation incorrectly assumed that International Trade Commission. These denominated interest rate. Because amendments to the final determinations all companies within the Prisma Group Rosex Group calculated its U.S. imputed did not include the 1992 inflation are being published in accordance with credit using a peso-denominated rate, it 19 CFR 353.28(c). adjustment in their submitted contends that the Department should amortization expense. However, Applicable Statute and Regulations have adjusted this rate instead of a respondent notes that the cost dollar-denominated rate. Petitioner Unless otherwise indicated, all verification report demonstrates that maintains that the Department’s citations to the statute and to the Prisma did include the 1992 inflation computer instructions to change the Department’s regulations are in adjustment for farm Del Campo in its peso-based interest rate to a dollar-based reference to the provisions in effect on submitted amortization expenses. rate appear to be correct. December 31, 1994. We agree. The cost verification report We agree with respondent that this at page 9 indicates that one of the seven Case History and Amendments of the error constitutes a ministerial error as Prisma Group farms (Del Campo) did Final Determinations defined by section 751(f) of the Act. It include in its submitted cost In accordance with section 735(d) of was the Department’s intention to use a information its inflation adjusted pre- the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the U.S. interest rate of 7.575 percent in production material amortization costs Act), on February 6, 1995, the Rosex Group’s imputed credit for years prior to the period of Department of Commerce (the calculation. Therefore, we have investigation (POI). The other six farms Department) published its final corrected this ministerial error. that make up the Prisma Group did not Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices 13959 make adjustments for inflation. Because interest expense to the mini-roses already net of returns. Therefore, Mocari we did not intend to make an because: (1) Respondent indicated that requests that the Department recalculate adjustment for Del Campo that had an insignificant portion (less than one its cost of manufacture (COM) using the already been made, we have percent) of the total cultivated area of sales quantity indicated on line 8 of the recalculated the inflation adjustment. one of the three farms within the Bojaca CV tables. In addition, Mocari requests Group produced mini-roses; and, (2) that the Department not subtract Bojaca because the cost of production for mini- additional stems from the amount Issue 1: Bojaca contends that it was roses, the basis used to allocate interest reported on line 8 of the CV tables incorrect for the Department to use BIA expense to Bojaca’s different products, because such action represents an to impute amounts for brokerage and was not provided by the company. We improper double-counting of returns. duties whenever the values for those intended to compute interest expense by The petitioner states that Mocari expenses were reported as zero for U.S. excluding only the portion of interest should have reported an amount which ESP customers. Bojaca asserts that it expense that relates to the dairy farm. was inclusive of returns in line 8 of the was only for customer 4 that there were We have made this adjustment, but only CV tables instead of an amount which zero values for brokerage or duties, and as it related to the dairy farm. was net of returns. The petitioner argues maintains that because it could not that Mocari should have notified the segregate these amounts, it reported the Mocari Department earlier that the amount combined amounts under air freight. Issue 1: Mocari argues that the reported on line 8 of the CV table was Petitioner argues that Bojaca failed to Department mistakenly deducted air net of returns. Therefore, petitioner cite to any questionnaire response or freight expenses which it did not incur maintains that clerical error comments verification exhibit which informed the on its purchase price (PP) sales are not the forum in which to determine Department that brokerage and duty transactions. Mocari points out that new factual claims. expenses were consolidated with air these sales were made on an FOB We agree with respondent. Sales freight. Petitioner asserts that Bojaca did Bogota basis, and requests that the verification exhibit 19 shows that the not explain why a reasonable allocation Department deduct the air freight amount Mocari reported on line 8 of the methodology could not segregate these expenses from only the ESP sales CV tables is net of returns. Accordingly, amounts, and adds that it is not clear transactions. The petitioner argues that we have recalculated the COM, interest, that brokerage and duty expenses were Mocari had ample opportunity and general and administrative always included in air freight. throughout the investigation to correct expenses for Mocari using the quantity Therefore, petitioner asserts that the any error in reporting air freight. In amount on line 8 of the CV tables. Department’s choice of BIA to fill addition, the petitioner maintains that Further, because this figure is net of Bojaca’s reported zero values does not Mocari has not provided a basis which returns, we did not deduct an additional constitute a ministerial error. demonstrates that its proposed amount for returns from this figure; this We agree with respondent in part. We correction would be limited only to action would have represented double- verified that Bojaca had included its removing erroneous expenses. counting. duty and brokerage expenses in its air We agree with respondent. We Grupo Intercontinental freight expenses for customer 4. verified that Mocari did not pay air Therefore, we incorrectly applied BIA to freight for PP sales. Therefore, we have Issue 1: Grupo Intercontinental customer 4. However, we found that corrected the error by deducting (Intercontinental) alleges that in its CV there are zero values for other ESP amounts for air freight from ESP sales calculation, the Department erred in its customers. Therefore, we have only. calculation of a home market packing continued to use BIA for the other ESP Issue 2: Mocari claims that the cost as BIA. Intercontinental argues that customers that have a zero value Department mistakenly included it in the Department should have used its reported in these fields. the list of companies that had no U.S. U.S. packing cost, as required by section Issue 2: Bojaca argues that the borrowings during the POI and should 353.50(a)(3) of the Department’s Department incorrectly calculated not have used BIA to calculate imputed regulations. Intercontinental further constructed value (CV) packing expense credit expenses and inventory carrying states that instead of using the verified by using total packing expenses for cost. Mocari maintains that the U.S. packing expense in its CV roses, irrespective of destination, rather Department should have used its actual calculation, the Department used a than total U.S. packing expense. borrowing rate instead of the publicly home market BIA amount that should We agree. We intended to use total ranged interest rate to calculate imputed have been applied only to home market U.S. packing expenses rather than total credit expenses and inventory carrying sales of export quality roses for which packing expenses in our CV calculation. costs. no packing costs were reported. We have recalculated CV packing We agree with respondent. We Therefore, Intercontinental requests that expense to correct this error. intended to use Mocari’s actual interest the Department apply the U.S. packing Issue 3: Bojaca argues that the rate in our imputed credit expenses and expense in its CV calculation. Department erroneously allocated the inventory carrying costs calculations. We agree that the Department erred in entire group-wide interest expense to Mocari’s financial statements show that using the BIA home market packing roses, when it should have allocated it paid interest on short-term borrowings expense for CV. While we properly only the proportion of the group-wide during the POI. Accordingly, we have applied the per stem packing cost for interest expense associated with rose revised Mocari’s imputed credit purposes of the cost test, we intended to activities. Bojaca argues that the interest calculation and inventory carrying cost use the verified U.S. packing amount for expense associated with the dairy farm to use its short-term dollar-denominated calculating CV. Therefore, we revised and mini-roses should not have been interest rate. our calculation to correct this clerical included in the calculation. Issue 3: Mocari claims that the error. We agree. We intended to exclude Department should not have subtracted Issue 2: Intercontinental states that from our cost calculations the portion of the total number of stems returned from the Department intended to correct interest expense related to the dairy the sales quantity indicated on the CV Colombian Flower Council (CFC) fees farm. We purposely did not allocate any tables because the amount reported was for certain customers in certain months 13960 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices and that, in making the programming the Department’s failure to allocate the We agree. Because we inadvertently changes necessary to accomplish this combined interest expenses to GAB was overlooked the inclusion of the task, the Department mistakenly inadvertent, and that the Department capitalization and amortization of prior changed the CFC fees for all customers intended to allocate the combined period vegetative period costs, we have in all months. We agree, and have interest expenses of the four grower/ adjusted the CV to allow for the current corrected this error. exporters over their combined stems period capitalization of vegetative Caicedo Group sold for all flower types. period costs. We agree. We intended to allocate the Issue 3: Arbusta alleges that the Issue 1: Caicedo states that the combined interest expense of the four Department mistakenly added actual Department’s inflation adjustment was grower/exporters to the rose operations historical depreciation expenses to CV intended to be a reasonable estimate of of those companies, including instead of only the revaluation of those the effects of inflation on depreciation Inverfloral’s GAB division. Therefore, expenses. Arbusta contends that this and amortization expenses denominated we recalculated Caicedo’s interest addition double counts the amount of in historical pesos. Caicedo argues, expense by first allocating the total historical depreciation. however, that the Department erred in combined interest expenses of the four We agree. We inadvertently added applying its inflation adjustment to the companies between Inverfloral/GAB historical depreciation to CV. Therefore, company’s total reported cost of (non-grower) and the other three because we unintentionally double- cultivation, including current companies (which all grow flowers) counted this expense, we have corrected cultivation costs, and that this is the based on the ratio of Inverfloral/GAB’s the error. equivalent of punitive ‘‘BIA.’’ Caicedo productive and long-term assets to the Issue 4: Arbusta states that in its CV further argues that its record provides total productive and long-term assets of calculation the Department used an information regarding the company’s all four companies. Because companies incorrect packing expense. Petitioner 1993 depreciation and amortization of generally borrow capital in order to also notes that the packing cost used in pre-production expenses. finance the purchase of such assets, we the CV calculation for Arbusta conflicts We agree that the Department with the Department’s analysis mistakenly adjusted Caicedo’s current consider this approach to be the most reasonable indicator of the borrowing memorandum. cultivation costs for inflation. We agree with both petitioner and Accordingly, we have recalculated the needs of the rose production versus bouquet assembly sides of Caicedo’s respondent, and determine this to be a inflation adjustment by applying the ministerial error. Accordingly, we have determined inflation rate to non-current, operations. For each of the four grower/ exporters, we included in productive corrected the packing expenses used in pre-production amortization and CV. depreciation costs only. assets the year-end 1993 financial Issue 2: Caicedo argues that the statement balances for inventory, crop Guaisa investments, crops in development, and Department should adjust the cull Guaisa contends that the Department long-term assets, including fixed assets. revenue to recognize the insurance reallocated certain expenses to roses compensation proceeds the company In order to allocate the remaining based on an incorrect rose area received for hailstorm damage. Caicedo interest expense between rose and other percentage for Guaisa farm. states that the insurance proceeds, flower growing operations at the three We agree with Guaisa in part. We which were originally reported as an production companies, we used the found a typographical error in our offset to overhead, were subsequently ratio of rose cultivation area to total calculation of the correct roses reclassified by Caicedo and included in cultivation area, for the three companies cultivated area. However, the rose area the balance for cull revenue. Caicedo that grow flowers. This methodology is calculated by Guaisa that it requested concludes that the Department made a consistent with that used for several of the Department use in its recalculation ministerial error by excluding the the other Colombian rose growing is incorrect. Accordingly, we have reduction in rose production costs companies. corrected the typographical error we resulting from the insurance proceeds. Ecuador found in our original calculation and We agree. We have reduced Caicedo’s rejected the figure calculated by Guaisa. total costs by the insurance proceeds On February 8, 1995, Arbusta-Agritab received. (Arbusta) and Guanguilqui Agro Scope of Investigation Issue 3: Caicedo contends that the Industrial S.A. (Guaisa) made timely The products covered by these Department made two ministerial errors allegations that the Department made investigations are fresh cut roses, in its allocation of interest expenses. ministerial errors in its final including sweethearts or miniatures, First, Caicedo argues that the determination. On February 16, 1995, intermediates, and hybrid teas, whether Department erred in allocating interest petitioner provided its comments on the imported as individual blooms (stems) expense over total export quality rose alleged errors. or in bouquets or bunches. Loose rose stems sold during the POI. Because the Arbusta foliage (greens), loose rose petals and particular companies involved produce detached buds are excluded from these and sell other types of flowers, Caicedo Issue 1: Arbusta states that the investigations. Roses are classifiable maintains that the Department should Department incorrectly multiplied DHL under subheadings 0603.10.6010 and have allocated interest expense over delivery charges by quantity before 0603.10.6090 of the Harmonized Tariff total flower stems. Second, Caicedo subtracting this expense from U.S. price. Schedule of the United States (HTSUS). claims that the Department failed to We agree. Because we did not intend The HTSUS subheadings are provided allocate any of the combined interest to multiply the per stem DHL expense for convenience and customs purposes. expense to Great American Bouquet by quantity, we have corrected this The written description of the scope of S.A. (GAB), a division of Inverfloral error. these investigations is dispositive. LTDA (Inverfloral) that does not grow Issue 2: Arbusta argues that the flowers, but, rather, incorporates Department incorrectly disallowed the Suspension of Liquidation numerous flower types, including roses, company’s capitalization of costs In accordance with 19 U.S.C. 1673b, into bouquets. Caicedo concludes that incurred during the vegetative period. we are directing the U.S. Customs Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices 13961 Service to continue to suspend consumption on or after the date of which the foreign market value of the liquidation of all entries of fresh cut publication of this notice in the Federal merchandise subject to this roses from Colombia and Ecuador, as Register. The Customs Service shall investigation exceeds United States defined in the ‘‘Scope of Investigation’’ require a cash deposit or the posting of price as shown in the table below. The section of this notice, that are entered, a bond on all entries equal to the following is a list of all the final or withdrawn from warehouse, for estimated weighted-average amount by margins, including the amended final margins, in these investigations. Margin Manufacturer/Producer/Exporter percent Colombia Flores Mocari S.A. (and its related farms Cultivos Miramonte and Devor Colombia) ...... 2.86 Rosex (and its related farms Rosex Ltda. La Esquina and Paraiso Farms), Induflora Ltda., and Rosas Sausalito Ltda.) ...... 2.44 Grupo Prisma (and its related farms Flores del Campo Ltda., Flores Prisma S.A., Flores Acuarela S.A., Flores el Pincel S.A., Rosas del Colombia Ltda., Agropecuaria Cuernavaca Ltda.) ...... 0.00 Grupo Bojaca (and its related farms Agricola Bojaca Ltda., Universal Flowers, and Plantas y Flores Tropicales Ltda. (Tropifora)) ... 20.66 Caicedo Group (and its related farms Agrobosque, Productos el Rosal S.A., Productos el Zorro S.A., Exportaciones Bochia S.A. - Flora Ltda., Flores del Cauca, Aranjuez S.A., Andalucia S.A., Inverfloral S.A., and Great America Bouquet) ...... 15.07 Grupo Intercontinental (and its related farms Flora Intercontinental and Flores Aguablanca) ...... 3.92 All Others ...... 5.53 Ecuador Arbusta-Agritab (and its related farms Agrisabe, Agritab, and Flaris) ...... 4.01 Guanguilqui Agro Industrial S.A. (and its related farm Indipasisa) ...... 14.29 All Others ...... 5.41 These amended final determinations Case History vapor pressure at 75 degrees fahrenheit are published in accordance with Since the publication of the (24 degrees Celsius) exceeds a gauge section 751(f) of the Act and 19 CFR preliminary determination in the pressure of 15 pounds per square inch. 353.28(c). Federal Register, 59 FR 40525 (August Non-refillable pocket lighters are Dated: March 3, 1995. 9, 1994), the following events have imported under subheading Susan G. Esserman, occurred. 9613.10.0000 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States Assistant Secretary for Import On September 13, 1994, at petitioner’s Administration. request, we extended the final (‘‘HTSUS’’). Refillable, disposable pocket lighters would be imported [FR Doc. 95–6403 Filed 3–14–95; 8:45 am] determination in this investigation to under subheading 9613.220.0000. BILLING CODE 3510±DS±P coincide with the final determination in the companion antidumping Although the HTSUS subheadings are investigation (59 FR 46961). provided for convenience and Customs On November 3, 1994, respondents purposes, our written description of the [C±549±811] requested that the Department postpone scope of this proceeding is dispositive. Final Negative Countervailing Duty the final antidumping and Applicable Statute and Regulations countervailing duty determinations. Determination: Disposable Pocket Unless otherwise indicated, all Lighters From Thailand Therefore, on November 16, 1994, the Department published in the Federal citations to the statute and to the AGENCY: Import Administration, Register a notice postponing the final Department’s regulations are references International Trade Administration, antidumping and countervailing duty to the provisions as they existed on Department of Commerce. determinations until no later than December 31, 1994. March 8, 1995 (59 FR 59211). References to the Countervailing EFFECTIVE DATE: March 15, 1995. We conducted verification of the Duties: Notice of Proposed Rulemaking FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: responses submitted on behalf of the and Request for Public Comments, 54 Elizabeth A. Graham, Office of Government of Thailand (GOT) and FR 23366 (May 31, 1989) (Proposed Countervailing Investigations, Import Thai Merry Co., Ltd. (Thai Merry) from Regulations), which were withdrawn on Administration, U.S. Department of October 17–18, and on October 28, January 3, 1995 (60 FR 80), are provided Commerce, Room 3099, 14th Street and 1994, respectively. We received case solely for further explanation of the Constitution Avenue, N.W., briefs on February 23, 1995, from Department’s CVD practice. The subject Washington, D.C. 20230; telephone petitioner and respondent, and received matter of these regulations is being (202) 482–4105. a rebuttal brief from respondent on considered in connection with an Final Determination. The Department March 1, 1995. ongoing rulemaking proceeding which, of Commerce (‘‘the Department’’) among other things, is intended to determines that no benefits which Scope of Investigation conform the Department’s regulations to constitute subsidies within the meaning The products covered by this the Uruguay Round Agreements Act. of section 701 of the Tariff Act of 1930, investigation are disposable pocket Injury Test as amended (‘‘the Act’’), are being lighters, whether or not refillable, whose provided to manufacturers, producers, fuel is butane, isobutane, propane, or Although Thailand is not a ‘‘country or exporters in Thailand of disposable other liquified hydrocarbon, or a under the Agreement’’ within the pocket lighters. mixture containing any of these, whose meaning of section 701(b) of the Tariff 13962 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices Act of 1930, as amended (‘‘the Act’’), the determine that this program confers an CVD investigation. (The fact that Thai merchandise being investigated is non- export bounty or grant. To calculate the Merry subcontracted some assembly dutiable under the Generalized System benefit for the POI, we divided the tax operations to unrelated firms was only of Preferences and Thailand is a savings by the total value of export raised in the AD investigation.) contracting party to the General sales, pursuant to 355.47(c)(1)(ii) of the Respondent emphasizes that the Agreement on Tariffs and Trade. Proposed Regulations (Countervailing Department verified that Thai Merry is Thailand, therefore, is entitled to an Duties: Notice of Proposed Rulemaking not located in an export processing zone injury test on imports of the subject and Request for Public Comments, 54 and that the company did not benefit merchandise pursuant to section FR 23366 (May 31, 1989)). On this basis, from this program during the POI. 303(a)(2) of the Act. On June 20, 1994, we calculated a net bounty or grant of Additionally, respondent asserts that the ITC preliminarily determined that 0.23 percent ad valorem. since the Department chose not to verify imports of the subject merchandise from Because this is the only the location of the subcontractor’s Thailand materially injure, or threaten countervailable program and the rate is assembly plants in connection with the material injury to, a U.S. industry. de minimis, pursuant to 19 CFR 355.7 CVD verification, it would be unfair to assign a margin to Thai Merry based on Period of Investigation (1994), we determine that no benefits which constitute bounties or grants BIA. For purposes of this final within the meaning of the DOC Position: We consider determination, the period for which we countervailing duty law are being petitioner’s allegation untimely and, are measuring bounties or grants (the provided to manufacturers, producers, therefore, have not considered its period of investigation (‘‘POI’’)) is or exporters of disposable pocket allegation in this investigation. Pursuant calendar year 1993. lighters in Thailand. to § 353.31(c)(i) of the Proposed Regulations, ‘‘the Secretary will not Analysis of Programs B. Programs Determined to be Not Used consider any subsidy allegation Based upon our analysis of the We established at verification that the submitted by the petitioner or other petition, the responses to our following programs were not used interested party, as defined in paragraph questionnaires, verification and during the POI. (i)(3), (i)(4), (i)(5), or (i)(6) of section comments made by interested parties, A. Industrial Estates/Export Processing 355.2, later than: (i) In an investigation, we determine the following: Zones 40 days prior to the scheduled date of A. Programs Determined to be B. Preferential Short-term Loans Under the Secretary’s preliminary Countervailable the Export Packing Credit Program determination.’’ Petitioner first alleged C. Tax and Duty Exemptions Under the that subsidies could have been provided 1. Section 31 of the Investment Investment Promotion Act (sections to Thai Merry’s unrelated assembly Promotion Act 28, 33, 34, 36(1), 36(2), 36(3) and plants in its case briefs, 13 days prior to The Investment Promotion Act of 36(4) the final determination. 1977 (‘‘IPA’’) provides incentives for D. Tax Certificates for Exporters We further note that section 355.39 of investment to promote the development E. Rediscount of Industrial Bills the Proposed Regulations does not of the Thai economy. The IPA F. International Trade Promotion Fund apply in this case. Section 355.39 provides that if ‘‘the Secretary discovers authorizes an array of tax exemptions Interested Party Comments and exclusions. The IPA is administered a practice which appears to provide a by the Board of Investment (BOI) Comment 1: Petitioner asserts that the subsidy with respect to the merchandise through promotion certificates. These Department should countervail and the practice was not alleged or certificates list the various sections of government subsidies provided to two examined in the proceeding, the the IPA under which a company is plants which provide assembly services Secretary will examine the practice if eligible to receive benefits. under subcontract to Thai Merry. These the Secretary concludes that sufficient Under section 31, companies may assembly plants are not owned by Thai time remains before the scheduled date obtain a three-to-eight year exemption Merry, although the materials processed for the Secretary’s final determination or from payment of corporate income tax in these facilities are the property of final results of review.’’ In the context on profits derived from promoted Thai Merry. These assembly plants were of the companion AD investigation, the activities, as well as deductions from discussed in the course of the Department verified that Thai Merry net profits for losses incurred during the antidumping (AD) verification, not in subcontracts certain of its assembly tax exemption period. The 1977 IPA Act the CVD verification. Petitioner believes operations. The Department then has been amended several times and, in that because one of these plants verified the location and function of 1991, the GOT passed the Investment assembles safety-lock lighters, which are these plants, and the fact that Thai Promotion Act No. 2 of 1991. This 1991 only sold in the United States, the Merry did not own these assembly Act was the law in effect during the POI. facility may be benefitting from being plants. However, in the context of this Section 16 of this law states that eligible located in an export processing zone. proceeding, we did not discover ‘‘a activities for this exemption include Petitioner asserts that unless respondent practice which appears to provide a ‘‘ * * * activities which involve can provide proof that these facilities subsidy.’’ Therefore, the Department production for export.’’ are not located in an export processing would not have been obligated to We verified that Thai Merry applied zone, the Department should presume conduct an examination of the situation, for and received section 31 income tax that these plants receive subsidies and even had there been ‘‘sufficient time’’ to exemptions during the POI. The that Thai Merry benefits from such do so. approval certificate received by Thai subsidies, and should apply a We agree with respondents that it is Merry for participation in this program countervailing duty rate to Thai Merry inappropriate to apply BIA to Thai states that ‘‘the company has received a based on BIA. Merry based on an unsupported promoted status in the business for Respondent contends that petitioner’s allegation that subsidies may have been production of gas lighters for export.’’ brief should be rejected due to the granted to the assembly plants owned Because Thai Merry received these inclusion of arguments based on by its unrelated subcontractor(s). benefits for exported lighters, we information not on the record of the Petitioner has not made a sufficiently Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices 13963 detailed allegation either that the National Oceanic and Atmospheric programs for fish and wildlife resources, assembly plants received Administration to continue to enter into cooperative countervailable benefits, or how such agreements with colleges and countervailable benefits might be [Docket No. 95±0222054±5054±01; I.D. universities, with game and fish accruing to Thai Merry through either of 021495A] departments of the several states, and these plants. RIN 0648±ZA15 with nonprofit organizations relating to Petitioner has acknowledged that cooperative research units. The these assembly plants are not owned by Financial Assistance for Chesapeake Departments of Commerce (DOC), Thai Merry. Petitioner has provided no Bay Stock Assessments to Encourage Justice, State, the Judiciary, and Related argument as to why the Department Research Projects for Improvement in Agencies Appropriations Act of 1995 should countervail alleged subsidies the Stock Conditions of the makes funds available to the Secretary. provided to an unrelated subcontractor Chesapeake Bay Fisheries B. Catalog of Federal assistance. The of a company under investigation. research to be funded is in support of AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries the Chesapeake Bay Studies (CFDA Therefore, we conclude that Thai Merry Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and did not benefit from this program. 11.457), under the Chesapeake Bay Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Stock Assessment Committee (CBSAC). Verification Commerce. C. Program description. The CBSAC ACTION: Notice of availability of funds. was established in 1985 to plan and In accordance with section 776(b) of review Bay-wide resource assessments, the Act, we verified the information SUMMARY: A total of $540,000 in Fiscal coordinate relevant actions of state and used in making our final determination. Year (FY) 1995 funds is available Federal agencies, report on fisheries We followed standard verification through the NOAA/NMFS Chesapeake status and trends, and determine, fund procedures, including meeting with Bay Office to assist interested state and review research projects. The government and company officials, fishery agencies, academic institutions, program implements a Bay-wide plan examination of relevant accounting and other nonprofit organizations for the assessment of commercially, records and examination of original relating to cooperative research units, in recreationally, and selected ecologically source documents. Our verification carrying out research projects to provide important species in the Chesapeake results are outlined in detail in the information for Chesapeake Bay Stock Bay. In 1988, CBSAC developed a Bay- public versions of the verification Assessments through cooperative wide Stock Assessment Plan, in reports, which are on file in the Central agreements. About $180,000 of the base response to provisions in the Records Unit (Room B–099 of the Main amount is available to initiate new Chesapeake Bay Agreement of 1987. The Commerce Building). projects in FY 1995, as described in this plan identified that key obstacles to ITC Notification announcement. NMFS issues this notice assessing Bay stocks were the lack of describing the conditions under which consistent, Bay-wide, fishery-dependent In accordance with section 705(d) of eligible applications will be accepted and fishery-independent data. Research the Act, we will notify the ITC of our and how NMFS will determine which projects funded since 1988 have focused determination. Since we have applications will be selected for on developing and improving fishery- determined that no bounties or grants funding. independent surveys and catch statistics are being provided to manufacturers, DATES: Applications for funding under for key Bay species, such as striped producers or exporters of disposable this program will be accepted until May bass, oysters, blue crabs, and alosids. pocket lighters in Thailand, the 1, 1995, 6 p.m. eastern standard time. Stock assessment research is essential, investigation will be terminated upon Applications received after that time given the recent declines in harvest and publication of this notice in the Federal will not be considered for funding. No apparent stock condition for many of Register. Hence, the ITC is not required applications will be accepted by the important species of the Chesapeake to make a final injury determination facsimile machine submission. Bay. with respect to this countervailing duty Successful applicants generally will II. Areas of Special Emphasis proceeding. be selected approximately 90 days from A. Proposals should exhibit Return of Destruction of Proprietary the date of publication in the Federal familiarity with related work that is Information Register of this notice. The earliest date for awards will be approximately 180 completed or ongoing. Where This notice serves as the only days after the date of publication in the appropriate, proposals should be reminder to parties subject to Federal Register of this notice. multidisciplinary. Coordinated efforts Administrative Protective Order (APO) involving multiple eligible applicants or ADDRESSES: Send applications to: M. of their responsibility concerning the persons are encouraged. Eligible women Elizabeth Gillelan, Division Chief, return or destruction of proprietary and minority owned and operated non- NOAA Chesapeake Bay Office, NMFS, information disclosed under APO in profit organizations are encouraged to 410 Severn Avenue, Suite 107A, accordance with 19 CFR 355.34(d). apply. Annapolis, MD 21403. Failure to comply is a violation of the Consideration for funding will be APO. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: M. given to applications that address the Elizabeth Gillelan, 410/267–5660. This determination is published following stock assessment research and pursuant to section 705(d) of the Act SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: management priorities for the Chesapeake Bay. These are listed in and 19 CFR 355.20(a)(4). I. Introduction priority order: Dated: March 8, 1995. A. Authority. The Fish and Wildlife 1. Design and development of a Bay- Susan G. Esserman, Act of 1956, as amended, at 16 U.S.C. wide recreational survey for blue crabs. Assistant Secretary for Import 753 (a), authorizes the Secretary of This study should provide not only Administration. Commerce (Secretary), for the purpose estimates of blue crab harvest by [FR Doc. 95–6400 Filed 3–14–95; 8:45 am] of developing adequate, coordinated, category (eg., hard, soft, peeler) and BILLING CODE 3510±DS±P cooperative research and training associated effort, but also biological 13964 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices sample data on size or age distribution recreational harvest. The pilot study DOC/NOAA/NMFS employees, of the recreational harvest. This could should minimally address the following: including full-time, part-time, and be designed as a stand-alone survey, or (1) Comparisons of catch rates among intermittent personnel (or their spouses as a supplement to the NMFS Marine the various fishing modes, methods, and or blood relatives who are members of Recreational Fisheries Statistics Survey times, etc. which will serve as the basis their immediate households) are not (MRFSS). for determining the proportional eligible to submit an application under A major impediment to understanding sampling needed to provide unbiased this solicitation or aid in the preparation the status of the fishery resources in the estimates. of an application, except to provide Chesapeake Bay is the lack of (2) Identification and resolution of information on program goals, funding knowledge of the total removals, by any deficiencies in the sampling frame. priorities, application procedures, and fishing, of important fish and shellfish (3) Final estimates of the pilot study completion of application forms. Since species. While estimates of commercial period recreational harvest by category, this is a competitive program, assistance catches from both Maryland and mode (with associated effort) and will not be provided in conceptualizing, Virginia are available based on state measures of percent standard error developing, or structuring proposals. reporting requirements, estimates of about the point estimates. Eligible applicants outside the recreational blue crab harvest are not Copies of a report of a workshop Chesapeake Bay region may submit available for most years. A main which discussed concerns specific to proposals, as long as their objectives concern to be addressed in the design of the design of a recreational blue crab support the technical and management this survey is the difficulty in obtaining survey may be obtained from the NOAA priorities of the Chesapeake Bay, as estimates of recreational blue crab Chesapeake Bay Office. defined in section II.A. above. All catches since much of the harvest is 2. Design and conduct a study to solicited proposals received by the landed at private, rather than public, determine the discard mortality and closing date will be considered by docks and ramps. discard size frequencies in the NMFS. The recreational survey design should commercial and recreational fisheries in B. Duration and terms of funding. be consistent with the model of the Chesapeake Bay. This study should Under this solicitation, NMFS will fund NMFS MRFSS, with its two principal provide information on the reason for Chesapeake Bay Stock Assessment design components. First, a telephone discard (e.g., minimum size regulation, Research Projects for 1 year cooperative survey instrument used to enumerate lack of market, etc.), the length agreements. The cooperative agreement total period and seasonal directed distribution of discards, and discard has been determined as the appropriate fishing effort by mode. Secondly, an mortality rates, primarily for summer funding instrument because of the access intercept survey component to flounder and bluefish, as well as other substantial involvement of NMFS in: estimate period/seasonal mean catch- important Bay species. This is to be a 1. Developing program research rate by mode and category, and the onetime study, not a design effort for priorities; collection of biological characterization future implementation. 2. Evaluating the performance of the data. Discard information is limited and program for effectiveness in meeting Proposals for this priority must current assessments are forced to use regional goals for Chesapeake Bay stock address the following aspects of the analogous information from other assessments; survey design. species and limited areas. Data from this 3. Monitoring the progress of each a. Identification of the access- study would be a valuable improvement funded project; intercept sampling frame, including: in coastwide assessments. 4. Holding periodic workshops with (1) List of all access sites. 3. Design of a cost-effective American investigators; and (2) Detailed model for scheduling the shad mark-and-recapture (tagging) study 5. Working with recipients in temporal and geographic distribution of which would provide abundance and preparation of annual reports field interviews within the sampling mortality estimates for Chesapeake Bay summarizing current accomplishments frame, and the routing scheme among stocks. There is currently a Bay-wide of the Chesapeake Bay Stock access sites. moratorium on the harvest of American Assessment Committee. Project dates (3) Description of information to be shad, yet coastal intercept fisheries should be scheduled to begin no later obtained from interviews, specifically continue to harvest this species. This than 1 October 1995. Cooperative the interview survey questionnaire. study should be designed to identify agreements are approved on an annual (4) Description of the nature and which fisheries harvest Bay stocks, and basis but may be considered eligible for manner of collection of biological provide estimates of the abundance and continuation beyond the first project samples which will minimally include mortality rates for those stocks. and budget period subject to the size, sex, and category by mode. B. Applications addressing the approved scope of work, satisfactory b. Identification of the telephone priorities should build upon, or take progress, and availability of funds at the survey sampling frame, including: into account, any related past or current total discretion of NMFS. However, (1) Specifications of who is included work. there are no assurances for such in the sampling frame and how this was continuation. Publication of this notice III. How to Apply determined. does not obligate NMFS to award any (2) Complete description of the A. Eligible Applicants. Applications specific cooperative agreement or to temporal distribution of telephone calls for cooperative agreements under the obligate any part of the entire amount of and associated sample size Chesapeake Bay Studies Program may funds available. requirements. be submitted, in accordance with the C. Cost Sharing. Applications must (3) Specification of the interview procedures set forth in this notice, by reflect the total budget necessary to survey questionnaire. any state game and fish department, accomplish the project, including c. Completion of a pilot study, which college or university, or other nonprofit contributions and/or donations. Cost will successfully demonstrate the organizations relating to cooperative sharing is not required under the effectiveness of the above two survey research units. Other Federal agencies Chesapeake Bay Stock Assessment components for the estimation and or institutions are not eligible to receive Research Program. However, cost characterization of blue crab Federal assistance under this notice. sharing is encouraged to enhance the Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices 13965 value of a project, and in case of a tie a. Cover sheet: An applicant must use (4) Benefits or results expected: in considering proposals for funding, OMB Standard Form 424 (revised 4–92) Identify and document the results or cost sharing may affect the final as the cover sheet for each project. benefits to be derived from the proposed decision. The appropriateness of all cost Applicants may obtain copies of these activities. sharing will be determined on the basis forms from the NOAA Grants (5) Project statement of work: The of guidance provided in applicable Management Division or the NOAA Statement of Work is the scientific or Federal cost principles. If an applicant Chesapeake Bay Office (see ADDRESSES). technical action plan of activities that chooses to share costs, and if that b. Project summary: Each proposal are to be accomplished during each application is selected for funding, the must contain a summary of not more budget period of the project. This applicant will be bound by the than one page that provides the description must include the specific percentage of cost sharing reflected in following: methodologies, by project job activity, the award documents. (1) Project title. proposed for accomplishing the The non-Federal share may include (2) Project status (new). proposal’s objective(s). If the work funds received from private sources or (3) Project duration (beginning and described in this section does not from state or local governments or the ending dates). contain sufficient detail to allow for value of in-kind contributions. Federal (4) Name, address, and telephone proper technical evaluation, NMFS will funds may not be used to meet the non- number of applicant. not consider the application for funding Federal share of matching funds, except (5) Principal Investigator(s). and will return it to the applicant. as provided by Federal statute. In-kind (6) Project objectives. Investigators submitting proposals in contributions are noncash contributions (7) Summary of work to be performed. response to this announcement are provided by the applicant or non- (8) Total Federal funds requested. strongly encouraged to develop inter- Federal third parties. In-kind (9) Cost sharing to be provided from institutional, inter-disciplinary research contributions may be in the form of, but non-Federal sources, if any. Specify teams in the form of single, integrated are not limited to, personal services whether contributions are project- proposals or as individual proposals rendered in carrying out functions related cash or in-kind. that are clearly linked together. Such (10) Total project cost. related to the project, and permission to collaborative efforts will be factored into c. Project description: Each project use real or personal property owned by the final funding decision. must be completely and accurately others (for which consideration is not Each Statement of Work must include described. Each project description may required) in carrying out the project. To the following information: be up to 15 pages in length. If an support the budget, the applicant must application is awarded, NMFS will (a) The applicant’s name. describe briefly the basis for estimating make all portions of the project (b) The inclusive dates of the budget the value of the non-Federal funds description available to the public for period covered under the Statement of derived from in-kind contributions. review; therefore, NMFS cannot Work. The total cost of a project begins on guarantee the confidentiality of any (c) The title of the proposal. the effective date of a cooperative information submitted as part of any (d) The scientific or technical agreement between the applicant and an project, nor will NMFS accept for objectives and procedures that are to be authorized representative of the U.S. consideration any project requesting accomplished during the budget period. Government and ends on the date confidentiality of any part of the project. Devise a detailed set of objectives and specified in the award. Accordingly, the Each project must be described as procedures to answer who, what, how, time expended and costs incurred in follows: when, and where. The procedures must either the development of a project or (1) Identification of problem(s): be of sufficient detail to enable the financial assistance application, or Describe the specific problem to be competent workers to be able to follow in any subsequent discussions or addressed and the area of emphasis to them and to complete scheduled negotiations prior to the award, are which the project responds (see section activities. neither reimbursable nor recognizable as II above). (e) Location of the work. part of the recipient’s cost share. (2) Project objectives: This is one of (f) A list of all project personnel and D. Format. 1. Applications for project the most important parts of the Project their responsibilities. funding must be complete. Applicants Proposal. Use the following guidelines (g) A milestone table that summarizes must identify the specific research for stating the objective of the project. the procedures (from item priority or priorities to which they are (a) Keep it simple and easily III.D.2.c.(5)(d)) that are to be attained in responding. For applications containing understandable. each month covered by the Statement of more than one project, each project (b) Be as specific and quantitative as Work. component must be identified possible. (6) Participation by persons or groups individually using the format specified (c) Specify the ‘‘what and when;’’ other than the applicant: Describe the in this section. If an application is not avoid the ‘‘how and why.’’ level of participation required in the in response to a priority, it should be so (d) Keep it attainable within the time, project(s) by NOAA or other government stated. Applicants should not assume money, and human resources available. and non-government entities. Specific prior knowledge on the part of NMFS as (e) Use action verbs that are NOAA employees should not be named to the relative merits of the project accomplishment oriented. in the initial proposal. described in the application. (3) Need for Government financial (7) Federal, state and local Applications are not to be bound in any assistance: Demonstrate the need for government activities: List any programs manner and should be one-sided. All assistance. Any appropriate database to (Federal, state, or local government or incomplete applications will be substantiate or reinforce the need for the activities, including Sea Grant, state returned to the applicant. Applicants project should be included. Explain Coastal Zone Management Programs, must submit one signed original and why other funding sources cannot fund NOAA Oyster Disease Research two copies of the complete application. all the proposed work. List all other Program, the state/Federal Chesapeake 2. Applications must be submitted in sources of funding that are or have been Bay Program, etc.) this project would the following format: sought for the project. affect and describe the relationship 13966 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices between the project and those plans or the project may not be fully understood, 2. Provide independent review based activities. or the value of the project may be on the same criteria as the technical (8) Project management: Describe how underestimated. The absence of review. the project will be organized and adequate supporting documentation 3. Discuss all review comments as a managed. Include resumes of principal may cause reviewers to question panel. investigators. List all persons directly assertions made in describing the 4. Provide individual panelist scores employed by the applicant who will be project and may result in lower ranking and suggestions for modifications (i.e., involved with the project. If a of the project. Information presented in budget, personnel, technical approach, consultant and/or subcontractor is this section should be clearly referenced etc.). selected prior to application in the project description. D. Funding decision. 1. Applications submission, include the name and will be ranked by NMFS into two qualifications of the consultant and/or IV. Evaluation Criteria and Selection groups: (a) Recommended, and (b) not subcontractor and the process used for Procedures recommended. As previously stated selection. A. Initial evaluation of applications. (section III A.1.), collaborative proposals (9) Monitoring of project performance: Applications will be reviewed by NOAA and applications which propose a cost Identify who will participate in to assure that they meet all requirements share are strongly encouraged, and monitoring the project. of this announcement, including therefore will be given added weight in (10) Project impacts: Describe the eligibility and relevance to the the selection process. Numeric ranking impact of the project in terms of Chesapeake Bay Stock Assessment will be the major consideration for anticipated increased production, sales, Research Program. deciding which of the ‘‘recommended’’ product quality and safety, improved proposals will be selected for funding. management, or any other values that B. Consultation with experts in the 2. After projects have been ranked for will be produced by this project. field of stock assessment research. For funding, the Chief of the NOAA/NMFS Describe how these products or services applications meeting the requirements Chesapeake Bay Office, in consultation will be made available to the fisheries of this solicitation, NMFS will conduct with the Assistant Administrator for and management communities. a technical evaluation of each project Fisheries, NOAA, will determine the (11) Evaluation of project: The prior to any other review. This review projects to be recommended for funding applicant is required to provide an normally will involve experts from non- based upon the technical evaluations, evaluation of project accomplishments NOAA as well as NOAA organizations. panel review, and the evaluation factors; at the end of each budget period and in All comments submitted to NMFS will ascertain which projects do not the final report. The application must be taken into consideration in the substantially duplicate other projects describe the methodology or procedures technical evaluation of projects. that are currently funded by NOAA or to be followed to determine technical Technical evaluators will submit are approved for funding by other feasibility, or to quantify the results of independent reviews to NMFS. Federal offices; and, determine the the project in promoting increased Reviewers will be asked to comment on amount of funds available for the production, product quality and safety, the following evaluation criteria: program. The exact amount of funds management effectiveness, or other 1. Problem description and awarded to each project will be measurable factors. conceptual approach for resolution, determined in preaward negotiations (12) Total project costs: Total project especially the applicant’s between the applicant, the Grants cost is the amount of funds required to comprehension of the problem(s), Office, and the NOAA/NMFS accomplish what is proposed in the familiarity with related work that is Chesapeake Bay Office staff. Statement of Work, and includes completed or ongoing, and the overall contributions and donations. All costs concept proposed to resolve the V. Administrative Requirements must be shown in a detailed budget. A problem(s) (30 points). A. Obligations of the applicant. 1. standard budget form (SF–424A) is 2. Soundness of project design/ Deliverables—In addition to quarterly available from the offices listed (see technical approach, especially whether status and budget reports, and at the ADDRESSES). NMFS will not consider the applicant provided sufficient time of submission of the final report of fees or profits as allowable costs for information to technically evaluate the results of funded projects, recipients grantees. Additional cost detail may be project and, if so, the strengths and must submit a four-to-five page required prior to a final analysis of weaknesses of the technical design summary of project work and results overall cost allowability, allocability, proposed for problem resolution (35 that will be compiled in a report of and reasonableness. The date, period points). Chesapeake Bay Stock Assessment covered, and findings for the most 3. Project management and experience Research Program results. Projects that recent financial audit performed, as well and qualifications of personnel, produce non-experimental data must as the name of the audit firm, the including organization and management have copies of these data transferred to contact person, and phone number and of the project, and the personnel the NOAA/NMFS Chesapeake Bay address, must be also provided. experience and qualifications (15 Office in both compiled, hard copy d. Supporting documentation: points). format, and as a verified, electronic data Provide any required documents and file. Full, clearly stated documentation 4. Justification and allocation of the any additional information necessary or of the contents of such data files must budget in terms of the work to be useful to the description of the project. be submitted with these data. The amount of information will depend performed (20 points). 2. Periodic workshops—Investigators on the type of project proposed, but C. Review Panel. NMFS will convene will be expected to attend one or two should be no more than 20 pages. The a review panel consisting of at least workshops with other Stock Assessment applicant should present any three regionally recognized experts in Research Program researchers to information that would emphasize the the scientific and management aspects encourage interdisciplinary dialogue value of the project in terms of the of stock assessment research who will and forge synthesis of results. significance of the problems addressed. conduct reviews as follows: 3. Primary applicant certifications— Without such information, the merits of 1. Evaluate technical reviews. All primary applicants must submit a Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices 13967 completed Form CD–511, 2. Indirect cost rates—The total dollar or termination of funds and grounds for ‘‘Certifications Regarding Debarment, amount of the indirect costs proposed in possible punishment by a fine or Suspension and Other Responsibility an application under this program must imprisonment as provided in 18 U.S.C. Matters; Drug-Free Workplace not exceed the current indirect cost rate 1001. Requirements and Lobbying,’’ and the negotiated and approved by a cognizant 8. Preaward activities—If applicants following explanations are hereby Federal agency. NOAA’s acceptance of incur any costs prior to an award being provided: negotiated rates is subject to total made, they do so solely at their own risk a. Nonprocurement debarment and indirect costs not to exceed 100% of of not being reimbursed by the suspension—Prospective participants total direct costs. This language is Government. Notwithstanding any (as defined at 15 CFR 26.105) are subject pursuant to the NOAA Grants and verbal or written assurance that may to 15 CFR part 26, ‘‘Nonprocurement Cooperative Agreements Policy Manual, have been received, there is no Debarment and Suspension,’’ and the Chapter 3(B)(2). obligation on the part of DOC to cover related section of the certification form 3. Past performance—Unsatisfactory preaward costs. prescribed above applies; performance under prior Federal awards 9. Purchase of American-made b. Drug-free workplace—Grantees (as may result in an application not being equipment and products—Applicants defined at 15 CFR 26.605) are subject to considered for funding. In addition, any are hereby notified that they will be 15 CFR part 26, subpart F, recipient and/or researcher who is past encouraged, to the greatest extent ‘‘Governmentwide Requirements for due for submitting acceptable progress practicable, to purchase American-made Drug-Free Workplace (Grants),’’ and the reports on any previous project funded equipment and products with funding related section of the certification form under this program may be ineligible to provided under this program in prescribed above applies; be considered for new awards until the accordance with Congressional intent as c. Anti-lobbying—Persons (as defined delinquent reports are received, set forth in the resolution contained in at 15 CFR 28.105) are subject to the reviewed and deemed acceptable by Public Law 103–317, sections 607(a) lobbying provisions of 31 U.S.C. 1352, NMFS. and (b). ‘‘Limitation on use of appropriated 4. Financial management 10. Other—If an application is funds to influence certain Federal certifications/preaward accounting selected for funding, DOC has no contracting and financial transactions,’’ survey—Successful applicants, at the obligation to provide any additional and the lobbying section of the discretion of the NOAA Grants Officer, funding in connection with that award. certification form prescribed above may be required to have their financial Renewal of an award to increase applies to applications/bids for grants, management systems certified by an funding or extend the period of cooperative agreements, and contracts independent public accountant as being performance is at the total discretion of for more than $100,000, and loans and in compliance with Federal standards DOC. loan guarantees for more than $150,000, specified in the applicable OMB Cooperative agreements awarded or the single family maximum mortgage Circulars prior to execution of the pursuant to pertinent statutes shall be in limit for affected programs, whichever is award. Any first-time applicant for accordance with the Fisheries Research greater; and Federal grant funds may be subject to a Plan (comprehensive program of preaward accounting survey by the DOC d. Anti-lobbying disclosure—Any fisheries research) in effect on the date prior to execution of the award. applicant who has paid or will pay for of the award. 5. Delinquent Federal debts—No lobbying using any funds must submit award of Federal funds shall be made to Classification an SF-LLL, ‘‘Disclosure of Lobbying an applicant who has an outstanding Activities,’’ as required under 15 CFR This action has been determined to be delinquent Federal debt until either: part 28, appendix B. not significant for purposes of E.O. a. The delinquent account is paid in 12866. 4. Lower tier certifications— full; Applications under this program are Recipients shall require applicants/ b. A negotiated repayment schedule is subject to Executive Order 12372, bidders for subgrants, contracts, established and at least one payment is ‘‘Intergovernmental Review of Federal subcontracts, or other lower tier covered received; or Programs.’’ transactions at any tier under the award c. Other arrangements satisfactory to Prior notice and an opportunity for to submit, if applicable, a completed DOC are made. public comment are not required by the Form CD–512, ‘‘Certifications Regarding 6. Name checks—Potential recipients Administrative Procedure Act or any Debarment, Suspension, Ineligibility may be required to submit an other law for this notice concerning and Voluntary Exclusion-Lower Tier ‘‘Identification-Application for Funding grants, benefits, and contracts. Covered Transactions and Lobbying’’ Assistance’’ (Form CD–346), which is Therefore, a regulatory flexibility and disclosure form SF-LLL, used to ascertain background analysis is not required for purposes of ‘‘Disclosure of Lobbying Activities.’’ information on key individuals the Regulatory Flexibility Act. Form CD–512 is intended for the use of associated with the potential recipient. This notice contains collections of recipients and should not be transmitted All non-profit and for-profit applicants information subject to the Paperwork to DOC. SF-LLL submitted by any tier are subject to a name check review Reduction Act, which have been recipient or subrecipient should be process. Name checks are intended to approved by OMB under OMB control submitted to DOC in accordance with reveal if any key individuals associated numbers 0348–0043, 0348–0044, and the instructions contained in the award with the applicant have been convicted 0605–0001. document. of or are presently facing, criminal B. Other requirements. 1. Federal charges such as fraud, theft, perjury, or Dated: March 7, 1995. policies and procedures—Recipients other matters that significantly reflect Gary Matlock, and subrecipients are subject to all on the applicant’s management honesty Program Management Officer, National Federal laws and Federal and DOC or financial integrity. Applicants will Marine Fisheries Service. policies, regulations, and procedures also be subject to credit check reviews. [FR Doc. 95–6312 Filed 3–14–95; 8:45 am] applicable to Federal financial 7. False statements—A false statement assistance awards. on the application is grounds for denial BILLING CODE 3510±22±F 13968 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices [I.D. 030795C] and on March 30, from 9:00 a.m. until will begin at 10:00 a.m. and adjourn at approximately 12:00 noon. 4:00 p.m. South Atlantic Fishery Management The Administrative Committee will The meetings are open to the public, Council; Public Meeting meet on March 28, from 10:00 a.m. until and will be conducted in the English AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries 12:00 noon, to discuss administrative language. However, simultaneous Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and matters regarding Council operation and translation (English/Spanish) will be Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), in closed session to discuss personnel available at the AP meeting. Commerce. matters at the Council office, from 2:00 Fishers and other interested persons ACTION: Notice of public meeting. p.m. until 5:00 p.m. are invited to attend. Members of the Except as noted, both meetings will be public will be allowed to submit oral or SUMMARY: The South Atlantic Council’s held at the Conference Room of the written statements regarding agenda (Council) Ad Hoc Rock Shrimp Travelodge Hotel, in Isla Verda, PR. issues. Advisory Panel (Panel) will meet on Except for the closed session above, FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: March 30, 1995, at the Town and all other meetings are open to the Caribbean Fishery Management Council, Country Inn, 2008 Savannah Highway, public, and will be conducted in 268 Mun˜ oz Rivera Avenue, Suite 1108, Charleston, SC; telephone: (803) 571– English. However, simultaneous San Juan, Puerto Rico 00918–2577; 1000. translation (Spanish-English) will be telephone: (809) 766–5926. The Panel will discuss options for available during the Council meeting SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Amendment 1 to the Shrimp Fishery (March 29 and 30). Fishers and other These Management Plan that will protect interested persons are invited to attend meetings are physically accessible to bottom habitat while allowing the rock and participate with oral or written people with disabilities. For more shrimp industry to operate. The Panel statements regarding agenda issues. information or requests for sign language interpretation and/or other also will discuss options for permits and FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: mandatory reporting requirements in auxiliary aids please contact Mr. Miguel Caribbean Fishery Management Council, A. Rolo´n, Executive Director, Caribbean the fishery, as well as the information 268 Mun˜ oz Rivera Avenue, Suite 1108, provided by industry on harvest areas Fishery Management Council, at the San Juan, PR 00918–2577; telephone: above address and telephone number, at and landings of rock shrimp in the (809) 766–5926. South Atlantic region. least 5 days prior to the meeting date. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: These Dated: March 9, 1995. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: meetings are physically accessible to South Atlantic Fishery Management people with disabilities. For more David S. Crestin, Council, One Southpark Circle, Suite information or requests for sign Acting Director, Office of Fisheries 306, Charleston, SC 29407–4699; language interpretation and/or other Conservation and Management, National Marine Fisheries Service. telephone: (803) 571–4366. auxiliary aids please contact Mr. Miguel SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This A. Rolo´n, Executive Director, Caribbean [FR Doc. 95–6313 Filed 3–14–95; 8:45 am] meeting is physically accessible to Fishery Management Council, at the BILLING CODE 3510±22±F people with disabilities. Requests for above address and telephone number, at sign language interpretation or other least 5 days prior to the meeting date. auxiliary aids should be directed to the Dated: March 9, 1995. Council office at the above address by COMMISSION ON CIVIL RIGHTS March 23, 1995. David S. Crestin, Acting Director, Office of Fisheries Notice of Public Meeting Cancellation Dated: March 9, 1995. Conservation and Management, National of the California Advisory Committee David S. Crestin, Marine Fisheries Service. Acting Director, Office of Fisheries [FR Doc. 95–6314 Filed 3–14–95; 8:45 am] Notice is hereby given, pursuant to the provisions of the rules and Conservation and Management, National BILLING CODE 3510±22±F Marine Fisheries Service. regulations of the U.S. Commission on [FR Doc. 95–6315 Filed 3–14–95; 8:45 am] Civil Rights, that a meeting of the BILLING CODE 3510±22±F [I.D. 030795E] California Advisory Committee to the Commission which was to have Caribbean Fishery Management convened on Friday, March 17, 1995, at [I.D. 030795D] Council; Meeting 10:00 a.m. and adjourned at 5:00 p.m., at the Holiday Inn-Marine World, 1000 Caribbean Fishery Management AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Fairgrounds Drive, Vallejo, California Council; Public Meetings Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 94589, has been canceled. AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), The original notice for the March 17, Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Commerce. 1995, meeting was announced in the Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), ACTION: Notice of public meetings. Federal Register on February 24, 1995, Commerce. FR Doc. 95–4528, 60 FR–10350, No. 37. SUMMARY: The Scientific and Statistical ACTION: Notice of public meetings. Persons desiring additional Committee (SSC) and the Advisory information should contact Philip SUMMARY: The Caribbean Fishery Panel (AP) of the Caribbean Fishery Montez, Director of the Western Management Council (Council) and its Management Council (Council) will Regional Office, 213–894–3437 (TTD Administrative Committee will hold hold separate meetings to discuss the 213–894–0508). separate meetings. The Council will Draft Queen Conch Fishery Management hold its 83rd regular public meeting to Plan. Dated at Washington, DC, March 10, 1995. discuss the Draft Queen Conch Fishery The SSC will meet on March 21, 1995, Carol-Lee Hurley, Management Plan, among other topics. at the Travelodge Hotel, San Juan, Chief, Regional Programs Coordination Unit. The Council will convene on March Puerto Rico. The AP will meet on March [FR Doc. 95–6476 Filed 3–14–95; 8:45 am] 29, 1995, from 9:00 a.m. until 5:00 p.m. 27, at the same location. Both meetings BILLING CODE 6335±01±P Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices 13969 Agenda and Notice of Public Meeting DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY time periods referred to above shall run of the Nevada Advisory Committee concurrently. Office of Arms Control and Issued in Washington, D.C. on March 8, Notice is hereby given, pursuant to Nonproliferation; Proposed 1995. the provisions of the rules and Subsequent Arrangement Edward T. Fei, regulations of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, that a meeting of the Pursuant to Section 131 of the Atomic Acting Director, International and Regional Energy Act of 1954, as amended (42 Security Division, ffice of Arms Control and Nevada Advisory Committee to the Nonproliferation. Commission will convene on 9:30 a.m. U.S.C. 2160), notice is hereby given of [FR Doc. 95–6385 Filed 3–14–95; 8:45 am] to 12:00 p.m. on Friday, April 7, 1995, a proposed ‘‘subsequent arrangement’’ at the Offices of Walther, Key, Maupin, under the Additional Agreement for BILLING CODE 6450±01±M et al, 3500 Lakeside Drive, 2nd Floor, Cooperation between the Government of Reno, Nevada 89509. The purpose of the the United States of America and the Office of Arms Control and meeting is to review current civil rights European Atomic Energy Community Nonproliferation; Proposed developments in the State and plan (EURATOM) Concerning Peaceful Uses Subsequent Arrangement future program activities. of Atomic Energy, as amended, and the Persons desiring additional Agreement for Cooperation between the Pursuant to Section 131 of the Atomic information, or planning a presentation Government of the United States of Energy Act of 1954, as amended (42 to the Committee, should contact America and the Government of U.S.C. 2160), notice is hereby given of Committee Chairperson Margo Switzerland Concerning Civil Uses of a proposed ‘‘subsequent arrangement’’ Piscevich, or Philip Montez, Director of Atomic Energy, as amended. under the Additional Agreement for the Western Regional Office, 213–894– The subsequent arrangement would Cooperation between the Government of 3437 (TDD 213–894–0508). Hearing- give approval, which must be obtained the United States of America and the impaired persons who will attend the under the above-mentioned agreements, European Atomic Energy Community meeting and require the services of a for the following transfer of special (EURATOM) Concerning Peaceful Uses sign language interpreter should contact nuclear materials of United States of Atomic Energy, as amended, and the the Regional Office at least five (5) origin, or of special nuclear materials Agreement for Cooperation between the working days before the scheduled date produced through the use of materials of Government of the United States of of the meeting. United States origin, as follows: America and the Government of The meeting will be conducted Switzerland to the United Kingdom for Switzerland Concerning Civil Uses of pursuant to the provisions of the rules the purpose of reprocessing 112 Atomic Energy, as amended. and regulations of the Commission. irradiated fuel assemblies containing The subsequent arrangement would give approval, which must be obtained Dated at Washington, DC, March 3, 1995. approximately 20,000 kilograms of uranium and containing 165 kilograms under the above-mentioned agreements, Carol-Lee Hurley, of the isotope uranium-235 (enriched to for the following transfer of special Chief, Regional Programs Coordination Unit. approximately 0.83%) and 185 nuclear materials of United States [FR Doc. 95–6290 Filed 3–14–95; 8:45 am] kilograms of plutonium from the origin, or of special nuclear materials BILLING CODE 6335±01±P Muhleberg nuclear power station. This produced through the use of materials of subsequent arrangement is designated as United States origin, as follows: RTD/EU(SD)–81. Switzerland to France for the purpose of reprocessing 14 irradiated fuel The United States has received DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE assemblies containing approximately assurance from the Government of 2,500 kilograms of uranium and Switzerland that the recovered uranium Department of the Air Force containing 21 kilograms of the isotope and plutonium will be stored in the uranium-235 (enriched to United Kingdom, and will not be USAF Scientific Advisory Board approximately 0.84%) and 23 kilograms transferred from the United Kingdom, Meeting of plutonium from the Muhleberg nor put to any use, without the prior nuclear power station. This subsequent The USAF Scientific Advisory consent of the United States arrangement is designated as RTD/ Board’s Science & Technology Review Government. of Advanced Weapons will meet on 3– EU(SD)–82. In accordance with Section 131 of the The United States has received 7 April 1995 at Kirtland AFB, NM from Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. assurance from the Government of it has been determined that this Switzerland that the recovered uranium The purpose of the meeting is to subsequent arrangement will not be fulfill the yearly SAB Science and and plutonium will be stored in France, inimical to the common defense and and will not be transferred from France, Technology Review in the area of security. Advanced Weapons. nor put to any use, without the prior This subsequent arrangement will consent of the United States The meeting will be closed to the take effect no sooner than fifteen days public in accordance with Section 552b Government. after the date of publication of this In accordance with Section 131 of the of Title 5, United States Code, notice and after fifteen days of Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, specifically subparagraphs (1) and (4) continuous session of the Congress, it has been determined that this thereof. beginning the day after the date on subsequent arrangement will not be For further information, contact the which the reports required by section inimical to the common defense and Scientific Advisory Board Secretariat at 131(b)(1) of the Atomic Energy Act of security. (703) 697–8845. 1954, as amended (42 U.S.C. 2160), are This subsequent arrangement will Patsy J. Conner, submitted to the Committee on take effect no sooner than fifteen days Air Force Federal Register Liaison Officer. International Relations of the House of after the date of publication of this [FR Doc. 95–6281 Filed 3–14–95; 8:45 am] Representatives and the Committee on notice and after fifteen days of BILLING CODE 3910±01±P Foreign Relations of the Senate. The two continuous session of the Congress, 13970 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices beginning the day after the date on submitted to the Committee on Member Reports which the reports required by section International Relations of the House of Standing Committee Reports 131(b)(1) of the Atomic Energy Act of Representatives and the Committee on • Public Communications 1954, as amended (42 U.S.C. 2160), are Foreign Relations of the Senate. The two • Member Selection submitted to the Committee on time periods referred to above may run 9:15 a.m. Break International Relations of the House of concurrently. 9:30 a.m. Amendments to procedures— review, discussion, vote Representatives and the Committee on Issued in Washington, D.C., on March 8, Foreign Relations of the Senate. The two 1995. 11:00 a.m. BWID Risk Management Film 12:15 p.m. Lunch time periods referred to above shall run Edward T. Fei, concurrently. 1:15 p.m. INEL Future Land Use: Acting Director, Division of International and committee presents proposed Issued in Washington, D.C. on March 10, Regional Security, Office of Arms Control and response to assumptions and 1995. Nonproliferation. Edward T. Fei, conclusions of plan—discussion [FR Doc. 95–6384 Filed 3–14–95; 8:45 am] 3:15 p.m. Break Acting Director, International and Regional BILLING CODE 6450±01±M 3:30 p.m. INEL Future Land Use— Security Division, Office of Arms Control and Nonproliferation. Consensus Building 5:00 p.m. Public Comment Availability [FR Doc. 95–6383 Filed 3–14–95; 8:45 am] Environmental Management Site 6:00 p.m. Adjourn BILLING CODE 6450±01±M Specific Advisory Board, Idaho National Engineering Laboratory Wednesday, March 22, 1995 7:30 a.m. Sign-In and Registration Office of Arms Control and AGENCY: Department of Energy. 8:00 a.m. Miscellaneous Business Nonproliferation; Proposed ACTION: Notice of Open Meeting. • Day Two Agenda review, revision, Subsequent Arrangement SUMMARY: Pursuant to the provisions of acceptance Pursuant to Section 131 of the Atomic the Federal Advisory Committee Act • Old Business from Day 1 Energy Act of 1954, as amended (42 (Public Law 92–463, 86 Stat. 770) notice 8:30 a.m. Prioritization/Budget—discuss U.S.C. 2160), notice is hereby given of is hereby given of the following and review committee work a proposed ‘‘subsequent arrangement’’ Advisory Committee meeting: 10:30 a.m. Break under the Agreement for Cooperation Environmental Management Site 10:45 a.m. Prioritization/Budget between the Government of the United Specific Advisory Board (EM SSAB), 12:00 noon Lunch States of America and the Government Idaho National Engineering Laboratory. 1:15 p.m. Board Work: Spent Nuclear Fuel Committee Follow-up of Switzerland concerning Civil Uses of DATES: Tuesday, March 21, 1995 from 3:15 p.m. Break Atomic Energy, as amended, and the 8:00 a.m. Mountain Standard Time 3:30 p.m. Action plan—Develop agenda Additional Agreement for Cooperation (MST) until 6:00 pm MST and for May meeting—priority setting between the Government of the United Wednesday, March 22, 1995 from 8:00 DSTP Committee Follow-Up States of America and the European a.m. MST until 5:00 p.m. MST. There 5:00 p.m. Adjourn Atomic Energy Community will be a public comment availability (EURATOM) concerning Peaceful Uses session Tuesday, March 21, 1995 from A final agenda will be available at the of Atomic Energy, as amended. 5:00 to 6:00 p.m. MST. meeting. The subsequent arrangement to be ADDRESSES: Shilo Inn, 780 Lindsay Public Comment Availability carried out under the above-mentioned Blvd, Idaho Falls, ID 83402, (208)523– agreements involves approval for the The two-day meeting is open to the 0088. transfer of 315 kilograms of fissile public, with a Public Comment FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: plutonium from the reprocessing site in Availability session scheduled for France to either the Siemens facility in Idaho National Engineering Laboratory Tuesday, March 21, 1995 from 5:00 p.m. Hanau, the Federal Republic of Information 1–800–708–2680 or Marsha to 6:00 p.m. MST. The Board will be Germany, the Compagnie Generale des Hardy, Jason Associates Corporation available during this time period to hear Matieres Nucleaires (COGEMA) in Staff Support 1–208–522–1662. verbal public comments or to review France or the British Nuclear Fuels, plc SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: any written public comments. If there in the United Kingdom. The plutonium are no members of the public wishing to Purpose of the Committee will be used for fabrication of mixed comment or no written comments to plutonium-uranium oxide fuel for use in The Board will be developing a review, the board will continue with it’s power reactors within the European recommendation on the Idaho National current discussion. Written statements Community. Engineering Laboratory Future Land Use may be filed with the Committee either In accordance with Section 131 of the Plan, studying budget prioritization before or after the meeting. Individuals Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, activities for the DOE-ID FY 1997 who wish to make oral statements it has been determined that this budget, and continue its study of risk pertaining to agenda items should subsequent arrangement will not be management. The Board also intends to contact the Idaho National Engineering inimical to the common defense and adopt revised operating procedures. Laboratory Information line or Marsha Hardy, Jason Associates, at the security. Tentative Agenda This subsequent arrangement will addresses or telephone numbers listed take effect no sooner than fifteen days March 21, 1995 above. Requests must be received 5 days after the date of publication of this 7:30 a.m. Sign-in and Registration prior to the meeting and reasonable notice and after fifteen days of 8:00 a.m. Miscellaneous Business: provision will be made to include the continuous session of the Congress, • Agenda Review/Revision/ presentation in the agenda. The beginning the day after the date on Acceptance Designated Federal Official is which the reports required by section Old Business empowered to conduct the meeting in a 131(b)(1) of the Atomic Energy Act of • DDFO Report fashion that will facilitate the orderly 1954, as amended (42 U.S.C. 2160), are • Chair Report conduct of business. Each individual Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices 13971 wishing to make public comment will Interchange Agreement with the City of in accordance with cost-of-service be provided a maximum of 5 minutes to Hamilton, Ohio. formulas, including a formulaic present their comments. This notice is The Interchange Agreement proposes determination of the return on common being published less than 15 days before interchange service schedules for equity. the date of the meeting, due to emergency service, interchange power, Copies of the filing were served upon programmatic issues that had to be short-term power, limited term power the affected wholesale Customers, the resolved prior to publication. and transmission service. The service Public Utility Commission of Texas, the schedules have been modified to Oklahoma Corporation Commission, the Minutes achieve consistency with Commission Louisiana Public Service Commission The minutes of this meeting will be policy. The Agreement is proposed to be and the Arkansas Public Service available for public review and copying made effective March 1, 1994. Copies of Commission. at the Freedom of Information Public the revised Service Schedules were Comment date: March 22, 1995, in Reading Room, 1E–190, Forrestal served upon the Public Utilities accordance with Standard Paragraph E Building, 1000 Independence Avenue, Commission of Ohio and the City of at the end of this notice. SW, Washington, DC 20585 between Hamilton. 6. Consolidated Edison Company of 9:00 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday-Friday, Comment date: March 22, 1995, in New York except Federal holidays. accordance with Standard Paragraph E Issued at Washington, DC on March 9, at the end of this notice. [Docket No. ER95–661–000] 1995. 3. The Washington Water Power Take notice that on February 28, 1995, Rachel M. Samuel, Consolidated Edison Company of New [Docket No. ER95–397–000] Acting Deputy, Advisory Committee York, Inc. (Con Edison) tendered for Management Officer. Take notice that on March 2, 1995 filing an agreement with Enron Power [FR Doc. 95–6382 Filed 3–14–95; 8:45 am] The Washington Water Power Company Marketing, Inc. (Enron) to provide for BILLING CODE 6450±01±P (WWP), tendered for filing with the the sale of energy and capacity. For Federal Energy Regulatory Commission energy sold by Con Edison the ceiling an amendment to its Agreement for the rate is 100 percent of the incremental Federal Energy Regulatory sale of capacity and associated energy to energy cost plus up to 10 percent of the Commission Modesto Irrigation District (MID). WWP incremental energy cost plus up to 10 states the purpose of the amendment is percent of the SIC (where such 10 [Docket No. ER93±879±000, et al.] to clarify the pricing of capacity and percent is limited to 1 mill per KWhr energy sold to MID. when the SIC in the hour reflects a Cincinnati Gas & Electric Company, et Comment date: March 22, 1995, in purchased power resource). The ceiling al.; Electric Rate and Corporate accordance with Standard Paragraph E rate for capacity sold by Con Edison is Regulation Filings at the end of this notice. $7.70 per megawatt hour. For energy and capacity sold by Enron the rates 4. Montaup Electric Company March 8, 1995. will be market based. Take notice that the following filings [Docket No. ER95–449–000] Con Edison states that a copy of this have been made with the Commission: Take notice that on February 23, 1995, filing has been served by overnight delivery upon Enron. 1. Cincinnati Gas & Electric Company Montaup Electric Company tendered for filing a Notice of Withdrawal of its filing Comment date: March 22, 1995, in [Docket No. ER93–879–000] of January 17, 1995 in the above- accordance with Standard Paragraph E Take notice that the Cincinnati Gas & referenced docket. at the end of this notice. Electric Company (CG&E) on March 2, Comment date: March 22, 1995, in 7. Idaho Power Company 1995 tendered for filing revised Service accordance with Standard Paragraph E Schedules A through D to an at the end of this notice. [Docket No. ER95–662–000] Interchange Agreement with the Wabash Take notice that on February 28, 1995, 5. Southwestern Electric Power Valley Power Authority. Idaho Power Company (IPC) tendered Company The Interchange Agreement proposes for filing revisions to Idaho Power interchange service schedules for [Docket No. ER95–660–000] Company FERC Rate Schedule No. 77, emergency service, interchange power, Take notice that on February 28, 1995, Transmission Service Agreement short-term power, limited term power Southwestern Electric Power Company between Idaho Power and Bonneville and transmission service. The (SWEPCO) tendered for filing the Final Power Administration (BPA). The Agreement is proposed to be made return on common equity (Final ROE) to revision of several exhibits was effective immediately. Copies of the be used in redetermining or ‘‘truing-up’’ necessary to reflect the addition of revised Service Schedules were served cost-of-service formula rates for certain transmission facilities necessary upon the Public Utilities Commission of wholesale service in 1994 to Northeast for providing service to BPA. Idaho Ohio and the Wabash Valley Power Texas Electric Cooperative, inc., the City Power requests an effective date of May Authority. of Bentonville, Arkansas, the City of 1, 1995 for said revisions. Comment date: March 22, 1995, in Hope, Arkansas, the Oklahoma Comment date: March 22, 1995, in accordance with Standard Paragraph E Municipal Power Authority, Rayburn accordance with Standard Paragraph E at the end of this notice. Country Electric Cooperative, Inc., at the end of this notice. 2. Cincinnati Gas & Electric Company Cajun Electric Power Cooperative, inc. 8. Southern Company Services, Inc. and TEX-LA Electric Cooperative of [Docket No. ER94–1579–000] Texas, Inc., and East Texas Electric [Docket No. ER95–663–000] Take notice that the Cincinnati Gas & Cooperative, Inc. SWEPCO provides Take notice that on March 1, 1995, Electric Company (CG&E) on March 2, service to these Customers under Southern Company Services, Inc., as 1995, tendered for filing revised Service contracts which provide for periodic agent for Alabama Power Company, Schedules A through E to an changes in rates and charges determined Georgia Power Company, Gulf Power 13972 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices Company, Mississippi Power Company, 12. Unitil Power Corporation DEA, the Commission’s staff has and Savannah Electric and Power [Docket No. ER95–668–000] analyzed the potential future company (the ‘‘Southern Companies’’) environmental impacts of the project Take notice that on March 1, 1995, tendered for filing amendments to and has concluded that approval of the Unitil Power Corporation tendered for various unit power sale and/or project, with appropriate environmental filing a Notice of Cancellation of FERC transmission service agreements protection and enhancement measures, Rate Schedule No. 2. between Southern Companies and Comment date: March 22, 1995, in would not constitute a major federal various neighboring electric utilities. accordance with Standard Paragraph E action that would significantly affect The purpose of the amendments is to at the end of this notice. quality of the human environment. ensure the required adoption of SFAS Copies of the DEA are available for No. 109 will have no effect on billings 13. Exeter & Hampton Electric review in the Public Reference Branch, under the agreements. Company Room 3104, of the Commission’s offices Comment date: March 22, 1995, in [Docket No. ER95–669–000] at 941 North Capitol Street, N.E., accordance with Standard Paragraph E Take notice that on March 1, 1995, Washington, D.C. 20426. Any comments should be filed within at the end of this notice. Exeter & Hampton Electric Company 30 days from the date of this notice and 9. Gulf Power Company tendered for filing a Notice of Cancellation of FERC Rate Schedule No. should be addressed to Lois D. Cashell, [Docket No. ER95–665–000] 1. Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Take notice that on March 1, 1995, Comment date: March 22, 1995, in Commission, 925 North Capitol Street, Gulf Power Company filed a letter accordance with Standard Paragraph E N.E., Washington, D.C. 20426. For agreement dated January 6, 1995 at the end of this notice. further information, contact Michael Strzelecki, Environmental Coordinator, revising the contract executed by the Standard Paragaphs United States of America, Department of at (202) 219–2827. Energy, acting by and through the E. Any person desiring to be heard or Linwood A. Watson, Jr., Southeastern Power Administration and to protest said filing should file a Acting Secretary. Gulf Power Company. The letter motion to intervene or protest with the [FR Doc. 95–6305 Filed 3–14–95; 8:45 am] agreement extends the term of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, BILLING CODE 6717±01±M existing Contract until the effective date 825 North Capitol Street, N.E., Washington, D.C. 20426, in accordance of new arrangements or the filing of a [Docket No. CP94±793±001, et al.] notice of termination, whichever occurs with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission’s Rules of Practice and first. Southern Natural Gas Company, et al.; Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 18 CFR Comment date: March 22, 1995, in Natural Gas Certificate Filings accordance with Standard Paragraph E 385.214). All such motions or protests at the end of this notice. should be filed on or before the March 8, 1995. comment date. Protests will be Take notice that the following filings 10. Southern California Edison considered by the Commission in have been made with the Commission: Company determining the appropriate action to be 1. Southern Natural Gas Company [Docket No. ER95–666–000] taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the proceeding. [Docket No. CP94–793–001] Take notice that Southern California Any person wishing to become a party Take notice that on February 23, 1995, Edison Company on March 1, 1995, must file a motion to intervene. Copies tendered for filing a Notice of as amended on February 27, 1995, of this filing are on file with the Southern Natural Gas Company Cancellation of FERC Rate Schedule Commission and are available for public Nos. 247.27, 248.27 and 249.27. (Southern), Post Office Box 2563, inspection. Birmingham, Alabama 35202–2563, Comment date: March 22, 1995, in Lois D. Cashell accordance with Standard Paragraph E filed in Docket No. CP94–793–001 an Secretary. at the end of this notice. amendment to the request filed by [FR Doc. 95–6311 Filed 3–14–95; 8:45 am] Southern on September 22, 1994, in 11. Tampa Electric Company BILLING CODE 6717±01±P Docket No. CP94–793–000 pursuant to Docket No. ER95–667–000 Sections 157.205 and 157.211 of the Commission’s Regulations under the Take notice that on March 1, 1995, [Project No. 11322±000 California] Natural Gas Act (18 CFR 157.205 and Tampa Electric Company (Tampa 157.211) for authorization to construct Electric) tendered for filing an Tuolumne Utilities District; Availability of Draft Environmental Assessment and operate a delivery point for service agreement to provide non-firm to International Paper under Southern’s transmission service for Enron Power March 9, 1995. blanket certificate issued in Docket No. Marketing, Inc. (Enron). In accordance with the National CP82–406–000. Southern hereby Tampa Electric proposes that the Environmental Policy Act of 1969 and requests authorization to construct the agreement be made effective on the the Federal Energy Regulatory delivery point facilities authorized earlier of the date it is accepted for filing Commission’s (Commission) under Southern’s Part 157 Blanket or April 30, 1995, and therefore requests regulations, 18 CFR Part 380 (Order No. Certificate in the above-referenced waiver of the Commission’s notice 486, 52 F.R. 47897), the Office of proceeding to serve Alabama Gas requirement. Hydropower Licensing has reviewed the Corporation (Alagasco) instead of Copies of the filing have been served application for a minor license for the International Paper, all as more fully set on Enron and the Florida Public Service Columbia Water Supply Hydroelectric forth in the request which is on file with Commission. Project, located near the town of Sonora, the Commission and open to public Comment date: March 22, 1995, in in Tuolumne County, California, and inspection. accordance with Standard Paragraph E has prepared a Draft Environmental Southern states that the construction at the end of this notice. Assessment (DEA) for the project. In the of the facilities proposed in Docket No. Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices 13973 CP94–793–000 was automatically system thus continuing service to its 25 4. Columbia Gas Transmission authorized under Southern’s Blanket existing rural domestic customers. No Corporation Certificate pursuant to Section 157.206 customers or service will be abandoned [Docket No. CP95–240–000] of the Commission’s Regulations on as a result of the facilities transfer. November 15, 1994. In the Amendment Take notice that on March 2, 1995, Lines ADM–8 and ADM–9 were Columbia Gas Transmission Corporation to the Request, Southern states that it originally constructed in 1930 as gas proposes to construct and operate the (CGT), PO Box 1273, 1700 MacCorkle supply lines and through a merger NGT Avenue, S.E., Charleston, West Virginia measurement and other facilities at the acquired them from Southwest Natural delivery point to deliver gas to Alagasco 26031, filed in an abbreviated Gas Company, they were later application pursuant to Section 7(c) and instead of directly to International Paper certificated in Docket No. CP62–216. at International Paper’s Riverdale plant 7(b) of the Natural Gas Act for a Production has since depleted on these certificate of public convenience and in Dallas County, Alabama. Southern two lines. states that the location and siting of the necessity authorizing CGT to construct Comment date: April 24, 1995, in facilities, the configuration of the and operate approximately 12.1 miles of accordance with Standard Paragraph G facilities, the estimated cost of the 24-inch pipeline, replacing at the end of this notice. facilities and the projected load to be approximately 11 miles of deteriorating served all remains the same as filed in 3. Williston Basin Interstate Pipeline bare, coupled 20-inch pipeline in two the Request. Further, Southern states Company segments. The proposal will permit the that the only change to the Request is replacement of certain deteriorating [Docket No. CP95–233–000] that Southern will serve Alagasco at the facilities as well as the provision of delivery point by providing Alagasco Take notice that on March 1, 1995, additional firm transportation services with transportation service under its Williston Basin Interstate Pipeline to WV Power and Westvaco under Rate Schedule IT as set forth in its FERC Company (Williston Basin), 200 North CGT’s Part 284 Blanket Certificate. Gas Tariff. Third Street, Suite 300, Bismarck, North Specifically, CGT is requesting Comment date: April 24, 1995, in Dakota 58501, filed in Docket No. CP95– authorization in this application for the accordance with Standard Paragraph G 233–000 an application pursuant to following: at the end of this notice. Section 7(c) of the Natural Gas Act, 1a. The construction and operation of requesting authorization to construct approximately 7.0 miles of 24-inch 2. NorAm Gas Transmission Company and operate approximately 13.4 miles of pipeline replacing approximately 6.4 [Docket No. CP95–225–000] replacement mainline in Sheridan and miles of 20-inch pipeline designated as Take notice that on February 24, 1995, Johnson Counties, Wyoming, all as more CGT’s Line KA and a 0.1 mile extension NorAm Gas Transmission Company fully set forth in the application on file of 8-inch Line KA–26 in Wyoming (NGT), 1600 Smith Street, Houston, with the Commission and open to County, West Virginia. Texas 77002, filed in Docket No. CP95– public inspection. b. The transfer of approximately 0.7 225–000 a request pursuant to Sections Specifically, Williston Basin states mile of the 20-inch Line KA being 157.205 and 157.216 of the that it proposes to replace replaced in Segment 1a above to low Commission’s Regulations under the approximately 13.4 miles of the 8-inch pressure transmission service. c. Abandonment of the remaining Natural Gas Act (18 CFR 157.205, Billy Creek-Sheridan transmission line approximately 5.7 miles of 20-inch Line 157.216) for authorization to abandon beginning in Johnson County, Wyoming KA being replaced as described in certain facilities in Oklahoma under and terminating in Sheridan County, Segment 1a above. NorAm’s blanket certificate issued in Wyoming. It is averred that the Billy 2a. The construction and operation of Docket No. CP82–384–000 and CP82– Creek-Sheridan line was installed in approximately 5.1 miles of 24-inch 384–001 pursuant to Section 7 of the 1930 and that severe corrosion and leaks pipeline to replace approximately 4.6 Natural Gas Act, all as more fully set have been found throughout the line. miles of 20-inch pipeline designated as forth in the request that is on file with Williston Basin further states that this Line KA, and a 0.1 mile extension of 3- the Commission and open to public proposal represents the final inch Line KA–14, both in Wyoming and inspection. replacement portion of the Billy Creek- Raleigh Counties, West Virginia, and NorAm proposes to abandon in place Sheridan line. Williston Basin states and transfer by sale to Arkla (Arkla), a b. Abandonment of the 4.6 miles of that environmental and safety 20-inch pipeline being replaced as division of NorAm Energy Corp, at an considerations has prompted it to estimated net book value of $80,732.78, described in Segment 2a., all as more relocate approximately 40 percent of the Lines ADM–8 and ADM–9 which are fully set forth in the application which replacement line outside of its existing located in Pontotoc County, Oklahoma. is on file with the Commission and open right-of-way. It is stated that the Line ADM–8 is 13,700 feet in length of to public inspection. proposed replacement line will enable 2-inch pipe extending from Section 4, The construction cost is estimated by Williston Basin to maintain a safe and Township 4N, Range 5E to Section 16, CGT to be $12,541,000. WV Power and reliable gas transmission pipeline to the Township 4N, Range 5E and serves 12 Westvaco have agreed to pay a portion cities of Buffalo and Sheridan, Arkla customers. NGT proposes to ($300,294) of the incremental costs Wyoming. abandon the entire line in place from associated with increasing the pipe size station 0+00 to 137+00. Line ADM–9 is It is estimated that the cost of the to 24-inch. 6,402 feet in length of 2-inch pipe proposed replacement facilities for this Comment date: March 28, 1995, in extending from Section 4, Township 4N, project will be approximately accordance with Standard Paragraph F Range 5E to Section 11, Township 4N, $1,133,950, which Williston Basin at the end of this notice. proposes to finance through internally Range 5E and serves 13 Arkla 5. Florida Gas Transmission Company customers. NGT proposes to abandon generated funds and/or interim short the entire line in place from station term bank loans. [Docket No. CP95–241–000] 0+00 to 64+02. After the transfer by sale, Comment date: March 29, 1995, in Take notice that on March 3, 1995, Arkla will operate these two lines and accordance with Standard Paragraph F Florida Gas Transmission Company incorporate them into its distribution at the end of this notice. (FGT), 1400 Smith Street, Houston, 13974 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices Texas 77002, filed in Docket No. CP95– Tennessee explains that the additional of the instant notice by the Commission, 241–000 a request pursuant to Sections meter is necessary to handle gas file pursuant to Rule 214 of the 157.205 and 157.216 of the measurement on peak days. Tennessee Commission’s Procedural Rules (18 CFR Commission’s Regulations under the further states that while the increased 385.214) a motion to intervene or notice Natural Gas Act (18 CFR 157.205 and deliveries of gas to Central Gas would be of intervention and pursuant to Section 157.216) for permission and approval to through release capacity, IT, or 157.205 of the Regulations under the abandon and remove a meter station and authorized overruns, the total quantities Natural Gas Act (18 CFR 157.205) a any related appurtenant facilities, to be delivered for Central Gas’ account protest to the request. If no protest is located in San Patricio County, Texas. after establishment of the new delivery filed within the time allowed therefor, FGT makes such request, under its meter would not exceed the total the proposed activity shall be deemed to blanket certificate issued in Docket No. quantities authorized prior to this be authorized effective the day after the CP82–553–000 pursuant to Section 7 of request. Tennessee states that it would time allowed for filing a protest. If a the Natural Gas Act, all as more fully set be reimbursed for the cost of the project, protest is filed and not withdrawn forth in the request that is on file with estimated to be $27,446. within 30 days after the time allowed the Commission and open to public Comment date: April 24, 1995, in for filing a protest, the instant request inspection. accordance with Standard Paragraph G shall be treated as an application for FGT states that it is proposing to at the end of this notice. authorization pursuant to Section 7 of abandon facilities which once served as Standard Paragraphs the Natural Gas Act. a point of measurement for natural gas Lois D. Cashell, which bypassed the Warren processing F. Any person desiring to be heard or Secretary. plant. It is stated that the Warren plant to make any protest with reference to has not been used for some time and is said application should on or before the [FR Doc. 95–6310 Filed 3–14–95; 8:45 am] not expected to be used in the future. comment date, file with the Federal BILLING CODE 6717±01±P The estimated cost of removal is Energy Regulatory Commission, $15,800 with an estimated salvage value Washington, D.C. 20426, a motion to [Docket No. CP95±237±000] of $15,825. intervene or a protest in accordance It is averred that the proposed activity with the requirements of the Greeley Gas Company; Application for is not prohibited by FGT’s existing tariff Commission’s Rules of Practice and Service Area Determination and that it has sufficient capacity to Procedure (18 CFR 385.214 or 385.211) continue all services without detriment and the Regulations under the Natural March 9, 1995. or disadvantage to FGT’s firm Gas Act (18 CFR 157.10). All protests Take notice that on March 2, 1995, customers. filed with the Commission will be Greeley Gas Company (Greeley), a Comment date: April 24, 1995, in considered by it in determining the Division of Atmos Energy Corporation, accordance with Standard Paragraph G appropriate action to be taken but will Three Lincoln Centre, 5430 LBJ at the end of this notice. not serve to make the protestants parties Freeway, Dallas, Texas 75265, filed in to the proceeding. Any person wishing Docket No. CP95–237–000, an 6. Tennessee Gas Pipeline Company to become a party to a proceeding or to application pursuant to Section 7(f) of [Docket No. CP95–242–000] participate as a party in any hearing the Natural Gas Act (NGA) for a service Take notice that on March 3, 1995, therein must file a motion to intervene area determination for its Lamar System Tennessee Gas Pipeline Company in accordance with the Commission’s in the states of Colorado and Kansas, all (Tennessee), P.O. Box 2511, Houston, Rules. as more fully set forth in the application Texas 77252, filed in Docket No. CP95– Take further notice that, pursuant to which is on file with the Commission 242–000 a request pursuant to Sections the authority contained in and subject to and open to public inspection. 157.205 and 157.212 of the the jurisdiction conferred upon the Greeley states that its Lamar System Commission’s Regulations under the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission serves consumers in approximately six Natural Gas Act (18 CFR 157.205, by Sections 7 and 15 of the Natural Gas towns in southwest Kansas and 16 157.212) for authorization to establish a Act and the Commission’s Rules of towns in southeast Colorado, as well as new delivery point under Tennessee’s Practice and Procedure, a hearing will certain irrigation customers and right-of- blanket certificate issued in Docket No. be held without further notice before the way grantors. Greeley submits that grant CP82–413–000 pursuant to Section 7 of Commission or its designee on this of this application would assist Greeley the Natural Gas Act, all as more fully set application if no motion to intervene is to maximize gas cost benefits and forth in the request that is on file with filed within the time required herein, if enhance supply options for its Lamar the Commission and open to public the Commission on its own review of System customers. inspection. the matter finds that a grant of the Greeley asserts its Lamar System Tennessee proposes to establish an certificate and/or permission and meets the Commission’s criteria for additional delivery point in order to approval for the proposed abandonment granting a service area determination. properly meter expanded volumes of up are required by the public convenience Greeley states the following: All of its to 6,000 Dekatherms per day for Central and necessity. If a motion for leave to sales are regulated by either the Gas Company (Central Gas), a subsidiary intervene is timely filed, or if the Colorado or the Kansas public service of Alabama-Tennessee Natural Gas Commission on its own motion believes commission; there are no sales for resale Company. Tennessee states that it that a formal hearing is required, further on the Lamar System, only retail sales would install a 3-inch meter and notice of such hearing will be duly and transportation for other customers; associated piping adjacent to an existing given. the Lamar System is essentially one delivery meter (Meter No. 2–0431) Under the procedure herein provided integrated local distribution system with located at M.P. 554–1+1.10 on the 500– for, unless otherwise advised, it will be certain gathering areas; the system is 1 Line and M.P. 554–3+1.10 on the 500– unnecessary for applicant to appear or limited to a specific geographical area in 3 Line in Lauderdale County, Alabama. 1 be represented at the hearing. rural Kansas and Colorado, and G. Any person or the Commission’s connects to only one interstate pipeline, 1 See 34 FPC 452 (1965). staff may, within 45 days after issuance Colorado Interstate Gas Company; and Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices 13975 there are no other distribution [Docket No. RP94±93±007] not yet been approved by the companies in the area. Commission. National states that this K N Interstate Gas Transmission left a tariff sheet in effect as of October Greeley requests that the Commission Company; Revised Compliance Filing treat its Lamar System as a local 1, 1994, that did not include the P–2 distribution company for purposes of March 9, 1995. and IR–2 Rate Schedules. National states that since the Commission Section 311 of the Natural Gas Policy Take notice that on March 7, 1995, K approved the P–2 and IR–2 Rate Act. Greeley further requests a waiver of N Interstate Gas Transmission Co. (KNI) tendered for filing a revised tariff sheet Schedules in a February 13, 1995, Order all reporting and accounting in Docket No. RP94–80–000, et al., requirements and rules and regulations in compliance with the Commission’s February 10, 1995 Letter Order in the effective August 24, 1994, it is filing to which are ordinarily applicable to supersede the sheet effective as of natural gas companies. referenced proceeding. KNI states that its February 27, 1995 tariff compliance October 1, 1994, which did not include Any person desiring to be heard or to filing inadvertently did not contain the the P–2 and IR–2 rates. make any protest with reference to said correct IT rate on Sheet No. 4 of First Any person desiring to protest said application should on or before March Revised Volume No. 1–C of its FERC filing should file a protest with the 30, 1995, file with the Federal Energy Gas Tariff. KNI further states that Sub. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Regulatory Commission, Washington, First Revised Sheet No. 4, submitted 825 North Capitol Street, NE., D.C. 20426, a motion to intervene or a with its filing, makes the appropriate Washington, D.C. 20426, in accordance protest in accordance with the correction. with Rule 211 of the Commission’s requirements of the Commission’s Rules KNI states that copies of the filing Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR were served upon each person 385.211). All such protests should be 385.214 and 385.211) and the designated on the official service list filed on or before March 16, 1994. Protests will be considered by the regulations under the Natural Gas Act complied by the Secretary in this Commission in determining the (18 CFR 157.10). All protests filed with proceeding. appropriate action to be taken but will the Commission will be considered by Any person desiring to protest said not serve to make protestants parties to it in determining the appropriate action filing should file a protest with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, the proceeding. Copies of this filing are to be taken but will not serve to make 825 North Capitol Street, N.E., on file with the Commission and are the protestants parties to the Washington D.C. 20426, in accordance available for public inspection. proceeding. Any person wishing to with Section 385.211 of the Linwood A. Watson, Jr., become a party in any proceeding Commission’s Rules and Regulations. Acting Secretary. herein must file a motion to intervene All such protests should be filed on or [FR Doc. 95–6308 Filed 3–14–95; 8:45 am] in accordance with the Commission’s before March 16, 1995. Protests will be BILLING CODE 6717±01±M rules. considered by the Commission in Take further notice that, pursuant to determining the appropriate action to be the authority contained in and subject to taken, but will not serve to make any [Docket No. QF86±556±004] protestants parties to the proceeding. the jurisdiction conferred upon the Sunnyside Cogeneration Associates; Copies of this filing are on file with the Commission by Sections 7 and 15 of the Application for Commission Commission and are available for public Natural Gas Act and the Commission’s Recertification of Qualifying Status of inspection in the Public Reference Rules of Practice and Procedure, a a Small Power Production Facility hearing will be held without further Room. notice before the Commission or its Linwood A. Watson, Jr., March 9, 1995. designee on this application if no Acting Secretary. On February 28, 1995, Sunnyside motion to intervene is filed within the [FR Doc. 95–6306 Filed 3–14–95; 8:45 am] Cogeneration Associates (applicant), c/o time required herein, if the Commission BILLING CODE 6717±01±M B&W Sunnyside L.P., 20 South Van on its own review of the matter finds Buren Avenue, Barberton, OH 44203, and c/o NRG Sunnyside Inc., 1221 that a service area determination is [Docket No. TM95±2±16±003] required by the public convenience and Nicollet Mall, Suite 700, Minneapolis, necessity. If a motion for leave to National Fuel Gas Supply Corporation; MN 55403, submitted for filing an intervene is timely filed, or if the Compliance Filing application for recertification of a facility as a small power production Commission on its own motion believes March 9, 1995. facility pursuant to Section 292.207(b) that formal hearing is required, further Take notice that on March 6, 1995, of the Commission’s Regulations. No notice of such hearing will be duly National Fuel Gas Supply Corporation determination has been made that the given. (National) tendered for filing as part of submittal constitutes a complete filing. Under the procedure herein provided its FERC Gas Tariff, Third Revised According to the applicant, the for, unless otherwise advised, it will be Volume No. 1, Third Substitute Fifth bituminous coal refuse-fueled small unnecessary for Greeley to appear or to Revised Sheet No. 6. power production facility is located at be represented at the hearing. National states that this tariff sheet is Carbon County, Utah, and consists of a Linwood A. Watson, Jr., filed in response to the Commission’s circulating fluidized bed boiler and an order issued on October 21, 1994, in the extraction/condensing steam turbine Acting Secretary. above-captioned proceeding. generating unit. the facility commenced [FR Doc. 95–6303 Filed 3–14–95; 8:45 am] Specifically, National states that the commercial operation on March 19, BILLING CODE 6717±01±M October 21 Letter Order rejected Second 1993. Substitute Fifth Revised Sheet No. 6 In Docket No. QF86–556–000, the filed in this proceeding as premature applicant was granted certification for a because the tariff sheet included the P– 45 MW topping-cycle cogeneration 2 and IR–2 Rate Schedules which had facility [39 FERC ¶ 62,091 (1987)]. In 13976 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices Docket No. QF86–556–001, the facility three-month period October through with interest from the time customers was recertified to reflect a change in the December, 1993 under the assumption first paid these carrying charges to the steam host [49 FERC ¶ 62,288 (1989)]. In that under recoveries for this period, date of the refund. On November 14, Docket No. QF86–566–002, the facility which were included in WNG’s prior 1994, WNG refunded $1,503,020, which was recertified to reflect changes in the filing in Docket Nos. RP95–172 and included interest from July 1, 1990 facility’s design and an increase in the RP94–205, would be permitted to be through November 14, 1994, to the net electric power production capacity included in that prior filing. In this customers who paid such carrying to 51.1 MW [53 FERC ¶ 62,029 (1990)]. regard, WNG also proposed that such charges. In Docket No. QF86–566–003, the under recovery component, which WNG states that a copy of its filing applicant was granted recertification for represents the October through was served on all jurisdictional a small power production facility with December 1993 period, be permitted to customers receiving a refund, all a maximum net electric power remain in effect for a full twelve participants listed on the service lists production capacity of 52 MW. The months. Such twelve-month period maintained by the Commission in the instant recertification is submitted to ends on March 31, 1995 for Storage and docket referenced above, and interested reflect a change in the ownership the West Panhandle gathering area, and state commissions. structure. on May 31, 1995 for all other areas. Any person desiring to be heard or to Any person desiring to be heard or Accordingly, WNG proposed to file protest said filing should file a motion objecting to the granting of qualifying revised tariff sheets effective April 1, to intervene or protest with the Federal status should file a motion to intervene 1995 and June 1, 1995 to eliminate the Energy Regulatory Commission, 825 or protest with the Federal Energy under or over recovery component North Capitol Street, N.E., Washington, Regulatory Commission, 825 North applicable to October through December D.C. 20426, in accordance with Rules Capitol Street NE., Washington, DC 1993. 211 and 214 of the Commission’s Rules 20426, in accordance with rules 211 and WNG states that copies of this filing of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 214 of the Commission’s Rules of are being served on all participants 385.211 and 18 CFR 385.214). All such Practice and Procedure. All such listed on the service lists maintained by motions or protests should be filed on motions or protests must be filed within the Commission in the dockets or before March 23, 1995. Protests will 30 days after the date of publication of referenced above and on all the WNG’s be considered by the Commission in this notice in the Federal Register, and jurisdictional customers and interested determining the appropriate action to be must be served on the applicant. state commissions. taken, but will not serve to make Protests will be considered by the Any person desiring to be heard or to protestants parties to the proceeding. Commission in determining the protest said filing should file a motion Any person wishing to become a party appropriate action to be taken, but will to intervene or protest with the Federal must file a motion to intervene. Copies not serve to make protestants parties to Energy Regulatory Commission, 825 of this filing are on file with the the proceeding. Any person wishing to North Capitol Street, N.E., Washington, Commission and are available for public become a party must file a petition to D.C. 20426, in accordance with 18 CFR inspection. intervene. Copies of this filing are on 385.214 and 385.211 of the Linwood A. Watson, Jr., file with the Commission and are Commission’s Rules and Regulations. Acting Secretary. available for public inspection. All such motions or protests should be [FR Doc. 95–6304 Filed 3–14–95; 8:45 am] filed on or before March 16, 1995. Linwood A. Watson, Jr., BILLING CODE 6717±01±M Acting Secretary. Protests will be considered by the [FR Doc. 95–6309 Filed 3–14–95; 8:45 am] Commission in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will BILLING CODE 6717±01±M not serve to make protestants parties to ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION the proceeding. Any person wishing to AGENCY [Docket No. RP95±201±000] become a party must file a motion to intervene. Copies of this filing are on [FRL±5172±6] Williams Natural Gas Company; Filing file with the Commission and are Draft Example Enhanced Monitoring available for public inspection in the March 9, 1995. Protocols Take notice that on March 1, 1995, public reference room. Williams Natural Gas Company (WNG) Linwood A. Watson, Jr., AGENCY: Environmental Protection filed Schedule A, Pages 2 and 3 from its Acting Secretary. Agency, Office of Enforcement and December 1, 1994 filing, in Docket No. [FR Doc. 95–6307 Filed 3–14–95; 8:45 am] Compliance Assurance and Office of Air TM95–2–45–001, which shows no BILLING CODE 6717±01±M and Radiation. under or over recovery for October ACTION: Notice of availability. through December 1993 for its Storage [Docket No. FA90±68±003] and West Panhandle gathering area. SUMMARY: The Offices of Compliance and Air Quality Planning and Standards Therefore, no tariff filing is being made Williams Natural Gas Company; Filing at this time. WNG will make a filing to are announcing the availability of be effective June 1, 1995 to eliminate the March 9, 1995. thirteen draft example enhanced under or over recovery component that Take notice that Williams Natural Gas monitoring protocols for public review has been in the percentages for all other Company (WNG) on November 23, and comment through the Technology areas for twelve months. 1995, tendered for filing a report of Transfer Network electronic bulletin WNG states that it failed on December refunds made to jurisdictional board system (919–541–5742 or 1, 1994, in Docket No. TM95–2–43–001 customers. Internet: TELNET ttnbbs.rtpnc.epa.gov). to reflect revised fuel and loss WNG states that Commission order FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: reimbursement percentages effective issued October 14, 1994 required WNG Peter R. Westlin, Office of Air Quality January 1, 1995. In the filing, WNG did to refund the principal amount of and Standards, Environmental not include under recoveries for the $1,088,254 at issue in this proceeding, Protection Agency, Mail Drop 19, Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices 13977 Research Triangle Park, North Carolina next five years to assist in the Manual Monitoring of Fuel Gas Sulfur 27711, (919–541–1058). implementation of the Enhanced Content for Process Heaters at SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The EPA Monitoring Rule. The Agency is seeking Petroleum Refineries: Twice daily is publishing today through the comments on these draft EMPs measurement of fuel H2S content for Technology Transfer Network (TTN), regarding their applicability, technical fuels with sulfur content less than 20 Emission Measurement Technical merit, and appropriate level of percent of compliance limit. Information Center (EMTIC) electronic flexibility. Commenters with additional Demonstrated Compliance Parameter bulletin board, Enhanced Monitoring supporting data for these or other Limit Monitoring for Permanent Total Menu, thirteen draft example enhanced example EMPs are encouraged to submit Enclosure and Thermal Incinerator monitoring protocols (EMPs) for public those data. Comments on the draft EMPs Used for a Magnetic Tape Coating Line: review and comment. These example are requested by April 14, 1995, and Monitoring of incinerator combustion protocols have been prepared in may be sent to Peter Westlin either in temperature, enclosure flow rate response to needs expressed by state hard copy at the address above or via differential pressure, and process and local permitting authorities and the TTN electronic mail. The Agency operating times as indicators of industry source owners and operators in will review the comments, consider compliance operation. implementing the forthcoming 40 CFR changes resulting from the promulgation Demonstrated Compliance Parameter Part 64, the Enhanced Monitoring Rule, of the rule, revise the EMPs as Limit Monitoring for Vented Curing proposed in the Federal Register, appropriate, and issue final versions of Oven and Thermal Incinerator Used for October 22, 1993 (58 FR 54648). the EMPs in the following few months a Metal Coil Coating Line: Monitoring of Comments on the draft EMPs are through the EMTIC electronic bulletin incinerator combustion temperature, requested by April 10, 1995, and may be board, and will announce their curing oven flow rate differential sent to Peter Westlin either in hard copy availability through a notice in the pressure, and process operating times as at the address above or via the TTN Federal Register. indicators of compliance operation. electronic mail. The thirteen example EMPs are as Continuous NOX Emission Monitoring The draft example EMPs include follows: System and Conversion Factor for Nitric Predictive NOX Emission Monitoring specific process, pollutant, and control Acid Plants: Application of a CEMS and System for Natural Gas Fired Electric device applicability statements, site-specific conversion factor to Utility Boilers: NOX emissions in ng/J executive summaries, monitoring calculate mg/MG of NOX emissions per calculated from boiler parameter protocol design, and measurement and acid production rate. measurements. Continuous SO2 and NOX Emission calculation procedures to produce data Fuel Sampling and Sulfur Analysis in units consistent with applicable Monitoring System for Coal-Fired for Oil-Fired Electric Utility Boilers: SO2 Industrial Boilers: Application of a emission limits. The EPA intends the emissions in ng/J and kg/hr based on final EMPs to serve as examples upon CEMS and F-factors to calculate ng/J fuel sulfur content, heat content, and emission rates. which source owners or operators can flow rate measurements. design site-specific protocols to include Generic Continuous Emissions Predictive Effluent Flow Rate Monitoring System Protocol: A generally in operating permit applications. Note Monitoring System for Fossil Fuel-Fired that publication of example EMPs does applicable protocol for applying CEMS Electric Utility Boilers: Total gas exhaust for SOX, NOX, and diluent not imply automatic approval of any volume flow rate based on fuel and site-specific EMP described in a permit measurements to calculate emissions in boiler operating parameter units of the applicable standard. application submitted to the relevant measurements, m3/hr. permitting authority; however, for a Record Keeping and Calculation Dated: March 3, 1995. permit application for an emission unit Procedures for Coating and Inking Steven A. Herman, with operating characteristics consistent Processes that Use Compliance Assistant Administrator for Enforcement and with those described in a published Coatings: Total VOC emissions Compliance Assurance. example EMP and including a proposed calculated from coating organic content [FR Doc. 95–6406 Filed 3–14–95; 8:45 am] site-specific EMP analogous to the and use rate measurements. BILLING CODE 6560±50±P example EMP, the EPA intends that the Continuous NOX Emission Monitoring EMP can be presumed acceptable. System for Stationary Gas Turbines: [OPP±00367A; FRL±4942±1] Presumptive acceptability would not Application of a CEMS for NOX preclude the need to verify that the concentration measurements for gas Dermal Absorption Studies of performance of the EMP is consistent turbines that do not use water or steam Pesticides; Availability of Guideline with applicable requirements which injection rate for NOX control. will be described in detail in the final Operation and Maintenance Protocol AGENCY: Environmental Protection Part 64 rule scheduled for promulgation for Processes Using Venturi Scrubber Agency (EPA). in April 1995. Additional information Control for Particulate Matter: ACTION: Notice of availability. on the presumptive acceptability of Application of control device operating example EMPs and the permit parameter measurements and specific SUMMARY: This notice announces the application review process is provided corrective actions applied in availability of the guideline for Dermal in the December 28, 1994, Federal combination and in lieu of direct absorption Studies of Pesticides. This Register notice (59 FR 66844) which particulate emission monitoring. guideline is part of Subdivision F of the reopened the comment period on the Operation and Maintenance Protocol Pesticide Assessment Guidelines, which proposed enhanced monitoring rule for for Processes Using Positive Pressure provide guidance for registrants in the a limited number of issues. Note that the Fabric Filters for Particulate Matter conduct of tests to support registration comment period ended on February 3, Control: Application of visible of pesticides under the Federal 1995. emissions monitoring and specific Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide The first thirteen example EMPs corrective actions applied in Act (FIFRA). The Agency has made represent the first of about 300 that the combination and in lieu of direct arrangements for the Dermal Absorption Agency anticipates producing over the particulate emission monitoring. of Pesticides guideline to be made 13978 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices available through the U.S. Department guideline for Dermal Absorption studies to the limited space, seating at the of Commerce, National Technical of Pesticides incorporates comments of meeting will be on a first-come basis. Information Service (NTIS). the public and the FIFRA Scientific ADDRESSES: Written comments should ADDRESSES: Copies of the guideline for Advisory Panel. It is specifically be sent to: James Morant, Chief, Dermal Absorption of Pesticides may be designed to assist in the risk assessment National Environmental Statistics obtained through the U.S. Department of of pesticide exposure by the dermal Branch, Environmental Statistics and Commerce, National Technical route, following the determination of a Information Division, U.S. Information Service, 5285 Port Royal significant toxic effect in toxicology Environmental Protection Agency, Mail Road, Springfield, Virginia 22161, (703) studies performed by the oral or Code 2163, 401 M Street, SW., 487–4650. Orders may be placed by inhalation route. Washington, DC 20460. telephone to the NTIS Order Desk and Dated: February 27, 1995. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTRACT: charged against a deposit account or Stephanie R. Irene, James Morant, Designated Federal American Express, VISA, or Mastercard, Official, Direct Line (202) 260–2266, or sent by mail with check, money Acting Director, Health Effects Division, Office of Pesticide Programs. General Line (202) 260–2680, Fax (202) order, or deposit account number. For [FR Doc. 95–6409 Filed 3–14–95; 8:45 am] 260–4968. rush orders, telephone 1–800–336–4700. Dated: March 3, 1995. From Virginia, Canada, Mexico, or BILLING CODE 6560±50±F James Morant, International, call (703) 487–4650. The Designated Federal Official. publication number is PB 95–148615. [FRL±5173±1] FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: [FR Doc. 95–6408 Filed 3–14–95; 8:45 am] Robert P. Zendzian, Health Effects Environmental Statistics BILLING CODE 6560±50±M Division (7509C), Office of Pesticide Subcommittee of the National Advisory Council for Policy and Technology; Programs, U.S. Environmental [PF±619; FRL±4930±8] Protection Agency, 401 M St., SW., Public Meeting Washington, DC 20460. (703) 305– AGENCY: Environmental Protection Pesticide Tolerance Petitions 5495). Agency. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Under the AGENCY: Environmental Protection ACTION: Notice of Public Meeting. Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Agency (EPA). Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) pesticides SUMMARY: Pursuant to the Federal ACTION: Notice. must be tested for a variety of health Advisory Committee Act, Public Law effects. Specific data requirements are 92–463, notice is hereby given that the SUMMARY: This notice announces receipt codified in 40 CFR part 158. Guidelines Environmental Statistics Subcommittee by EPA of an initial filing of two feed for the conduct of such studies have (of the Environmental Information and additive petitions (FAPs), and it been developed by the Office of Assessment Committee) of the National announces one amendment to a Pesticide Programs and are made Advisory Council for Environmental previously published pesticide petition available through the National Policy and Technology (NACEPT) will (PP). Technical Information service (NTIS). hold a one and one-half day meeting of ADDRESSES: By mail, submit written The Pesticide Assessment guidelines, the full Subcommittee. comments to: Public Response and Subdivision F, describe protocols for The Environmental Statistics Program Resources Branch, Field performing toxicology and related tests Subcommittee was formed to provide Operations Division (7506C), Office of to support registration of pesticides key recommendations and strategic Pesticide Programs, Environmental under the Federal Food, Drug, and advice on the statistical products and Protection Agency, 401 M St., SW., Cosmetic Act and the Federal activities necessary to enhance the Washington, DC 20460. In person, bring Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Agency’s knowledge about comments to: Rm. 1132, CM #2, 1921 Act. environmental statistics and trends, and Jefferson Davis Hwy., Arlington, VA Subdivision F was proposed for to explore information gaps from the 22202. public comment in 1978 and published perspective of the users/producers of Information submitted as a comment in October 1982. At that time the these data products. The meeting is concerning this notice may be claimed Agency published criteria for being held to discuss and offer critical confidential by marking any part or all performing a dermal absorption study advice on an information policy of that information as ‘‘Confidential on a pesticide and reserved a line item, initiative, 305b reports, and the role, Business Information’’ (CBI). section 85–3, for a guideline on Dermal functions, and information needs of a Information so marked will not be Absorption Studies of Pesticides. The Federal statistical agency. disclosed except in accordance with Agency had available a protocol for Scheduling constraints preclude oral procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2. dermal absorption studies but did not comments from the public during the A copy of the comment that does not consider it ready for publication. meeting. Written comments can be contain CBI must be submitted for Following 9 years of experience with submitted by mail, and will be inclusion in the public record. studies on the dermal absorption of transmitted to Committee members for Information not marked confidential pesticides, a proposed guideline for consideration. may be disclosed publicly by EPA Dermal Absorption Studies of Pesticides DATES: The public meeting will be held without prior notice. All written was made available for public comment on April 3, 1995 from 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 comments will be available for public by publication in the Federal Register of p.m. and April 4, 1995 from 9:00 a.m. inspection in Rm. 1132 at the address March 13, 1991 and a revised proposed to 1:00 p.m. The meetings will be held given above, from 8 a.m. to 4 p.m., guideline in the Federal Register of at the Hall of States, 444 North Capitol Monday through Friday, excluding legal October 21, 1993. The revised proposed Street, NW., Rooms 383–385, holidays. guideline was presented to the FIFRA Washington, DC 20011. The hall FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: By Scientific Advisory Panel on December telephone number is (202) 624–5490. mail: Registration Division (7505C), 15, 1993 at a public meeting. This final This meeting is open to the public. Due Office of Pesticide Programs, Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices 13979 Environmental Protection Agency, 401 petition at the following office location/ M St., SW., Washington, DC 20460. In telephone number: person, contact the PM named in each Office location/telephone num- Product Manager ber Address George LaRocca (PM 13) ...... Rm. 204, CM #2, 703-305- 1921 Jefferson Davis Hwy., Arlington, VA. 6100. Bob Taylor (PM 25) ...... Rm. 241, CM #2, 703-305- Do. 6027. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: EPA has metabolites, trans-deltamethrin: (1R,3S)- ADDRESSES: The draft PR Notice is received a food/feed additive petitions 3(2,2-dibromovinyl)-2,2- available from Leonard Cole, By mail: and one amendment to a previously dimethylcyclopropane-carboxylic acid Registration Division (7505C), Office of published pesticide petition as follows: (S)-alpha-cyano-3-phenoxybenzyl ester Pesticide Programs, Environmental and alpha-R-deltamethrin: (1R,3R)- Initial Filings Protection Agency, 401 M St., SW., 3(2,2-dibromovinyl)-2,2- Washington, DC 20460. Office location 1. FAP 4H5701. Monsanto Co., 800 N. dimethylcyclopropane-carboxylic acid and telephone number: Rm. 713, Crystal Lindberg Blvd., St. Louis, MO 63167, (R)-alpha-cyano-3-phenoxybenzyl ester Mall #2, 1921 Jefferson Davis Highway, has submitted the feed additive petition calculated as parent, in or on cottonseed Arlington, VA, (703) 308–7618. Submit to EPA that proposes amendment to 40 at 0.02 ppm. Since the filing, the section written comments to: By mail: Public CFR 186.3500 to establish a regulation F has been changed to reflect an Docket and Freedom of Information permitting residues of the herbicide increase in tolerance for cottonseed to Section, Field Operations Division glyphosate (N-(phosphonomethyl) 0.04 ppm. (PM 13) (7506C), Office of Pesticide Programs, glycine) resulting from the application Authority: 7 U.S.C. 136a. Environmental Protection Agency, 401 of the isopropylamine salt of glyphosate and/or the monoammonium salt of Dated: March 1, 1995. M St., SW., Washington, DC 20460. In glyphosate in or on the feed commodity person bring comments to: Rm. 1128, soybean, aspirated grain fractions, at 30 Stephen L. Johnson, CM #2, 1921 Jefferson Davis Highway, parts per million (ppm). (PM 25) Director, Registration Division, Office of Arlington, VA. Pesticide Programs. 2. FAP 5H5719. AgrEvo USA Co., Information submitted and any Little Falls Centre One, 2711 Centerville [FR Doc. 95–6420 Filed 3–14–95; 8:45 am] comment(s) concerning this notice may Rd., Wilmington, DE 19808 (formerly BILLING CODE 6560±50±F be claimed confidential by marking any Hoechst-Roussel Agri-Vet Co.), has part or all of that information as submitted a feed additive petition to [OPP±00404; FRL±4939±6] ‘‘Confidential Business Information’’ EPA that proposes amendment to 40 (CBI). Information so marked will not be CFR part 185 to establish a regulation Voluntary Reduced-Risk Pesticides disclosed except in accordance with permitting residues of the pesticide Initiative Update; Notice of Availability procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2. deltamethrin (1R,3R)-3(2,2- and Request for Comments A copy of the comment(s) that does not dibromovinyl)-2,2- contain CBI must be submitted for dimethylcyclopropane-carboxylic acid AGENCY: Environmental Protection inclusion in the public record. (S)-alpha-cyano-3-phenoxybenzyl ester Agency (EPA). Information not marked confidential and its metabolites, trans-deltamethrin: ACTION: Notice. may be disclosed publicly by EPA (1R,3S)-3(2,2-dibromovinyl)-2,2- without prior notice to the submitter. SUMMARY: EPA is soliciting comments dimethylcyclopropane-carboxylic acid Information on the proposed text and on the Agency’s proposal to slightly (S)-alpha-cyano-3-phenoxybenzyl ester any written comments will be available and alpha-R-deltamethrin: (1R,3R)-3- expand its Voluntary Reduced-Risk Pesticides Initiative. Under this for public inspection in Rm. 1128 at the (2,2-dibromovinyl)-2,2- Virginia address given above, from 8 dimethylcyclopropane-carboxylic acid proposal, the Agency would request a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, (R)-alpha-cyano-3-phenoxybenzyl ester additional information to be submitted excluding legal holidays. calculated as parent, in or on the food as part of the reduced-risk rationale commodity cottonsed oil at 0.20 ppm provided for new chemical registrations. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: By (PM-13) In addition, the Agency would consider mail: Leonard Cole (7505C), certain applications for new uses of Amended Filing Environmental Protection Agency, 401 already-registered pesticides for M St., SW., Washington, DC 20460. 3. PP 2F4055. In a notice issued in the inclusion in the voluntary program. Office location and telephone number: Federal Register of March 11, 1992 (48 This policy is described in a draft Rm. 713, Crystal Mall #2, 1921 Jefferson FR 8659), it was announced that Pesticide Regulation (PR) Notice Davis Highway, Arlington, VA, (703) Hoechst-Roussel Agri-Vet Co., Route entitled, ‘‘Voluntary Reduced-Risk 308–7618. 202-206, P.O. Box 2500, Somerville, NJ Pesticides Initiative Update’’ which is 08876-1258, proposed to amend 40 CFR available upon request. Interested SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This part 180 by establishing a regulation to parties may request a copy of the Federal Register notice announces the permit residues of the insecticide Agency’s proposed policy as set forth in availability of the draft PR Notice and deltamethrin (1R,3R)-3(2,2- the ADDRESSES unit of this notice. solicits comment. If, after reviewing any dibromovinyl)dimethylcyclopropane- DATES: Written comments, identified by comments, EPA determines that changes carboxylic acid (S)-alpha-cyano-3- the docket number [OPP–00404], must are warranted, the Agency will revise phenoxybenzyl ester and its be received on or before May 1, 1995. the draft PR Notice prior to release. 13980 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices List of Subjects active ingredients not included in any sodium-o-nitrophenolate, and sodium-5- Environmental protection, previously registered products. nitroguaiacolate. Administrative practice and procedure, EPA subsequently received an A copy of this fact sheet, which Agricultural commodities, Pesticides application from Asahi Chemical Co., to provides a summary description of the and pests. register the pesticide product Atonik chemical, use patterns and Manufacturing Use Product (File formulations, science findings, and the Dated: March 1, 1995. Symbol 64922–L), containing the active Agency’s regulatory position and Stephen L. Johnson, ingredients sodium-p-nitrophenolate, rationale, may be obtained from the Director, Registration Division, Office of sodium-o-nitrophenolate, sodium-5- National Technical Information Service Pesticide Programs. nitroguaiacolate at 0.334, 0.223, and (NTIS), 5285 Port Royal Road, [FR Doc. 95–6411 Filed 3–14–95; 8:45 am] 0.111 percent. However, since the notice Springfield, VA 22161. BILLING CODE 6560±50±F of receipt of application was not In accordance with section 3(c)(2) of published in Federal Register as FIFRA, a copy of the approved label and required by FIFRA, as amended, the list of data references used to [OPP±30327A; FRL±4938±9] interested parties may submit written support registration are available for comments within 30 days from the date public inspection in the office of the Asahi Chemical Co.; Approval of of publication of this notice for this Product Manager. The data and other Pesticide Product Registrations product only. scientific information used to support On January 20, 1995, EPA approved registration, except for material AGENCY: Environmental Protection five new products as follows: specifically protected by section 10 of Agency (EPA). 1. Atonik Plant Growth Stimulator FIFRA, are available for public ACTION: Notice. (EPA Registration Number 64922–1) for inspection in the Public Response and use to increase nutrient intake in cotton, Program Resources Branch, Field SUMMARY: This notice announces rice, and soybeans. Operations Division (7506C), Office of Agency approval of applications to 2. Sodium-p-Nitrophenolate Pesticide Programs, Environmental register the pesticide products Atonik Technical (EPA Registration Number Protection Agency, Rm. 1132, CM #2, Plant Growth Stimulator, Sodium-p- 64922–3) for formulation of plant Arlington, VA 22202 (703–305–5805). Nitrophenolate Technical, Sodium-o- regulators and use on cotton, rice, and Requests for data must be made in Nitrophenolate Technical, Sodium-5- soybeans. accordance with the provisions of the Nitroguaiacolate Technical, and Atonik 3. Sodium-o-Nitrophenolate Freedom of Information Act and must Manufacturing Use Product, containing Technical (EPA Registration Number be addressed to the Freedom of active ingredients not included in any 64922–4) for formulation of plant Information Office (A–101), 401 M St., previously registered products pursuant regulators and use on cotton, rice, and SW., Washington, D.C. 20460. Such to the provisions of section 3(c)(5) of the soybeans. requests should: (1) Identify the product Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and 4. Sodium-5-Nitroguaiacolate name and registration number and (2) Rodenticide Act (FIFRA), as amended. Technical (EPA Registration Number specify the data or information desired. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: By 64922-2) for formulation of plant Authority: 7 U.S.C. 136. mail: Connie Welch, Product Manager regulators and use on cotton, rice, and (PM) 21, Registration Division (7505C), soybeans. List of Subjects Office of Pesticide Programs, 401 M St., 5. Atonik Manufacturing Use Product SW., Washington, DC 20460. Office Environmental protection, Pesticides (EPA Registration Number 64922–5) for and pests, Product registration. location and telephone number: Rm. for formulation of plant regulators and 227, CM #2, Environmental Protection use on cotton, rice, and soybeans. Dated: February 27, 1995. Agency, 1921 Jefferson Davis Hwy, The Agency has considered all Stephen L. Johnson, Arlington, VA 22202, (703–305–6900). required data on risks associated with Director, Registration Division, Office of SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: EPA the proposed use of sodium-p- Pesticide Programs. issued a notice, published in the nitrophenolate, sodium-o- Federal Register of December 11, 1991 nitrophenolate, and sodium-5- [FR Doc. 95–6413 Filed 3–14–95; 8:45 am] (56 FR 64621), which announced that nitroguaiacolate, and information on BILLING CODE 6560±50±F Asahi Chemical Manufacturing Co., social, economic, and environmental Ltd., c/o M-D Group Incorporation (U.S. benefits to be derived from use. [OPP±30233A; FRL±4940±4] Agent), 6708 S. Atlanta Place, Tulsa, OK Specifically, the Agency has considered 74136, (now located at Nara Prefecture the nature of the chemical and its Bear Country Products; Approval of a Japan), had submitted applications to pattern of use, application methods and Pesticide Product Registration register the pesticide products Sodium- rates, and level and extent of potential p-Nitrophenolate Technical, Sodium-o- exposure. Based on these reviews, the AGENCY: Environmental Protection Nitrophenolate Technical, and Sodium- Agency was able to make basic health Agency (EPA). 5-Nitroguaiacolate Technical (EPA File safety determinations which show that ACTION: Notice. Symbols 64922–G, 64922–U, and use of sodium-p-nitrophenolate, 64922–E), containing the active sodium-o-nitrophenolate, and sodium-5- SUMMARY: This notice announces ingredients sodium-p-nitrophenolate, nitroguaiacolate when used in Agency approval of an application to sodium-o-nitrophenolate, and sodium-5- accordance with widespread and register the pesticide product Bear nitroguaiacolate at 82, 98, and 98 commonly recognized practice, will not Skunker, containing active ingredients percent respectively, The product, generally cause unreasonable adverse not included in any previously Atonik (File Symbol 64922–R), also effects to the environment. registered product pursuant to the included in this notice, contains the More detailed information on these provisions of section 3(c)(5) of the three active ingredients listed above at registrations is contained in a Chemical Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and 0.3, 0.2, and 0.1 percent respectively, Fact Sheet on sodium-p-nitrophenolate, Rodenticide Act (FIFRA), as amended. Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices 13981 FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: By support registration are available for (59 FR 54903), which announced that mail: Robert Forrest, Product Manager public inspection in the office of the Church and Dwight Co., Inc, 469 North (PM) 14, Registration Division (7505C), Product Manager. The data and other Harrison St., Princeton, NJ 08543-5297, Office of Pesticide Programs, 401 M St., scientific information used to support had submitted applications to register SW., Washington, DC 20460. Office registration, except for material the pesticide products Armicarb location and telephone number: Rm. specifically protected by section 10 of Potassium Bicarbonate, F.C.C. and 219, CM #2, Environmental Protection FIFRA, are available for public Armicarb Sodium Bicarbonate, F.C.C., Agency, 1921 Jefferson Davis Hwy, inspection in the Public Response and (EPA File Symbols 10772–E and 10772– Arlington, VA 22202, (703) 305–6600; e- Program Resources Branch, Field G), containing the active ingredients mail: [email protected]. Operations Division (7506C), Office of potassium bicarbonate and sodium SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: EPA Pesticide Programs, Environmental bicarbonate both at 99.9 percent issued a notice, published in the Protection Agency, Rm. 1132, CM #2, respectively, active ingredients not Federal Register of November 30, 1983 Arlington, VA 22202 (703–305–5805). included in any previously registered (48 FR 54116) which announced that Requests for data must be made in products. Bear Country Products, 144 Commercial accordance with the provisions of the The applications were approved on St., Sunnyvale, CA 94086, had Freedom of Information Act and must December 20, 1994, as Armicarb submitted an appplication to register the be addressed to the Freedom of Potassium Bicarbonate, F.C.C. and pesticide product Bear Skunker (File Information Office (A–101), 401 M St., Armicarb Sodium Bicarbonate, F.C.C., Symbol 48099–R), containing the active SW., Washington, D.C. 20460. Such (EPA Registration Numbers 10772–2 and 10772–3), for formulating use into ingredients diethyl sulfide (CAS No. requests should: (1) Identify the product fungicides for plant disease control on 352–93–2) and 1-butanethiol (CAS No. name and registration number and (2) flowers, ornamentals, turf, fruits, 109–79–5) not included in any specify the data or information desired. vegetables, and field crops. previously registered product. Authority: 7 U.S.C. 136. The Agency has considered all The application was approved on required data on risks associated with List of Subjects February 15, 1995, as Bear Skunker to the proposed use of potassium deter human/bear contact (EPA Environmental protection, Pesticides bicarbonate and sodium bicarbonate, Registration Number 48099–1). This is and pests, Product registration. and information on social, economic, the first bear deterrent registered by the Dated: March 2, 1995. and environmental benefits to be Agency and the first product containing Stephen L. Johnson, derived from use. Specifically, the the two active ingredients diethyl Agency has considered the nature of the sulfide and 1-butanethiol. Director, Registration Division, Office of Pesticide Programs. chemical and its pattern of use, The Agency has considered all application methods and rates, and level required data on risks associated with [FR Doc. 95–6414 Filed 3–14–95; 8:45 am] and extent of potential exposure. Based the proposed use of diethyl sulfide and BILLING CODE 6560±50±F on these reviews, the Agency was able 1-butanethiol, and information on to make basic health safety social, economic, and environmental [OPP±30375A; FRL±4938±8] determinations which show that use of benefits to be derived from use. potassium bicarbonate and sodium Specifically, the Agency has considered Church and Dwight Co.; Approval of bicarbonate when used in accordance the nature of the chemical and its Pesticide Product Registrations with widespread and commonly pattern of use, application methods and recognized practice, will not generally rates, and level and extent of potential AGENCY: Environmental Protection cause unreasonable adverse effects to exposure. Based on these reviews, the Agency (EPA). the environment. Agency was able to make basic health ACTION: Notice. More detailed information on these safety determinations which show that registrations is contained in a Chemical use of diethyl sulfide and 1-butanethiol SUMMARY: This notice announces Fact Sheet on potassium bicarbonate when used in accordance with Agency approval of applications and sodium bicarbonate. widespread and commonly recognized submitted by Church and Dwight Co., A copy of this fact sheet, which practice, will not generally cause Inc, to register the pesticide products provides a summary description of the unreasonable adverse effects to the Armicarb Potassium Bicarbonate, F.C.C. chemical, use patterns and environment. and Armicarb Sodium Bicarbonate, formulations, science findings, and the More detailed information on this F.C.C., containing active ingredients not Agency’s regulatory position and registration is contained in a Chemical included in any previously registered rationale, may be obtained from the Fact Sheet on Bear Skunker products pursuant to the provisions of National Technical Information Service [Registration: First bear deterrent and its section 3(c)(5) of the Federal Insecticide, (NTIS), 5285 Port Royal Road, two new active ingredients, diethyl Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act Springfield, VA 22161. sulfide and 1-butanethiol]. (FIFRA), as amended. In accordance with section 3(c)(2) of A copy of this fact sheet, which FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: By FIFRA, a copy of the approved label and provides a summary description of the mail: Connie Welch, Product Manager the list of data references used to chemical, use patterns and (PM) 21, Registration Division (7505C), support registration are available for formulations, science findings, and the Office of Pesticide Programs, 401 M St., public inspection in the office of the Agency’s regulatory position and SW., Washington, DC 20460. Office Product Manager. The data and other rationale, may be obtained from the location and telephone number: Rm. scientific information used to support National Technical Information Service 227, CM #2, Environmental Protection registration, except for material (NTIS), 5285 Port Royal Road, Agency, 1921 Jefferson Davis Hwy, specifically protected by section 10 of Springfield, VA 22161. Arlington, VA 22202, (703–305–6900). FIFRA, are available for public In accordance with section 3(c)(2) of SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: EPA inspection in the Public Response and FIFRA, a copy of the approved label and issued a notice, published in the Program Resources Branch, Field the list of data references used to Federal Register of November 2, 1994 Operations Division (7506C), Office of 13982 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices Pesticide Programs, Environmental The application was approved on Dated: March 2, 1995. Protection Agency, Rm. 1132, CM #2, February 2, 1995, as 1,4Sight for use as Stephen L. Johnson, Arlington, VA 22202 (703-305–5805). an aerosol to control the sprouting of Director, Registration Division, Office of Requests for data must be made in potatoes during the storage phase (EPA Pesticide Programs. accordance with the provisions of the Registration Number 67727–1). [FR Doc. 95–6410 Filed 3–14–95; 8:45 am] Freedom of Information Act and must The Agency has considered all be addressed to the Freedom of BILLING CODE 6560±50±F required data on risks associated with Information Office (A-101), 401 M St., the proposed use of 1,4- SW., Washington, D.C. 20460. Such dimethylnaphthalene, and information [OPP±180960; FRL±4935±3] requests should: (1) Identify the product on social, economic, and environmental name and registration number and (2) Emergency Exemptions specify the data or information desired. benefits to be derived from use. Specifically, the Agency has considered AGENCY: Environmental Protection Authority: 7 U.S.C. 136. the nature of the chemical and its Agency (EPA). pattern of use, application methods and List of Subjects ACTION: Notice. rates, and level and extent of potential Environmental protection, Pesticides exposure. Based on these reviews, the SUMMARY: EPA has granted specific and pests, Product registration. Agency was able to make basic health exemptions for the control of various Dated: February 27, 1995. safety determinations which show that pests to the 10 States listed below. There were four crisis exemptions Stephen L. Johnson, use of 1,4-dimethylnaphthalene when used in accordance with widespread initiated by various States. Quarantine Director, Registration Division, Office of exemptions have been granted to the Pesticide Programs. and commonly recognized practice, will not generally cause unreasonable United States Department of [FR Doc. 95–6412 Filed 3–14–95; 8:45 am] Agriculture/Animal and Plant Health adverse effects to the environment. BILLING CODE 6560±50±F Inspection Service. These exemptions, More detailed information on this issued during the months of October, registration is contained in a Chemical November, and December 1994, are [OPP±30383; FRL±4940±2] Fact Sheet on 1,4-dimethylnaphthalene. subject to application and timing D-I-1-4, Inc.; Approval of a Pesticide A copy of this fact sheet, which restrictions and reporting requirements Product Registration provides a summary description of the designed to protect the environment to chemical, use patterns and the maximum extent possible. EPA has AGENCY: Environmental Protection formulations, science findings, and the denied four specific and one Public Agency (EPA). Agency’s regulatory position and Health exemption requests. Information ACTION: Notice. rationale, may be obtained from the on these restrictions is available from National Technical Information Service the contact persons in EPA listed below. SUMMARY: This notice announces (NTIS), 5285 Port Royal Road, DATES: See each specific, crisis, and Agency approval of an application to Springfield, VA 22161. quarantine exemption for its effective register the pesticide product 1,4Sight, date. In accordance with section 3(c)(2) of containing an active ingredient not FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: See FIFRA, a copy of the approved label and included in any previously registered each emergency exemption for the name the list of data references used to product pursuant to the provisions of of the contact person. The following support registration are available for section 3(c)(5) of the Federal Insecticide, information applies to all contact Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act public inspection in the office of the persons: By mail: Registration Division (FIFRA), as amended. Product Manager. The data and other (7505W), Office of Pesticide Programs, FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: By scientific information used to support Environmental Protection Agency, 401 mail: Cynthia Giles-Parker, Product registration, except for material M St., SW., Washington, DC 20460. Manager (PM) 22, Registration Division specifically protected by section 10 of Office location and telephone number: (7505C), Office of Pesticide Programs, FIFRA, are available for public 6th Floor, CS #1, 2800 Jefferson Davis 401 M St., SW., Washington, DC 20460. inspection in the Public Response and Highway, Arlington, VA, (703) 308– Office location and telephone number: Program Resources Branch, Field 8417; e-mail: Rm. 229, CM #2, Environmental Operations Division (7506C), Office of [email protected]. Pesticide Programs, Environmental Protection Agency, 1921 Jefferson Davis SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: EPA has Hwy, Arlington, VA 22202, (703–305– Protection Agency, Rm. 1132, CM #2, granted specific exemptions to the: 5540). Arlington, VA 22202 (703–305–5805). 1. Arkansas State Plant Board for the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: EPA Requests for data must be made in use of cypermethrin on mustard greens received an appplication from D-I-1-4, accordance with the provisions of the to control various insects; October 20, Inc., 15401 Cartwright Road, Boise, ID Freedom of Information Act and must 1994, to October 19, 1995. (Libby 83703, to register the pesticide product be addressed to the Freedom of Pemberton) 1,4Sight (File Symbol 67727–R), Information Office (A–101), 401 M St., 2. California Environmental containing the active ingredient 1,4- SW., Washington, D.C. 20460. Such Protection Agency for the use of methyl dimethylnaphthalene at 94.7 percent, an requests should: (1) Identify the product bromide on watermelon to control active ingredient not included in any name and registration number and (2) nematodes, weeds, and soil diseases; previously registered product. However, specify the data or information desired. November 18, 1994, to April 30, 1995. since the notice of receipt of application Authority: 7 U.S.C. 136. (Libby Pemberton) was not published in the Federal 3. California Environmental Register, as required by FIFRA, as List of Subjects Protection Agency for the use of naled amended, interested parties may submit on swiss chard to control aphids; written comments within 30 days from Environmental protection, Pesticides November 23, 1994, to November 22, the date of publication of this notice. and pests, Product registration. 1995. (Margarita Collantes) Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices 13983 4. California Environmental avermectin on tomatoes to control significant economic losses if Protection Agency for the use of leafminers; October 3, 1994, to October oxyfluorfen is not available. (Larry metalaxyl on mustard greens to control 2, 1995. (Larry Fried) Fried) 17. Texas Department of Agriculture white rust; October 10, 1994, to August 4. Pennsylvania Department of for the use of avermectin on peppers to 21, 1995. California had initiated a crisis Agriculture for the use of chlorothalonil control broad mites; November 23, 1994, exemption for this use. (Susan Stanton) on mushrooms to control verticillium 5. California Environmental to November 22, 1995. (Larry Fried) fungicola. This specific exemption was Protection Agency for the use of 18. Washington Department of denied because the estimated lifetime prometryn on parsley to control weeds; Agriculture for the use of zinc dietary cancer risk from the registered December 21, 1994, to December 21, phosphide on dormant timothy and 1995. (Andrea Beard) timothy/alfalfa mixtures to control uses of chlorothalonil and the use on 6. California Environmental meadow voles; October 4, 1994, to April mushrooms exceeds the level generally Protection Agency for the use of 15, 1995. (Susan Stanton) considered acceptable by EPA. The clethodim on dry bulb onions to control Crisis exemptions were initiated by current estimates of cancer risk from annual bluegrass; December 14, 1994, to the: this use preclude any further progress December 13, 1995. (Margarita 1. Arkansas State Plant Board on toward registration. (Susan Stanton) Collantes) October 17, 1994, for the use of 5. Texas Department of Agriculture 7. Florida Department of Agriculture metolachlor on spinach to control for the use of sodium fluoroacetate on and Consumer Services for the use of weeds. This program has ended. (Susan certain mammalian vectors to control avermectin on strawberries to control Stanton) gray fox rabies. A notice of receipt of spider mites; October 10, 1994, to June 2. Georgia Department of Agriculture this public health exemption was 30, 1995. (Larry Fried) on October 20, 1994, for the use of published in the Federal Register of 8. Florida Department of Agriculture metalaxyl on collards, mustard greens, August 24, 1994 (59 FR 43580), an and Consumer Services for the use of and turnip greens to control downy extension of comment period later mildew. This program is expected to avermectin on head lettuce to control published September 8, 1994 (59 FR last until June 30, 1995. (Susan Stanton) leafminers; November 14, 1994, to 46428). The Agency concluded that the 3. Hawaii Department of Agriculture November 13, 1995. (Larry Fried) proposed vector control program cannot 9. Florida Department of Agriculture on November 10, 1994, for the use of be expected with any degree of certainty and Consumer Services for the use of imidacloprid on tomatoes to control to be effective in halting the spread of avermectin on potatoes to control whiteflies. This program is expected to the epizootic. For this reason, the leafminers; December 22, 1994, to June last until November 10, 1995. (Andrea Agency denied the request for a public 1, 1995. (Libby Pemberton) Beard) 10. Florida Department of Agriculture 4. Pennsylvania Department of health exemption. This conclusion is and Consumer Services for the use of Agriculture on October 5, 1994, for the based on the following: the geographical imidacloprid on tomatoes to control use of chlorothalonil on mushrooms to area encompassed by the epizootic whiteflies; December 14, 1994, to control verticillium diseases. This crisis appears to be too large to ensure that the December 14, 1995. A notice of receipt exemption was revoked on October 7, landowner executed vector control published in the Federal Register of 1994, due to dietary risk issues and lack efforts could be managed and November 16, 1994 (59 FR 59223). The of progress toward registration of this coordinated efficiently; the type of bait situation was determined to be urgent use. (Susan Stanton) proposed for use could not, on the basis and nonroutine, and significant EPA has denied specific and public of available relevant data, be expected to economic losses were expected without health exemption requests from the: selectively target gray foxes and the this use. (Andrea Beard) 1. Connecticut Department of primary host organisms or the purported 11. Florida Department of Agriculture Agriculture for the use of oxyfluorfen on ancillary vector species efficiently or and Consumer Services for the use of strawberries to control weeds. This effectively; and the proposed spacing of fenpropathrin on tomatoes to control specific exemption was denied because individual baits and the baiting density whiteflies; December 14, 1994, to the Agency was not able to conclude suggest that the expected taking of most December 14, 1995. (Andrea Beard) that strawberry growers will experience baits by nontarget species would create 12. Georgia Department of Agriculture significant economic losses if significant gaps in the proposed barrier for the use of sethoxydim on canola to oxyfluorfen is not available. (Larry treatment that is intended to reduce gray control Italian ryegrass; October 10, Fried) fox populations and confine the 1994, to April 15, 1995. (Susan Stanton) 2. Georgia Department of Agriculture epizootic. (Libby Pemberton) 13. Hawaii Department of Agriculture for the use of chlorothalonil on collards, EPA has granted a quarantine for the use of hydramethylnon on mustard greens, and turnip greens to pineapples to control big-headed and control fungal diseases. This specific exemption to the United States Argentine ants; December 22, 1994, to exemption was denied because of Department of Agriculture/Animal and December 21, 1995. (Libby Pemberton) unacceptable dietary risk, lack of Plant Health Inspection Service for the 14. Idaho Department of Agriculture adequate progress toward registration, use of diazinon soil treatments and for the use of imazalil on sweet corn and the State’s failure to satsify data malathion in quarantined areas within seed to control dieback syndrome; requirements imposed last year as a the State of Florida to eradicate exotic October 7, 1994, to October 1, 1995. condition for consideration of future subtropical members of the fruit fly (Susan Stanton) section 18 requests for this use. (Susan family Tephritidae. November 30, 1994, 15. New Jersey Department of Stanton) to November 29, 1997. (Susan Stanton). Agriculture for the use of Pro-Gro 3. New Hampshire Department of Authority: 7 U.S.C. 136. (carboxin/thiram) on onion seed to Agriculture for the use of oxyfluorfen on control onion smut; October 19, 1994, to strawberries to control weeds. This List of Subjects June 1, 1995. (Susan Stanton) specific exemption was denied because 16. Puerto Rico Commonwealth, the Agency was not able to conclude Environmental protection, Pesticides Department of Agriculture, for the use of that strawberry growers will experience and pests, Crisis exemptions. 13984 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices Dated: March 6, 1995. inserted in the plant expression vector the International Settlements Policy Stephen L. Johnson, pZ01502. PP 5G4448 filed by Ciba-Geigy (ISP) waiver approach. Such carriers are Corp., P.O. Box 12257, Research required to file copies of operating Director, Registration Division, Office of Pesticide Programs. Triangle Park, NC 27709-2257, has agreements. See 47 CFR Sections 43.51, requested the establishment of an 64.1001, and 63.01. The information is [FR Doc. 95–6415 Filed 3–14–95; 8:45 am] exemption from the requirement of a used for monitoring and enforcement BILLING CODE 6560±50±F tolerance for the plant pesticide Bacillus purposes. thuringiensis subsp. kurstaki CryIA(b) OMB Control No.: 3060–0253. [PP 4G4409 and 5G4448/T668; FRL±4939± insect control protein as produced in Expiration Date: 02/28/98. 9] corn plants and the genetic material Title: Connection of Telephone necessary for its production. Equipment to the Telephone Network, Northrup King Co. and Ciba-Geigy EPA reiterates that these filings have Part 68, Sections 68.106, 68.108, 68.110. Corp.; Initial Filings of Exemptions been received, but they are not yet Estimated Annual Burden: 57,540 from the Requirement of Tolerances; granted. If the temporary tolerances are total annual hours; .057 hours per Technical Amendment granted, notice to this effect will be response. published in the Federal Register. Description: Section 68.106 requires AGENCY: Environmental Protection This document contains technical customers connecting terminal Agency (EPA). amendments only and does not require equipment or protective circuitry to the ACTION: Notice; Technical amendment. notice and comment, 5 U.S.C. 553. telephone network to provide, upon List of Subjects request, certain information to the SUMMARY: EPA is issuing a technical telephone company. Section 68.108 amendment to clarify a notice on Environmental protection, requires telephone companies to notify establishing temporary exemptions from Agricultural commodities, Pesticides customers of possible discontinuance of the requirement of tolerances for the and pests, Reporting and recordkeeping service when customer’s equipment is delta endotoxin protein produced in requirements. malfunctioning and to inform them of field corn by a CryIA(b) gene from Dated: March 2, 1995. their right to file a complaint. Section Bacillus thuringiensis subsp. kurstaki Janet L. Andersen, 68.110 requires telephone companies to HD-1 and inserted in the plant provide technical information Acting Director of Biopesticides and Pollution expression vector pZ01502 and for the concerning inter-face parameters not plant pesticide Bacillus-thuringiensis Prevention Division, Office of Pesticide Programs. specified in Part 68 and to notify subsp. kurstaki CryIA(b) insect control customers of changes in telephone protein as produced in corn plants and [FR Doc. 95–5800 Filed 3–7–95; 3:17 pm] company facilities, equipment, the genetic material necessary for its BILLING CODE 6560±50±F operations or procedures where such production. EPA has not yet granted the changes can be reasonably expected to temporary tolerance exemptions; render any customer’s terminal instead, EPA is announcing that it has FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS equipment incompatible with the received the petitions and is considering COMMISSION telephone company’s communication whether or not to grant them. facilities. The collections are designed EFFECTIVE DATE: March 15, 1995. Public Information Collections to prevent harm to the telephone FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Approved by Office of Management network when customer-provided Michael Mendelsohn, Biopesticides and and Budget equipment is connected to telephone Pollution Prevention Division (7501W), March 8, 1995. company lines and assures that Office of Pesticide Programs, The Federal Communications customers will not overload the Environmental Protection Agency, 401 Commission (FCC) has received Office telephone lines with excessive M St., SW., Washington, DC 20460. of Management and Budget (OMB) equipment which would degrade Office location and telephone number: approval for the following public service to the customers and others. Crystal Station, 5th Fl. 2800 Crystal information collections pursuant to the OMB Control No.: 3060–0450. Drive, Arlington, VA 22202, (703)-308- Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980, Pub. Expiration Date: 02/28/98. 8712; e-mail: L. 96–511. For further information Title: Detariffing the Installation and [email protected]. contact Shoko B. Hair, Federal Maintenance of Inside Wiring Services, SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In the Communications Commission, (202) Reports on State Regulatory Activities Federal Register of February 15, 1995 418–1379. (CC Docket No. 79–105). (60 FR 8658), EPA issued a notice of Description: 47 CFR Section 43.41 temporary tolerance exemptions for PP Federal Communications Commission. requires that each local exchange carrier 4G4409 filed by Northrup King Co. and OMB Control No.: 3060–0458. (LEC) with annual operating revenues of PP 5G4448 filed by Ciba-Geigy Corp. Expiration Date: 02/28/98. $100 million or more file, within thirty EPA is issuing this technical Title: Regulation of International days of its publication or release, a copy amemdment to that notice to state that Accounting Rates (CC Docket No. 90– of any state or local statute, rule order, the petitions have not yet been granted, 337). or other document that regulates, or but are being considered. PP 4G4409 Estimated Annual Burden: 240 total proposes to regulate, the price or prices filed by Northrup King Co., 7500 Olson annual hours; 2 hours per response. the LEC charges for inside wiring Memorial Hwy., Golden Valley, MN Description: CC Docket No. 90–337 services. The rules applies only to the 55427, has requested the establishment implemented rules making it easier for LEC serving the greatest number of of an exemption from the requirement of U.S. carriers engaged in international access lines within the portions of the a tolerance for the delta endotoxin telecommunications to negotiate lower state that are, or would be, subject to the protein produced in field corn by a accounting rates. Simple reductions in state regulation. The information filed is CryIA(b) gene from Bacillus rates are made pursuant to a notification used by the Commission to monitor the thuringiensis subsp. kurstaki HD-1 and approach; other changes are subject to activities of state agencies that desire to Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices 13985 impose price regulation for inside NW., Washington, DC or may be Ocean Freight Forwarder License wiring services provided by telephone purchased from the Commission’s copy Applicants companies. The information is used to contractor, ITS, Inc., (202) 875–3800. help ensure that such actions do not Opposition to these petitions must be Notice is hereby given that the impede federal policies. filed March 30, 1995. See § 1.4(b)(1) of following applicants have filed with the Federal Maritime Commission OMB Control No.: 3060–0439. the Commission’s rules (47 CFR Expiration Date: 02/28/98. 1.4(b)(2)). Replies to an opposition must applications for licenses as ocean freight Title: Regulations Concerning be filed within 10 days after the time for forwarders pursuant to section 19 of the Indecent Communications by filing oppositions has expired. Shipping Act of 1984 (46 U.S.C. app. Telephone. 1718 and 46 CFR 510). Estimated Annual Burden: 10,200 Subject: Amendment of the Amateur Persons knowing of any reason why total annual hours; .166 hours per Service Rules to Implement a Vanity any of the following applicants should response. Call Sign System. (PR Docket No. 93– not receive a license are requested to Description: Section 223 of the 305) contact the Office of Freight Forwarders, Communications Act of 1934, as Number of Petitions Filed: 3 Federal Maritime Commission, amended, 47 U.S.C. Section 223, as Federal Communications Commission. Washington, DC 20573. amended imposes fines and penalties on William F. Caton, Maracargo Inc., 2503B NW 72nd Ave., those who knowingly use the telephone Miami, Fl 33122 Acting Secretary. to make obscene or indecent Officers: V. Enrique Camejo, communications for commercial [FR Doc. 95–6337 Filed 3–14–95; 8:45 am] President, Pedro Enrique Garcia purposes. 47 CFR Section 64.201 BILLING CODE 6712±01±M Arcaya, Vice President implements the statute. Section 64.201 American Custom Inc., 700 Rockaway contains several requirements which are Turnpike, Lawrence, NY 11559, imposed on carriers, adult message Officer: Key Y. Chung, President service providers and those who solicit FEDERAL MARITIME COMMISSION Rio Bravo Freight Forwarders, Inc., 1919 their services to ensure that minors are S. Shiloh, Ste. 234, Garland, TX denied access to material deemed Notice of Agreement(s) Filed 75042 indecent. Officers: Everett Claborn, President, The Federal Maritime Commission Mildred L. Coker, Vice President Federal Communications Commission. hereby gives notice of the filing of the A M Logistics Services, 4311 Pan William F. Caton, following agreement(s) pursuant to American Boulevard, Laredo, TX Acting Secretary. section 5 of the Shipping Act of 1984. 78043 [FR Doc. 95–6391 Filed 3–14–95; 8:45 am] Interested parties may inspect and Alberto H. Magnon, III, Sole BILLING CODE 6712±01±F obtain a copy of each agreement at the Proprietor Washington, DC Office of the Federal Tradestar Shipping Corp., 147–182nd Street, Jamaica, NY 11413 [Correction To Report No. 2060] Maritime Commission, 800 North Capitol Street, NW., 9th Floor. Officer: Richard Weinstock, President Petition for Reconsideration of Actions Interested parties may submit comments Time Definite Services, Inc., 2745 South in Rulemaking Proceedings on each agreement to the Secretary, Armstrong Court, Des Plaines, IL Federal Maritime Commission, 60018 March 10, 1995. Washington, DC 20573, within 10 days Officer: Michael Suarez, President Report No. 2060, released March 6, after the date of the Federal Register in By the Federal Maritime Commission. 1995 erroneously listed the Docket which this notice appears. The Dated: March 9, 1995. Number as 91–113. The Docket Number requirements for comments are found in Joseph C. Polking, is corrected as listed below. § 572.603 of Title 46 of the Code of Secretary. Subject: Transport Rate Structure and Federal Regulations. Interested persons [FR Doc. 95–6296 Filed 3–14–95; 8:45 am] Pricing. (CC Docket No. 91–213) should consult this section before BILLING CODE 6730±01±M Number of Petition Field: 1 communicating with the Commission Federal Communications Commission. regarding a pending agreement. William F. Caton, Agreement No.: 232–011481–001. FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM Acting Secretary. Title: Hanjin/AMA Agreement. [FR Doc. 95–6336 Filed 3–14–95; 8:45 am] Agency Forms Under Review Parties: Hanjin Shipping Co., Ltd., BILLING CODE 6712±01±M Cho Yang Shipping Co., Ltd., DSR- AGENCY: Board of Governors of the Senator Lines. Federal Reserve System. ACTION: Request for comment; extension [Report No. 2062] Synopsis: The proposed amendment of comment period. modifies Article 5.10 of the Agreement Petition for Reconsideration and by deleting the language that restricted Clarification of Actions in Rulemaking SUMMARY: On January 5, 1995, the Board the parties to maintain membership in Proceedings requested comment on proposed the Conference. revisions to the Annual Report of March 10, 1995. By Order of the Federal Maritime Foreign Banking Organizations (FR Y-7) Petition for reconsideration have been Commission. including the Nonbank Financial filed in the Commission rulemaking Dated: March 9, 1995. Information Summary (NFIS), the proceedings listed in this public notice Structure Report on U.S. Banking and and published pursuant to 47 CFR Joseph C. Polking, Nonbanking Activities (FR Y-7A), and 1.429(e). The full text of these Secretary. the Foreign Banking Organization documents are available for viewing and [FR Doc. 95–6295 Filed 3–14–95; 8:45 am] Confidential Report of Operations (FR coping in Room 239, 1919 M Street, BILLING CODE 6730±01±M 2068). On January 27, the Board 13986 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices announced that the comment period Confidential Report of Operations (FR approval under section 4(c)(8) of the would be extended by 30 days until 2068). In view of the significance of the Bank Holding Company Act (12 U.S.C. March 9. The Deputy Secretary of the procedural changes that are proposed in 1843(c)(8)) and § 225.21(a) of Regulation Board, acting under delegated authority, the reports, the Board is extending the Y (12 CFR 225.21(a)) to commence or to has again extended the comment period comment period to March 31, 1995, for engage de novo, either directly or to give the public additional time to the FR Y-7, other than the NFIS, and the through a subsidiary, in a nonbanking comment. The comment period for the FR 2068, and to May 31, 1995, for the activity that is listed in § 225.25 of FR Y-7, other than the NFIS, and for the NFIS and the FR Y-7A. Regulation Y as closely related to FR 2068 has been extended until March Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve banking and permissible for bank 31, 1995. The comment period for the System, March 9, 1995 holding companies. Unless otherwise NFIS and the FR Y-7A has been William W. Wiles, noted, such activities will be conducted extended until May 31, 1995. Secretary of the Board. throughout the United States. DATES: Comments must be received by Each application is available for March 31, 1995 (FR Y-7; FR 2068), or by [FR. Doc. 95–6375 Filed 3–14–95; 8:45am] BILLING CODE 6210±01±F immediate inspection at the Federal May 31, 1995 (FR Y-7A; NFIS). Reserve Bank indicated. Once the ADDRESSES: Comments may be mailed to application has been accepted for Mr. William W. Wiles, Secretary, Board Ralph Neal Barber; Change in Bank processing, it will also be available for of Governors of the Federal Reserve Control Notice inspection at the offices of the Board of System, 20th and C Streets, N.W., Governors. Interested persons may Washington, D.C. 20551, or delivered to Acquisition of Shares of Banks or express their views in writing on the the Board’s mail room between 8:45 Bank Holding Companies question whether consummation of the a.m. and 5:15 p.m., and to the security proposal can ‘‘reasonably be expected to control room outside of those hours. The notificant listed below has produce benefits to the public, such as Both the mail room and the security applied under the Change in Bank greater convenience, increased control room are accessible from the Control Act (12 U.S.C. 1817(j)) and § competition, or gains in efficiency, that courtyard entrance on 20th Street 225.41 of the Board’s Regulation Y (12 outweigh possible adverse effects, such between Constitution Avenue and C CFR 225.41) to acquire a bank or bank as undue concentration of resources, Street, N.W. Comments received may be holding company. The factors that are decreased or unfair competition, inspected in room B-1122 between 9:00 considered in acting on notices are set conflicts of interests, or unsound a.m. and 5:00 p.m., except as provided forth in paragraph 7 of the Act (12 banking practices.’’ Any request for a in section 261.8 of the Board’s Rules U.S.C. 1817(j)(7)). hearing on this question must be Regarding Availability of Information, The notice is available for immediate accompanied by a statement of the 12 CFR 261.8(a). inspection at the Federal Reserve Bank reasons a written presentation would A copy of the comments may also be indicated. Once the notice has been not suffice in lieu of a hearing, submitted to the OMB desk officer for accepted for processing, it will also be identifying specifically any questions of the Board: Milo Sunderhauf, Office of available for inspection at the offices of fact that are in dispute, summarizing the Information and Regulatory Affairs, the Board of Governors. Interested evidence that would be presented at a Office of Management and Budget, New persons may express their views in hearing, and indicating how the party Executive Office Building, Room 3208, writing to the Reserve Bank indicated commenting would be aggrieved by Washington, D.C. 20503. for the notice or to the offices of the approval of the proposal. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: A Board of Governors. Comments must be Unless otherwise noted, comments copy of the proposed form, the request received not later than March 29, 1995. for clearance (OMB 83-I), supporting A. Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta regarding the applications must be statement, instructions, and other (Zane R. Kelley, Vice President) 104 received at the Reserve Bank indicated documents that will be placed into Marietta Street, N.W., Atlanta, Georgia or the offices of the Board of Governors OMB’s public docket files once 30303: not later than March 29, 1995. approved may be requested from the 1. Ralph Neal Barber, Duluth, A. Federal Reserve Bank of agency clearance officer, Mary M. Georgia; to retain 18.26 percent of the Philadelphia (Michael E. Collins, Senior McLaughlin, Federal Reserve Board voting shares of First Security Vice President) 100 North 6th Street, Clearance Officer (202-452-3829), Corporation, Norcross, Georgia, and Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19105: Division of Research and Statistics, thereby indirectly acquire First Security 1. Dauphin Deposit Corporation, Board of Governors of the Federal National Bank, Norcross, Georgia. Harrisburg, Pennsylvania; to engage de novo in providing financial advice to Reserve System, Washington, D.C. Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve 20551. For the hearing impaired only, System, March 9, 1995. state and local governments and foreign governments, pursuant to § Telecommunications Device for the Deaf Jennifer J. Johnson, 225.25(b)(4)(v) of the Board’s Regulation (TTD) Dorothea Thompson (202-452- Deputy Secretary of the Board. 3544), Board of Governors of the Federal Y. [FR Doc. 95–6346 Filed 3–14–95; 8:45 am] Reserve System, Washington, D.C. B. Federal Reserve Bank of San 20551. BILLING CODE 6210±01±F Francisco (Kenneth R. Binning, SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Board Director, Bank Holding Company) 101 Market Street, San Francisco, California has received a request to extend the Dauphin Deposit Corporation, et al.; 94105: comment period on the proposed Notice of Applications to Engage de revisions to the Annual Report of novo in Permissible Nonbanking 1. Wells Fargo & Company, San Foreign Banking Organizations (FR Y-7) Activities Francisco, California; to engage de novo including the Nonbank Financial through its de novo subsidiary Wells Information Summary (NFIS), the The companies listed in this notice Fargo Equity Capital Inc., San Francisco, Structure Report on U.S. Banking and have filed an application under § California, in making and servicing Nonbanking Activities (FR Y-7A), and 225.23(a)(1) of the Board’s Regulation Y commercial loans, pursuant to § the Foreign Banking Organization (12 CFR 225.23(a)(1)) for the Board’s 225.25(b)(1) of the Board’s Regulation Y. Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices 13987 Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve proposal will produce public benefits Each application is available for System, March 9, 1995. that outweigh any potential adverse immediate inspection at the Federal Jennifer J. Johnson, effects. In particular, Chemical and Reserve Bank indicated. Once the Deputy Secretary of the Board. Mellon maintain that the proposal will application has been accepted for [FR Doc. 95–6348 Filed 3–14–95; 8:45 am] enhance competition and enable processing, it will also be available for BILLING CODE 6210±01±F Chemical and Mellon to offer their inspection at the offices of the Board of customers greater convenience and Governors. Interested persons may accessibility. Chemical and Mellon also express their views in writing to the Mellon Bank Corporation, Pittsburgh, maintain that their proposal would not Reserve Bank or to the offices of the Pennsylvania, and Chemical Banking diminish competition in light of the Board of Governors. Any comment on Corporation, New York, New York; qualitative characteristics of the an application that requests a hearing Notices to engage in certain industry. must include a statement of why a Nonbanking Activities In publishing the proposal for written presentation would not suffice comment, the Board does not take a in lieu of a hearing, identifying Mellon Bank Corporation, Pittsburgh, position on issues raised by the specifically any questions of fact that Pennsylvania (Mellon), and Chemical proposal. Notice of the proposal is are in dispute and summarizing the Banking Corporation, New York, New published solely to seek the views of evidence that would be presented at a York (Chemical), have applied pursuant interested persons on the issues to section 4(c)(8) of the Bank Holding hearing. presented by the application and does Unless otherwise noted, comments Company Act (12 U.S.C. 1843(c)(8)) not represent a determination by the regarding each of these applications (BHC Act) and § 225.23(a)(3) of the Board that the proposal meets, or is must be received not later than April 7, Board’s Regulation Y (12 CFR likely to meet, the standards of the BHC 1995. 225.23(a)(3)), to each acquire a 50 Act. Any comments or requests for A. Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago percent interest in a Delaware hearing should be submitted in writing (James A. Bluemle, Vice President) 230 partnership, Chemical Mellon and received by William W. Wiles, South LaSalle Street, Chicago, Illinois Shareholder Services, Ridgefield Park, Secretary, Board of Governors of the 60690: New Jersey (Partnership). Mellon and Federal Reserve System, Washington, 1. Norton Capital Corporation, Morris, Chemical would transfer substantially D.C. 20551, not later than March 31, Illinois; to merge with Sheridan all the assets of their respective 1995. Any request for a hearing on this Bancorp, Inc., Sheridan, Illinois, and shareholder services businesses to application must, as required by § thereby indirectly acquire Sheridan Partnership, and Partnership would 262.3(e) of the Board’s Rules of State Bank, Sheridan, Illinois. provide the following services to issuers Procedure (12 CFR 262.3(e)), be B. Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis of equity securities: shareholder account accompanied by a statement of the (Randall C. Sumner, Vice President) 411 maintenance; dividend disbursement; reasons why a written presentation Locust Street, St. Louis, Missouri 63166: mailings to equity security holders; would not suffice in lieu of a hearing, 1. Mercantile Bancorporation, Inc., St. annual meeting services; transfer and identifying specifically any questions of Louis, Missouri; to acquire 100 percent issuance, as agent, of equity security fact that are in dispute, summarizing the of the voting shares of Mercantile Bank certificates; investor relations; evidence that would be presented at a of Lebanon, Lebanon, Missouri, a de reorganization services; stock option hearing, and indicating how the party novo bank. processing, recordkeeping and account commenting would be aggrieved by C. Federal Reserve Bank of maintenance; restricted securities approval of the proposal. Minneapolis (James M. Lyon, Vice processing and recordkeeping; stock This application may be inspected at President) 250 Marquette Avenue, watch services and proxy solicitation; the offices of the Board of Governors, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55480: and dividend reinvestment and stock the Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland, 1. Norwest Corporation, Minneapolis, purchase plan administration. In or the Federal Reserve Bank of New Minnesota; to acquire 100 percent of the addition, Partnership would provide York. voting shares of Norwest Bank Grand ‘‘private label’’ bondholder account Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve Forks, N.A., Grand Forks, North Dakota, maintenance for certain existing System, March 9, 1995. a de novo bank. customers of Mellon. Chemical and Jennifer J. Johnson, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve Mellon maintain that the Board Deputy Secretary of the Board. System, March 9, 1995. previously has determined that the [FR Doc. 95–6347 Filed 3–14–95; 8:45 am] Jennifer J. Johnson, proposed activities are closely related to Deputy Secretary of the Board. banking. See 12 CFR 225.25 (b)(3). BILLING CODE 6210±01±F [FR Doc. 95–6349 Filed 3–14–95; 8:45 am] These activities will be conducted BILLING CODE 6210±01±F nationwide. Norton Capital Corporation, et al.; In order to approve the proposal, the Formations of; Acquisitions by; and Board must determine that the proposed Mergers of Bank Holding Companies Norwest Corporation; Application to activities to be conducted by Engage in Nonbanking Activities Partnership ‘‘can reasonably be The companies listed in this notice expected to produce benefits to the have applied for the Board’s approval Norwest Corporation, Minneapolis, public, such as greater convenience, under section 3 of the Bank Holding Minnesota, (Applicant), has filed notice increased competition, or gains in Company Act (12 U.S.C. 1842) and § pursuant to section 4(c)(8) of the Bank efficiency, that outweigh possible 225.14 of the Board’s Regulation Y (12 Holding Company Act (12 U.S.C. adverse effects, such as undue CFR 225.14) to become a bank holding 1843(c)(8)) (BHC Act) and § 225.23(a)(3) concentration of resources, decreased or company or to acquire a bank or bank of the Board’s Regulation Y (12 CFR unfair competition, conflicts of holding company. The factors that are 225.23(a)(3)) to engage in the activity of interests, or unsound banking considered in acting on the applications providing for a fee employment practices.’’ 12 U.S.C. 1843(c)(8). are set forth in section 3(c) of the Act information, including salary, length of Chemical and Mellon believe that the (12 U.S.C. 1842(c)). employment and name of employer, 13988 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices through its wholly-owned subsidiary, In order to satisfy the proper incident FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION Norwest Mortgage Corporation, Des to banking test, section 4(c)(8) of the [File No. 941 0131] Moines, Iowa (Norwest Mortgage). BHC Act requires the Board to find that Norwest Mortgage would provide this the performance of the activities by Schnuyck Markets, Inc.; Proposed information to affiliated and unaffiliated Company can reasonably be expected to Consent Agreement With Analysis to depository institutions, and to other produce benefits to the public, such as Aid Public Comment creditors for use in connection with an greater convenience, increased extension of credit including a lease competition, or gains in efficiency that AGENCY: Federal Trade Commission. transaction that is the functional outweigh possible adverse effects, such ACTION: Proposed consent agreement. equivalent of an extension of credit. as undue concentration of resources, These activites will be conducted SUMMARY: In settlement of alleged decreased or unfair competition, nationwide. violations of federal law prohibiting Section 4(c)(8) of the BHC Act conflicts of interest, or unsound banking unfair acts and practices and unfair provides that a bank holding company practices. Applicant believes that the methods of competition— in connection may, with Board approval, engage in proposed activities will benefit the with Schnuck Markets’ proposed any activity which the Board, after due public by promoting competition. acquisition of supermarkets currently notice and opportunity for hearing, has Applicant believes that the proposed owned by National Holdings, Inc.—this determined (by order or regulation) to activities will not result in any unsound consent agreement, accepted subject to be so closely related to banking or banking practices or other adverse final Commission approval, would managing or controlling banks as to be effects. require, among other things, the a proper incident thereto. This statutory In publishing the proposal for Missouri-based corporation to divest 24 test requires that two separate tests be comment, the Board does not take a stores in the St. Louis area to met for an activity to be permissible for position on issues raised by the Commission-approved purchasers, and a bank holding company. First, the proposal. Notice of the proposal is would require the respondent, for ten Board must determine that the activity years, to obtain Commission approval published solely in order to seek the is, as a general matter, closely related to before acquiring an interest in a views of interested persons on the banking. Second, the Board must find in supermarket, or another entity that a particular case that the performance of issues presented by the application and operates a supermarket, in the relevant the activity by the applicant bank does not represent a determination by area. the Board that the proposal meets, or is holding company may reasonably be DATES: Comments must be received on likely to meet, the standards of the BHC expected to produce public benefits that or before May 15, 1995. Act. outweigh possible adverse effects. ADDRESSES: Comments should be A particular activity may be found to Any comments or requests for hearing directed to: FTC/Office of the Secretary, meet the ‘‘closely related to banking’’ should be submitted in writing and Room 159, 6th St. and Pa. Ave., N.W., test if it is demonstrated that banks have received by William W. Wiles, Washington, D.C. 20580. generally provided the proposed Secretary, Board of Governors of the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: activity; that banks generally provide Federal Reserve System, Washington, services that are operationally or Ronald Rowe, FTC/S–2105, D.C. 20551, not later than March 29, functionally similar to the proposed Washington, D.C. 20580. (202) 326– 1995. Any request for a hearing on this activity so as to equip them particularly 2610. well to provide the proposed activity; or application must, as required by § SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuant that banks generally provide services 262.3(e) of the Board’s Rules of to Section 6(f) of the Federal Trade that are so integrally related to the Procedure (12 CFR 262.3(e)), be Commission Act, 38 Stat. 721, 15 U.S.C. proposed activity as to require their accompanied by a statement of the 46 and § 2.34 of the Commission’s Rules provision in a specialized form. reasons why a written presentation of Practice (16 CFR 2.34), notice is National Courier Ass’n v. Board of would not suffice in lieu of a hearing, hereby given that the following consent Governors, 516 F.2d 1229, 1237 (D.C. identifying specifically any questions of agreement containing a consent order to Cir. 1975). In addition, the Board may fact that are in dispute, summarizing the cease and desist, having been filed with consider any other basis that may evidence that would be presented at a and accepted, subject to final approval, demonstrate that the activity has a hearing, and indicating how the party by the Commission, has been placed on reasonable or close relationship to commenting would be aggrieved by the public record for a period of sixty banking or managing or controlling approval of the proposal. (60) days. Public comment is invited. banks. Board Statement Regarding Such comments or review will be This application may be inspected at Regulation Y, 49 FR 806 (1984). considered by the Commission and will the offices of the Board of Governors or Applicant believes that the proposed be available for inspection and copying the Federal Reserve Bank of activities meet the National Courier at its principal office in accordance with standard because: (1) employment and Minneapolis. § 4.9(b)(6)(ii) of the Commission’s Rules salary history information is Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve of Practice (16 CFR 4.9(b)(6)(ii)). information that is routinely obtained System, March 9, 1995. Agreement Containing Consent Order by a bank in connection with an Jennifer J. Johnson, extension of credit; (2) the information The Federal Trade Commission Deputy Secretary of the Board. to be provided is primarily financial in (‘‘Commission’’) having initiated an nature because the relevant information [FR Doc. 95–6350 Filed 3–14–95; 8:45 am] investigation of Schnuck Markets, Inc.’s is the amount of salary or wages earned BILLING CODE 6210±01±F (‘‘Schnucks’’) proposed acquisition of by an individual over a period of time; certain assets of National Holdings, Inc. and (3) the proposed activities are and certain affiliates (‘‘National’’), and it operationally and functionally similar to now appearing that Schnucks, operating a credit bureau pursuant to § hereinafter sometimes referred to as 225.25(b)(24) of Regulation Y. ‘‘proposed respondent,’’ is willing to Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices 13989 enter into an agreement containing an the following Order to divest and to including nonfood items such as soaps, Order to divest certain assets and to cease and desist in disposition of the detergents, paper goods, other cease and desist from certain acts, and proceeding, and (2) make information household products, and health and providing for other relief. public with respect thereto. When so beauty aids. It is hereby agreed by and among entered, the Order shall have the same E. The term St. Louis MSA means the proposed respondent, its duly force and effect and may be altered, metropolitan statistical area consisting authorized officers and attorneys, and modified, or set aside in the same time of the following areas: in Missouri, the counsel for the Commission that: provided by statute for other orders. The counties of Franklin, Jefferson, Lincoln, 1. Proposed respondent Schnuck Order shall become final upon service. St. Charles, St. Louis, Warren, and the Markets, Inc. is a corporation organized, Delivery by the United States Postal city of St. Louis; in Illinois, the counties existing, and doing business under and Service of the complaint and decision of Clinton, Jersey, Madison, Monroe, by virtue of the laws of the State of containing the agreed-to-Order to and St. Clair. Missouri, with its office and principal proposed respondent’s address as stated II place of business located at 11420 in this Agreement shall constitute Lackland Road, St. Louis, MO 63146– service. Proposed respondent waives It is further ordered that: 6928. any right it may have to any other A. Respondent shall divest, absolutely 2. Proposed respondent admits all the manner of service. The complaint may and in good faith, within twelve months jurisdictional facts set forth in the draft be used in construing the terms of the from the date this Order becomes final: of complaint. Order, and no agreement, 1. The following supermarkets located 3. Proposed respondent waives: understanding, representation, or in the city of St. Louis, Missouri: a. Any further procedural steps; interpretation not contained in the a. National Store no. 15 located at 2700 b. The requirement that the Order or the Agreement may be used to S. Grand Avenue, St. Louis, MO Commission’s decision contain a vary or contradict the terms of the 63118; statement of findings of fact and Order. b. National store no. 30 located at 5433 conclusions of law; 7. Proposed respondent has read the Southwest Avenue, St. Louis, MO c. All rights to seek judicial review or proposed complaint and Order 63139; otherwise to challenge or contest the contemplated hereby. Proposed c. National store no. 50 located at 8945 validity of the Order entered pursuant to respondent understands that once the Riverview Drive, St. Louis, MO 63137; this agreement; and Order has been issued, it will be and d. Any claim under the Equal Access d. National store no. 60 located at 1605 required to file verified written reports to Justice Act. S. Jefferson, St. Louis, MO 63104. 4. This agreement shall not become showing that it has fully complied with the Order. Proposed respondent further 2. The following supermarkets located part of the public record of the in St. Louis County, Missouri: proceeding unless and until it is understands that it may be liable for civil penalties in the amount provided a. National store no. 26 located at 8823 accepted by the Commission. If this Ladue Road, Ladue, MO 63124; agreement is accepted by the by law for each violation of the Order after it becomes final. b. National store no. 45 located at 6 S. Commission it, together with the draft of Old Orchard, Webster, MO 63119; complaint contemplated thereby, will be Order c. National store no. 46 located at 10431 placed on the public record for a period I St. Charles, St. Ann, MO 63074; of sixty (60) days and information in d. National store no. 47 located at 13041 respect thereto publicly released. The It is ordered that, as used in this New Halls Ferry, Florissant, MO Commission thereafter may either Order, the following definitions shall 63033; withdraw its acceptance of this apply: e. National store no. 62 located at 421 agreement and so notify the proposed A. Respondent or Schnuck Markets, N. Kirkwood Road, Kirkwood, MO respondent, in which event it will take Inc. means Schnuck Markets, Inc., its 63122; such action as it may consider predecessors, subsidiaries, divisions, f. National store no. 63 located at 7434 appropriate, or issue and serve its and groups and affiliates controlled by Olive Street Road, University City, complaint (in such form as the Schnuck Markets, Inc., their successors MO 63130; circumstances may require) and and assigns, and their directors, officers, g. National store no. 77 located at 4432 decision, in disposition of the employees, agents, and representatives. Lemay Ferry Road, Mehlville, MO proceeding. B. Assets to be divested means the 63129; 5. This agreement is for settlement supermarket assets described in h. National store no. 85 located at 14855 purposes only and does not constitute Paragraph II.A. of this Order. Clayton Road, Chesterfield, MO an admission by proposed respondent C. Commission means the Federal 63011; that the law has been violated as alleged Trade Commission. i. Schnucks store no. 103 located at in the draft of the complaint, or that the D. Supermarket means a full-line 9719 Crestwood Road, Crestwood, facts as alleged in the draft complaint, retail grocery store that carries a wide MO 63126; other than jurisdictional facts, are true. variety of food and grocery items in j. Schnucks store no. 124 located at 3661 6. This agreement contemplates that, particular product categories, including Reavis Barracks, St. Louis, MO 63125; if it is accepted by the Commission, and bread and dairy products; refrigerated k. Schnucks store no. 130 located at if such acceptance is not subsequently and frozen food and beverage products; 10223 Lewis & Clark, Bellefontaine, withdrawn by the Commission pursuant fresh and prepared meats and poultry; MO 63136; and to the provisions of § 2.34 of the produce, including fresh fruits and l. Schnucks store no. 195 located at Commission’s Rules, the Commission vegetables; shelf-stable food and 6965 Parker Road, St. Louis, MO may, without further notice to the beverage products, including canned 63033. proposed respondent, (1) Issue its and other types of packaged products; 3. The following supermarkets located complaint corresponding in form and staple foodstuffs, which may include in St. Charles County, Missouri: substance with the draft of the salt, sugar, flour, sauces, spices, coffee, a. National store no. 22 located at 850 complaint and its decision containing and tea; and other grocery products, Jungerman, St. Peters, MO 63376; and 13990 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices b. Schnucks store no. 126 located at Agreement attached to this Order and necessary to permit the trustee to effect 1355 South 5th Street, St. Charles, made a part hereof as Appendix I. The the divestitures required by this Order. MO 63301. Asset Maintenance Agreement shall 4. The trustee shall have twelve (12) 4. The following supermarkets located continue in effect until such time as all months from the date the Commission in Jefferson County, Missouri: assets to be divested have been divested or court approves the trust agreement described in Paragraph III. B. 3. to a. National store no. 65 located at 1200 as required by this Order. accomplish the divestitures, which shall Sugar Creek Square, Fenton, MO III be subject to the prior approval of the 63026; and It is further ordered that: Commission. If, however, at the end of b. National store no. 70 located at 215 A. If respondent has not divested, the twelve-month period, the trustee has Arnold Cross Road, Arnold, MO absolutely and in good faith and with submitted a plan of divestiture or 63010. the Commission’s prior approval, the believes that divestiture can be achieved 5. The following supermarkets located assets to be divested within twelve within a reasonable time, the divestiture in Madison County, Illinois: months from the date this Order can be achieved within a reasonable a. National store no. 35 located at 1716 becomes final, the Commission may time, the divestiture period may be Vandalia Road, Collinsville, IL 62234; appoint a trustee to divest any of the extended by the Commission, or, in the and assets to be divested. In the event that case of a court-appointed trustee, by the b. Schnucks store no. 175 located at the Commission or the Attorney General court; provided, however, the 1435 Vaughn Road, Wood River, IL brings an action pursuant to section 5(1) Commission may extend this 12-month 62095. of the Federal Trade Commission Act, period only one (1) time for one (1) year. 6. The following supermarkets located 15 U.S.C. 45(1), or any other statute 5. The trustee shall have full and in St. Clair County, Illinois: enforced by the Commission, complete access to the personnel, books, respondent shall consent to the a. National store no. 64 located at 1290 records, and facilities related to the appointment of a trustee in such action. Camp Jackson Road, Cahokia, IL assets to be divested or to any other Neither the appointment of a trustee nor 62206; and relevant information, as the trustee may a decision not to be appoint a trustee b. National store no. 80 located at 4 request. Respondent shall develop such under this Paragraph shall preclude the Market Place, Fairview Heights, IL financial or other information as such Commission or the Attorney General trustee may reasonably request and shall 62208. from seeking civil penalties or any other cooperate with the trustee. Respondent The assets to be divested shall include relief available to it, including a court- shall take no action to interfere with or the supermarket business operated, and appointed trustee, pursuant to § 5(1) of impede the trustee’s accomplishment of all assets, leases, properties, business the Federal Trade Commission Act, or the divestitures. Any delays in and goodwill, tangible and intangible, any other statute enforced by the divestiture caused by respondent shall utilized in the supermarket operations Commission, for any failure by the extend the time for divestiture under at the locations listed above, but shall respondent to comply with this Order. this Paragraph in an amount equal to the not include those assets consisting of or B. If a trustee is appointed by the delay, as determined by the Commission pertaining to Schnucks or National trade Commission or a court pursuant to or, for a court-appointed trustee, by the names, trade dress, trade marks, service Paragraph III.A. of this Order, court. marks, and such other intangible assets respondent shall consent to the 6. The trustee shall use his or her best that respondent also utilizes in its following terms and conditions efforts to negotiate the most favorable business at locations other than those regarding the trustee’s powers, duties, price and terms available in each listed above. authority, and responsibilities: contract that is submitted to the B. Respondent shall divest the assets 1. The Commission shall select the Commission, subject to respondent’s to be divested only to an acquirer or trustee, subject to the consent of absolute and unconditional obligation to acquirers that receive the prior approval respondent, which consent shall not be divest at no minimum price. The of the Commission and only in a unreasonably withheld. The trustee divestitures shall be made in the manner that receives the prior approval shall be a person with experience and manner and to the acquirer or acquirers of the Commission. The purpose of the expertise in acquisitions and as set out in Paragraph II. of this Order; divestiture is to ensure the continuation divestitures. If respondent has not provided, however, if the trustee of the assets to be divested as ongoing opposed, in writing, including the receives bona fide offers for an asset to viable enterprises engaged in the reasons for opposing, the selection of be divested from more than one supermarket business and to remedy the any proposed trustee within ten (10) acquiring entity, and if the Commission lessening of competition resulting from days after written notice by the staff of determines to approve more than one the acquisition alleged in the the Commission to respondent of the such acquiring entity, the trustee shall Commission’s complaint. identity of any proposed trustee, divest such asset to the acquiring entity C. Pending divestiture of the assets to respondent shall be deemed to have or entities selected by respondent from be divested, respondent shall take such consented to the selection of the among those approved by the actions as are necessary to maintain the proposed trustee. Commission. viability, competitiveness, and 2. Subject to the prior approval of the 7. The trustee shall serve, without marketability of the assets to be divested Commission, the trustee shall have the bond or other security, at the cost and to comply with Paragraphs II and III of exclusive power and authority to divest expense of respondent, on such this Order and to prevent the the assets to be divested. reasonable and customary terms and destruction, removal, wasting, 3. Within ten (10) days after conditions as the Commission or a court deterioration, or impairment of the appointment of the trustee, respondent may set. The trustee shall have the assets to be divested except in the shall execute a trust agreement that, authority to employ, at the cost and ordinary course of business and except subject to the prior approval of the expense of respondent, such for ordinary wear and tear. Commission and, in the case of a court- consultants, accountants, attorneys, D. Respondent shall comply with all appointed trustee, of the court, transfers investment bankers, business brokers, the terms of the Asset Maintenance to the trustee all rights and powers appraisers, and other representatives Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices 13991 and assistants as are necessary to carry that owns any interest in or operates any full description of the efforts being out the trustee’s duties and supermarket or owned any interest in or made to comply with Paragraphs II and responsibilities. The trustee shall operated any supermarket within six (6) III of the Order, including a description account for all monies derived from the months of such proposed acquisition in of all substantive contacts or sale and all expenses incurred. After the St. Louis MSA. negotiations for the divestiture and the approval by the Commission and, in the Provided, however, that these identity of all parties contacted. case of a court-appointed trustee, by the prohibitions shall not apply to the Respondent shall include in its court, of the account of the trustee, construction of new facilities by compliance reports copies of all written including fees for his or her services, all respondent or the acquisition of or communications to and from such remaining monies shall be paid at the leasing of a facility that has not operated parties, all internal memoranda, and all direction of the respondent, and the as a supermarket within six (6) months reports and recommendations trustee’s power shall be terminated. The of respondent’s offer to purchase or concerning divestiture. trustee’s compensation shall be based at lease. B. One (1) year from the date this least in significant part on a commission V Order becomes final, annually for the arrangement contingent on the trustee’s next nine (9) years on the anniversary of divesting the assets to be divested to It is further ordered that, for a period the date this Order becomes final, and satisfy Paragraph II of this Order. of ten (10) years commencing on the at other times as the Commission may 8. Respondent shall indemnify the date this Order becomes final: require, respondent shall file verified trustee and hold the trustee harmless A. Respondent shall neither enter into written reports with the Commission against any losses, claims, damages, nor enforce any agreement that restricts setting forth in detail the manner and liabilities, or expenses arising out of, or the ability of any person (as defined in form in which it has complied and is in connection with, the performance of Section 1(a) of the Clayton Act, 15 complying with this Order. the trustee’s duties, including all U.S.C. § 12(a)) acquiring any VII reasonable fees of counsel and other supermarket owned or operated by expenses incurred in connection with respondent, any leasehold interest in It is further ordered that respondent the preparation for, or defense of any any supermarket, or any interest in any shall notify the Commission at least claim, whether or not resulting in any retail location used as a supermarket on thirty (30) days prior to any proposed liability, except to the extent that such or after January 1, 1995 in the St. Louis change in respondent such as liabilities, losses, damages, claims, or MSA to operate a supermarket at that dissolution, assignment, sale resulting expenses result from misfeasance, gross site; provided however, that nothing in in the emergence of a successor negligence, willful or wanton acts, or this Paragraph shall prevent respondent corporation, or the creation or bad faith by the trustee. from entering into or enforcing any dissolution of subsidiaries or any other 9. If the trustee ceases to act or fails agreement requiring its approval of any change in respondent that may affect to act diligently, a substitute trustee sublease, assignment, or change in compliance obligations arising out of shall be appointed in the same manner occupancy, which approval shall not be the Order. unreasonably withheld; provided as provided in Paragraph III.A. of this VIII Order. further that use of a site for the 10. The Commission or, in the case of operation of a supermarket shall not be It is further ordered that, for the a court-appointed trustee, the court, a basis for withholding such approval. purpose of determining or securing may on its own initiative or at the B. Respondent shall not remove any compliance with this Order, respondent request of the trustee issue such equipment from a supermarket owned shall permit and duly authorized additional Orders or directions as may or operated by respondent in the St. representative of the Commission: be necessary or appropriate to Louis MSA prior to a sale, sublease, A. Upon five days’ written notice to accomplish the divestiture required by assignment, or change in occupancy, respondent, access, during office hours this Order. except for replacement or relocation of and in the presence of counsel, to 11. The trustee shall have no such equipment in or to any other inspect and copy all books, ledgers, obligation or authority to operate or supermarket owned or operated by accounts, correspondence, memoranda maintain the assets to be divested. respondent in the ordinary course of and other records and documents in the 12. The trustee shall report in writing business, or as part of any negotiation possession or under the control of to respondent and the Commission for a sale, sublease, assignment, or respondent relating to any matters every sixty (60) days concerning the change in occupancy of such contained in this Order; and trustee’s efforts to accomplish supermarket. B. Upon five days’ written notice to divestiture. respondent and without restraint or VI interference from it, to interview IV It is further ordered that: respondent or officers, directors, or It is further ordered that, for a period A. Within sixty (60) days after the employees of respondent in the of ten (10) years from the date this Order date this Order becomes final and every presence of counsel. becomes final, respondent shall not, sixty (60) days thereafter until Asset Maintenance Agreement without the prior approval of the respondent has fully complied with the Commission, directly or indirectly, provisions of Paragraphs II or III of this This Asset Maintenance Agreement through subsidiaries, partnerships, or Order, respondent shall submit to the (‘‘Agreement’’) is by and between otherwise: Commission verified written reports Schnuck Markets, Inc. (‘‘Schnucks’’), a A. Acquire any ownership or setting forth in detail the manner and corporation organized under the laws of leasehold interest in any facility that has from in which it intends to comply, is the State of Missouri, with its principal operated as a supermarket within six (6) complying, and has complied with offices located at 11420 Lackland Road, months of the date of such proposed Paragraphs II and III of this Order. St. Louis, MO 63146–6928, and the acquisition in the St. Louis MSA. Respondent shall include in its Federal Trade Commission B. Acquire any stock, share capital, compliance reports, among other things (‘‘Commission’’), an independent equity, or other interest in any entity that are required from time to time, a agency of the United States 13992 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices Government, established under the respect to the Acquisition, except that authorized representative or Federal Trade Commission Act of 1914, the Commission may exercise any and representatives of the Commission: 15 U.S.C. 41, et seq. (collectively ‘‘the all rights to enforce this Agreement and a. Access during the office hours of Parties’’). the Consent Order annexed hereto and Schnucks, in the presence of counsel, to made a part thereof, and, in the event inspect and copy all books, ledgers, Premises the required divestiture is not accounts, correspondence, memoranda Whereas, Schnucks, pursuant to an accomplished, to appoint a trustee to and other records and documents in the agreement dated November 23, 1994, seek divestiture of the Assets, the possession or under the control of agreed to purchase certain assets of Parties agree as follows: Schnucks relating to compliance with National Holdings, Inc. and certain this Agreement; and affiliates (hereinafter ‘‘Acquisition’’); Terms of Agreement b. Upon five (5) days’ notice to and 1. Schnucks agrees to execute, and Schnucks and without restraint or Whereas, the Commission is now upon its issuance to be bound by, the interference from them, to interview investigating the Acquisition to attached Consent Order. The Parties officers or employees of Schnucks, who determine if it would violate any of the further agree that each term defined in may have counsel present, regarding statutes enforced by the Commission; the attached Consent Order shall have any such matters. and the same meaning in this Agreement. 7. This Agreement shall not be Whereas, if the Commission accepts 2. Unless the Commission brings an binding until approved by the the attached Agreement Containing action to seek to enjoin the proposed Commission. Consent Order, the Commission is Acquisition pursuant to Section 13(b) of Analysis of Proposed Consent Order to required to place it on the public record the Federal Trade Commission Act, 15 Aid Public Comment for a period of sixty (60) days for public U.S.C. 53(b), and obtains a temporary comment and may subsequently restraining order or preliminary The Federal Trade Commission withdraw such acceptance pursuant to injunction blocking the proposed (‘‘Commission’’) has accepted for public the provisions of § 2.34 of the Acquisition, Schnucks will be free to comment from Schnuck Markets, Inc. Commission’s Rules; and close the Acquisition after 11:59 p.m., (‘‘Schnucks’’) an agreement containing a Whereas, the Commission is March 8, 1995. proposed consent order. The agreement concerned that if an agreement is not 3. Schnucks agrees that from the date is designed to remedy anticompetitive reached preserving the status quo ante this Agreement is accepted until the effects stemming from Schnucks’ of the assets to be divested as described earliest of the dates listed in acquisition of a number of supermarkets in II.A. of the attached Agreement subparagraphs 3.a–3.b it will comply owned by National Holdings, Inc. and Containing Consent Order (‘‘Assets’’) with the provisions of this Agreement: certain affiliates (‘‘National’’). during the period prior to their a. Three business days after the The agreement has been placed on the divestitures, when those Assets will be Commission withdraws its acceptance public record for sixty (60) days for in the hands of Schnucks, that any of the Consent Order pursuant to the receipt of comments by interested divestiture resulting from any provisions of § 2.34 of the Commission’s persons. Comments received during this administrative proceeding challenging Rules; or period will become part of the public the legality of the Acquisition might not b. On the day the divestiture set out record. After sixty days, the be possible, or might produce a less in the Consent Order has been Commission will again review the than effective remedy; and completed. agreement and the comments received Whereas, the Commission is 4. From the time Schnucks acquires and will decide whether it should concerned that prior to divestiture to the the Assets until the divestiture set out withdraw from the agreement or make acquirer, it may be necessary to preserve in the Consent Order has been final the agreement’s proposed order. the continued viability and completed, Schnucks shall maintain the The Commission’s draft complaint competitiveness of the Assets; and viability, competitiveness and charges that on or about November 23, Whereas, the purpose of this marketability of the Assets, and shall 1994, Schnucks agreed to acquire Agreement and of the Consent Order is not cause the wasting or deterioration of supermarkets owned by National in to preserve the Assets pending the the Assets, nor shall it sell, transfer, Missouri and Illinois. The Commission divestiture to the acquirer approved by encumber or otherwise impair their has reason to believe that the the Federal Trade Commission under marketability or viability. acquisition, as well as the agreement to the terms of the Order, in order to 5. Should the Commission seek in any enter into the acquisition, would remedy any anticompetitive effects of proceeding to compel Schnucks to substantially lessen competition in the Acquisition; and divest itself of the Assets or to seek any violation of Section 7 of the Clayton Whereas, Schnucks entering into this other injunctive or equitable relief, Act, as amended, 15 U.S.C. 18, and Agreement shall in no way be construed Schnucks shall not raise any objection Section 5 of the FTC Act, as amended, as an admission by Schnucks that the based upon the expiration of the 15 U.S.C. 45. Acquisition is illegal; and applicable Hart-Scott-Rodino Antitrust According to the draft complaint, Whereas, Schnucks understands that Improvements Act waiting period or the Schnucks and National are direct no act or transaction contemplated by fact that the Commission has not sought competitors for the retail sale of food this Agreement shall be deemed to enjoin the Acquisition. Schnucks also and grocery items in supermarkets, or immune or exempt from the provisions waives all rights to contest the validity narrower product markets contained of the antitrust laws, or the Federal of this Agreement. therein, in the St. Louis MSA, or Trade Commission Act by reason of 6. For the purpose of determining or narrower geographic markets contained anything contained in this Agreement; securing compliance with this therein. The St. Louis MSA consists of Now, therefore, in consideration of Agreement, subject to any legally the Missouri counties of Franklin, the Commission’s agreement that, recognized privilege, and upon written Jefferson, Lincoln, St. Charles, St. Louis, unless the Commission determines to request with reasonable notice to Warren; the City of St. Louis; and the reject the Consent Order, it will not seek Schnucks to its principal offices, Illinois counties of Clinton, Jersey, further relief from the parties with Schnucks will permit any duly Madison, Monroe, and St. Clair. Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices 13993 According to the draft complaint, these k. Schnucks store No. 130 located at thereafter until the divestitures are markets are highly concentrated and 10223 Lewis & Clark, Bellefontaine, completed, and annually for a period of entry is difficult or unlikely. Schnucks’ MO 63136; and ten years. acquisition of National may reduce l. Schnucks store No. 195 located at The purpose of this analysis is to competition in these markets by 6965 Parker Road, St. Louis, MO invite public comment on the proposed eliminating the direct competition 63033. consent order to aid the Commission in between Schnucks and National, by 3. The following supermarkets located its determination of whether it should increasing the likelihood that Schnucks in St. Charles County, Missouri: make final the proposed consent order will become a dominant firm, and by a. National store No. 22 located at 850 contained in the agreement. increasing the likelihood of collusive Jungerman, St. Peters, MO 63376; and This analysis is not intended to behavior among the remaining b. Schnucks store No. 126 located at constitute an official interpretation of competitors. 1355 South 5th Street, St. Charles, the agreement and proposed consent The agreement containing consent MO 63301. order, nor is it intended to modify the order attempts to remedy the 4. The following supermarkets located terms of the agreement and proposed Commission’s competitive concerns in Jefferson County, Missouri: consent order in any way. about the acquisition. Under the terms a. National store No. 65 located at 1200 Donald S. Clark, of the proposed order, Schnucks must Sugar Creek Square, Fenton, MO Secretary. divest 24 supermarkets within twelve 63026; and months, to a purchaser approved by the Concurring Statement of Commissioner b. National store No. 70 located at 215 Commission. If Schnucks fails to satisfy Mary L. Azcuenaga Arnold Cross Road, Arnold MO the divestiture provisions, the 63010. Re: Schnuck Markets, Inc., File No. 941– Commission may appoint a trustee to 0131; Schwegmann Giant Super divest supermarkets to satisfy the terms 5. The following supermarkets located Markets, Inc., File No. 941–0130 in Madison County, Illinois: of the order. The 24 supermarkets to be The two complaints allege geographic a. National store No. 35 located at 1716 divested are: markets comprising ‘‘the St. Louis MSA, Vandalia Road, Collinsville, IL 62234; 1. The following supermarkets located and narrower markets contained and in the city of St. Louis, Missouri: therein’’ and ‘‘metro New Orleans, b. Schnucks store No. 175 located at a. National store No. 15 located at 2700 Louisiana area, which consists of the 1435 Vaughn Road, Wood River, IL S. Grand Avenue, St. Louis, MO parishes of Orleans, Jefferson, and St. 62095. 63118; Bernard, and narrower markets b. National store No. 30 located at 5433 6. The following supermarkets located contained therein.’’ Although I question Southwest Avenue, St. Louis, MO in St. Clair County, Illinois: the board geographic markets alleged, 63139; a. National store No. 64 located at 1290 the investigational record contains c. National store No. 50 located at 8945 Camp Jackson Road, Cahokia, IL sufficient information to support a Riverview Drive, St. Louis, MO 63137; 62206; and finding of reason to believe with respect and b. National store No. 80 located at 4 to small, discrete geographic markets d. National store No. 60 located at 1605 Market Place, Fairview Heights, IL located within the broad regions alleged S. Jefferson, St. Louis, MO 63104. 62208 in the complaint, and the stores to be 2. The following supermarkets located For a period of ten years from the date divested were selected with a view to in St. Louis County, Missouri: the order becomes final, the order also remedying competitive concerns in the prohibits Schnucks from acquiring, small, discrete markets. a. National store No. 26 located at 8823 without prior Commission approval, In addition, the complaints allege as Ladue Road, Ladue MO 63124; supermarket assets located in, or any the product market ‘‘the retail sale of b. National store No. 45 located at 6 S. interest (such as stock) in any entity that food and grocery products in Old Orchard, Webster, MO 63119; owns or operates a supermarket located supermarkets, and narrow markets c. National store No. 46 located at 10431 in, the St. Louis MSA. This does not contained therein.’’ A serious argument St. Charles, St. Ann, MO 63074; prevent Schnucks from constructing can be made that the market should d. National store No. 47 located at 13041 new supermarket facilities on its own; include sales of food and groceries in New Halls Ferry, Florissant, MO nor does it prevent Schnucks from certain stores other than traditional 63033; leasing facilities not operated as supermarkets. Since the investigational e. National store No. 62 located at 421 supermarkets within the previous six record suggests that the concentration is N. Kirkwood Road, Kirkwood, MO months. high even if additional sales are 63122; For a period of ten years, if Schnucks included in the market, the issue need f. National store No. 63 located at 7434 sells or leases a supermarket to another not be resolved at this time. Olive Street Road, University City, person, Schnucks may not enter into or Accordingly, I concur in the decision to MO 63130; enforce any agreement that would accept the consent agreements for g. National store No. 77 located at 4432 restrict the ability of that person to publication. Lemay Ferry Road, Mehlville, MO operate a supermarket. In addition, [FR Doc. 95–6342 Filed 3–14–95; 8:45 am] 63129; subject to certain exceptions, Schnucks h. National store No. 85 located at 14855 may not remove any equipment from a BILLING CODE 6750±01±M Clayton Road, Chesterfield, MO supermarket it owns or operates prior to 63011; a sale, sublease, assignment, or change i. Schnucks store No. 103 located at in occupancy. [File No. 941 0130] 9719 Crestwood Road, Crestwood, The respondent is required to provide Schwegmann Giant Super Markets, MO 63126; to the Commission a report of Inc.; Proposed Consent Agreement j. Schnucks store No. 124 located at compliance with the order within sixty With Analysis to Aid Public Comment 3661 Reavis Barracks, St. Louis, MO (60) days following the date the order 63125; becames final, every sixty (60) days AGENCY: Federal Trade Commission. 13994 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices ACTION: Proposed consent agreement. 1. Proposed respondent Schwegmann Order shall become final upon service. Giant Super Markets, Inc. is a Delivery by the United States Postal SUMMARY: In settlement of alleged corporation organized, existing, and Service of the complaint and decision violations of federal law prohibiting doing business under and by virtue of containing the agreed-to Order to unfair acts and practices and unfair the laws of the State of Louisiana, with proposed respondent’s address as stated methods of competition—in connection its office and principal place of business in this Agreement, to the attention of the with Schwegmann’s proposed located at 5300 Old Gentilly Road, New officer signing this agreement, shall acquisition of supermarkets currently Orleans, Louisiana 70126. constitute service. Proposed respondent owned by National Holdings, Inc.—this 2. Proposed respondent admits all the waives any right it may have to any consent agreement, accepted subject to jurisdictional facts set forth in the draft other manner of service. The complaint final Commission approval, would of complaint. may be used in construing the terms of require, among other things, the 3. Proposed respondent waives: the Order, and no agreement, Louisiana-based corporation to divest a. Any further procedural steps; understanding, representation, or seven stores in the New Orleans area to b. The requirement that the interpretation not contained in the Commission-approved purchasers, and Commission’s decision contain a Order or the Agreement may be used to would require the respondent, for ten statement of findings of fact and vary or contradict the terms of the years, to obtain Commission approval conclusions of law; Order. c. All rights to seek judicial review or before acquiring an interest in a 7. Proposed respondent has read the supermarket, or another entity that otherwise to challenge or contest the validity of the Order entered pursuant to proposed complaint and Order operates a supermarket, in the relevant contemplated hereby. Proposed area. this agreement; and d. Any claim under the Equal Access respondent understands that once the DATES: Comments should be received on to Justice Act. Order has been issued, it will be or before May 15, 1995. 4. This agreement shall not become required to file verified written reports ADDRESSES: Comments should be part of the public record of the showing that it has fully complied with directed to: FTC/Office of the Secretary, proceeding unless and until it is the Order. Proposed respondent further Room 159, 6th St. and Pa. Ave., NW., accepted by the Commission. If this understands that it may be liable for Washington, DC 20580. agreement is accepted by the civil penalties in the amount provided FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Commission it, together with the draft of by law for each violation of the Order Ronald Rowe, FTC/S–2105, complaint contemplated thereby, will be after it becomes final. Washington, DC 20580. (202) 326–2610. placed on the public record for a period Order SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuant of sixty (60) days and information in to Section 6(f) of the Federal Trade respect thereto publicly released. The I Commission Act, 38 Stat. 721, 15 U.S.C. Commission thereafter may either It is ordered that, as used in this 46 and § 2.34 of the Commission’s Rules withdraw its acceptance of this Order, the following definitions shall of Practice (16 CFR 2.34), notice is agreement and so notify the proposed apply: hereby given that the following consent respondent, in which event it will take A. Respondent or Schwegmann means agreement containing a consent order to such action as it may consider John F. Schwegmann and Schwegmann cease and desist, having been filed with appropriate, or issue and serve its Giant Super Markets, Inc., its and accepted, subject to final approval, complaint (in such form as the predecessors, subsidiaries, divisions, by the Commission, has been placed on circumstances may require) and and groups and affiliates controlled by the public record for a period of sixty decision, in disposition of the Schwegmann Giant Super Markets, Inc., (60) days. Public comment is invited. proceeding. their successors and assigns, and their Such comments or views will be 5. This agreement is for settlement directors, officers, employees, agents, considered by the Commission and will purposes only and does not constitute and representatives. be available for inspection and copying an admission by proposed respondent at its principal office in accordance with that the law has been violated as alleged B. Assets to be divested means the § 4.9(b)(6)(ii) of the Commission’s Rules in the draft of the complaint, or that the supermarket assets described in of Practice (16 CFR 4.9(b)(6)(ii)). facts as alleged in the draft complaint, Paragraph II.A. of this Order. other than jurisdictional facts, are true. C. Commission means the Federal Agreement Containing Consent Order 6. This agreement contemplates that, Trade Commission. The Federal Trade Commission if it is accepted by the Commission, and D. Supermarket means a full-line (‘‘Commission’’) having initiated an if such acceptance is not subsequently retail grocery store that carries a wide investigation of Schwegmann Giant withdrawn by the Commission pursuant variety of food and grocery items in Super Markets, Inc.’s (‘‘Schwegmann’’) to the provisions of § 2.34 of the particular product categories, including proposed acquisition of certain assets of Commission’s Rules, the Commission bread and dairy products; refrigerated National Holdings, Inc. and certain may, without further notice to the and frozen food and beverage products; affiliates (‘‘National’’), and it now proposed respondent, (1) issue its fresh and prepared meats and poultry; appearing that Schwegmann, hereinafter complaint corresponding in form and produce, including fresh fruits and sometimes referred to as ‘‘proposed substance with the draft of the vegetables; shelf-stable food and respondent,’’ is willing to enter into an complaint and its decision containing beverage products, including canned agreement containing an Order to divest the following Order to divest and to and other types of packaged products; certain assets and to cease and desist cease and desist in disposition of the staple foodstuffs, which may include from certain acts, and providing for proceeding, and (2) make information salt, sugar, flour, sauces, spices, coffee, other relief. public with respect thereto. When so and tea; and other grocery products, It is hereby agreed by and among entered, the Order shall have the same including nonfood items such as soaps, proposed respondent, its duly force and effect and may be altered, detergents, paper goods, other authorized officers and attorneys, and modified, or set aside in the same time household products, and health and counsel for the Commission that: provided by statute for other orders. The beauty aids. Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices 13995 E. New Orleans metro area means the assets to be divested except in the subject to the prior approval of the area consisting of Jefferson, Orleans, and ordinary course of business and except Commission and, in the case of a court- St. Bernard parishes in Louisiana. for ordinary wear and tear. appointed trustee, of the court, transfers D. Respondent shall comply with all to the trustee all rights and powers II the terms of the Asset Maintenance necessary to permit the trustee to effect It is further ordered that: Agreement attached to this Order and the divestitures required by this Order. A. Respondent shall divest, absolutely made a part hereof as Appendix I. The 4. The trustee shall have twelve (12) and in good faith, within twelve months Asset Maintenance Agreement shall months from the date the Commission from the date this Order becomes final: continue in effect until such time as all or court approves the trust agreement 1. That Stanley supermarket located at assets to be divested have been divested described in Paragraph III. B. 3. to 315 E. Judge Perez Drive (store No. as required by this Order. accomplish the divestitures, which shall be subject to the prior approval of the 79), Chalmette, LA; III 2. Canal Villere supermarket located at Commission. If, however, at the end of 4726 Paris Avenue (store No. 24), It is further ordered that: the twelve-month period, the trustee has A. If respondent has not divested, New Orleans, LA; submitted a plan of divestiture or absolutely and in good faith and with 3. Canal Villere supermarket located at believes that divestiture can be achieved the Commission’s prior approval, the 2125 Caton Street (store No. 25), New within a reasonable time, the divestiture assets to be divested within twelve Orleans, LA; period may be extended by the months from the date this Order 4. That Stanley supermarket located at Commission, or, in the case of a court- becomes final, the Commission may 4223 Chef Menteur Highway (store appointed trustee, by the court; appoint a trustee to divest any of the No. 8), New Orleans, LA; provided, however, the Commission assets to be divested. In the event that 5. That Stanley supermarket located at may extend this 12-month period only the Commission or the Attorney General 9319 Jefferson Highway (store No. 33), one (1) time for one (1) year. brings an action pursuant to section 5(l) River Ridge, LA; 5. The trustee shall have full and of the Federal Trade Commission Act, 6. Canal Villere supermarket located at complete access to the personnel, books, 15 U.S.C. 45(l), or any other statute 5245 Veterans Memorial Boulevard records, and facilities related to the enforced by the Commission, (store No. 93), Metairie, LA; and assets to be divested or to any other respondent shall consent to the 7. Canal Villere supermarket located at relevant information, as the trustee may appointment of a trustee in such action. 135 Robert E. Lee Boulevard (store request. Respondent shall develop such Neither the appointment of a trustee nor No. 83), New Orleans, LA. financial or other information as such a decision not to appoint a trustee under trustee may reasonably request and shall The assets to be divested shall include this Paragraph shall preclude the cooperate with the trustee. Respondent the supermarket business operated, and Commission or the Attorney General shall take no action to interfere with or all assets, leases, properties, business from seeking civil penalties or any other impede the trustee’s accomplishment of and goodwill, tangible and intangible, relief available to it, including a court- the divestitures. Any delays in utilized in the supermarket operations appointed trustee, pursuant to § 5(l) of divestiture caused by respondent shall at the locations listed above, but shall the Federal Trade Commission, for any extend the time for divestiture under not include those assets consisting of or failure by the respondent to comply this Paragraph in an amount equal to the pertaining to any Schwegmann or with this Order. delay, as determined by the Commission National trade names, trade dress, trade B. If a trustee is appointed by the or, for a court-appointed trustee, by the marks, service marks, computer Commission or a court pursuant to court. software, vehicles and other assets Paragraph III.A. of this Order, 6. The trustee shall use his or her best except fixtures also used or to be used respondent shall consent to the efforts to negotiate the most favorable by respondent at locations other than following terms and conditions price and terms available in each those listed above in connection with regarding the trustee’s powers, duties, contract that is submitted to the the Schwegmann or National business authority, and responsibilities: Commission, subject to respondent’s operations. 1. The Commission shall select the absolute and unconditional obligation to B. Respondent shall divest the assets trustee, subject to the consent of divest at no minimum price. The to be divested only to an acquirer or respondent, which consent shall not be divestitures shall be made in the acquirers that receive the prior approval unreasonably withheld. The trustee manner and to the acquirer or acquirers of the Commission and only in a shall be a person with experience and as set out in Paragraph II of this Order; manner that receives the prior approval expertise in acquisitions and provided, however, if the trustee of the Commission. The purpose of the divestitures. If respondent has not receives bona fide offers for an asset to divestiture is to ensure the continuation opposed, in writing, including the be divested from more than one of the assets to be divested as ongoing reasons for opposing, the selection of acquiring entity, and if the Commission viable enterprises engaged in the any proposed trustee within ten (10) determines to approve more than one supermarket business and to remedy the days after written notice by the staff of such acquiring entity, the trustee shall lessening of competition resulting from the Commission to respondent of the divest such asset to the acquiring entity the acquisition alleged in the identity of any proposed trustee, or entities selected by respondent from Commission’s complaint. respondent shall be deemed to have among those approved by the C. Pending divestiture of the assets to consented to the selection of the Commission. be divested, respondent shall take such proposed trustee. 7. The trustee shall serve, without actions as are necessary to maintain the 2. Subject to the prior approval of the bond or other security, at the cost and viability, competitiveness, and Commission, the trustee shall have the expense of respondent, on such marketability of the assets to be divested exclusive power and authority to divest reasonable and customary terms and to comply with Paragraphs II and III of the assets to be divested. conditions as the Commission or a court this Order and to prevent the 3. Within ten (10) days after may set. The trustee shall have the destruction, removal, wasting, appointment of the trustee, respondent authority to employ, at the cost and deterioration, or impairment of the shall execute a trust agreement that, expense of respondent, such 13996 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices consultants, accountants, attorneys, acquisition in the New Orleans metro complying, and has complied with investment bankers, business brokers, area. Paragraphs II and III of this Order. appraisers, and other representatives B. Acquire any stock, share capital, Respondent shall include in its and assistants as are necessary to carry equity, or other interest in any entity compliance reports, among other things out the trustee’s duties and that owns any interest in or operates any that are required from time to time, a responsibilities. The trustee shall supermarket or owned any interest in or full description of the efforts being account for all monies derived from the operated any supermarket within six (6) made to comply with Paragraphs II and sale and all expenses incurred. After months of such proposed acquisition in III of the Order, including a description approval by the Commission and, in the the New Orleans metro area. of all substantive contacts or case of a court-appointed trustee, by the Provided, however, that these negotiations for the divestiture and the court, of the account of the trustee, prohibitions shall not apply to the identity of all parties contacted. including fees for his or his services, all construction of new facilities by Respondent shall include in its remaining monies shall be paid at the respondent or the acquisition of or compliance reports copies of all written direction of the respondent, and the leasing of a facility that has not operated communications to and from such trustee’s power shall be terminated. The as a supermarket within six (6) months parties, all internal memoranda, and all trustee’s compensation shall be based at of respondent’s offer to purchase or reports and recommendations least in significant part on a commission lease. concerning divestiture. arrangement contingent on the trustee’s V B. One year (1) from the date this divesting the assets to be divested to Order becomes final, annually for the satisfy Paragraph II of this Order. It is further ordered that, for a period next nine (9) years on the anniversary of 8. Respondent shall indemnify the of ten (10) years commencing on the the date this Order becomes final, and trustee and hold the trustee harmless date this Order becomes final: at other times as the Commission may against any losses, claims, damages, A. Respondent shall neither enter into require, respondent shall file verified liabilities, or expenses arising out of, or nor enforce any agreement that restricts written reports with the Commission in connection with, the performance of the ability of any person (as defined in setting forth in detail the manner and the trustee’s duties, including all Section 1(a) of the Clayton Act, 15 form in which it has complied and is reasonable fees of counsel and other U.S.C. 12(a)) acquiring any supermarket complying with this Order. expenses incurred in connection with owned or operated by respondent, any the preparation for, or defense of any leasehold interest in any supermarket, VII claim, whether or not resulting in any or any interest in that portion of any It is further ordered that respondent liability, except to the extent that such retail location used as a supermarket on shall notify the Commission at least liabilities, losses, damages, claims, or or after January 1, 1995 in the New thirty (30) days prior to any proposed expenses result from misfeasance, gross Orleans metro area to operate a change in respondent such as negligence, willful or wanton acts, or supermarket at that site; provided dissolution, assignment, sale resulting bad faith by the trustee. however, that nothing in this Paragraph in the emergence of a successor 9. If the trustee ceases to act or fails shall prevent respondent from entering corporation, or the creation or to act diligently, a substitute trustee into or enforcing any agreement dissolution of subsidiaries or any other shall be appointed in the same manner requiring its approval of any sublease, change in respondent that may affect as provided in Paragraph III.A. of this assignment, or change in occupancy, compliance obligations arising out of Order. which approval shall not be the Order. 10. The Commission or, in the case of unreasonably withheld; provided a court-appointed trustee, the court, further that use of a site for the VIII may on its own initiative or at the operation of a supermarket shall not be It is further ordered that, for the request of the trustee issue such a basis for withholding such approval. purpose of determining or securing additional Orders or directions as may B. Respondent shall not remove any compliance with this Order, respondent be necessary or appropriate to equipment for a supermarket owned or shall permit any duly authorized accomplish the divestiture required by operated by respondent in the New representative of the Commission: this Order. Orleans metro area prior to a sale, A. Upon five days’ written notice to 11. The trustee shall have no sublease, assignment, or change in respondent, access, during office hours obligation or authority to operate or occupancy, except for replacement or and in the presence of counsel for maintain the assets to be divested. relocation of such equipment in or to respondent, to inspect and copy all 12. The trustee shall report in writing any other supermarket owned or books, ledgers, accounts, to respondent and the Commission operated by respondent in the ordinary correspondence, memoranda and other every sixty (60) days concerning the course of business, or as part of any records and documents in the trustee’s efforts to accomplish negotiation for a sale, sublease, possession or under the control of divestiture. assignment, or change in occupancy of respondent relating to any matters such supermarket. contained in this Order; and IV B. Upon five days’ written notice to It is further ordered that, for a period VI respondent and without restraint or of ten (10) years from the date this Order It is further ordered that: interference from it, to interview becomes final, respondent shall not, A. Within sixty (60) days after the respondent or officers, directors, or without the prior approval of the date this Order becomes final and every employees of respondent in the Commission, directly or indirectly, sixty (60) days thereafter until presence of counsel for respondent through subsidiaries, partnerships, or respondent has fully complied with the relating to any matters contained in this otherwise: provisions of Paragraphs II or III of this Order. A. Acquire any ownership or Order, respondent shall submit to the leasehold interest in any facility that has Commission verified written reports Asset Maintenance Agreement operated as a supermarket within six (6) setting forth in detail the manner and This Asset Maintenance Agreement months of the date of such proposed form in which it intends to comply, is (‘‘Agreement’’) is by and between Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices 13997 Schwegmann Giant Super Markets, Inc. by this Agreement shall be deemed has not sought to enjoin the Acquisition. (‘‘Schwegmann’’), a corporation immune or exempt from the provisions Schwegmann also waives all rights to organized under the laws of the State of of the antitrust laws, or the Federal contest the validity of this Agreement. Louisiana, with its principal offices Trade Commission Act by reason of 6. For the purpose of determining or located at 5300 Old Gentilly Road, New anything contained in this Agreement; securing compliance with this Orleans, Louisiana 70126, and the Now, therefore, in consideration of Agreement, subject to any legally Federal Trade Commission the Commission’s agreement that, recognized privilege, and upon written (‘‘Commission’’), an independent unless the Commission determines to request with reasonable notice to agency of the United States reject the Consent Order, it will not seek Schwegmann to its principal offices, Government, established under the further relief from the parties with Schwegmann shall permit any duly Federal Trade Commission Act of 1914, respect to the Acquisition, except that authorized representative or 15 U.S.C. § 41, et seq. (collectively ‘‘the the Commission may exercise any and representatives of the Commission: Parties’’). all rights to enforce this Agreement and a. Access during the office hours of the Consent Order annexed hereto and Schwegmann, in the presence of Premises made a part thereof, and, in the event counsel for Schwegmann, to inspect and Whereas, Schwegmann, pursuant to the required divestiture is not copy all books, ledgers, accounts, an agreement dated November 23, 1994, accomplished, to appoint a trustee to correspondence, memoranda and other agreed to purchase certain assets of seek divestiture of the Assets, the records and documents in the National Holdings, Inc. and certain Parties agree as follows: possession or under the control of affiliates (hereinafter ‘‘Acquisition’’); Schwegmann relating to compliance and Terms of Agreement with this Agreement; and Whereas, the Commission is now 1. Schwegmann agrees to execute, and Without restraint or interference from investigating the Acquisition to upon its issuance to be bound by, the them, to interview officers or employees determine if it would violate any of the attached Consent Order. The Parties of Schwegmann, who may have counsel statutes enforced by the Commission; further agree that each term defined in present, regarding any such matters. and the attached Consent Order shall have 7. This Agreement shall not be Whereas, if the Commission accepts the same meaning in this Agreement. binding until approved by the the attached Agreement Containing 2. Unless the commission brings an Commission. Consent Order, the Commission is action to seek to enjoin the proposed Analysis of Proposed Consent Order to required to place it on the public record Acquisition pursuant to Section 13(b) of Aid Public Comment for a period of sixty (60) days for public the Federal Trade Commission Act, 15. comment and may subsequently U.S.C. § 53(b), and obtains a temporary The Federal Trade Commission withdraw such acceptance pursuant to restraining order or preliminary (‘‘Commission’’) has accepted for public the provisions of §§ 2.34 of the injunction blocking the proposed comment from Schwegmann Giant Commission’s Rules; and Acquisition, Schwegmann will be free Super Markets, Inc. (‘‘Schwegmann’’) an Whereas, the Commission is to close the Acquisition after 11:59 p.m., agreement containing a proposed concerned that if an agreement is not March 8, 1995. consent order. The agreement is reached preserving the status quo ante 3. Schwegmann agrees that from the designed to remedy anticompetitive of the assets to be divested as described date this Agreement is accepted until effects stemming from Schwegmann’s in II.A. of the attached Agreement the earliest of the dates listed in acquisition of a number of supermarkets Containing Consent Order (‘‘Assets’’) subparagraphs 3.a—3.b it will comply owned by National Holdings, Inc. and during the period prior to their with the provisions of this Agreement: certain affiliates (‘‘National’’). divestitures, when those assets will be a. Three business days after the The agreement has been placed on the in the hands of Schwegmann, that any Commission withdraws its acceptance public record for sixty (60) days for divestiture resulting from any of the Consent Order pursuant to the receipt of comments by interested administrative proceeding challenging provisions of § 2.34 of the Commission’s persons. Comments received during this the legality of the Acquisition might not Rules; or period will become part of the public be possible, or might produce a less b. On the day the divestitute set out record. After sixty days, the than effective remedy; and in the Consent Order has been Commission will again review the Whereas, the Commission is completed. agreement and the comments received concerned that prior to divestiture to the 4. From the time Schwegmann and will decide whether it should acquirer, it may be necessary to preserve acquires the Assets until the earliest of withdraw from the agreement or make the continued viability and the dates listed in subparagraphs 3.a— final the agreement’s proposed order. competitiveness of the Assets; and 3.b, Schwegmann shall maintain the The Commission’s draft complaint Whereas, the purpose of this viability, competitiveness and charges that on or about November 23, Agreement and of the Consent Order is marketability of the Assets, and shall 1994, Schwegmann agreed to acquire to preserve the Assets pending the not cause the wasting or deterioration of National’s supermarkets located in divestiture to the acquirer approved by the Assets, nor shall it sell, transfer, Louisiana, Mississippi, and Alabama. the Federal Trade Commission under encumber or otherwise impair their The Commission has reason to believe the terms of the Order, in order to marketability or viability. that the acquisition, as well as the remedy any anticompetitive effects of 5. Should the Commission seek in any agreement to enter into the acquisition, the Acquisition; and proceeding to compel Schwegmann to would substantially lessen competition Whereas, Schwegmann entering into divest itself of the Assets or to seek any in violation of Section 7 of the Clayton this Agreement shall in no way be other injunctive or equitable relief, Act, as amended, 15 U.S.C. 18, and construed as an admission by Schwegmann shall not raise any Section 5 of the FTC Act, as amended, Schwegmann that the Acquisition is objection based upon the expiration of 15 U.S.C. 45. illegal; and the applicable Hart-Scott-Rodino According to the draft complaint, Whereas, Schwegmann understands Antitrust Improvements Act waiting Schwegmann and National are direct that no act or transaction contemplated period or the fact that the Commission competitors for the retail sale of food 13998 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices and grocery items in supermarkets, or supermarket to another person, not be resolved at this time. narrower product markets contained Schwegmann may not enter into or Accordingly, I concur in the decision to therein, in the ‘‘New Orleans metro enforce any agreement that would accept the consent agreements for area,’’ which consists of the parishes of restrict the ability of that person to publication. Orleans, Jefferson, and St. Bernard, or operate a supermarket. In addition, [FR Doc. 95–6343 Filed 3–14–95; 8:45 am] narrower geographic markets contained subject to certain exceptions, BILLING CODE 6750±01±M therein. According to the draft Schwegmann may not remove any complaints, the relevant markets are equipment from a supermarket it owns highly concentrated and entry is or operates prior to a sale, sublease, GENERAL SERVICES difficult or unlikely. Schwegmann’s assignment, or change in occupancy. acquisition of National may reduce The respondent is required to provide ADMINISTRATION competition in these markets by to the Commission a report of Construction of FDA Regional Office eliminating the direct competition compliance with the order within sixty and Laboratory; Environmental Impact between Schwegmann and National, by (60) days following the date the order Statement; Jamaica, Queens County, increasing the likelihood that becomes final, every sixty (60) days New York Schwegmann will become a dominant thereafter until the divestitures are firm, and by increasing the likelihood of completed, and annually for a period of AGENCY: General Services collusive behavior among the remaining ten years. Administration (GSA). competitors. The purpose of this analysis is to ACTION: Notice of Intent to hold a public The agreement containing consent invite public comment on the proposed scoping meeting and prepare and file an order attempts to remedy the consent order to aid the Commission in Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). Commission’s competitive concerns its determination of whether it should about the acquisition. Under the terms make final the proposed consent order SUMMARY: The GSA is issuing this notice of the proposed order, Schwegmann contained in the agreement. to advise the public that an EIS will be must divest seven supermarkets within This analysis is not intended to prepared for the construction of the twelve months, to a purchaser approved constitute an official interpretation of FDA Regional Office and Laboratory in by the Commission. If Schwegmann the agreement and proposed consent Jamaica, Queens County, New York. fails to satisfy the divestiture provisions, order, nor is it intended to modify the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. the Commission may appoint a trustee terms of the agreement and proposed Peter A. Sneed, Asset Manager, U.S. to divest supermarkets to satisfy the consent order in any way. General Services Administration, Public terms of the order. The seven Donald S. Clark, Buildings Service, 26 Federal Plaza, supermarkets to be divested are: Secretary. Room 1609, New York City, NY 10278, 1. That Stanley supermarket located at (212) 264–3581. 315 E. Judge Perez Drive (store No. Concurring Statement of Commissioner SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The GSA 79), Chalmette, LA; Mary L. Azcuenaga will serve as lead agency and project 2. Canal Villere supermarket located at Re: Schnuck Markets, Inc., File No. 941– 4726 Paris Avenue (store No. 24), sponsor in the preparation and filing of 0131; Schwegmann Giant Super an EIS for the construction of the FDA New Orleans, LA; Markets, Inc., File No. 941–0130 3. Canal Villere supermarket located at Regional Office and Laboratory in 2125 Caton Street (store No. 25), New The two complaints allege geographic Jamaica, Queens County, New York. The Orleans, LA; markets comprising ‘‘the St. Louis MSA, proposed action would involve the 4. That Stanley supermarket located at and narrower markets contained construction and operation of the 4223 Chef Menteur Highway (store therein’’ and ‘‘metro New Orleans, facility on an assemblage of two No. 8), New Orleans, LA; Louisiana area, which consists of the properties located at the intersection 5. That Stanley supermarket located at parishes of Orleans, Jefferson, and St. 158th Street and Liberty Avenue. 9319 Jefferson Highway (store No. 33), Bernard, and marrower markets Combined, these two properties are 4.25 River Ridge, LA; contained therein.’’ Although I question acres (1.73 hectares) in size. The 6. Canal Villere supermarket located at the broad geographic markets alleged, existing FDA regional facilities are 5245 Veterans Memorial Boulevard the investigational record contains located in Federal Building #2 of the (store No. 93), Metairie, LA; sufficient information to support a Federal Complex in Sunset Park, 7. Canal Villere supermarket located at finding of reason to believe with respect Brooklyn, New York. Due to the 135 Robert E. Lee Boulevard (store to small, discrete geographic markets deteriorated condition of, and space No. 83), New Orleans, LA. located within the broad regions alleged constraints in, the present facility, FDA For a period of ten years from the date in the complaint, and the stores to be has requested relocation to a modern the order becomes final, the order also divested were selected with a view to expanded facility to accommodate the prohibits Schwegmann from acquiring, remedying competitive concerns in the additional staffing required to provide without prior Commission approval, small, discrete markets. increased oversight and product supermarket assets located in, or any In addition, the complaints allege as monitoring. This action is intended to interest (such as stock) in any entity that the product market ‘‘the retail sale of provide 175,000 occupiable square feet owns or operates a supermarket located food and grocery products in (16,250 square meters) of office, storage, in, the New Orleans metro area. This supermarkets, and narrower markets and special space. does not prevent Schwegmann from contained therein.’’ A serious argument The EIS will evaluate the FDA constructing new supermarket facilities can be made that the market should regional facility alternatives, including on its own; nor does it prevent include sales of food and groceries in the No-Action Alternative. It will also Schwegmann from leasing facilities not certain stores other than traditional evaluate impacts on the affected operated as supermarkets within the supermarkets. Since the investigational environment, including, but not limited previous six months. record suggests that the concentration is to, socioeconomics, hazardous For a period of ten years, if high even if additional sales are materials, traffic/transportation, land Schwegmann sells or leases a included in the market, the issue need use, cultural resources, and noise. Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices 13999 PUBLIC SCOPING MEETING: To ensure that ATSDR Great Lakes Human Health Effects property such as patentable material all issues relating to the proposed Research Program. and personal information concerning project are identified and all potentially Written comments are welcome and should individuals associated with the significant issues are addressed and be received by the contract person listed below prior to the opening of the meeting. applications and/or proposals, the satisfied in the EIS, public comments Contact person for more information: disclosure of which would constitute a and suggestions are being solicited. To Charles Xintaras, Sc.D., Executive Secretary, clearly unwarranted invasion of facilitate the receipt of comments, a Board of Scientific Counselors, ATSDR, personal privacy. public scoping meeting will be held on Mailstop E–28, 1600 Clifton Road, NE., (Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Monday, March 20, 1995 from 2 p.m. to Atlanta, Georgia 30333, telephone 404/639– Programs Nos. 93.837, Heart and Vascular 0708. 4 p.m. and from 6 p.m. to 8 p.m. in the Diseases Research; 93.838, Lung Diseases auditorium of the Joseph Addabbo Dated: March 8, 1995. Research; and 93.839, Blood Diseases and Federal Building, 1 Jamaica Center Carolyn J. Russell, Resources Research, National Institutes of Plaza, Jamaica, New York. Director, Management Analysis and Services Health.) Written comments may be mailed to Office, Centers for Disease Control and Dated: March 9, 1995. the informational contact person no Prevention (CDC). Margery G. Grubb, later than April 7, 1995. [FR Doc. 95–6318 Filed 3–14–95; 8:45 am] Senior Committee Management Specialist, Issued in New York City, New York on BILLING CODE 4163±70±M March 7, 1995. NIH. Karen R. Adler, [FR Doc. 95–6398 Filed 3–14–95; 8:45 am] Regional Administrator, General Services National Institutes of Health Genome BILLING CODE 4140±01±M Administration, Region 2. Research Review Committee; Notice [FR Doc. 95–6289 Filed 3–14–95; 8:45 am] of Cancellation of Meeting BILLING CODE 6820±23±M National Heart, Lung, and Blood Notice is hereby given of the Institute; Notice of a Closed Meeting cancellation of the meeting of the Genome Research Review Committee, Pursuant to Section 10(d) of the DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND National Center for Human Genome HUMAN SERVICES Federal Advisory Committee Act, as Research, March 14, 1995, Embassy amended (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2), notice Suites Hotel, Chevy Chase Pavilion, Agency for Toxic Substances and is hereby given of the following Heart, Washington, D.C. which was published Disease Registry Lung, and Blood Special Emphasis in the Federal Register on March 3, 1995 Panel (SEP) meeting: Board of Scientific Counselors, (60 FR 11975). The meeting was cancelled due to Name of SEP: Mechanisms of Post Bone Agency for Toxic Substances and Marrow Transplantation Lung Injury. Disease Registry: Meeting complications of other commitments of several members of the committee and Date: April 5–6, 1995. In accordance with section 10(a)(2) of will be rescheduled at a later date. Time: 7:30 p.m. Place: Holiday Inn, Chevy Chase, the Federal Advisory Committee Act Dated: March 9, 1995. (Pub. L. 92–463), the Agency for Toxic Maryland. Margery G. Grubb, Contact Person: Dr. Lynn M. Amende, 5333 Substances and Disease Registry Senior Committee Management Specialist, (ATSDR) announces the following Westbard Avenue, Room 5A10, Bethesda, NIH. Maryland 20892, (301) 594–7480. committee meeting. [FR Doc. 95–6326 Filed 3–14–95; 8:45 am] Purpose/Agenda: To review and evaluate Name: Board of Scientific Counselors, BILLING CODE 4140±01±M grant applications. ATSDR. Times and dates: 8:30 a.m.–5:00 p.m., The meeting will be closed in April 20, 1995. 8:30 a.m.–12:40 p.m., April National Heart, Lung, and Blood accordance with the provisions set forth 21, 1995. Institute; Notice of a Closed Meeting in sec. 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5, Place: The Centers for Disease Control and U.S.C. Applications and/or proposals Prevention, Auditorium A, 1600 Clifton Pursuant to Section 10(d) of the Road, NE, Atlanta, Georgia 30333. and the discussions could reveal Federal Advisory Committee Act, as confidential trade secrets or commercial Status: The entire meeting will be open to amended (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2), notice the public. property such as patentable material Purpose: The Board of Scientific is hereby given of the following Heart, and personal information concerning Counselors, ATSDR, advises the Lung, and Blood Special Emphasis individuals associated with the Administrator, ATSDR, on ATSDR programs Panel (SEP) meeting: applications and/or proposals, the to ensure scientific quality, timeliness, Name of SEP: Review of the Vascular disclosure of which would constitute a utility, and dissemination of results. Disease Academic Award. clearly unwarranted invasion of Specifically, the Board advises on the Date: April 9–10, 1995. personal privacy. adequacy of the science in ATSDR-supported Time: 7 p.m. research, emerging problems that require Place: Holiday Inn, Chevy Chase, (Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance scientific investigation, accuracy and Maryland. Programs Nos. 93.837, Heart and Vascular currency of the science in ATSDR reports, Contact Person: S. Charles Selden, Ph.D., Diseases Research; 93.838, Lung Diseases and program areas to emphasize and/or to de- 5333 Westbard Avenue, Room 552, Bethesda, Research; and 93.839, Blood Diseases and emphasize. Maryland 20892, (301) 594–7476. Resources Research, National Institutes of Agenda: The Agenda will include an Purpose/Agenda: To review and evaluate Health.) update on Superfund reauthorization and grant applications. Dated: March 9, 1995. will also focus on other issues of concern to The meeting will be closed in ATSDR, including ATSDR’s programs for accordance with the provisions set forth Margery G. Grubb, physician and community education, in sec. 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5, Senior Committee Management Specialist, development of the medical assistance NIH. program, progress report by the Board of U.S.C. Applications and/or proposals Scientific Counselors, ATSDR, work group and the discussions could reveal [FR Doc. 95–6397 Filed 3–14–95; 8:45 am] on health studies, and an overview of the confidential trade secrets or commercial BILLING CODE 4140±01±M 14000 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices National Heart, Lung, and Blood attend and need special assistance, such and discuss issues related to business of Institute; Amendment Notice of as sign language interpretation or other the Board. Attendance by the public Meeting reasonable accommodations, should will be limited to space available. contact Ms. Plummer. A summary of the meeting and a Notice is hereby given of a change in Dated: March 8, 1995. roster of committee members may be the meeting of the NHLBI SEP on obtained from James F. Battey, M.D., Dietary Protein and Blood Pressure, Susan K. Feldman, Committee Management Officer, NIH. Ph.D., Executive Secretary of the Board April 20, 1995, which was published in of Scientific Counselors, NIDCD, 5 [FR Doc. 95–6329 Filed 3–14–95; 8:45 am] the Federal Register on February 21 (60 Research Ct., Room 2B–28, Rockville, FR 9692). BILLING CODE 4140±01±M Maryland 20850. This Special Emphasis Panel was to Individuals who plan to attend and have convened at 9:00 a.m. on April 20, need special assistance, such as sign at the Rockledge Building, Conference National Institute on Deafness and language interpretation or other Room 8115, 8th Floor, National Other Communication Disorders; reasonable accommodations, should Institutes of Health, but has been Notice of Closed Meeting contact Dr. Battey at least two weeks changed to 9:00 a.m. on April 20, 1995, Pursuant to Section 10(d) of the prior to the meeting. at the Natcher Building, Building 45, Federal Advisory Committee Act, as Conference Room B, National Institutes (Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance amended (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2), notice Program No. 93.173 Biological Research of Health. is hereby given of the following The entire meeting will be open to the Related to Deafness and Communication meeting: public to provide concept review of the Disorders) Name of Committee: National Institute on Dated: March 8, 1995. proposed contract or grant solicitations. Deafness and Other Communication Susan K. Feldman, Dated: March 8, 1995. Disorders Special Emphasis Panel. Committee Management Officer, NIH. Susan K. Feldman, Dates: April 11–13, 1995. Time: 8 am to 5 pm each day. [FR Doc. 95–6328 Filed 3–14–95; 8:45 am] Committee Management Officer, NIH. Place: Hyatt Regency, Bethesda, MD. BILLING CODE 4140±01±M [FR Doc. 95–6327 Filed 3–14–95; 8:45 am] Contact Person: Marilyn Semmes, Ph.D., BILLING CODE 4140±01±M Acting Chief, Scientific Review Branch, NIDCD, NIH, ESP Suite 400C, 6120 Executive Boulevard, MSC 7180, Bethesda, MD 20892– DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR National Institute of Child Health and 7180, 301/496–8683. Human Development; Notice of Purpose/Agenda: To review and evaluate Bureau of Land Management grant applications. Meeting of the National Advisory The meeting will be closed in accordance [AZ±050±05; 1790±00] Board on Medical Rehabilitation with the provisions set forth in sec. Research 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5, U.S.C. Intent To Prepare an Environmental Applications and/or proposals and the Assessment and/or Environmental Pursuant to Pub. L. 92–463, notice is discussions could reveal confidential trade Impact Statement for the La Paz hereby given of the meeting of the secrets or commercial property such as County Regional Landfill Expansion National Advisory Board on Medical patentable material and personal information Project, Yuma District, AZ Rehabilitation Research, National concerning individuals associated with the Institute of Child Health and Human applications and/or proposals, the disclosure AGENCY: Bureau of Land Management, Development, April 6–7, 1995, Radisson of which would constitute a clearly Interior. unwarranted invasion of personal privacy. Plaza Lord Hotel, 20 West Baltimore ACTION: Notice of Intent To Prepare an Street, Baltimore, Maryland 21201. (Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Environmental Assessment and/or The meeting will be open to the Program No. 93.173 Biological Research Related to Deafness and Communication Environmental Impact Statement for the public from 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. on Disorders). La Paz County Regional Landfill April 6 and 9:00 a.m. to adjournment on Dated: March 9, 1995. Expansion Project. April 7. Attendance by the public will be limited to space available. Board Margery G. Grubb, SUMMARY: The Yuma District’s Havasu topic will include: (1) A report on fiscal Senior Committee Management Specialist, Resource Area Office is preparing an issues concerning the National Center NIH. Environmental Assessment and/or for Medical Rehabilitiation Research [FR Doc. 95–6396 Filed 3–14–95; 8:45 am] Environmental Impact Statement for the (Center) and the Institute; (2) reports on BILLING CODE 4140±01±M expansion of the La Paz County program activities of the Center; (3) a Regional Landfill, and the construction discussion of general priority areas of of a railroad drill track (spur) and haul National Institute of Deafness and research for the Center; (4) reports by road. The landfill is located near the Other Communications Disorders; the National Science Foundation and intersection of Arizona State Highways Notice of Meeting of the Board of the Department of Veterans Affairs; and 72 and 95, approximately 15 miles Scientific Counselors, NIDCD (5) a discussion of support for medical southeast of Parker, Arizona. La Paz rehabilitiation research by government Pursuant to Pub. L. 92–463, notice is County has submitted an application for agencies. hereby given of a meeting of the Board 6.3 miles of right-of-way across public Ms. Mary Plummer, Committee of Scientific Counselors, NIDCD, on lands pursuant to the Federal Land Management Specialist, NICHD, 6100 April 13, 1995. The meeting will be Policy Management Act of 1976, and a Building, Room 5E03, National conducted as a telephone conference request for the sale of 480 acres of Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland call originating from Building 31C, public land pursuant to the Recreation 20892, Area Code 301, 496–1485, will Room 3C05, National Institutes of and Public Purposes Act of 1926, as provide a summary of the meeting and Health, 9000 Rockville Pike, Bethesda, amended. The Bureau of Land a roster of Advisory Board members as Maryland. Management has responsibility for the well as substantive program The meeting will be open to the environmental review of the right-of- information. Individuals who plan to public from 2 to 4 pm to present reports way and land sale application pursuant Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices 14001 to the National Environmental Policy Dated: March 7, 1995. Pegasus Drive, Bakersfield, California Act (NEPA). Preparation of appropriate Don Applegate, 93308; (805) 391–6000. NEPA documentation will follow Nonrenewable Resource Advisor/Acting Dated: March 6, 1995. Council on Environmental Quality District Manager. James Wesley Abbot, Regulations for implementing the [FR Doc. 95–6331 Filed 3–14–95; 8:45 am] Caliente Resource Area Manager. procedural provisions of NEPA, BILLING CODE 4310±32±P [FR Doc. 95–6235 Filed 3–14–95; 8:45 am] pertinent guidance contained in the BILLING CODE 4310±40±M Department of Interior Manual on [CA±010±03±1220±01; 5±00160±GP5±010± Environmental Quality (DM 516), and 001] the BLM NEPA Handbook (H–1790–1). National Park Service La Paz County proposes the Temporary Vehicle Use Restriction Order for Caliente Resource Area Hamilton Grange National Memorial, expansion of an existing 160-acre New York County, New York; Final landfill, with an additional 480 acres, AGENCY: Bureau of Land Management, General Management Plan and and the construction of 6.3 miles of drill Interior. Environmental Impact Statement track and/or haul road to service the ACTION: Establishment of temporary In accordance with the National facility. Construction of the drill track vehicle use restriction in the Kelso Environmental Policy Act 102(2)(C) of will require a Clean Water Act (CWA) Creek and Isabella Management Areas 1969, the National Park Service, U.S. Section 404 Nationwide Permit for the within Kern County in the Caliente Department of the Interior announces crossing of Bouse Wash. Resource Area, Bakersfield District, that a Final Environmental Impact Implementation of the proposed project California. will provide regional, long-term waste Statement (FEIS) has been prepared on disposal capacity. SUMMARY: This emergency action the four alternatives for future restricts vehicle use on BLM- management and use of Hamilton The Environmental Assessment and/ administered public land in the Isabella Grange National Memorial. or Environmental Impact Statement will Management Area due top trash This notice announces the availability be developed by a third party contractor dumping and erosion problems and of the FEIS for public review. Following who has been approved by the Bureau restricts vehicle use on BLM- a 30-day no-action period, a Record of of Land Management. The contractor administered public lands in the Kelso Decision will be written documenting will use an interdisciplinary team to Creek Management Area due to severe the range of alternatives considered and develop the document. The Bureau of vandalism of range developments. Both evaluated, the preferred alternative Land Management will retain overall areas will be addressed on a permanent selected, and the rationale for its responsibility for preparation and basis in a Resource Management Plan. selection. review of the document. Vehicle use on roadways is restricted to For further inquiries about the FEIS, Complete records of all phases of the ‘‘Administrative Access Only’’ and shall and requests for additional copies environmental documentation process be limited to persons specifically should be directed to the will be available for public review at the designated by the Area Manager to drive Superintendent, Manhattan Sites, 26 Wall Street, New York, New York 10005 Bureau of Land Management, Havasu on said roadways. The public lands over or by calling (212) 825–6992. Resource Area Office, 3189 Sweetwater which these roads travel and located in Avenue, Lake Havasu City, Arizona. portions of NW1⁄4 Section 12, Township Dated: March 9, 1995. 27 South, Range 32 East; SE1⁄4 Section The public is invited to participate in Sandy Corbett, 29 and SW1⁄4 Section 28, Township 26 the NEPA process beginning with Acting Regional Director. South, Range 35 East; N1⁄2 Section 4 and scoping and the identification of issues [FR Doc. 95–6323 Filed 3–14–95; 8:45 am] 1 2 N ⁄ Section 9, Township 27 South, BILLING CODE 4310±70±P in April 1995. Range 35 East, all Mount Diablo Base DATES: Public Scoping Meetings to and Meridian, in the County of Kern, identify issues will be held as follows: State of California. This restriction will National Center for Preservation Wednesday, April 5, 1995 (1–3 pm), apply from the date of publication in the Technology and Training: Grant Quartzsite Town Hall Complex, Public Federal Register and remain in effect Program Announcement Library Meeting Room, 465 North until an amendment thereof or until AGENCY: National Park Service, Plymouth Avenue, 465 North Plymouth publication of a Resource Management Department of the Interior. Avenue, Quartzsite, Arizona; telephone Plan which adequately addresses public ACTION: Grant program announcement (602) 927–6593; and Wednesday, April access on these lands. and publication of selection criteria. 5, 1995 (6–8 pm), La Paz County Board SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This of Supervisor’s Meeting Room, 1112 emergency road closure is intended to The National Center for Preservation Joshua Avenue, Parker, Arizona; control vehicle use on public lands for Technology and Training, an office of telephone (602) 669–6138. protection of range developments, to the National Park Service, is accepting prevent further trash dumping, and to proposals for its 1995 Preservation The comment period for this Notice of abate erosion on sensitive hillsides. Intent ends April 14, 1995. Technology and Training Grants. Only Authority for this restriction order is proposals postmarked no later than COMMENTS/FURTHER INFORMATION: Send contained in CFR Title 43, Chapter II, April 1, 1995 will be considered. comments and/or requests for further 8364.1(a). The Center’s grant program supports information to: Bureau of Land DATES: This order will be effective on preservation technology and training Management, Havasu Resource Area, March 15, 1995. projects in the fields of archeology, Attention: Joe Liebhauser, 3189 FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: architecture, historic landscapes, Sweetwater Avenue, Lake Havasu City, James Abbott, Caliente Resource Area materials conservation, and history or Arizona 86403. Telephone: (602) 855– Manager, Caliente Resource Area, interpretation. Approximately 9017. Bureau of Land Management, 3801 $900,000.00 will be awarded; each grant 14002 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices is limited to $40,000.00 and proposals spring 1995; report of activities since judge’s (ALJ’s) initial determination (ID) for smaller amounts are encouraged. the November 1994 Board meeting; (Order No. 3) in the above-captioned Grantee’s total direct and indirect review of the Center’s budget and investigation terminating the administrative costs shall not exceed 25 discussion of a five-year plan for the investigation on the basis of a settlement percent of their total grant award. organization. agreement. Proposals from government agencies The Board will meet on Tuesday, May FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: and non-profit institutions are eligible. 2nd, from 8:30 am until 12 noon and Mark D. Kelly, Esq., Office of the Principal criteria for selection include: from 1:15 until 5 pm. On Wednesday, General Counsel, U.S. International 1. Proposed projects shall be May 3rd, the meeting will start at 9 am Trade Commission, telephone 202–205– innovative in their disciplines and shall and end at 12 noon and on Thursday, 3106. not duplicate current or recent May 4th, it will be held from 9 am until SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On August developments in preservation research 2 pm (the Board will be served a 1, 1994, Ricoh Co., Ltd. and Ricoh Corp. or training. working lunch in order to complete filed a complaint with the Commission 2. Proposed projects shall have broad miscellaneous business). Meetings will alleging violation of section 337 in the application in preservation practice. be open to the public. However, importation, sale for importation, and 3. Proposed projects shall address facilities and space for accommodating the sale within the United States after identifiable national needs. members of the public are limited and importation of certain facsimile 4. Proposed projects shall be cost- persons will be accommodated on a machines and components thereof that efficient and practical. first-come, first-served basis. Any allegedly infringed claims 1, 5, 7, 8, 9 5. Proposed work shall be completed member of the public may file a written or 10 of U.S. Letters Patent 4,249,216, or approximately one year from award. statement concerning the matters to be Grants will be selected in a two-tier claims 1, 2, 4, 8, or 10 of U.S. Letters discussed with Dr. Elizabeth A. Lyon, Patent 4,494,149, owned by process. The first tier will be comments Chair, Preservation Technology and complainants. by expert readers; the second tier will be Training Board, P.O. Box 1269, Flowery The Commission instituted an a selection panel comprised of Federal Branch, Georgia 30542. investigation of the complaint, and employees. Persons wishing more information published a notice of investigation in Funds for the 1995 grants program concerning this meeting, or who wish to the Federal Register on September 8, will be obligated no later than submit written statements, may do so by 1994, 59 FR 46447 (1994). The notice September 30, 1995. contacting Mr. E. Blaine Cliver, named Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. of Dated: March 6, 1995. Designated Federal Official, Seoul, Korea, and Samsung Electronics E. Blaine Cliver, Preservation Technology and Training America, Inc. of Ridgefield Park, New Chief, Preservation Assistance Division. Board, National Park Service, Jersey as respondents. [FR Doc. 95–6393 Filed 3–14–95; 8:45 am] Preservation Assistance Division, P.O. On December 22, 1994, complainants BILLING CODE 4310±70±P Box 37127, Washington, DC 20013– and respondents filed a joint motion to 7127, telephone: (202) 343–9573. Draft terminate the investigation based on a summary minutes of the meeting will be settlement agreement. On February 10, National Preservation Technology and available for public inspection about 1995, the ALJ granted the joint motion Training Board; Meeting eight weeks after the meeting at the and issued an ID (Order No. 3) office of the Preservation Assistance terminating the investigation on the AGENCY: National Park Service, Division, Suite 200, 800 North Capitol basis of the settlement agreement. No Department of the Interior. Street, Washington, DC. petitions for review, or agency or public ACTION: Notice of meeting of the Dated: March 7, 1995. comments were received. National Preservation Technology and This action is taken under the Training Board. E. Blaine Cliver, authority of section 337 of the Tariff Act Chief, Preservation Assistance, National Park of 1930, 19 U.S.C. 1337, and Notice is hereby given in accordance Service. Commission rule 210.42, 19 C.F.R. with the Federal Advisory Committee [FR Doc. 95–6392 Filed 3–14–95; 8:45 am] § 210.42. Act, 5 U.S.C. Appendix (1988), that the BILLING CODE 4310±70±P Copies of the public version of the National Preservation Technology and ALJ’s ID, and all other nonconfidential Training Board will meet on May 2–4, documents filed in connection with this 1995, in Washington, DC. INTERNATIONAL TRADE investigation are or will be available for The Board was established by COMMISSION inspection during official business Congress to provide leadership, policy [Investigation No. 337±TA±367] hours (8:45 a.m. to 5:15 p.m.) in the advice, and professional oversight to the Office of the Secretary, U.S. National Center for Preservation Notice of Commission Determination International Trade Commission, 500 E Technology and Training, as required not to Review an Initial Determination Street SW., Washington, DC 20436, under the National Historic Preservation Terminating the Investigation on the telephone 202–205–2000. Hearing- Act of 1966, as amended (16 U.S.C. Basis of a Settlement Agreement impaired persons are advised that 470). information on the matter can be The Board will meet each day, May 2– AGENCY: U.S. International Trade obtained by contacting the 4, in the Board Room of the American Commission. Commission’s TDD terminal on 202– Institute of Architects (AIA) at 1735 ACTION: Notice. 205–1810. New York Avenue, NW., in Washington, DC. Matters to be discussed will In the Matter of: Certain Facsimile By order of the Commission. include: A summary of the FY 1995 Machines and Components Thereof Issued: March 7, 1995. grant applications received and SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that Donna R. Koehnke, discussion of the grant review the U.S. International Trade Secretary. procedures; reports on the Center’s Commission has determined not to [FR Doc. 95–6376 Filed 3–14–95; 8:45 am] working groups meetings held in the review the presiding administrative law BILLING CODE 7020±02±P Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices 14003 DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE Justice published a notice in the Federal Notice Pursuant to the National Register pursuant to Section 6(b) of the Cooperative Research and Production Antitrust Division Act on September 23, 1993 (58 Fed. Reg. Act of 1993ÐPoweropen Association, 49529). Inc. Notice Pursuant to the National Cooperative Research and Production The last notification was filed with Notice is hereby given that, on Act of 1993ÐFieldbus Foundation the Department on July 5, 1994. This September 30, 1994, pursuant to Section notice has not yet been published in the 6(a) of the National Cooperative Notice is hereby given that, on Federal Register. Research and Production Act of 1993, December 8, 1994, supplemented by Constance K. Robinson, 15 U.S.C. 4301 et seq. (‘‘the Act’’), filings of December 20, 1994 and Director of Operations, Antitrust Division. PowerOpen Association, Inc. December 22, 1994, pursuant to Section (‘‘PowerOpen’’), has filed written [FR Doc. 95–6285 Filed 3–14–95; 8:45 am] 6(a) of the National Cooperative notifications simultaneously with the Research and Production Act of 1993, BILLING CODE 4410±01±M Attorney General and the Federal Trade 15 U.S.C. 4301 et seq. (‘‘the Act’’), the Commission disclosing changes in its Fieldbus Foundation (‘‘Fieldbus’’) has membership. The notifications were filed written notifications Notice Pursuant to the National filed for the purpose of extending the simultaneously with the Attorney Cooperative Research and Production Act’s provisions limiting the recovery of General and the Federal Trade Act of 1993ÐPortland Cement antitrust plaintiffs to actual damages Commission disclosing certain changes. Association under specified circumstances. Specifically, the December 8, 1994 Specifically, the identities of the new notification advises that effective Notice is hereby given that, on members of PowerOpen are: AVD September 23, 1994, InterOperable November 22, 1994, pursuant to Section Systems, Moscow, RUSSIA; Bell & System Project Foundation (‘‘ISPF’’) 6(a) of the National Cooperative Howell, Lincolnwood, IL; Digital merged with WorldFip North America, Research and Production Act of 1993, Equipment Corporation, Rocky Hill, CT; Inc.; ISPF was the surviving entity, 15 U.S.C. 4301 et seq. (‘‘the Act’’), Dun & Bradstreet Software Service, Inc., changed its name to Fieldbus Portland Cement Association (‘‘PCA’’) Framingham, MA; EMC Corporation, Foundation (‘‘Fieldbus’’) and identified has filed written notification Hopkinton, MA; Federal Express the following new members: Allen- simultaneously with the Attorney Corporation, Memphis, TN; Finsiel— Bradley Company, Inc., Highland General and the Federal Trade Consulenza ed Applicazioni Heights, OH; Allen-Bradley Japan Co., Commission disclosing changes in its Informatiche, Napoli, ITALY; Hewlett- Ltd, Tokyo, Japan; Bailey Controls Co., membership. The notifications were Packard, Cupertino, CA; Industrial Wickliffe, OH; E.I. duPont De Nemours filed for the purpose of extending the Technology Research Institute, Taiwan, & Co., Inc., Wilmington, DE; Honeywell, Act’s provisions limiting the recovery of ROC; Infotech Automatisering, AH Inc., Phoenix, AZ; K.K. CODIX, Tokyo, antitrust plaintiffs to actual damages Nymegen, NETHERLANDS; Institute for Japan; Nagano Keiki Seisakusho, Ltd., under specified circumstances. Information Industry, Taipei, Taiwan, Tokyo, Japan; Niigata Masoneilan Co., Specifically, Herzog Automation Corp., ROC; Kendall Square Research, Ltd., Chiba, Japan; Proctor & Gamble Cleveland, Ohio has become an Waltham, MA; Northern Telecom MBA, Company, Cincinnati, OH; Square D Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA; OC Company, Knightdale, NC; Tokyo Keiso Associate Member of PCA; and Passamaquoddy Technology and Systems, Inc., FAirfax, VA; Ohio! Co., Ltd., Tokyo, Japan; Uticor Uniforum, Cleveland, OH; Open Cemtech LP have resigned as Associate Technology, Inc., Bettendorf, IA; and Networks Engineering, Inc., Ann Arbor, Members of PCA. Yamatake-Honeywell Co., Ltd. Tokyo, MI; PowerHouse Systems, Inc., Menlo Japan. The December 20, 1994, No other changes have been made in Park, CA; Scott & Scott Systems, Inc., notification discloses that DKK either the membership or planned Seattle, WA; SKY Computers, Corporation, Tokyo, Japan; Glaxo, Inc., activity of the group research project. Chemlsford, MA; Tidalwave Microtech, Research Triangle Park, NC; and Presys Membership in this group research Fremont, CA; TriGem Computers, Inc., Instrumentos E Sistemas Ltda, San project remains open, and PCA intends Amsam City, Kyunggi, KOREA; Paulo, Brazil, have become new to file additional written notification Warthman Associates, Palo Alto, CA; members. Lastly, the December 22, disclosing all changes in membership. Zuken-Redac LTD, Tewkesbury, 1994, notification discloses that Pacific On January 7, 1985, PCA filed its Gloucestershire, UNITED KINGDOM. Avionics Corp., Redmond, WA has No other changes have been made in original notification pursuant to Section become a new member. These either the membership or planned notifications were filed for the purpose 6(a) of the Act. The Department of activity of the group research project. of extending the Act’s provisions Justice published a notice in the Federal Membership in this group research limiting the recovery of antitrust Register pursuant to Section 6(b) of the project remains open, and PowerOpen plaintiffs to actual damages under Act on February 5, 1985, 50 FR 5015. intends to file written notifications specified circumstances. The last notification was filed with disclosing all changes in membership. No other changes have been made in the Department on August 9, 1994. A On April 21, 1993, PowerOpen filed either membership or planned activity notice was published in the Federal its original notification pursuant to of the group research project. Register pursuant to Section 6(b) of the Section 6(a) of the Act. The Department Membership in this group research Act on October 18, 1994, 59 FR 52556. of Justice published a notice in the project remains open, and Fieldbus Constance K. Robinson, Federal Register pursuant to Section intends to file additional written 6(b) of the Act on June 22, 1993 (58 Fed. notifications disclosing all changes in Director of Operations, Antitrust Division. Reg. 33954). membership. [FR Doc. 95–6284 Filed 3–14–95; 8:45 am] The last notification was filed with On May 7, 1993, Fieldbus filed its BILLING CODE 4410±01±M the Department on July 1, 1994. A original notification pursuant to Section notice was published in the Federal 6(a) of the Act. The Department of Register pursuant to Section 6(b) of the 14004 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices Act on November 14, 1994 (59 Fed. Reg. simultaneously with the Attorney opinion and recommended ruling, 56533). General and the Federal Trade findings of fact, conclusions of law and Constance K. Robinson, Commission disclosing changes in its decision, the administrative law judge Director of Operations Antitrust Division. membership. The notifications were recommended that Respondent’s [FR Doc. 95–6286 Filed 3–14–95; 8:45 am] filed for the purpose of extending the application for DEA registration be BILLING CODE 4410±01±M Act’s provisions limiting the recovery of denied. In a footnote of her antitrust plaintiffs to actual damages recommended decision, the under specified circumstances. administrative law judge referenced Notice Pursuant to the National Specifically, the following have become specific documents that were submitted Cooperative Research and Production members of the Corporation: Institut by Respondent after the administrative Act of 1993ÐPine Oil Joint Venture National de Recherche en Informatique hearing. The administrative law judge et en Automatique, Le Chesnay, recommended that the Deputy Notice is hereby given that, on FRANCE; and KL Group, Inc., Toronto, Administrator not consider these December 28, 1994, pursuant to Section CANADA. submissions, since most of the 6(a) of the National Cooperative No other changes have been made in documents pertained to matters Research and Production Act of 1993 15 either membership or planned activity previously litigated and conclusively U.S.C. 4301 et seq. (‘‘the Act’’), SCM of the group research project. decided in a previous criminal action, Glidco Organics has filed written Membership in this group research and therefore, consideration of them notifications simultaneously with the project remains open, and the was barred by the doctrine of res Attorney General and the Federal Trade Corporation intends to file additional judicata. No exceptions were filed by Commission disclosing changes in its written notifications disclosing all either party. membership. The notifications were changes in membership. On August 16, 1994, Respondent filed filed for the purpose of extending the On September 15, 1993, the a Petition for Reconsideration of the Act’s provisions limiting the recovery of Corporation filed its original administrative law judge’s decision antitrust plaintiffs to actual damages notification pursuant to Section 6(a) of recommending denial of his application under specified circumstances. the Act. The Department of Justice for DEA registration. On August 17, Specifically, the following members published a notice in the Federal 1994, the administrative law judge have withdrawn their membership with Register pursuant to Section 6(b) of the denied this petition as lacking in merit. SCM Glidco Orgnaics: Sistesis quimica Act on November 10, 1993 (58 FR On August 30, 1994, the S.A. de C.V. and Johnson Chemical Co., 59737). The last notification was filed administrative law judge transmitted the Inc. with the Department on June 14, 1994. record to the Deputy Administrator. The No other changes have been made in A notice was published in the Federal Deputy Administrator has carefully considered the entire record in this either the membership or planned Register pursuant to Section 6(b) of the matter and pursuant to 21 CFR 1316.67, activity of the joint venture. Act on November 7, 1994 (59 FR 55490). Membership in this joint venture hereby issues his final order in this Constance K. Robinson, remains open, and SCM Glidco Organics matter based upon findings of fact and intends to file additional written Director of Operations, Antitrust Division. conclusions of law as hereinafter set notification disclosing all changes in [FR Doc. 95–6283 Filed 3–14–95; 8:45 am] forth. The Deputy Administrator membership. BILLING CODE 4410±01±M concurs with Judge Bittner’s On January 5, 1987, American recommendation not to consider Cyanamid Company filed its original specific post hearing submissions of the notification pursuant to Section 6(a) of Drug Enforcement Administration Respondent. Accordingly, these the Act. The Department of Justice [Docket No. 93±52] submissions were not considered in published a notice in the Federal rendering this decision. Register pursuant to Section 6(b) of the Robert A. Leslie, M.D.; Denial of The administrative law judge found Act on February 5, 1987, 52 F. R. 37190. Application that Respondent graduated from The last notification was filed with the medical school in 1955, became Department on August 13, 1993. A On May 13, 1993, the Deputy licensed as a physician in 1958, and notice was published in the Federal Assistant Administrator (then-Director), practiced medicine in Los Angeles Register pursuant to Section 6(b) of the Office of Diversion Control, Drug during the period at issue in this case. Act on September 20, 1993, 58 F.R. Enforcement Administration (DEA), On April 1, 1986, a complaint was filed 51103. issued an Order to Show Cause to in the Municipal Court of Long Beach, Constance K. Robinson, Robert A. Leslie, M.D., of Los Angeles, California, charging Respondent with California, proposing to deny his Director of Operations, Antitrust Division. seventeen misdemeanor counts, sixteen application for registration as a of which related to the unlawful [FR Doc. 95–6282 Filed 3–14–95; 8:45 am] practitioner. The Order to Show Cause handling of controlled substances. BILLING CODE 4410±01±M alleged that the Respondent’s Following a jury trial, on October 9, registration would be inconsistent with 1986, Respondent was found guilty on Notice Pursuant to the National the public interest as that term is used eight counts of unlawfully prescribing, Cooperative Research and Production in 21 U.S.C. 823(f). administering, furnishing or dispensing Act of 1993ÐX Consortium, Inc. Respondent, acting pro se, requested controlled substances between July 1985 a hearing on the issues raised by the and January 1986. Respondent’s Notice is hereby given that, on Order to Show Cause, and the matter convictions were affirmed on appeal by December 8, 1994, pursuant to Section was placed on the docket of the Appellate Department of the 6(a) of the National Cooperative Administrative Law Judge Mary Ellen Superior Court, State of California, in a Research and Production Act of 1993, Bittner. Following prehearing Memorandum Judgement issued on May 15 U.S.C. 4301 et seq. (‘‘the Act’’), X procedures, a hearing was held in Los 18, 1988. Consortium, Inc. (the ‘‘Corporation’’) Angeles, California, on December 8 and Based on his criminal convictions, on has filed written notification 9, 1993. On July 27, 1994, in her August 17, 1988, the California Board of Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices 14005 Medical Quality Assurance (BMQA) judge found this argument without application for DEA registration be filed an accusation against Respondent merit based on the provisions of 21 denied. seeking to suspend his medical license. U.S.C. 877, regarding judicial review, The Deputy Administrator having Following an administrative hearing, on and the fact that there is no provision considered the entire record adopts the July 24, 1989, the state administrative in the Code of Federal Regulations for administrative law judge’s findings of law judge recommended that filing requests for reconsideration. fact, conclusions of law, and Respondent’s medical license be Pursuant to 21 U.S.C. 823(f), the recommended ruling in its entirety. revoked, but that the revocation be Deputy Administrator may deny any Accordingly, the Deputy Administrator stayed for five years, that Respondent be application for registration, if he of the Drug Enforcement placed on probation subject to certain determines that the continued Administration, pursuant to the conditions, and that he be suspended registration would be inconsistent with authority vested in him by 21 U.S.C. 823 from the practice of medicine for 90 the public interest. In determining the and 824 and 28 CFR 0.100(b) and 0.104, days. After the BMQA adopted the public interest, the following factors are hereby orders that the application for decision of the state administrative law considered: registration, executed by Robert A. judge, Respondent sued BMQA, but was (1) The recommendation of the Leslie, M.D., be, and it hereby is, unsuccessful both in the lower court appropriate State licensing board or denied. This order is effective March 15, and on appeal. The court subsequently professional disciplinary authority. 1995. fined Respondent $10,000, and found (2) The applicant’s experience in Dated: March 8, 1995. that his appeal was frivolous. dispensing controlled substances. On June 21, 1989, DEA issued an (3) The applicant’s conviction record Stephen H. Greene, Order to Show Cause, seeking to revoke under Federal or State laws relating to Deputy Administrator. Respondent’s prior DEA Certificate of the distribution, or dispensing of [FR Doc. 95–6297 Filed 3–14–95; 8:45 am] Registration, AL0033186. Respondent controlled substances. BILLING CODE 4410±09±M requested a hearing, but later submitted (4) Compliance with applicable State, a written statement of his position in Federal, or local laws relating to lieu of participating in a hearing. Based controlled substances. DEPARTMENT OF LABOR on Respondent’s statement and the (5) Such other conduct which may Government’s investigative file, threaten the public health and safety. Pension and Welfare Benefits effective August 17, 1990, the then- It is well established that these factors Administration Acting Administrator revoked are to be considered in the disjunctive, i.e., the Deputy Administrator may [Prohibited Transaction Exemption 95±24; Respondent’s DEA registration, based Exemption Application No. D±09787, et al.] upon the finding that his continued properly rely on any one or a registration would be inconsistent with combination of the factors and give each Grant of Individual Exemptions; the public interest. See Robert A. Leslie, factor the weight he deems appropriate. Boston Cement Masons Union Local M.D., 55 FR 29278 (1990). Respondent See Henry J. Schwarz, Jr., M.D., Docket No. 534 Deferred Income Plan, et al. subsequently filed a new application for No. 88–42, 54 FR 16422 (1989). In DEA registration on February 6, 1992, considering whether grounds exist to AGENCY: Pension and Welfare Benefits which is the subject of this proceeding. deny Respondent’s application for DEA Administration, Labor. Respondent testified at the registration, the administrative law ACTION: Grant of individual exemptions. administrative hearing to matters judge found all of the above factors surrounding his criminal conviction. relevant. SUMMARY: This document contains Respondent argued that his prescribing The administrative law judge found exemptions issued by the Department of to undercover operatives was justified that Respondent’s testimony, Labor (the Department) from certain of based upon their physical conditions documentary evidence and pleadings in the prohibited transaction restrictions of and complaints of pain, and that he was this proceeding contended that his the Employee Retirement Income entrapped; during the criminal trial, the criminal conviction was invalid. The Security Act of 1974 (the Act) and/or operatives perjured themselves administrative law judge concluded the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (the regarding events that took place during however, that the conviction is res Code). their visits with Respondent; his direct judicata, and that Respondent should Notices were published in the Federal appeal of his criminal convictions was not be allowed to relitigate the matter. Register of the pendency before the denied, and his subsequent filing of ten The administrative law judge found Department of proposals to grant such petitions for habeas corpus in state and that during the administrative hearing, exemptions. The notices set forth a federal courts were unsuccessful; and, although Respondent was free to offer summary of facts and representations he sued his attorney for malpractice new evidence that he would never again contained in each application for based upon the latter’s failure to provide engage in the type of conduct that exemption and referred interested adequate legal representation. resulted in his conviction, he failed to persons to the respective applications Respondent also contended that the do so. The administrative law judge also for a complete statement of the facts and 1990 final order of the then-Acting found that while Respondent offered representations. The applications have Administrator relied on false statements evidence and expended time arguing the been available for public inspection at supplied by BMQA that were not part of invalidity of his criminal convictions, the Department in Washington, DC. The the original court record. Respondent he offered no evidence of remorse for notices also invited interested persons testified that he filed a petition for his prior conduct, that he has taken to submit comments on the requested reconsideration of that final order, rehabilitative steps, or that he exemptions to the Department. In however, since the Federal Register recognizes the severity of his actions. addition the notices stated that any notice of the final order was not timely The administrative law judge concluded interested person might submit a sent to him, the period for filing a that Respondent is either unwilling or written request that a public hearing be motion for reconsideration elapsed unable to discharge the responsibilities held (where appropriate). The before he became aware of the inherent in a DEA registration, and applicants have represented that they revocation. The administrative law therefore, recommended that his have complied with the requirements of 14006 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices the notification to interested persons. those obtainable in an arm’s length are made available to all shareholders of No public comments and no requests for transaction with an unrelated party; (2) Class E stock; and a hearing, unless otherwise stated, were an independent, qualified fiduciary, (5) The acquisition, holding, and received by the Department. who has approved of the leasing exercise by the Plan of a put option The notices of proposed exemption arrangements, agrees to monitor all granted by GM which permits the Plan were issued and the exemptions are leases on behalf of the Deferred Income to sell the Class E stock or a successor being granted solely by the Department Plan as well as the terms and conditions security for which the Class E stock has because, effective December 31, 1978, of the exemption at all times; (3) the been exchanged to GM. section 102 of Reorganization Plan No. rental charged by the Deferred Income This exemption is conditioned upon 4 of 1978 (43 FR 47713, October 17, Plan under each lease is based upon the the satisfaction of the following 1978) transferred the authority of the fair market rental value of the premises requirements: Secretary of the Treasury to issue as determined by an independent, (a) GM contributes to the Plan at least exemptions of the type proposed to the qualified appraiser; (4) the Building is 177 million shares of Class E stock but Secretary of Labor. revalued annually by the independent, no more than 186 million shares plus $4 qualified appraiser; (5) if appropriate, billion in cash, with at least $2 billion Statutory Findings the independent, qualified fiduciary contributed in conjunction with or prior In accordance with section 408(a) of adjusts the rentals charged for the office to the contribution of the Class E stock, the Act and/or section 4975(c)(2) of the space based upon the annual appraisals and the remaining $2 billion Code and the procedures set forth in 29 of the Building; and (6) the trustees contributed no later than September 30, CFR Part 2570, Subpart B (55 FR 32836, determine that the leasing arrangements 1995; (b) If less than 177 million shares of 32847, August 10, 1990) and based upon are in the best interests of the Pension Class E stock are contributed, GM will the entire record, the Department makes Plan, the Welfare Plan and the contribute additional cash in an amount the following findings: Apprenticeship Plan. equal to the difference between 177 For a more complete statement of the (a) The exemptions are administratively million and the number of shares of facts and representations supporting the feasible; Class E stock contributed times the per- (b) They are in the interests of the plans Department’s decision to grant this share value of such stock at the time of and their participants and beneficiaries; and exemption, refer to the notice of contribution, or a weighted average (c) They are protective of the rights of the proposed exemption published on participants and beneficiaries of the plans. price if such stock is not contributed on January 18, 1995 at 60 FR 3659. a single date; Boston Cement Masons Union Local No. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: (c) United States Trust (UST), an 534 Deferred Income Plan (the Deferred Kathryn Parr of the Department, independent qualified fiduciary, or a Income Plan), Boston Cement Masons telephone (202) 219–8971. (This is not successor independent fiduciary Union Local No. 534 Pension Plan (the a toll-free number.) acceptable to the Pension Benefit Pension Plan), Boston Cement Masons General Motors Hourly-Rate Employes Guaranty Corporation (PBGC) represents Union Local No. 534 Health and Pension Plan (the Plan) Located in the Plan’s interests with respect to the Welfare Plan (the Welfare Plan) and Detroit, Michigan acquisition of Class E stock and also Boston Cement Masons Union Local No. will serve as trustee of the Plan with 534 Apprenticeship Plan (the [Prohibited Transaction Exemption No. 95– sole discretion respecting the Apprenticeship Plan; Collectively, the 25; Application No. D–9734] management and disposition of the Plans) Located in Boston, Exemption Class E stock after the acquisition. UST Massachusetts must determine, prior to entering into The restrictions of sections 406(a), [Prohibited Transaction Exemption 95–24; any of the transactions described herein, 406(b)(1) and (b)(2), and 407(a) of the that each such transaction, including Application Nos. D–9787, D–9788, L–9789 Act and the sanctions resulting from the and L–9790, respectively] the contribution of the Class E stock, is application of section 4975 of the Code, in the interest of the Plan; Exemption by reason of section 4975(c)(1)(A) (d) UST negotiates and approves the 1 The restrictions of sections 406(a), through (E) of the Code shall not apply terms of any of the transactions between 406(b)(1) and (b)(2) of the Act and the to: the Plan and GM or its affiliates or sanctions resulting from the application (1) The transfer of shares of Class E certain defined contribution plans of section 4975 of the Code, by reason common stock (the Class E stock) of sponsored by GM or its affiliates; of section 4975(c)(1)(A) through (E) of General Motors Corporation (GM) to the (e) UST manages the holding and the Code, shall not apply to the Plan through the in-kind contribution of disposition of the Class E stock and proposed leasing of office space in a such shares by GM, a party in interest takes whatever action it deems building (the Building) owned by the with respect to such Plan; necessary to protect the rights of the Deferred Income Plan to the Boston (2) The holding of the Class E stock Plan; Cement Masons Union Local No. 534, a by the Plan; (f) The terms of any of the party in interest with respect to the (3) The sale for cash of shares of Class transactions between the Plan and Deferred Income Plan. E stock by the Plan to GM or its affiliates parties in interest are no less favorable In addition, the restrictions of section or to certain defined contribution plans to such Plan than terms negotiated at 406(b)(2) of the Act shall not apply to sponsored by GM or its affiliates; arm’s length under similar the proposed leasing of office space in (4) The exchange of shares of Class E circumstances with unrelated third the Building by the Deferred Income stock for publicly-traded securities parties; (g) A credit balance reserve is Plan to the Pension Plan, the Welfare between the Plan and GM or its affiliates maintained in the Plan consisting of the Plan and the Apprenticeship Plan. under the same terms and conditions as cash credit balance or cash generated This exemption is conditioned upon 1 from stock that has been sold in an the following requirements: (1) The For purposes of this exemption, references to specific provisions of Title I of the Act, unless amount equal to at least 25 percent terms of all such leasing arrangements otherwise specified, refer also to the corresponding are at least as favorable to the Plans as provisions of the Code. Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices 14007 (25%) of the contributed value 2 of the requested that the applicant address the of a pension benefit check, or the terms Class E stock which remains unsold in concerns raised by the commentators in of any health care plan. the Plan, for so long as such stock or any writing. A description of the comments With respect to (b), GM states that securities received in exchange exceeds and the applicant’s responses are UST, the independent fiduciary, has the percentage limitations described in summarized below. represented that the Plan’s receipt of the sections 407(a) and 407(f) of the Act (the Several of the written comments Class E stock will not violate the general ERISA Limits); received by the Department supported diversification rule of the Act, which (h) An independent qualified adoption of the exemption. In this requires that a plan’s assets be appraiser determines the fair market regard, after review of GM’s application sufficiently diversified in order to value of the Class E stock contributed to for exemption and the terms of the minimize the risk of large losses. the Plan as of the date of such Agreement between GM and PBGC, the With respect to (c), GM responded contribution, and determines the fair International Union, United that while in the abstract the market value of the Class E stock at Automobile, Aerospace and Agricultural contribution of cash may be superior to various other times as required under Implement Workers of America (the that of stock, the issue posed by the the agreement between GM and the UAW), the certified collective exemption application was not whether PBGC (the Agreement); bargaining representative for the Plan could choose to acquire Class (i) With respect to any sale or approximately 215,000 employees of E Stock where an equivalent value of exchange of Class E stock by the Plan to GM who are participants in the Plan and cash is available. In this regard, as the GM or its affiliates or to any defined approximately 255,000 retired former Plan is significantly underfunded, GM contribution plans sponsored by GM or employees of GM who are participants believes it is offering a way to its affiliates, no commission will be in the Plan, expressed support for the substantially improve the Plan’s funding charged to or paid by the Plan; application and stated its belief that the with a combined contribution of Class E (j) Any sale or exchange of Class E transactions which are the subject of stock and cash. stock between the Plan and GM or its this exemption are in the best interest of With respect to (d), GM maintains that affiliates will be for no less than the Plan’s participants and beneficiaries. the Agreement, deferring credit for the Some commentators neither ‘‘adequate consideration’’ within the contribution of Class E stock and the $4 supported nor opposed the exemption meaning set forth in section 3(18) of the billion in cash, provides considerable but either expressed a lack of Act, and any sale of Class E stock by the security because in all likelihood the understanding of the exemption or Plan to a defined contribution plan Plan will receive further cash raised other concerns that are beyond sponsored by GM or its affiliates will be contributions from GM in excess of at the prevailing price for such stock on the scope of this exemption proceeding. Other commentators opposed the minimum funding rules of the Act in the New York Stock Exchange (NYSE); the years between 1995 and 2003. In and exemption and raised questions and concerns regarding the transactions addition, GM states that the Agreement (k) The Plan incurs no fees, costs, or contains other protective features that other charges or expenses as a result of described therein. The concerns expressed by these commentators adequately address the potential for its participation in transaction (1), above future losses in value, if any, in the and, with regard to other transactions generally related to: (a) The impact on pension or health benefits; (b) the Class E stock. Finally, because the described herein, will not incur fees and dividends on Class E stock are based on other costs payable by the issuer under holding by the Plan of more than 5% of its assets in any company; (c) the the earnings of Electronic Data Systems the Registration Rights Agreement Corporation (EDS), GM believes the (RRA). preference for a cash contribution over that of stock; (d) the potential loss of contribution provides more EFFECTIVE DATE: This exemption will be value of the Class E stock; (e) the diversification than a security whose effective on March 13, 1995. restrictions on the Plan’s ability to sell dividends are based on the performance Written Comments the Class E stock under the terms of the of GM. RRA; (f) the fact that the Class E stock With respect to (e), GM states that In the Notice of Proposed Exemption is not a qualifying employer security; (g) UST, the independent fiduciary, is (the Notice), the Department invited all the control by the Plan of more than required by law to act solely in the interested persons to submit written 10% of the voting shares of a company; interest of the Plan and its participants comments and requests for a hearing on (h) the presence of a financial flexibility and beneficiaries. In this regard, UST is the exemption. All comments and exception in the Agreement given GM’s satisfied that, given the size of the block requests for hearing were due by recent financial history; (i) the effect of and the likely means of disposition, that December 29, 1994. an EDS sale on GM’s future the RRA affords ample opportunity for The Department received 157 letters contributions to the Plan; (j) the tax UST to sell or otherwise dispose of the from interested persons commenting on advantages to GM of the contribution of Plan’s Class E stock while maximizing the exemption. In addition, a number of Class E stock; and (k) the lack of a the value of such stock to the Plan. interested persons telephoned the mandatory requirement in the With respect to (f), GM states that Department. These individuals were exemption to convert the Class E stock although the Class E stock is not a assisted with their questions by into cash. qualifying employer security because members of the staff of the Office of The following summarizes the the Plan will acquire and hold in excess Exemption Determinations of the response to these concerns submitted to of the limits imposed by the Act, there Department. With respect to all the the Department by GM. With respect to are sufficient safeguards to protect the written comments submitted by (a) above, GM states that the exemption interest of the Plan and the participants interested persons, the Department does not change or affect in any way the and beneficiaries. In addition, GM forwarded copies to the applicant and pension benefits payable under the Plan points out the Class E stock is widely or health benefits for active or retired traded on the NYSE, and an 2 Contributed value means the value of the Class E stock when contributed to the Plan, as determined employees. As a result, the exemption independent fiduciary, UST, has by Duff & Phelps Capital Markets Co. (formerly Duff will not affect a participant’s eligibility negotiated a RRA that will allow it, as & Phelps Financial Consulting Co.). to receive a pension benefit, the amount trustee for the Class E stock, to dispose 14008 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices of the stock efficiently while certain modifications and clarifications and the interests of the Plan and its maximizing its value to the Plan. to the exemption as proposed and to the participants and beneficiaries are better With respect to (g), GM states that the Summary of Facts and Representations served by application of such Class E stock is widely traded on the (SFR). GM’s comments fall into three procedures than by enforcement NYSE and generates dividends based on categories: (1) clarification regarding the through the exemption. These reporting the earnings of EDS rather than on the relationship of the exemption to the and enforcement provisions are performance of GM. Further, an Agreement between the PBGC and GM carefully crafted to facilitate the timely independent fiduciary, UST, has regarding the contribution of cash and and effective resolution of disputes, negotiated a RRA that will allow UST, Class E stock; (2) issues relating to the while permitting the Plan to continue as trustee for the Class E stock, to conditions of the exemption; and (3) the orderly disposition of Class E stock. dispose of the stock efficiently while certain technical corrections to the SFR. The Agreement provides for annual maximizing its value to the Plan, and With respect to the first category of reporting by GM to the PBGC, and UST is satisfied that it can do so given the comment, GM informed the contains a dispute resolution the size of the block of Class E stock. Department that, since May 1994, GM mechanism through which the PBGC With respect to (h), GM states that the and the PBGC have been negotiating the can enforce the terms and conditions of commentator erroneously alleges that terms of a definitive Agreement. In its such Agreement. GM represents that it GM’s North American Operations (the application for exemption, GM will comply in all material respects with NAO) has met the ‘‘bad year’’ definition described the tentative terms of this the reporting provisions in the under the Agreement in each of the past Agreement, as reflected in an agreement Agreement (including as they may be five (5) years and asserts that this in principle (the AIP) executed on May changed from time to time by mutual pattern will continue in the future, 9, 1994, between the PBGC and GM. The agreement of GM and the PBGC). In allowing GM to access more of the Department summarized certain terms addition, the Agreement provides, credit balance than ‘‘what would appear of the AIP in the SFR. The proposed among other things, for access to the to the common layperson.’’ In fact, the exemption provided that any final courts, and under certain circumstances, NAO did not meet the ‘‘bad year’’ exemption would be conditioned upon for the posting of collateral by GM if a definition in 1994. Moreover, GM notes adherence to the material facts and disputed amount exceeds a certain that, although the proposed exemption representations described in the SFR. threshold. Accordingly, GM suggests is complex, the Department’s notice and GM notes that the terms of the AIP have that the exemption, if granted, contain comment process is fair and now been superseded by the executed the following language, ‘‘Several aspects comprehensive and the financial Agreement. Thus, GM believes that of the Agreement are of special flexibility provisions of the Agreement there is a substantial risk that any importance to the Department and were in principle were disclosed in the change in or non-adherence to a included as requirements (a), (b), and (g) Notice on the same basis and in the material provision will vitiate the of the proposed exemption * * * . same fashion as all other parts of the exemption and, thereby, preclude the Accordingly, if GM violates a term or exemption transaction. Plan from continuing to hold condition of the Agreement, other than With respect to (i), GM states that the contributed Class E stock above the commentator erroneously concludes the specific requirements noted above limits set forth in sections 407(a) and (emphasis added), the violation will be that if GM sells EDS, GM’s obligation to 407(f)(1) of the Act. This situation in contribute to the Plan will be nullified. addressed by PBGC under the turn would place the independent Agreement and not by withdrawal or In this regard, GM represents that the fiduciary, UST, in the position of other invalidation of the exemption Agreement provides that the credit potentially having to engage in a forced itself.’’ balance rules generally apply to stock liquidation of a sufficient quantity of for which the Plan’s Class E stock has Class E stock to bring the Plan within In this regard, the Department been exchanged. Further, GM asserts the limits of such sections of the Act. As requested the views of the PBGC that if the credit balance is unavailable, a result, GM requests clarification as to concerning whether a breach of the GM will still make at least the minimum whether any change in or non- Agreement by GM in the future should contributions required by the Act. adherence to either the terms of the AIP, void the exemption. The PBGC With respect to (j), GM states that the as described in the SFR, or the confirmed that the Agreement contains contribution of Class E stock to the Plan Agreement would render the exemption adequate enforcement mechanisms in does not defer or eliminate any income unavailable. the event of a breach. GM is required taxes that otherwise would be payable GM states that the Agreement is a under the Agreement to provide on GM’s disposition of Class E stock. contract between GM and the PBGC. It information to the PBGC that will With respect to (k), GM states that the is lengthy and complicated, reflecting enable the PBGC to monitor and confirm commentator erroneously assumes that the nature, size, and complexity of its that the restrictions have been properly GM will have control of the Plan’s subject. Assets likely to be valued in applied. Also, the PBGC will monitor portfolio after the Class E stock is excess of $10 billion will be at issue, and enforce those terms of the contributed. In this regard, GM and the terms of the Agreement will Agreement adopted by the Department represents that it will have no control require numerous complex calculations as conditions of the exemption, as over the management of such stock. to be performed. The Agreement will summarized in sections (a), (b), and (g) UST, the independent trustee, will have continue in force until at least October therein. As a result, the PBGC stated complete discretion over the 1, 2003, and, as with any such complex that it does not believe that voiding the management and disposition of the document, it is possible that good faith exemption is a necessary or appropriate Class E stock, and, in its sole discretion, differences may arise between GM and enforcement mechanism to ensure will determine how and when the Class the PBGC over the meaning and compliance with the Agreement, and E stock will be liquidated. application of its terms. that it would not recommend that the In addition to the comments GM notes in its comment that it exemption be voided for violation of a described above, the Department also believes that the Plan is fully protected term of the Agreement after GM has received comments from the applicant, by the reporting and enforcement contributed the stock and cash required GM. The comments from GM requested provisions set forth in the Agreement, by the Agreement and by sections (a) Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices 14009 and (b) of the proposed exemption. In proposed exemption, are important and intended that all fees associated with addition, the PBGC is of the opinion necessary to the continued availability the management and disposition of that voiding the exemption after the of the exemption. Accordingly, it is the Class E stock, other than certain stock is contributed could harm the Plan view of the Department that, if GM underwriting and other fees and costs if the independent fiduciary were forced violates a term or condition of the described in section 9 of the RRA, will to sell stock held by the Plan to bring Agreement, without violating one of the be borne by the Plan. GM suggests the Plan’s employer securities within express conditions of the exemption, the striking the underlined phrase above the ERISA Limits. violation will be addressed by the PBGC and substituting the phrase, UAW in its comment letter also in accordance with the enforcement ‘‘transaction (1), above and, with regard concurred with the views expressed by terms of such Agreement and will not to other transactions addressed herein, GM on the question of whether the result in the unavailability of the will not incur fees and other costs exemption should be voided in the exemption. The Department is of the payable by the issuer under the event of an alleged breach of the further view that the exemption will be Registration Rights Agreement.’’ The Agreement. UAW believes that the available despite the fact that the terms Department concurs with this comment enforcement mechanisms described in of the final Agreement differed in some and has revised the language of the Agreement are adequate and respects from the terms of the AIP condition (k). appropriate and that termination of the which was summarized in the SFR. With respect to the third category of exemption in the event of a breach of With respect to the second category of the comment, GM believes that certain that Agreement would only be harmful the comment, GM requests revisions to the SFR would more to participants and beneficiaries, in that modifications to the language of certain accurately describe the transactions. As termination of the exemption would by conditions of the exemption, as set forth mentioned above, the AIP was necessity force a massive and in the Notice. In this regard, condition summarized in the SFR. Subsequently, precipitous sale of the Class E stock. In (c) on page 56541 and repeated in item the AIP was superseded by the terms of the opinion of the UAW, selling the 18(c) on page 56549 of the Notice as the Agreement. Consequently, GM Class E stock under such conditions is published in the Federal Register, wishes to point out the following four not likely to result in the realization of states: ‘‘United States Trust (UST), an (4) provisions of the AIP which were optimum proceeds and would therefore independent qualified fiduciary, or a summarized in the SFR but which have diminish the assets in the Plan. successor independent fiduciary now been modified by the Agreement. However, the UAW noted that the acceptable to the Pension Benefit The second sentence of item 6 of the language suggested by GM to address Guaranty Corporation (PBGC) represents SFR on page 56543, states that GM’s this issue, as quoted above, would the Plan’s interests for all purposes with stock contribution will consist of, create the impression that these respect to the Class E stock and ‘‘* * * all of the remaining, 222 million requirements of the exemption are determines (emphasis added), prior to unissued shares of Class E stock less precisely co-extensive with the entering into any of the transactions approximately 45 million shares analogous sections of the Agreement. described herein, that each such reserved for conversion of GM’s Series The UAW further noted that the transaction, including the contribution C Preference Stock, or approximately language in (a), (b), and (g), as set forth of the Class E stock, is in the interest of 177 million shares.’’ In accordance with in the Notice, summarized but did not the Plan.’’ GM believes this to be an the terms of the Agreement, GM recite word for word such sections from overly broad description of the suggests that the phrase, ‘‘and the the Agreement. Accordingly, the UAW independent fiduciary’s responsibilities. number of shares of GM Class E stock suggested that the word, ‘‘included’’ in GM suggests striking the underlined that, as of the last contribution of such the first sentence of GM’s language phrase above and substituting in lieu stock, are reserved or committed (as quoted above be replaced with the thereof, ‘‘with respect to the acquisition Treasury shares or otherwise) for word, ‘‘summarized,’’ and the of Class E stock and also will serve as employee benefit plans, stock bonus underlined portion of the second trustee of the Plan with sole discretion plans, or employee stock programs,’’ sentence of GM’s language quoted above respecting the management and should have been inserted after the be changed to read, ‘‘without violating disposition of the Class E stock after the words, ‘‘Preference Stock,’’ in the above- one of the express conditions of the acquisition. UST must determine quoted language. exemption.’’ ** *.’’ The Department concurs with Item 12 of the SFR, on page 56545 The Department concurs with GM, the this comment and has modified the final (center column, third full paragraph), PBGC, and the UAW that the rights exemption accordingly. refers to GM’s ‘‘* * * access annually to embodied in the reporting and dispute Condition (k) on page 56541 and an amount of up to $1.5 billion of the resolution provisions of the Agreement repeated in item 18(k) on page 56549 of stock credit balance generated by the provide protection to the Plan, and that the Notice, as published in the Federal stock which has been sold.’’ GM enforcement by the PBGC through the Register, states: ‘‘The Plan incurs no suggests that in accordance with the procedures negotiated in the Agreement fees, costs, or other charges or expenses Agreement the phrase, ‘‘an average of will serve the interest of the Plan and its as a result of its participation in any of approximately,’’ should have been participants and beneficiaries. Further, the transactions (emphasis added).’’ GM inserted in the above-quoted language the Department believes that any ‘‘fire is concerned that this condition would between the words, ‘‘to’’ and ‘‘$1.5,’’ sale’’ of Class E stock which may result preclude the payment by the Plan to because $1.5 assumes GM’s access to the from the unavailability of the exemption UST or any other independent fiduciary stock credit balance at approximately through a change in or non-adherence to of fees for asset management services as the mid-point of a plan year and reflects the terms of the AIP described in the independent fiduciary. In this regard, interest over the first portion of the plan SFR or the Agreement would not be in the applicant notes that the application year at the Plan’s funding standard the interest of the Plan. However, the indicated that GM would bear the costs account rate. Department has determined that of UST’s fees in connection with the Item 12 of the SFR states on page compliance with certain provisions of Plan’s acquisition of the Class E stock 56545 (center column, sixth sentence of the Agreement, as summarized in but that fees for UST’s trustee services the second full paragraph) that, the paragraphs (a), (b), and (g) of the will be payable by the Plan. It is restriction relating to the 25% credit 14010 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices balance reserve ‘‘* * * will expire on for its main U.S. plans to reflect recent the earnings and financial performance October 1, 2003, if the Class E stock has experience and, effective 1993, lowered of EDS, UST has reviewed the business been exchanged for non-employer the asset earnings rate assumption for of EDS, as well as that of GM,’’ the securities.’’ GM notes that the those plans, to reflect GM’s reevaluation words, ‘‘under the current policy of the Agreement provides that, the restriction of the expected long-term rate of return GM board,’’ should have been inserted will expire when the contributed Class on Plan assets.’’ The Department before the word, ‘‘dividends.’’ The E stock or any shares received in concurs with this comment. Department concurs. exchange therefor no longer exceed the In item 5 of the SFR on page 56543 In footnote 15 on page 56544 (left ERISA Limits. If the contributed Class E (center column) in the first full column), the fourth sentence stated, shares are exchanged for non-employer paragraph, the fourth sentence stated ‘‘[a]t the discretion of the Board, as securities, the restriction will expire on that GM ‘‘* * * will continue to appropriate, the number in the the later of October 1, 2003 or the date contribute additional amounts above denominator from time to time on which the Class E stock has been those required in 1994 and future decreases as shares of Class E stock are exchanged for non-employer securities. years.’’ Although GM anticipates purchased and increases as shares are Item 12 of the SFR states on page making such contributions, GM suggests needed in order to meet certain 56546 (center column, top carryover that substituting in the phrase quoted requirements of GM’s employee benefit paragraph, last sentence) that, ‘‘GM’s above, the words, ‘‘intends to,’’ in lieu plans.’’ GM suggests that while the independent auditor will provide a of the word, ‘‘will,’’ and the words, above-quoted statement is correct, in the statement to the PBGC once GM utilizes ‘‘1994–1996,’’ in lieu of the phrase, interest of accuracy and completeness, the financial flexibility provisions ‘‘1994 and future years,’’ would have the following quoted sentence should described above.’’ GM suggests that in been more accurate. The Department have been added to the footnote: ‘‘[t]he accordance with the Agreement, striking concurs with this comment. denominator is subject to adjustment the quoted sentence and substituting in In the third sentence of item 8 of the from time to time (but never to a lieu thereof, ‘‘[f]or any plan year SFR on page 56543 (right column) GM number greater than one) by GM’s through the 2002 plan year for which suggests the underlined word, ‘‘or,’’ in Board, the discretion of which is limited GM utilizes the financial flexibility the phrase, ‘‘assets remaining after in accordance with criteria specified in provisions of the Agreement, GM will payments to creditors or (emphasis GM’s Certificate of Incorporation include in its submission to the PBGC added) to preferred or preference intended to preserve fairness as between a statement from its independent stockholders,’’ should have been the the interests of both the holders of Class auditor confirming the accuracy of the word, ‘‘and.’’ The Department concurs. E stock and the holders of $12⁄3 per schedule showing GM’s cash. In In the first sentence of the first value common stock.’’ Accordingly, the addition, upon request by the PBGC, paragraph of item 10 of the SFR on page Department does not object to the GM also will furnish for such plan years 56544 (left column), GM suggests that inclusion of GM’s additional clarifying a report from its independent auditor the phrase, ‘‘based upon,’’ should have language. describing agreed upon procedures it been substituted for ‘‘linked to’’ in the The following GM comments relate to has performed in order to assist the sentence, ‘‘[d]ividends on Class E stock the RRA and the Transfer Rights PBGC in evaluating the restructuring are linked to the earnings performance Agreement (TRA), as described in the charges included in GM’s financial of EDS.’’ The Department concurs. SFR. statements, if and to the extent those In item 12 of the SFR on page 56545 GM has commented upon the need of charges were used to determine GM’s (center column, first sentence, first full UST to be able to amend the RRA due adjusted net income.’’ The Department paragraph), GM suggests that the phrase, to circumstances that may arise in the concurs and notes that the above four ‘‘* * * GM has agreed to defer for two future. In GM’s view, the exemption, if (4) clarifications to the SFR are (2) years the use of the credit balance granted, should permit UST to execute consistent with the terms of the ** *,’’ should have read, ‘‘GM will amendments to the RRA that UST Agreement. defer until 1997 use of the credit believes are in the interest of the Plan Also, as part of the third category of balance arising from the contribution and its participants and beneficiaries, the comments, GM has suggested the (except for interest on the cash portion without forcing GM or the Plan to following modifications to the language thereof and as otherwise noted below). request another exemption. The of the SFR. ** *’’ GM states that because the cash Department concurs. In item 5 of the SFR on page 56543 portion of the contribution need not be Footnote 20 on page 56546, states that (center column), the first and second completed until September 30, 1995, the the term, ‘‘transfer’’ includes an ‘‘offer.’’ sentences in the first full paragraph deferral period could be as short as one GM suggests that, to more closely reflect stated: ‘‘[g]enerally, in order to correct (1) year. The Department concurs. the RRA and TRA, the word, ‘‘offer,’’ the unfunded liability of its main U.S. In item 12 of the SFR, in the last should have been omitted from the plans, GM has revised the mortality clause of the first full sentence in the definition of the term, ‘‘transfer.’’ The assumptions in such plans to more center column of page 56545, GM Department concurs. closely reflect recent actual experience. suggests that the underlined portion of In the second full paragraph in the Further, effective for 1993, GM has the phrase, ‘‘* * * to phase in full right column of page 56546, GM lowered the asset earnings rate access by GM to the credit balance in suggests that, to more closely reflect the assumption for its main U.S. plans.’’ GM the Plan’s funding standard account,’’ RRA, it would have been more complete points out that the mortality and asset (emphasis added) should have read, to insert the words ‘‘in the aggregate,’’ earnings rate assumptions were not ‘‘such credit balance.’’ The Department in the first sentence of the paragraph adopted in order to correct the concurs. such that the first sentence would have unfunded liability of GM’s main US In item 16 of the SFR in the first read as follows: ‘‘It is represented that plans but rather to accurately reflect sentence of the first full paragraph in there will be no limit, except for market recent experience. Accordingly, GM the right column of page 56548, GM considerations on the amount of Class E believes that the two sentences quoted suggests, and UST agrees, that in the stock that can be sold in the aggregate above should have read, ‘‘[d]uring 1992, phrase, ‘‘[b]ecause the marketability and (emphasis added) pursuant to a GM revised the mortality assumptions dividends of Class E stock are based on ‘demand’ transfer by the Plan.’’ Further, Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices 14011 the word, ‘‘[s]imilarly,’’ should have acquires 10 percent (10%) or more of Plan tendering, in general, if the tender been substituted in lieu of the phrase, the outstanding Class E stock (or results in a bidder in the tender offer ‘‘[i]n addition,’’ at the beginning of the securities convertible or exchangeable owning more than 50 percent (50%) of third sentence of the paragraph, such therefor) in a transaction or series of the total combined voting power of all that the third sentence should have read related transactions intended to achieve outstanding securities of GM or other as follows, ‘‘[s]imilarly (emphasis a strategic objective.’’ The Department issuer, the Plan will have the option to added), in a negotiated transaction, the concurs. put to GM or other issuer up to the same Plan may not transfer more than 2 In the second full paragraph in the left number of shares that would have been percent (2%) of the outstanding Class E column on page 56547, GM suggests purchased if tendered in the tender offer stock to any person or related group. that, to more closely reflect the RRA, the for a purchase price in cash equal to the ** *’’ The Department concurs. second sentence should have read, ‘‘[i]n price per share offered in the tender.’’ In the carryover paragraph at the top a ’piggyback’ registration, if GM, in its The Department concurs. of the right column on page 56546, GM reasonable judgment, expects that at In item 14 of the SFR, GM suggests suggests that, to more closely reflect the least 25 percent (25%) of the total that, to more closely reflect the TRA, the RRA, the last sentence should have number of shares of Class E stock to be first sentence in the second full read, ‘‘[u]nder the RRA, as long as the included in the offering are shares paragraph in the right column of page Plan owns 2 percent (2%) or more of the owned by the Plan, the Plan may select 56547 should have read, ‘‘[t]he Transfer outstanding Class E stock, the Plan may a co-manager reasonably acceptable to Agreement is intended to preserve GM’s transfer such stock only under certain GM.’’ The Department concurs. ability to consummate at a later date a terms and conditions summarized in the In its comment, GM states that the tax-free reorganization, including a paragraphs below.’’ The Department Plan and a Strategic Partner will split-off in which the Class E stock is concurs. participate on an equal, not on a pro converted into or exchanged for shares In the second full paragraph in the rata basis in piggyback registrations. of capital stock of EDS in a transaction right column on page 56546, GM Accordingly, GM suggests that, to more that results in GM no longer controlling suggests that, to more closely reflect the closely reflect the RRA, the phrase, ‘‘an EDS (’Split-Off’). In this regard, unless RRA, in the second sentence the equal basis,’’ should have been and until a Split-Off is consummated, adjective, ‘‘reasonable,’’ should have substituted for the phrase, ‘‘a pro rata the Plan will not be permitted to been inserted before the phrase, ‘‘best basis,’’ in the last sentence of the transfer Class E stock if such transfer efforts,’’ in the sentence, ‘‘However, in carryover paragraph in the center will result in more than 5 percent (5%) any public offering the lead column on the top of page 56547. The of the total value of Class E stock then underwriters must agree to use their Department concurs. outstanding being owned by any foreign best efforts to assure that no more than In the first full paragraph of the center person, as defined in the Code.’’ The 2 percent (2%) of the outstanding Class column on page 56547, GM suggests Department concurs. E stock is transferred to any person or that, to more closely reflect the RRA, in In the second full paragraph in the related group.’’ The Department the first sentence the phrase, ‘‘below 7.5 right column of page 56547, the third concurs. percent (7.5%) should have read ‘‘7.5 sentence stated, ‘‘[u]nder certain In the last paragraph in the right percent (7.5%) or less.’’ Further, the circumstances after the Split-Off, the column on page 56546, GM suggests fourth and fifth sentences in the same Plan may not transfer any Class E stock that, to more closely reflect the RRA, the paragraph should have read, ‘‘In if, as a result, the Plan would own less underlined phrases below should have general, if a stockholders rights plan is than 50 percent (50%) of the Class E been inserted so that the third sentence in effect when the third-party tender stock that it owned immediately after it should have read as follows, ‘‘[i]f, at any offer commences but, in connection received notice from GM of the Split- time that the Plan owns at least 25 with such offer, the stockholders rights Off.’’ GM suggests that, to more closely million shares of Class E stock plan is revoked or invalidated (or the reflect the TRA, the words, ‘‘after the (emphasis added), as a result of such rights issued thereunder are revoked or Split-Off’’ should not have been postponements or such market redeemed) either by GM’s Board of included in that sentence and the holdbacks, the Plan is not able to effect Directors or by a final and non- words, ‘‘a proposed’’ should have been a ‘demand’ transfer for a period of appealable court order, the Plan may inserted in lieu of the word, ‘‘the,’’ thirteen (13) months, and during such tender its shares of Class E stock into before the word, ‘‘Split-Off’’ the last period the Plan has not otherwise such offer. If there is no stockholders time it appears. transferred 25 million or more shares of rights plan in effect (other than as GM suggests that, to more closely Class E stock or had the opportunity to described above), generally the Plan reflect the TRA, the following quoted include at least 25 million shares of may tender its shares of Class E stock sentence should have been included as Class E stock in a piggyback registration into a tender offer so long as either the the next to the last sentence in the (emphasis added), GM must terminate GM Board or at least one-half of the second full paragraph in the right the postponement within sixty (60) days independent directors on the Board column of page 56547 of the Notice, of the Plan’s notification to GM of such have not recommended to stockholders ‘‘[f]rom the date of the initial fact and take all reasonable actions that such tender offer be rejected or contribution until the first anniversary necessary to effect such transfer.’’ The there are fewer than the two of the Split-Off, if any, the Plan may not Department concurs. independent directors on the Board.’’ transfer Class E stock to any person or In the first full paragraph in the left The Department concurs. group, if, as a result, such person or column on page 56547, in the definition In the second full paragraph in the group would own 5 percent (5%) or of Strategic Partner, GM suggests that to center column on page 56547, GM more of the Class E stock then more closely reflect the RRA, the second suggests that, to more closely reflect the outstanding.’’ In addition, GM in its sentence of the paragraph should have RRA, the first sentence should have comment provides further clarification read, ‘‘[a] Strategic Partner is an investor read, ‘‘[i]n the event the Plan is regarding the relationship of the above- or group of investors acting in concert prohibited as described above from quoted sentence to the last sentence of and designated as such by the Board of tendering into a third-party offer and the second full paragraph in the right GM (or any successor issuer) that GM does not otherwise consent to the column of page 56547 of the Notice. 14012 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices That sentence reads, ‘‘[f]rom the date of open market by several independent For a more complete statement of the the initial contribution until the second investment managers in the course of facts and representations supporting the anniversary of the Split-Off, unless EDS implementing their respective portfolio Department’s decision to grant this announces a merger with one or more management strategies. These shares are exemption refer to the Notice published corporations, the Plan may not transfer registered and tradable without on Monday, November 14, 1994, 59 FR Class E stock to any person or related restriction. Because these shares are 56541. group, if, as a result, such person or registered, not subject to any trading group would own 5 percent (5%) or restrictions, and under management of FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: more of the Class E stock then independent managers, GM believes Angelena C. Le Blanc of the Department, outstanding.’’ GM states that the two that it would be inappropriate to telephone (202) 219–8883 (This is not a sentences quoted above, when read transfer management of these shares to toll-free number.) together, mean that during the period UST pursuant to the exemption. Rather, General Information that begins on the initial contribution GM believes that these shares should date and ends on the first anniversary of remain under the control of their The attention of interested persons is the Split-Off date, the Plan may not respective managers to be held and directed to the following: transfer Class E stock to a person who disposed of in their discretion, as they (1) The fact that a transaction is the is (or, as a result of the transfer would pursue their respective portfolio subject of an exemption under section be) a ‘‘5 percent person.’’ However, management strategies. As a result, during the period that begins on the day these shares will not be subject to the 408(a) of the Act and/or section after the first anniversary of the Split- RRA and the TRA and will continue 4975(c)(2) of the Code does not relieve Off date and ends on the second under the control of their respective a fiduciary or other party in interest or anniversary of the Split-Off date (or managers, to be held or disposed of in disqualified person from certain other later, in the case of a merger event their discretion, rather than UST’s. provisions to which the exemptions occurring before the second anniversary A number of individual commentators does not apply and the general fiduciary of the Split-Off date), the Plan may requested a hearing with respect to the responsibility provisions of section 404 transfer Class E stock to a person who exemption. Most of these commentators of the Act, which among other things would, as a result of the transfer, appear to have requested a hearing require a fiduciary to discharge his constitute a ‘‘5 percent person,’’ if that because of their belief that the duties respecting the plan solely in the person agrees to be bound by the TRA. transaction would reduce their interest of the participants and The Department concurs. retirement benefits. In addition, several beneficiaries of the plan and in a In addition, to the comments from GM commentators requested a hearing but prudent fashion in accordance with described above, GM informed the did not state a reason for such request. section 404(a)(1)(B) of the Act; nor does Department of an event which In response to these requests for it affect the requirement of section transpired after the Notice was hearing, GM states that, given the published in the Federal Register. In 401(a) of the Code that the plan must number of participants and beneficiaries this regard, in item 12 on page 56545 of operate for the exclusive benefit of the receiving the Notice of Proposed the SFR, GM indicated that it employees of the employer maintaining Exemption, the number of requests for anticipated contributing $750 million to the plan and their beneficiaries; a hearing is de minimis. Moreover, none the Plan before the end of 1994 which, (2) These exemptions are of the requests for a hearing presented at its option, along with previous cash supplemental to and not in derogation contributions, could be considered part a compelling reason why such hearing should be held. of, any other provisions of the Act and/ of the $4 billion dollar contribution or the Code, including statutory or which is the subject of this exemption. The Department has considered the concerns expressed by the individuals administrative exemptions and In this regard, GM, in a letter dated transactional rules. Furthermore, the December 22, 1994, advised the who had requested a hearing and the applicant’s written response addressing fact that a transaction is subject to an Department that this $750 million administrative or statutory exemption is contribution in cash was made on such concerns. After consideration of not dispositive of whether the December 12, 1994. the materials provided, the Department GM also clarified certain does not believe that any issues have transaction is in fact a prohibited representations regarding the been raised which would require the transaction; and approximately 17 million shares of convening of a hearing. Further, after (3) The availability of these Class E stock held by the Plan prior to giving full consideration to the record, exemptions is subject to the express the contribution. On page 56546 of the including the comments by condition that the material facts and Notice, in the third full paragraph of the commentators and the responses of the representations contained in each center column, it is stated that the RRA applicant, the Department has application accurately describes all and the TRA ‘‘* * * will apply to all determined to grant the exemption, as material terms of the transaction which Class E stock held by the Plan whether described herein. In this regard, the is the subject of the exemption. acquired pursuant to the proposed comments submitted to the Department contribution in-kind or otherwise held have been included as part of the public Signed at Washington, DC, this 10th day of by the Plan at the time the exemption record of the exemption application. March, 1995. is granted. In this regard, the 17 million The complete application file, including Ivan Strasfeld, shares of Class E stock held by the Plan all supplemental submissions received Director of Exemption Determinations, prior to the contribution will be by the Department, is made available for Pension and Welfare Benefits Administration, surrendered to GM so that restrictions public inspection in the Public Department of Labor. may be placed on such shares.’’ Documents Room of the Pension [FR Doc. 95–6345 Filed 3–14–95; 8:45 am] Subsequent to the publication of the Welfare Benefits Administration, room BILLING CODE 4510±29±P Notice, it came to the attention of GM N–5507, U.S. Department of Labor, 200 that approximately 300,000 shares of the Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, 17 million shares were acquired on the DC 20210. Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices 14013 NUCLEAR REGULATORY April 13, 1995—The Workshop will Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852 will be COMMISSION be held at the NRC Auditorium from received between 7:30 am and 4:15 pm 7:30 am to 4:30 pm. on Federal Workdays. Cost Beneficial Licensing Actions May 26, 1995—All written comments Copies of comments received and (CBLA) and Technical Specifications on matters covered by the workshop relevant reference documents may be Improvement Program (TSIP) Public received by this date will be considered examined at the NRC Public Document Workshop by the staff. Written comments received Room at 2120 L Street NW (Lower AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory after May 26, 1995, will be considered Level), Washington, DC, between the Commission. to the extent practical. Written hours of 7:45 am and 4:15 pm on comments on the CBLA program and Federal workdays. ACTION: Notice of public workshop. the TSIP will be accepted before, FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: SUMMARY: The Nuclear Regulatory during, and after the workshop. Elizabeth L. Doolittle, Office of Nuclear Commission (NRC) will conduct a Advance comments, which could serve Reactor Regulation, Mail Stop OWFN public workshop on April 13, 1995, to to enhance the effectiveness of the 12–D–22, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory discuss the Commission’s Cost workshop, are particularly solicited. Commission, Washington, DC 20555– Beneficial Licensing Actions (CBLA) ADDRESSES: The workshop will be held 0001, telephone (301) 415–1247. program, and its Administrative Letter in the NRC Auditorium. The NRC addressing the program. The Auditorium is located on an SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Administrative Letter was issued to underground level between the One I. Background inform licensees of the CBLA program. White Flint North Building and the Two II. Tentative Agenda The CBLA program directs increased White Flint North Building at 11545 III. Workshop Content and Structure management attention to license Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland I. Background amendments designated as cost 20852. The NRC buildings are located beneficial licensing actions and across from the entrance to the White Executive Order 12866, ‘‘Regulatory provides for a more expeditious review. Flint Metro Station. Planning and Review,’’ issued by Participation in the CBLA program is Notification of intent to attend, and President Clinton on September 30, voluntary. However, the purpose of the desire to make a statement should be 1993, required all agencies to perform a workshop is also to encourage licensees sent to Elizabeth L. Doolittle, Mail Stop periodic review of existing regulations to develop CBLA programs if they have 0–12–D–22, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory to eliminate unnecessary and not already done so, and receive public Commission, Washington, DC 20555– unproductive requirements. Although comments on these activities. 0001. These notifications can also be the NRC already had several initiatives Current activities within the transmitted via facsimile or telephone. underway that were focused on Technical Specification Improvement The facsimile number is (301) 415–2279 improving the regulatory process by Program (TSIP) will also be discussed. and the telephone number is (301) 415– identifying and eliminating The Technical Specification 1247. The facsimile cover sheet should requirements that provided marginal Improvement Program was developed to contain the address information listed safety benefits, in May 1994 the establish criteria for relocating certain above. Letter or facsimile notifications Commission established the policies, technical specifications from the facility should contain, and people giving practices and framework for license to licensee-controlled notification via telephone should be institutionalizing its ‘‘Continuing documents such as the final safety prepared to provide, the following pre- Program for Regulatory Improvement.’’ analysis report. In July 1994 the NRC registration information: full name of The Continuing Program for Regulatory proposed to amend the Technical participants/attendees, name of Improvement described in SECY–94– Specification regulations pertaining to organization or business, mailing 090 consists of three NRC initiatives: nuclear power reactors in order to address, daytime telephone, facsimile 1. The Marginal to Safety Program, codify criteria for determining the number, a statement concerning 2. The Regulatory Review Group content of technical specifications. whether the person or organization Implementation Plan, and Licensees may propose converting their wishes to provide comments or a 3. The Cost Beneficial Licensing current technical specifications either in statement during the workshop, a Actions Program. parts, or at once (the preferred method) statement concerning whether the The NRC initiated its Marginal to to the improved Standard Technical person or organization intends to Safety Program (MSP) in the 1980s with Specifications (STS). Participation in provide written comments before or the purpose of identifying requirements the TSIP is voluntary. The principal after the workshop, and any specific that were considered to be marginal to focus of this workshop will be on both questions or comments that the safety and impose a substantial CBLA programs, and conversion to STS participant or organization would like to regulatory burden on licensees, and at commercial power reactors. While the be considered and/or addressed at the therefore should be relaxed or NRC presentations will be broad in workshop. eliminated. Over time the program was nature, NRC staff representatives will be Copies of documents cited in the redirected to focus on petitions for present to address specific questions Supplementary Information section are rulemaking and regulatory guidance with regard to the CBLA process or STS available for inspection and/or for identified by industry, since industry conversions. reproduction for a fee at the NRC Public was considered to be in the best DATES: March 24, 1995—Advance Document Room, 2120 L Street NW position to identify inefficient notification of intent to attend the (Lower Level), Washington, DC 20037. regulations that impose heavy economic workshop, desire to comment or make a Written comments may be sent to the burden. statement during the workshop, or both Chief, Rules Review and Directives Currently the NRC is proposing to is requested by the NRC. Participants Branch, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory modify its regulations in 10 CFR 2.802 are encouraged to submit written Commission, Washington, DC 20555– to provide guidance on the scope and comments, summaries, or both to the 0001. Hand-delivered comments to Two level of detail needed on petitions for staff by this date. White Flint North, 11545 Rockville rulemaking to reduce regulatory burden. 14014 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices The NRC prepared its Regulatory be expected to be reviewed before other complete conversion of their current Review Group (RRG) Implementation priority 3 licensing actions. technical specifications to the improved Plan in 1993 with the purpose of To assist in developing the CBLA Standard Technical Specifications. The identifying topic areas within NRC’s policy and tracking CBLAs, members of conversion to the improved Standard regulations and guidance where the NRC staff have been dedicated to Technical Specifications can save prescriptive requirements might be serve in a CBLA group for a limited licensees’ financial and staff resources substituted with performance-based time. The CBLA group, led by Eugene V. by relocating 30 to 40% of existing requirements and guidance. The RRG Imbro, gives general CBLA policy technical specifications to licensee- identified areas with significant guidance to NRC and licensee staffs, controlled documents and by potential for relief of burden with little tracks and trends CBLA submittal and incorporating the benefits of numerous or no adverse safety impact, as did NRC approval data, and works with the staff Generic Letters, at once. While the as part of the MIS program. and industry to identify CBLAs with benefits of converting to the new More than 60 recommendations for generic implications. The CBLA group technical specifications are hard to changes to the NRC’s regulations and has determined, based on licensee quantify, licensee owners’ groups guidance were made, and the NRC estimates, that CBLAs approved in 1994 project annual saving of between continues to make significant progress will result in an estimated industry $150,000 and $1.13 million per unit. toward completing these changes. lifetime saving in excess of $257.2 Licensees for about 40 units are The NRC began its Cost Beneficial million. Although the NRC licensing currently pursuing conversion to the Licensing Actions (CBLA) program on a project manager remains the primary improved Standard Technical pilot basis in mid-1993, and beginning point of contact for all licensing actions Specifications. in calendar year 1994, the CBLA option including CBLAs, licensees should was made available to all licensees with contact Mr. Imbro on (303) 415–2969 if II. Tentative Agenda the purpose of encouraging licensees to they have questions about the staff’s April 13, 1995 request plant specific license implementation of the CBLA program. amendments that reduce or eliminate One goal of the Technical 7:30 a.m. Registration license requirements that have an Specification Improvement Program is 8:30 a.m. Introduction incrementally small effect on safety but similar to the goal of the CBLA program, 8:45 a.m. CBLA Administrative Letter a high economic burden. In the past, and that is to substantially reduce Overview 9:45 a.m. BREAK licensee submittals of marginal safety regulatory burden. And, like the CBLA 10:00 a.m. Participant Presentations/ significance but high cost savings were program, participation in the Technical Panel Discussion in Response to given the lowest priority for NRC staff Specification Improvement Program is Participant Comments review, which may have discouraged voluntary. 11:45 a.m. Lunch licensees from submitting this type of In July 1994, the NRC proposed to 1:00 p.m. Technical Specification request. amend technical specification Improvement Program On February 23, 1995, the NRC issued regulations pertaining to nuclear power 2:30 p.m. BREAK Administrative Letter 95–02, ‘‘Cost reactors through a rule change to 10 CFR 2:45 p.m. Participant Presentations/ Beneficial Licensing Actions’’ to inform 50.36, Technical Specifications. The Panel Discussion in Response to addressees of the CBLA program. The purpose of the rule was to codify the Participant Comments letter explains that the CBLA program July 1993, final policy statement criteria 4:15 p.m. Summary and Conclusions will direct increased management for determining the content of technical (NRC) attention to license amendments specifications. These criteria were 4:30 p.m. Adjourn designated as cost beneficial licensing developed in recognition that the broad actions and will provide for a more use of technical specifications to impose III. Workshop Content and Structure expeditious review of certain requirements has diverted both NRC The workshop is structured to include amendment requests. Participation in and licensee attention from the more both NRC staff and licensees’ the CBLA program is voluntary. Placing important requirements in the technical presentations during the morning and additional emphasis on processing specification documents. Broad use of afternoon. An opportunity for other CBLAs was meant to directly improve technical specifications has resulted in questions and comments following the safety by allowing licensees to shift an adverse but unquantifiable impact on presentations is planned. resources from activities that improve safety. Under this rule change licensees Participants will be allowed to safety by only an incrementally small may voluntarily use the criteria as a express their views during specific amount to those that more significantly basis to propose relocation of existing comment periods. Participants who enhance safety. technical specifications that do not meet wish to make statements will be CBLAs are not new. Many licensee any of the criteria, from the facility scheduled in the order in which they requests seek to modify or delete license to licensee-controlled notified the staff of their desire to make requirements that have a small effect on documents, such as the final safety a statement, and as time permits. safety and are costly to implement. analysis report. Voluntary licensee Comments will be taken from parties in However, before June 1993, the NRR conversion of current technical the order in which they notified the staff priority ranking system assigned the specifications in this manner is of their intent to comment. The order of lowest priority (priority 4) to most expected to produce an improvement in comments will be: licensing submittals addressing items the safety of nuclear power plants (1) Parties who notified the staff by that benefited safety an incrementally through a reduction in unnecessary April 10, 1995; small amount without consideration of plant transients and more efficient use (2) Parties registering to comment the cost of implementation or restriction of NRC and industry resources. While before 8:30 am the day of the workshop; of operational flexibility. As discussed the NRC will allow licensees to take and in Administrative Letter 95–02, the advantage of the opportunity to convert (3) Parties who have not given prior priority ranking of CBLAs will be their current technical specifications in notice. further increased within the current parts, the NRC strongly encourages and Participants wishing to make priority 3 ranking, so that a CBLA could gives priority to licensees considering comments will be limited to 5 minutes. Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices 14015 These time limits may be adjusted Notice Of Consideration Of Issuance Of the NRC Public Document Room, the depending on the number of Amendments To Facility Operating Gelman Building, 2120 L Street, NW., presentations and comment. The Licenses, Proposed No Significant Washington, DC. The filing of requests workshop will be transcribed, and the Hazards Consideration Determination, for a hearing and petitions for leave to transcript will be available at the NRC And Opportunity For A Hearing intervene is discussed below. Public Document Room. The Commission has made a By April 14, 1995, the licensee may To foster meaningful discussions proposed determination that the file a request for a hearing with respect during this session and to aid following amendment requests involve to issuance of the amendment to the participants in preparing their no significant hazards consideration. subject facility operating license and presentations and comments, Under the Commission’s regulations in any person whose interest may be participants should consider the 10 CFR 50.92, this means that operation affected by this proceeding and who following set of questions: of the facility in accordance with the wishes to participate as a party in the • What impact will the CBLA proposed amendment would not (1) proceeding must file a written request Administrative Letter have on those involve a significant increase in the for a hearing and a petition for leave to organizations that the NRC regulates? probability or consequences of an intervene. Requests for a hearing and a petition for leave to intervene shall be • Should the NRC develop a CBLA accident previously evaluated; or (2) filed in accordance with the database that could be made available to create the possibility of a new or Commission’s ‘‘Rules of Practice for the public? different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated; or (3) Domestic Licensing Proceedings’’ in 10 • What are the reasons that the CBLA involve a significant reduction in a CFR Part 2. Interested persons should program has not been used more widely margin of safety. The basis for this consult a current copy of 10 CFR 2.714 by licensees? which is available at the Commission’s • proposed determination for each What are the savings that can result amendment request is shown below. Public Document Room, the Gelman from conversion to the improved The Commission is seeking public Building, 2120 L Street, NW., Standard Technical Specifications? comments on this proposed Washington, DC and at the local public Dated In Rockville, Maryland, this 9th day determination. Any comments received document room for the particular of March , 1995. within 30 days after the date of facility involved. If a request for a For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. publication of this notice will be hearing or petition for leave to intervene Eugene V. Imbro, considered in making any final is filed by the above date, the Director, RRG/CBLA Programs, Office of determination. Commission or an Atomic Safety and Nuclear Reactor Regulation. Normally, the Commission will not Licensing Board, designated by the [FR Doc. 95–6341 Filed 3–14–95; 8:45 am] issue the amendment until the Commission or by the Chairman of the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board BILLING CODE 7590±01±M expiration of the 30-day notice period. However, should circumstances change Panel, will rule on the request and/or during the notice period such that petition; and the Secretary or the Biweekly Notice failure to act in a timely way would designated Atomic Safety and Licensing result, for example, in derating or Board will issue a notice of a hearing or Applications and Amendments to shutdown of the facility, the an appropriate order. Facility Operating Licenses Involving Commission may issue the license As required by 10 CFR 2.714, a No Significant Hazards Considerations amendment before the expiration of the petition for leave to intervene shall set I. Background 30-day notice period, provided that its forth with particularity the interest of final determination is that the the petitioner in the proceeding, and Pursuant to Public Law 97-415, the amendment involves no significant how that interest may be affected by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission hazards consideration. The final results of the proceeding. The petition (the Commission or NRC staff) is determination will consider all public should specifically explain the reasons publishing this regular biweekly notice. and State comments received before why intervention should be permitted Public Law 97-415 revised section 189 action is taken. Should the Commission with particular reference to the of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as take this action, it will publish in the following factors: (1) the nature of the amended (the Act), to require the Federal Register a notice of issuance petitioner’s right under the Act to be Commission to publish notice of any and provide for opportunity for a made a party to the proceeding; (2) the amendments issued, or proposed to be hearing after issuance. The Commission nature and extent of the petitioner’s issued, under a new provision of section expects that the need to take this action property, financial, or other interest in 189 of the Act. This provision grants the will occur very infrequently. the proceeding; and (3) the possible Commission the authority to issue and Written comments may be submitted effect of any order which may be make immediately effective any by mail to the Rules Review and entered in the proceeding on the amendment to an operating license Directives Branch, Division of Freedom petitioner’s interest. The petition should upon a determination by the of Information and Publications also identify the specific aspect(s) of the Commission that such amendment Services, Office of Administration, U.S. subject matter of the proceeding as to involves no significant hazards Nuclear Regulatory Commission, which petitioner wishes to intervene. consideration, notwithstanding the Washington, DC 20555, and should cite Any person who has filed a petition for pendency before the Commission of a the publication date and page number of leave to intervene or who has been request for a hearing from any person. this Federal Register notice. Written admitted as a party may amend the This biweekly notice includes all comments may also be delivered to petition without requesting leave of the notices of amendments issued, or Room 6D22, Two White Flint North, Board up to 15 days prior to the first proposed to be issued from February 16, 11545 Rockville Pike, Rockville, prehearing conference scheduled in the 1995, through March 3, 1995. The last Maryland from 7:30 a.m. to 4:15 p.m. proceeding, but such an amended biweekly notice was published on Federal workdays. Copies of written petition must satisfy the specificity March 1, 1995. comments received may be examined at requirements described above. 14016 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices Not later than 15 days prior to the first Document Room, the Gelman Building, the TS Bases Section 3/4.5.2 and 3/ prehearing conference scheduled in the 2120 L Street, NW., Washington DC, by 4.5.3. These Bases sections would also proceeding, a petitioner shall file a the above date. Where petitions are filed be changed by modifying the test supplement to the petition to intervene during the last 10 days of the notice methods. which must include a list of the period, it is requested that the petitioner Basis for proposed no significant contentions which are sought to be promptly so inform the Commission by hazards consideration determination: litigated in the matter. Each contention a toll-free telephone call to Western As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), the must consist of a specific statement of Union at 1-(800) 248-5100 (in Missouri licensee has provided its analysis of the the issue of law or fact to be raised or 1-(800) 342-6700). The Western Union issue of no significant hazards controverted. In addition, the petitioner operator should be given Datagram consideration, which is presented shall provide a brief explanation of the Identification Number N1023 and the below: bases of the contention and a concise following message addressed to (Project 1. Would not involve a significant increase statement of the alleged facts or expert Director): petitioner’s name and in the probability orconsequences of an opinion which support the contention telephone number, date petition was accident previously evaluated. and on which the petitioner intends to mailed, plant name, and publication Trisodium Phosphate Dodecahydrate (TSP) is stored in the containment lower level to rely in proving the contention at the date and page number of this Federal raise the pH of the sump and spray water hearing. The petitioner must also Register notice. A copy of the petition following a Loss of Coolant Accident (LOCA). provide references to those specific should also be sent to the Office of the As the pH of the water increases, more sources and documents of which the General Counsel, U.S. Nuclear radioactive iodine is kept in solution and the petitioner is aware and on which the Regulatory Commission, Washington, possibility of airborne radioactivity leakage is petitioner intends to rely to establish DC 20555, and to the attorney for the decreased. An additional advantage of a those facts or expert opinion. Petitioner licensee. higher pH is the beneficial reduction in must provide sufficient information to Nontimely filings of petitions for chloride stress corrosion cracking of metal components in the containment following an show that a genuine dispute exists with leave to intervene, amended petitions, accident. the applicant on a material issue of law supplemental petitions and/or requests This chemical is an accident mitigator, not or fact. Contentions shall be limited to for a hearing will not be entertained an accident initiator in that it is not used matters within the scope of the absent a determination by the until after an accident has occurred. At the amendment under consideration. The Commission, the presiding officer or the time it goes into solution, the accident has contention must be one which, if Atomic Safety and Licensing Board that occurred, containment spray has been proven, would entitle the petitioner to the petition and/or request should be activated and water has collected in the relief. A petitioner who fails to file such granted based upon a balancing of containment sump. Therefore, increasing the Technical Specification minimum amount a supplement which satisfies these factors specified in 10 CFR verified to be in each containment will not requirements with respect to at least one 2.714(a)(1)(i)-(v) and 2.714(d). involve a significant increase in the contention will not be permitted to For further details with respect to this probability of an accident previously participate as a party. action, see the application for evaluated. Those permitted to intervene become amendment which is available for Updated Final Safety Analysis Report, parties to the proceeding, subject to any public inspection at the Commission’s Chapter 14.24, ‘‘Maximum Hypothetical limitations in the order granting leave to Public Document Room, the Gelman Accident’’, uses an assumption of a pre-RAS intervene, and have the opportunity to Building, 2120 L Street, NW., minimum containment spray pH of 5.0 for Washington, DC, and at the local public the iodine removal calculation and a post- participate fully in the conduct of the RAS sump pH of 7.0 for iodine retention. hearing, including the opportunity to document room for the particular Raising the pH to 7.0 does not increase the present evidence and cross-examine facility involved. consequences of an accident previously witnesses. Baltimore Gas and Electric Company, evaluated. If a hearing is requested, the The proposed change to Technical Docket Nos. 50-317 and 50-318, Calvert Commission will make a final Specification 4.5.2.e.4 would remove the Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant, Unit Nos. 1 determination on the issue of no amounts of chemical and water used in the and 2, Calvert County, Maryland significant hazards consideration. The test to the Bases. This relocation will not final determination will serve to decide Date of amendments request: January alter the test method or acceptance criteria, but will allow adjustments to the ratio of TSP when the hearing is held. 31, 1995 Description of amendments request: and borated water under the controls of 10 If the final determination is that the CFR 50.59 to reflect changes in plant amendment request involves no The proposed amendments would conditions. In the Bases, the amount of TSP significant hazards consideration, the revise the Technical Specifications used in the test is changed to reflect the ratio Commission may issue the amendment (TSs) for Calvert Cliffs, Unit Nos. 1 and of TSP to water that would be found in the and make it immediately effective, 2, to increase the amount of Trisodium containment following a LOCA. The notwithstanding the request for a Phosphate Dodecahydrate (TSP) located specified concentration of boron in the test hearing. Any hearing held would take in the containment sump baskets reflects the highest concentration that could required to be verified by TS be found in the containment following a place after issuance of the amendment. LOCA. The test temperature is changed to If the final determination is that the surveillance. The requested change is 120°F which is well below the temperature amendment request involves a the result of an reanalysis of the amount expected to be found in the containment significant hazards consideration, any of TSP necessary to maintain the sump following a LOCA. The decanting of hearing held would take place before appropriate pH in the containment the solution does not change the intent of the the issuance of any amendment. sump water subsequent to a Loss of test method since the dissolving period will A request for a hearing or a petition Coolant Accident. Specifically, the still be conducted without agitation. for leave to intervene must be filed with request would change the TS value of Therefore, this change does not involve a the Secretary of the Commission, U.S. TS 4.5.2.e.3 from the existing amount of significant increase in the probability or 3 3 consequences of an accident previously Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 100 ft to 289 ft . TS 4.5.2.e.4 would evaluated. Washington, DC 20555, Attention: also be changed by moving the amounts 2. Would not create the possibility of a new Docketing and Services Branch, or may of TSP and refueling water storage tank or different type of accident from any be delivered to the Commission’s Public water to be used in the required tests to accident previously evaluated. Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices 14017 The addition of more TSP does not The NRC staff has reviewed the (2) Create the possibility of a new or represent a significant change in the licensee’s analysis and, based on this different kind of accident from any configuration or operation of the plant. review, it appears that the three previously analyzed. Trisodium Phosphate Dodecahydrate is standards of 50.92(c) are satisfied. The proposed change does not affect the currently present in the containment lower Group 1 isolation safety function. The change level. There are no physical changes which Therefore, the NRC staff proposes to does not involve any plant hardware changes result from the increase in volume. The determine that the amendments request that could introduce any new failure modes proposed change to Technical Specification involves no significant hazards or effects; thus, the change can not create the 4.5.2.e.4 would move the amounts of consideration. possibility of a new or different kind of chemical and water used in the test to the Local Public Document Room accident from any previously analyzed. Bases. This relocation will not alter the test location: Calvert County Library, Prince (3) Involve a significant reduction in a method or acceptance criteria, but will allow Frederick, Maryland 20678. margin of safety. adjustments to the ratio of TSP and borated Attorney for licensee: Jay E. Silbert, The proposed change does not affect the water under the controls of 10 CFR 50.59 to Group 1 isolation safety function. The reflect changes in plant conditions. In the Esquire, Shaw, Pittman, Potts and Trowbridge, 2300 N Street, NW., proposed change is consistent with the FSAR Bases, the amount of TSP used in the test is [Final Safety Analysis Report] and Technical changed to reflect the ratio of TSP to water Washington, DC 20037. Specification basis associated with reactor that would be found in the containment NRC Project Director: Ledyard B. vessel inventory control and main steam line following a LOCA. The specified Marsh flooding. concentration of boron in the test reflects the The proposed change to the instrument highest concentration that could be found in Boston Edison Company, Docket No. calibration range does not affect the margin the containment following a LOCA. The test 50-293, Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station, of safety for systems or components affected temperature is changed to 120°F which is Plymouth County, Massachusetts by the change. Operating Pilgrim in well below the temperature expected to be accordance with the proposed Trip Level found in the containment sump following a Date of amendment request: February LOCA. The decanting of the solution does 9, 1995 Setting does not involve a significant not change the intent of the test method since Description of amendment request: reduction in the margin of safety. the dissolving period will still be conducted The proposed amendment would The NRC staff has reviewed the without agitation. increase the Reactor High Water Level licensee’s analysis and, based on this Therefore, this change would not create the Trip Level Setting for the Group 1 review, it appears that the three possibility of a new or different type of isolation. The change will allow an standards of 50.92(c) are satisfied. accident from any accident previously Therefore, the NRC staff proposes to evaluated. increase to the main steam isolation valve (MSIV) high water level isolation determine that the amendment request 3. Would not involve a significant involves no significant hazards reduction in a margin of safety. setpoint. Trisodium Phosphate Dodecahydrate is Basis for proposed no significant consideration. stored in the containment lower level to raise hazards consideration determination: Local Public Document Room the pH of the sump and spray water As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), the location: Plymouth Public Library, 11 following a LOCA. As the pH of the water licensee has provided its analysis of the North Street, Plymouth, Massachusetts increases, more radioactive iodine is kept in issue of no significant hazards 02360. solution and the possibility of airborne consideration, which is presented Attorney for licensee: W. S. Stowe, radioactivity leakage is decreased. below: Esquire, Boston Edison Company, 800 Additionally, a higher pH has a beneficial Boylston Street, 36th Floor, Boston, effect on chloride stress corrosion cracking of In accordance with 10 CFR 50.91, Boston Edison submits the following analysis Massachusetts 02199. metal components in the containment. NRC Project Director: Walter R. Butler Technical Specification 4.5.2.e.3 requires addressing the no significant hazards verification that a minimum volume of TSP consideration. The proposed changes do not: Carolina Power & Light Company, et is contained in the storage baskets in each (1) Involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident al., Docket No. 50-400, Shearon Harris containment. This change proposes to Nuclear Power Plant, Unit 1, Wake and increase that volume. The increased volume previously evaluated. will ensure the containment sump, when Operation of the station in accordance with Chatham Counties, North Carolina filled with water, will have an acceptable pH the proposed Trip Level Setting will not Date of amendment request: February following a LOCA. significantly increase the probability or 6, 1995 The proposed change to Technical consequences of an accident previously Description of amendment request: Specification 4.5.2.e.4 would move the evaluated. The MSIV high water level isolation signal is provided to protect against The change proposes to relocate the amounts of chemical and water used in the cycle specific core operating limits of test to the Bases. This relocation will not rapid depressurization due to a pressure alter the test method or acceptance criteria, regulator malfunction during plant startup. Figure 3.1-1, Shutdown Margin Versus but will allow adjustments to the ratio of TSP The high water level isolation signal is not Boron Concentration, from Technical and borated water under the controls of 10 functional when the mode switch is in the Specification (TS) 3.1.1.2, Shutdown CFR 50.59 to reflect changes in plant RUN position. A high water level in the Margins - Modes 3, 4, and 5, to the Core conditions. In the Bases, the amount of TSP reactor vessel indicates that fuel is covered. Operating Limits Report (COLR). used in the test is changed to reflect the ratio Increasing the Trip Level Setting will have Basis for proposed no significant of TSP to water that would be found in the minimal effect on moisture carryover in the hazards consideration determination: event of a pressure regulator failure at low containment following a LOCA. The As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), the specified concentration of boron in the test reactor power. MSIV closure (Group 1) is reflects the highest concentration that could initiated by low reactor pressure (810 psig) licensee has provided its analysis of the be found in the containment following a approximately 30 seconds into the event. The issue of no significant hazards LOCA. The test temperature is changed to resulting reactor water level swell is not consideration, which is presented 120°F which is well below the temperature sufficient to reach the bottom elevation of the below: expected to be found in the containment main steam lines. 1. The proposed amendment does not sump following a LOCA. The decanting of The proposed Technical Specification involve a significant increase in the the solution does not change the intent of the allowable value for the Reactor Low Level probability or consequences of an accident test method since the dissolving period will Trip Level Setting and the Reactor Low Low previously evaluated. still be conducted without agitation. Water Level Trip Level setting does not The proposed change of relocating TS Therefore, this change would not involve involve significant increase in the probability Figure 3.1-1, Shutdown Margin Versus Boron a significant reduction in a margin of safety. or consequence of an accident. Concentration to the COLR has no influence 14018 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices or impact to the probability or consequences stations. The licensee submitted a requested changes primarily affect review of an accident. The revised TS will continue combined amendment request covering and control activities, but also include other to implement the shutdown margin limits the three Duke Power nuclear stations. administrative changes affecting the approval through reference to the Shutdown Margin The proposed changes are described of station procedures (Oconee only), records Curve in the COLR. In addition, the COLR is retention, and definition of the term ODCM subject to the existing controls of TS 6.9.1.6. below. [offsite dose calculation manual] (McGuire Given that this change is an administrative 1. Remove the specific assignment of and [Catawba]). The provisions of the relocation of the Shutdown Margin Curve to responsibilities for the review, proposed amendment primarily involve the another TS controlled document, there distribution, and approval activities relocation of existing Technical would be no increase in the probability or contained in the Technical Review and Specifications review, distribution, or consequences of an accident previously Control Section of each station’s TS. approval requirements to internal Duke evaluated. The proposed specifications state that administrative controls. However, 2. The proposed amendment does not these activities will be performed by a implementation of the proposed amendment does involve changes to several review/ create the possibility of a new or different knowledgeable individual/organization. kind of accident from any accident distribution activities. Theses review/ previously evaluated. Approval of the affected documents is to distribution activities are primarily for: 1) No safety-related equipment, safety be at the appropriate manager/ Proposed changes to the stations’ Technical function, or plant operation will be altered as superintendent level as specified in Specifications, 2) Proposed tests and a result of this proposed change. The TS will Duke administrative controls. experiments which affect nuclear safety and continue to require operation within the 2. Move the requirement for the are not addressed in the stations’ FSAR required core operating limits. Therefore, the review of proposed changes in the [Final Safety Analysis Report] or Technical proposed changes do not create the stations’ TS and Operating Licenses by Specifications, 3) Environmental radiological possibility of a new or different kind of the Duke Nuclear Safety Review Board procedures, 4) Reportable events accident from any accident previously documentation and reports of violations of (NSRB) to Duke administrative Technical Specifications, 5) Reports of evaluated. procedures (Selected Licensee 3. The proposed amendment does not special reviews and investigations, and 6) involve a significant reduction in the margin Commitments documents) and change Reports of unplanned onsite releases of of safety. the wording of the requirements radiological material to the environs. Planned Relocation of the Shutdown Margin Curve covering NSRB meeting frequency. The implementation of the proposed Technical to the TS controlled COLR has no effect on Oconee TS covering the NSRB are being Specifications amendments utilizing Selected the core operating limits currently in force in rewritten to be consistent with McGuire Licensee Commitments will result in the TS 3.1.1.2. Future revisions to the Shutdown and Catawba. above items being reviewed/received by a Margin Curve are governed by TS 6.9.1.6 3. Add Technical Review and Control different organizational unit in the future. which stipulates the specific TS that The organizational unit is to be either the Program implementation and Plant recently initiated Plant Operations Review reference the COLR limits and the Operations Review Committee (PORC) methodologies utilized in developing those Committee (PORC) or the General Manager, limits. Given that the change is an implementation to the list of required Environmental Services. Personnel serving administrative relocation of the Shutdown procedures and programs for each on the PORC, and the General Manager, Margin Curve to another TS controlled nuclear station. Environmental Services will be qualified document, the proposed changes do not 4. Change or clarify certain TS based upon education and experience to involve a significant reduction in a margin of administrative requirements covering review the operational and technical safety. technical review and control activities considerations involved with the applicable The NRC staff has reviewed the or records retention requirements. items listed above. No required reviews are licensee’s analysis and, based on this 5. For Oconee only, under ‘‘Station being eliminated by the requested review, it appears that the three amendments, only the organizational units Operating Procedures,’’ revise the TS responsible for performing the reviews will standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) are requirements covering the review and be changed. Future reviews of theses items satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff approval of station procedures and under the auspices of the PORC or the proposes to determine that the temporary procedure changes such that General Manager, Environmental Services amendment request involves no these are now consistent with the will maintain a quality level equivalent to significant hazards consideration. corresponding requirements for that being currently achieved by Duke’s Local Public Document Room McGuire and Catawba. Qualified Reviewer Program, the Station location: Cameron Village Regional Basis for proposed no significant Managers, or the Library, 1930 Clark Avenue, Raleigh, hazards consideration determination: Duke Nuclear Safety Review Board as North Carolina 27605 applicable. Consequently, merely changing As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), the the organizational units performing future Attorney for licensee: R. E. Jones, licensee has provided its analysis of the General Counsel, Carolina Power & reviews, or making the additional issue of no significant hazards administrative changes described above, Light Company, Post Office Box 1551, consideration, which is presented results in no increase in the probability or Raleigh, North Carolina 27602 below: consequences of an accident previously NRC Project Director: William H. (It should be noted that the licensee evaluated because the review function will Bateman submitted a combined analysis that covers continue to be conducted in an equivalent Duke Power Company, Docket Nos. 50- McGuire, Catawba, and Oconee nuclear manner. stations.) The implementing SLC will also permit 369 and 50-370, McGuire Nuclear Standard ι1. The proposed amendments proposed amendments to the stations’ Station, Units 1 and 2, Mecklenburg will not involve a significant increase in the Technical Specifications and Operating County, North Carolina probability or consequences of an accident Licenses to be approved for the Station Date of amendment request: January previously evaluated. Manager by a designee. However, this 12, 1995 The provisions of these proposed individual will occupy a position equivalent Description of amendment request: amendments concern administrative changes to, or higher, in the Duke organization as the in the stations’ Technical Specifications Station manager. The proposed amendments would involving the Technical Review and Control, Additionally, the proposed changes do not revise and clarify portions of Technical Procedures and Programs/Station Operating directly impact the design or operation of any Specification (TS) Section 6.0, Procedures, and Records Retention/Station plant systems or components any more so ‘‘Administrative Controls,’’ for the Operating Records portions of the than the review and approval processes McGuire, Catawba, and Oconee nuclear Administrative Controls Section. The currently being conducted in accordance Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices 14019 with existing approved Technical NRC Project Director: Herbert N. sensitivity analysis for the NRC staff. Based Specifications. Berkow on the small value of the increase compared Standard ι2. The proposed amendments to the range of uncertainty in the CDF, the will not create the possibility of a new or Duke Power Company, Docket Nos. 50- increase is considered acceptable. different kind of accident from any 369 and 50-370, McGuire Nuclear Changes to surveillance test frequencies for previously evaluated. Station, Units 1 and 2, Mecklenburg the RTS [reactor trip system] interlocks do The proposed changes are administrative County, North Carolina not represent a significant reduction in in nature and primarily cover the review, testing. The currently specified test interval distribution, and/or approval function Date of amendment request: January for interlock channels allows the surveillance performed for items identified in existing 13, 1995 requirement to be satisfied by verifying that Technical Specifications. The quality level of Description of amendment request: the permissive logic is in its required state the future reviews will not decrease and the The proposed amendments would using the permissive annunciator window. ability of Duke to identify the possibility for increase the surveillance test intervals The surveillance as currently required only the concurrence of new or different kinds of and allowed outage times for Reactor verifies the status of the permissive logic and does not address verification of channel accidents prior to implementation will be Trip System (RTS) and Engineered maintained. Of specific interest in the setpoint or operability. The setpoint consideration of Standard ι2 is the review of Safety Features Actuation System verification and channel operability are proposed tests and experiments which affect (ESFAS) equipment based upon verified after a refueling shutdown. The station nuclear safety and are not addressed analyses by Westinghouse for the definition of the channel check includes in the FSAR or Technical Specifications. The Westinghouse Owners Group and comparison of the channel status with other Technical Specifications required reviews of approved by the NRC. The proposed channels for the same parameter. The these tests and experiments are not being changes to the RTS and ESFAS requirement to routinely verify permissive proposed for removal by these requested status is a different consideration than the instrumentation are based upon WCAP- availability of trip or actuation channels amendments. Only the organizational unit 10271, its supplements, and the NRC’s conducting the review of proposed tests and which are required to change state on the experiments is being changed by the safety evaluation reports. occurrence of an event and for which the requested amendments. The PORC, instead of Basis for proposed no significant function availability is more dependent on the Station Manager, is being assigned the hazards consideration determination: the surveillance interval. The change in responsibility for conducting the reviews of As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), the surveillance requirement to at least once proposed tests and experiments in the future. licensee has provided its analysis of the every refueling does not therefore represent It is believed that the combined expertise of issue of no significant hazards a significant change in channel surveillance the PORC membership will enhance Duke’s and does not involve a significant increase in consideration, which is presented unavailability of the RTS.The proposed ability to identify potential situations which below: could possibly involve a new, or different, changes do not result in an increase in the Criterion 1 - Operation of McGuire in severity or consequences of an accident kind of accident. accordance with the proposed license Standard ι3. The proposed amendments previously evaluated. Implementation of the amendment[s] [do] not involve a significant proposed changes affects the probability of will not involve a significant reduction in increase in the probability or consequences any margin of safety. failure of the RTS but does not alter the of an accident previously evaluated. manner in which protection is afforded nor The changes contained in the requested The determination that the results of the amendments are administrative in nature and the manner in which limiting criteria are proposed changes are within all acceptable established. do not impact the design capabilities or criteria was established in the SERs prepared operation of any plant structures, systems, or Criterion 2 - The proposed license for WCAP-10271, WCAP-10271 Supplement amendment[s] [do] not create the possibility components. There will be no reduction in 1, WCAP-10271 Supplement 2, and WCAP- margin of safety as a result of implementing of a new or different kind of accident from 10271 Supplement 2, Revision 1 issued by any accident previously evaluated. these requested amendments. Impact upon letters dated February 21, 1985, February 22, margin of safety is a consideration primarily The proposed changes do not result in a 1989, and April 30, 1990. Implementation of change in the manner in which the RTS included in the 10 CFR 50.59 evaluation the proposed changes is expected to result in process conducted for station procedures, provides plant protection. No change is being an acceptable increase in total RTS yearly made which alters the functioning of the RTS procedure changes, and nuclear station unavailability. This increase, which is modifications. The 10 CFR 50.59 evaluation (other than in a test mode). Rather, the primarily due to less frequent surveillance, likelihood or probability of the RTS process in conducted under the auspices of results in an increase of similar magnitude in the Duke Qualified Reviewer Program and is functioning properly is affected as described the probability of an Anticipated Transient above. Therefore, the proposed changes do not affected by these requested amendments. Without Scram (ATWS) and in the The impact on margin of safety for future not create the possibility of a new or different probability of core melt resulting from an Technical Specifications and Operating kind of accident. ATWS and also results in a small increase in License changes will be reviewed by the The proposed changes do not involve core damage frequency (CDF) due to ESFAS PORC, but these reviews will be equivalent hardware changes except those necessary to unavailability. in quality to the reviews presently conducted implement testing in bypass. Some existing Implementation of the proposed changes is by the Qualified Reviewers. instrumentation is designed to be tested in The NRC staff has reviewed the expected to result in a significant reduction bypass and current Technical Specifications in the probability of core melt from licensee’s analysis and, based on this allow testing in bypass. Testing in bypass is inadvertent reactor trips. This is a result of also recognized by IEEE standards. Therefore, review, it appears that the three a reduction in the number of inadvertent testing in bypass has been previously standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) are reactor trips (0.5 fewer inadvertent reactor approved and implementation of the satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff trips per unit per year) occurring during proposed changes for testing in bypass does proposes to determine that the testing of RTS instrumentation. This not create the possibility of a new or different amendment request involves no reduction is primarily attributable to testing kind of accident from any previously significant hazards consideration. in bypass and less frequent surveillance. evaluated. Furthermore, since the other Local Public Document Room The reduction in core melt frequency from proposed changes do not alter the location: Atkins Library, University of inadvertent reactor trips is sufficiently large functioning of the RTS, the possibility of a to counter the increase in ATWS core melt North Carolina, Charlotte (UNCC new or different kind of accident from any probability resulting in an overall reduction previously evaluated has not been created. Station), North Carolina 28223 in total core melt probability. Criterion 3 - The proposed license Attorney for licensee: Mr. Albert Carr, The values determined by the WOG and amendment[s] [do] not involve a significant Duke Power Company, 422 South presented in the WCAP for the increase in reduction in a margin of safety. Church Street, Charlotte, North Carolina CDF were verified by Brookhaven National The proposed changes do not alter the 28242 Laboratory (BNL) as part of an audit and manner in which safety limits, limiting safety 14020 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices system setpoints, or limiting conditions for 1. Remove the specific assignment of and [Catawba]). The provisions of the operation are determined. The impact of responsibilities for the review, proposed amendment primarily involve the reduced testing other than as addressed distribution, and approval activities relocation of existing Technical above is to allow a longer time interval over Specifications review, distribution, or which instrument uncertainties (e.g., drift) contained in the Technical Review and approval requirements to internal Duke may act. Experience has shown that the Control Section of each station’s TS. administrative controls. However, initial uncertainty assumptions are valid for The proposed specifications state that implementation of the proposed amendment reduced testing. these activities will be performed by a does involve changes to several review/ Implementation of the proposed changes is knowledgeable individual/organization. distribution activities. These review/ expected to result in an overall improvement Approval of the affected documents is to distribution activities are primarily for: 1) in safety by: be at the appropriate manager/ Proposed changes to the stations’ Technical 1) Less frequent testing will result in fewer superintendent level as specified in Specifications, 2) Proposed tests and inadvertent reactor trips and actuation of experiments which affect nuclear safety and Engineered Safety Features Actuation System Duke administrative controls. are not addressed in the stations’ FSAR components. 2. Move the requirement for the [Final Safety Analysis Report] or Technical 2) Higher quality repairs leading to review of proposed changes in the Specifications, 3) Environmental radiological improved equipment reliability due to longer stations’ TS and Operating Licenses by procedures, 4) Reportable events allowable repair times. the Duke Nuclear Safety Review Board documentation and reports of violations of 3) Improvements in the effectiveness of the (NSRB) to Duke administrative Technical Specifications, 5) Reports of operating staff in monitoring and controlling procedures (Selected Licensee special reviews and investigations, and 6) plant operation. This is due to less frequent Commitments documents) and change Reports of unplanned onsite releases of distraction of the operator and shift radiological material to the environs. Planned supervisor to attend to instrumentation the wording of the requirements implementation of the proposed Technical testing. covering NSRB meeting frequency. The Specifications amendments utilizing Selected The foregoing analysis demonstrates that Oconee TS covering the NSRB are being Licensee Commitments will result in the the proposed amendment[s] to McGuire’s rewritten to be consistent with McGuire above items being reviewed/received by a Technical Specifications [do] not involve a and Catawba. different organizational unit in the future. significant increase in the probability or 3. Add Technical Review and Control The organizational unit is to be either the consequences of a previously evaluated Program implementation and Plant recently initiated Plant Operations Review accident, [do] not create the possibility of a Operations Review Committee (PORC) Committee (PORC) or the General Manager, Environmental Services. Personnel serving new or different kind of accident, and [do] implementation to the list of required not involve a significant reduction in a on the PORC, and the General Manager, margin of safety. procedures and programs for each Environmental Services will be qualified Based upon the preceding analysis, Duke nuclear station. based upon education and experience to Power Company concludes that the proposed 4. Change or clarify certain TS review the operational and technical amendment[s] [do] not involve a significant administrative requirements covering considerations involved with the applicable hazards consideration. technical review and control activities items listed above. No required reviews are The NRC staff has reviewed the or records retention requirements. being eliminated by the requested licensee’s analysis and, based on this 5. For Oconee only, under ‘‘Station amendments, only the organizational units review, it appears that the three Operating Procedures,’’ revise the TS responsible for performing the reviews will be changed. Future reviews of these items standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) are requirements covering the review and under the auspices of the PORC or the satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff approval of station procedures and General Manager, Environmental Services proposes to determine that the temporary procedure changes such that will maintain a quality level equivalent to amendment request involves no these are now consistent with the that being currently achieved by Duke’s significant hazards consideration. corresponding requirements for Qualified Reviewer Program, the Station Local Public Document Room McGuire and Catawba. Managers, or the Duke Nuclear Safety Review location: Atkins Library, University of Basis for proposed no significant Board as applicable. Consequently, merely North Carolina, Charlotte (UNCC hazards consideration determination: changing the organizational units performing Station), North Carolina 28223 As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), the future reviews, or making the additional administrative changes described above, Attorney for licensee: Mr. Albert Carr, licensee has provided its analysis of the results in no increase in the probability or Duke Power Company, 422 South issue of no significant hazards consequences of an accident previously Church Street, Charlotte, North Carolina consideration, which is presented evaluated because the review function will 28242 below: continue to be conducted in an equivalent NRC Project Director: Herbert N. (It should be noted that the licensee manner. Berkow submitted a combined analysis that covers The implementing SLC will also permit McGuire, Catawba, and Oconee nuclear proposed amendments to the stations’ Duke Power Company, Docket Nos. 50- stations.) Technical Specifications and Operating 269, 50-270 and 50-287, Oconee Standard ι1. The proposed amendments Licenses to be approved for the Station Nuclear Station, Units 1, 2 and 3, will not involve a significant increase in the Manager by a designee. However, this Oconee County, South Carolina probability or consequences of an accident individual will occupy a position equivalent previously evaluated. to, or higher, in the Duke organization as the Date of amendment request: January The provisions of these proposed Station Manager. 12, 1995 amendments concern administrative changes Additionally, the proposed changes do not Description of amendment request: in the stations’ Technical Specifications directly impact the design or operation of any The proposed amendments would involving the Technical Review and Control, plant systems or components any more so revise and clarify portions of Technical Procedures and Programs/Station Operating than the review and approval processes Specification (TS) Section 6.0, Procedures, and Records Retention/Station currently being conducted in accordance ‘‘Administrative Controls,’’ for the Operating Records portions of the with existing approved Technical Administrative Controls Section. The Specifications. McGuire, Catawba, and Oconee nuclear ι stations. The licensee submitted a requested changes primarily affect review Standard 2. The proposed amendments and control activities, but also include other will not create the possibility of a new or combined amendment request covering administrative changes affecting the approval different kind of accident from any the three Duke Power nuclear stations. of station procedures (Oconee only), records previously evaluated. The proposed changes are described retention, and definition of the term ODCM The proposed changes are administrative below. [offsite dose calculation manual] (McGuire in nature and primarily cover the review, Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices 14021 distribution, and/or approval function Description of amendment request: GPU Nuclear Corporation, et al., performed for items identified in existing The requested change would modify Docket No. 50-289, Three Mile Island Technical Specifications. The quality level of Section 5.3.1, Fuel Assemblies, of the Nuclear Station, Unit No. 1, Dauphin the future reviews will not decrease and the Waterford 3 technical specifications. County, Pennsylvania ability of Duke to identify the possibility for the occurrence of new or different kinds of The requested change increases the Date of amendment request: January accidents prior to implementation will be maximum enrichment for the spent fuel 16, 1995 maintained. Of specific interest in the pool and containment temporary storage Description of amendment request: consideration of Standard ι2 is the review of rack from 4.1 to 4.9 weight percent U- The proposed amendment would revise proposed tests and experiments which affect 235 when fuel assemblies contain fixed the TMI-1 Technical Specifications (TS) station nuclear safety and are not addressed poisons. Waterford 3 plans to use higher to incorporate certain improvements in the FSAR or Technical Specifications. The enriched fuel in the next fuel cycle Technical Specifications required reviews of from the Revised Standard Technical (Cycle 8) to meet the energy plans and Specifications (TS) for Babcock & these tests and experiments are not being maintain a reload batch size similar to proposed for removal by these requested Wilcox nuclear power plants (NUREG- amendments. Only the organizational unit that used in Cycles 6 and 7. 1430). The amendment would also conducting the review of proposed tests and Basis for proposed no significant change the bases incorporating the experiments is being changed by the hazards consideration determination: results of analyses to support allowance requested amendments. The PORC, instead of As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), the for drift of the pressurizer code safety the Station Manager, is being assigned the licensee has provided its analysis of the valve setpoint. One of the proposed STS responsibility for conducting the reviews of issue of no significant hazards improvements involves a change to proposed tests and experiments in the future. consideration, which is presented Chapter 6, Administrative Controls, It is believed that the combined expertise of below: the PORC membership will enhance Duke’s The proposed change will increase the fuel affecting both TMI-1 and TMI-2 TSs. A ability to identify potential situations which enrichment limit in order to meetthe cycle separate notice of consideration of could possibly involve a new, or different, energy requirements while maintaining fuel issuance of amendment to facility kind of accident. batch sizes consistent with previous cycle operating license is being issued for the Standard ι3. The proposed amendments designs. The calculated k-effective, including proposed TMI-2 TSs Change. will not involve a significant reduction in uncertainties, demonstrate substantial margin Basis for proposed no significant any margin of safety. to criticality in the storage racks for both hazards consideration determination: The changes contained in the requested normal and accident conditions. No changes As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), the amendments are administrative in nature and to the facility are required. No new modes of do not impact the design capabilities or operating the fuel storage or transfer systems licensee has provided its analysis of the operation of any plant structures, systems, or are required, except a restriction to limit the issue of no significant hazards components. There will be no reduction in use of the new fuel vault to fuel with a consideration, which is presented margin of safety as a result of implementing maximum enrichment of 4.1 weight percent below: these requested amendments. Impact upon U-235. This restriction will be implemented 1. Operation of the facility in accordance margin of safety is a consideration primarily by administrative controls. Since the plant with the proposed amendment would not included in the 10 CFR 50.59 evaluation equipment and operation are essentially the involve a significant increase in the process conducted for station procedures, same, there is no significant increase in the probability of occurrence or the procedure changes, and nuclear station probability of a criticality accident. Since a consequences of an accident previously modifications. The 10 CFR 50.59 evaluation criticality event is demonstrated to be evaluated. process is conducted under the auspices of unfeasible, there are no increased adverse The proposed amendments involve a) an the Duke Qualified Reviewer Program and is consequences for such a postulated event. administrative change to both the TMI-1 and not affected by these requested amendments. As previously discussed, the proposed TMI-2 Technical Specifications which is The impact on margin of safety for future change will not result in a physical change consistent with the B&W Standard Technical Technical Specifications and Operating to the facility nor will it result in a significant Specifications (STS), NUREG-1430, and b) License changes will be reviewed by the change to the operation of the facility; changes to the TMI-1 Technical PORC, but these reviews will be equivalent therefore, it does not create the possibility of Specifications which are consistent with the in quality to the reviews presently conducted a new or different kind of accident from any STS. This change does not involve any by the Qualified Reviewers. accident previously evaluated. change to system or equipment configuration. The NRC staff has reviewed the The proposed change has been analyzed to The proposed amendment revises certain establish a k-effective, including surveillance requirements, extends certain licensee’s analysis and, based on this uncertainties, at or below the NRC criticality surveillance intervals as evaluated above, or review, it appears that the three acceptance criteria of k-effective below 0.95 involves changes that are purely standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) are including uncertainties at the 95/95 administrative. The reliability of systems satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff probability/confidence level; therefore, there and components relied upon to prevent or proposes to determine that the is no reduction in the margin of safety. mitigate the consequences of accidents amendment request involves no The NRC staff has reviewed the previously evaluated is not degraded by the significant hazards consideration. licensee’s analysis and, based on this proposed changes. Assurance of system and Local Public Document Room review, it appears that the three equipment availability is maintained. standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) are Therefore, this change does not increase the location: Oconee County Library, 501 probability of occurrence or the West South Broad Street, Walhalla, satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff consequences of an accident previously South Carolina 29691 proposes to determine that the evaluated. Attorney for licensee: J. Michael amendment request involves no 2. Operation of the facility in accordance McGarry, III, Winston and Strawn, 1200 significant hazards consideration. with the proposed amendment would not 17th Street, NW., Washington, DC 20036 Local Public Document Room create the possibility of a new or different NRC Project Director: Herbert N. location: University of New Orleans kind of accident from any accident Berkow Library, Louisiana Collection, Lakefront, previously evaluated. The changes only New Orleans, Louisiana 70122 involve changes to surveillance requirements Entergy Operations Inc., Docket No. 50- that are consistent with STS and with the Attorney for licensee: N.S. Reynolds, ASME Code. No new failure modes are 382, Waterford Steam ElectricStation, Esq., Winston & Strawn 1400 L Street Unit 3, St. Charles Parish, Louisiana created and thus the changes are bounded by N.W., Washington, D.C. 20005-3502 accidents previously evaluated. Date of amendment request: January NRC Project Director: William D. 3. Operation of the facility in accordance 27, 1995 Beckner with the proposed amendment would not 14022 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices involve a significant reduction in a margin of running due to a logic tie requiring air flow In summary, if a fire were to occur in fire safety. Each of these changes is compatible through the air handling equipment for the area C-17 which caused the loss of main with the STS and has been evaluated to chilled water system to operate during control room HVAC, the remote shutdown preserve the level of safety assured by the normal operation. The loss of the HVAC system would provide an acceptable method current TS. system in the control building would cause of shutdown. Since, for the purpose of event The NRC staff has reviewed the the main control room and the equipment analysis, all equipment in fire area C-17 is licensee’s analysis and, based on this rooms to begin heating up if exposed to assumed lost, a fire in fire area C-17 is review, it appears that the three design summer conditions. Operator actions bounded by the same analysis with or standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) are can be accomplished to minimize the heat up without a fixed suppression system in terms rates for the rooms prior to the areas reaching of equipment availability. Therefore, this satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff equipment temperature limits. This would proposes to determine that the request does not create the possibility of allow the operators to begin the shutdown occurrence of a new or different kind of amendment request involves no process from the main control room. If the accident from any accident previously significant hazards consideration. main control room continued to heat up, the evaluated. Local Public Document Room operators could accomplish the shutdown 3) The request does not involve a location: Government Publications using the remote shutdown system. HVAC significant reduction in a margin of safety. Section, State Library of Pennsylvania, for the remote shutdown panel is located in In this case, the margin of safety is implicit Walnut Street and Commonwealth fire area C-4 and would not be damaged by rather than being explicitly expressed as a a fire in fire area C-17. Operation of the Avenue, Box 1601, Harrisburg, PA numerical value. An implicit margin of safety control building HVAC system from the involves conditions for NRC acceptance. 17105. remote shutdown panel bypasses the logic Since the RBS Technical Specification Bases Attorney for licensee: Ernest L. Blake, between the chilled water system and the air do not specifically address a margin of safety Jr., Esquire, Shaw, Pittman, Potts & handling system. This would allow restart of for fire protection, the SAR, the NRC’s Safety the HVAC system for all areas except the Trowbridge, 2300 N Street, NW., Evaluation Report (SER), and appropriate Washington, DC 20037. main control room. The scenario would conclude in a manner similar to that other licensing basis documents were NRC Project Director: Phillip F. reviewed to determine if the proposed McKee described in RBS USAR Appendix 15A, Event 52, ‘‘Reactor Shutdown From Outside change would result in a reduction in a Gulf States Utilities Company, Cajun Main Control Room.’’ margin of safety. As stated, in part, in Attachment 4 to NPF-47: Electric Power Cooperative, and In summary, the probability of a fire occurring in fire area C-17 is not increased. EOI shall implement and maintain in effect Entergy Operations, Inc., Docket No. all provisions of the approved fire protection 50-458, River Bend Station, Unit 1, However, if a fire were to occur in fire area C-17 which caused the loss of main control program as described in the Final Safety West Feliciana Parish, Louisiana room HVAC, the remote shutdown system Analysis Report for the facility through Date of amendment request: January would provide an acceptable method of Amendment 22 and as approved in the SER 20, 1995 shutdown. The low fire loading and sparse dated May 1984 and Supplement 3 dated Description of amendment request: concentration of exposed combustible August 1985 subject to provisions 2 and 3.... material in fire area C-17 would limit fire As discussed in the Reason for Request, The proposed amendment would revise SSER 3 dated August 1985 states, in part: the fire hazards analysis for the River spread. Therefore, this request does not involve a significant increase in the On the basis of its evaluation the staff finds Bend Station (RBS) by allowing a probability or consequences of an accident that the applicant’s fire protection program deviation from 10 CFR 50, Appendix R, previously evaluated. with approved deviations is in conformance Section III.G.3 with respect to the 2) The request does not create the with the guidelines of BTP CMEB 9.5-1, requirement for a fixed fire suppression possibility of occurrence of a new or different sections III.G, III.J, and III.O of Appendix R system in fire area C-17. This area kind of accident from any accident to 10CFR50, and GDC 3, and is, therefore, houses the control building heating, previously evaluated. acceptable. ventilation and air conditioning (HVAC) The event of concern is a fire in fire area Thus, the margin of safety in this case can be defined as conformance with the specified systems and the loss due to a fire could C-17. Fire area C-17 does not have a fixed suppression system as required by 10 CFR fire protection guidelines. 10 CFR 50, cause the loss of main control room 50, Appendix R, Section III.G.3. Fire Appendix R, Section III.G.3, requires, in part, habitability. C-17 does not have a fixed suppression systems are generally used to that alternative shutdown capability be fire suppression system but depends limit fire spread, once the heat of the fire provided for areas where adequate separation upon the use of the existing remote opens thermally sensitive sprinklers. The low of redundant safe shutdown components shutdown system as described in the fire loading and sparse concentration of cannot be provided. In addition, fire updated safety analysis report (USAR). exposed combustible material in fire area C- detection and a fixed fire suppression system Basis for proposed no significant 17 would limit fire spread. However, for the must be installed in the area, room, or zone hazards consideration determination: purpose of event analysis, all equipment in under consideration. Since fire area C-17 As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), the fire area C-17 is assumed lost. Thus a fire in does not have a fixed suppression system, fire area C-17 is bounded by the same use of the remote shutdown system for a fire licensee has provided its analysis of the analysis with or in this fire area would deviate from the issue of no significant hazards without a fixed suppression system in requirements of 10 CFR 50, Appendix R, consideration, which is presented terms of equipment availability. Section III.G.3. However, as discussed below: The proposed method of shutdown for a previously, the low fire loading and sparse 1) The request does not involve a fire in fire area C-17 will be changed in that amount of exposed combustibles compensate significant increase in the probability or the remote shutdown system will be credited. for the lack of a fixed fire suppression consequences of accident previously Use of the remote shutdown system is system. There is no adverse impact on the evaluated. bounded by RBS USAR Appendix 15A, Event ability to achieve and maintain safe The event of concern is a fire in fire area 52, ‘‘Reactor Shutdown From Outside Main shutdown. Therefore, this request does not C-17. The low fire loading and sparse Control Room.’’ The HVAC for the remote involve a significant reduction in a margin of concentration of exposed combustible shutdown panel is located in fire area C-4 safety. material in fire area C-17 would limit fire and would be undamaged by a fire in fire The NRC staff has reviewed the spread. However, for this scenario all area C-17. Operation of the control building licensee’s analysis and, based on this equipment in fire area C-17 will be assumed HVAC system from the remote shutdown lost. Fire area C-17 contains the air handling panel bypasses the logic between the chilled review, it appears that the three units for the main control room envelope. water system and the air handling system. standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) are The loss of both air handling units would This would allow restart of the HVAC system satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff cause the control building chillers to stop for all areas except the main control room. proposes to determine that the Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices 14023 amendment request involves no Safe shutdown following a seismic event Northern States Power Company, significant hazards consideration. can be achieved using the LPCI [low pressure Docket Nos. 50-282 and 50-306, Prairie Local Public Document Room coolant injection] and ESW [emergency Island Nuclear Generating Plant, Unit location: Government Documents service water] systems, and the SRVs [safety Nos. 1 and 2, Goodhue County, Department, Louisiana State University, relief valves], which are all seismically Minnesota Baton Rouge, Louisiana 70803 qualified. Therefore, the FWCI system is not required to mitigate a seismic event. Date of amendment requests: January Attorney for licensee: Mark 9, 1995, as supplemented February 7, Wetterhahn, Esq., Winston & Strawn, 2. Create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any 1995 1400 L Street, N.W., Washington, D.C. Description of amendment requests: 20005 previously analyzed. Seismic reclassification of portions of The proposed amendments would NRC Project Director: William D. revise Prairie Island Nuclear Generating Beckner FWCI does not create the possibility of a new kind of an accident. The portion of the piping Plant Technical Specification (TS) 4.12, Northeast Nuclear Energy Company up to the second isolation valve (from the ‘‘Steam Generator Tube Surveillance,’’ (NNECO), Docket No. 50-245, Millstone RPV [reactor pressure vessel]), is seismically to incorporate revised acceptance Nuclear Power Station, Unit 1, New qualified and will remain classified as criteria for steam generator tubes with London County, Connecticut seismic. This ensures that a postulated degradation in the tubesheet roll failure in the non-seismic portion of piping expansion region. These criteria for Date of amendment request: July 28, or components does not degrade containment steam generator tube acceptance were 1994 integrity or result in a blowdown of the RPV. developed by Westinghouse Electric Description of amendment request: Consequential and environmental effects of a Corporation and are known as F* (≥F- The proposed amendment would add a FW [feedwater] piping failure have been Star’’) and L* (≥L-Star’’). These criteria footnote to Technical Specifcaiton 3.5.C. analyzed in the HELB [high energy line would be utilized to avoid unnecessary The footnote would state that the break] program and have been found to be plugging and sleeving of steam operability of the feedwater coolant acceptable. generator tubes. injection (FWCI) system be independent 3. Involve a significant reduction in the Basis for proposed no significant of its seismic capability. margin of safety. hazards consideration determination: Basis for proposed no significant All accidents, including LOCAs, can be As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), the hazards consideration determination: mitigated without using FWCI. FWCI is also licensee has provided its analysis of the As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), the not necessary for safe shutdown following a issue of no significant hazards licensee has provided its analysis of the seismic event. The intended function of the consideration, which is presented issue of no significant hazards FWCI subsystem is to reduce the likelihood below: consideration, which is presented of core uncovery during the lifetime of the 1. The proposed amendment[s] will not below: plant. The CS [core spray] and LPCI involve a significant increase in the NNECO has reviewed the proposed change subsystems provide redundant and diverse probability or consequences of an accident in accordance with 10CFR50.92 and means of injecting water to the RPV. The previously evaluated. concluded that the change does not involve FWCI subsystem provides an additional F* Steam Generator Tube Repair Criteria a significant hazards consideration (SHC). The supporting technical and safety diverse means to inject water. Since FWCI The basis for this conclusion is that the three evaluations of the subject criterion criteria of 10CFR50.92(c) are not will be maintained QA Category 1 (except for demonstrate that the presence of the compromised. The proposed change does not the seismic attribute), it will continue to tubesheet will enhance the tube integrity in involve an SHC because the change would provide the additional diversity to the the region of the hardroll by precluding tube not: injection systems. Considering the intended deformation beyond its initial expanded 1. Involve a significant increase in the function of the subsystem and the credit outside diameter. The resistance to both tube probability or consequences of an accident taken in the accident analysis, reclassifying rupture and tube collapse is strengthened by previously analyzed. FWCI to be non-seismic does not the presence of the tubesheet in that region. Any postulated failure in the non-seismic significantly reduce the margin of safety. The results of hardrolling of the tube into the portion of the FWCI subsystem may result in tubesheet is an interference fit between the a loss of feedwater flow transient. However The NRC staff has reviewed the tube and the tubesheet. Tube rupture cannot comparing the probability of occurrence of a licensee’s analysis and, based on this occur because the contact between the tube seismic event, any increase in the probability review, it appears that the three and tubesheet does not permit sufficient of occurrence of a loss of feedwater event standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) are movement of tube material. The radial would be small. The proposed change would satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff preload developed by the rolling process will have no impact on the probability of proposes to determine that the secure a postulated separated tube end occurrence of any other accident, including within the tubesheet during all plant LOCAs [loss of coolant accidents]. amendment request involves no conditions. In a similar manner, the The FWCI subsystem will continue to be significant hazards consideration. tubesheet does not permit sufficient maintained as QA Category 1 (except for the Local Public Document Room movement of tube material to permit seismic attribute). Therefore, it will remain location: Learning Resource Center, buckling collapse of the tube during available for accident mitigation for most postulated LOCA [loss-of-coolant accident] scenarios. Nevertheless, LOCA analyses have Three Rivers Community-Technical loadings. been reevaluated to demonstrate that FWCI is College, Thames Valley Campus, 574 The F* length of roll expansion is not necessary to show compliance with New London Turnpike, Norwich, CT sufficient to preclude tube pullout from tube 10CFR50.46. Potentially limiting LOCA 06360. degradation located below the F* distance, scenarios have been analyzed without the Attorney for licensee: Ms. L. M. regardless of the extent of the tube FWCI subsystem using an approved LOCA degradation. The existing Technical methodology. An active single failure was Cuoco, Senior Nuclear Counsel, Specification leakage rate requirements and postulated in addition to not taking credit for Northeast Utilities Service Company, accident analysis assumptions remain the FWCI subsystem. Based on the results of Post Office Box 270, Hartford, CT unchanged in the unlikely event that these analyses, the current design basis large 06141-0270. significant leakage from this region does and small break LOCAs remain bounding. occur. As noted above, tube rupture and Moreover, FWCI is not credited in mitigating NRC Project Director: Phillip F. pullout is not expected for tubes using the F* any of the non-LOCA transients/accidents. McKee criterion. Any leakage out of the tube from 14024 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices within the tubesheet at any elevation in the Implementation of the proposed F* to plant safety as defined in the USAR or the tubesheet is fully bounded by the existing criterion does not introduce any significant Technical Specification Bases. steam generator tube rupture analysis changes to the plant design basis. Use of the L* included in the Prairie Island Plant USAR criterion does not provide a mechanism to The use of the alternate tubesheet plugging [Updated Safety Analysis Report]. For plants initiate an accident outside of the region of criteria has been demonstrated to maintain with partial depth roll expansion like Prairie the expanded portion of the tube. Any the integrity of the tube bundle Island, a postulated tube separation within hypothetical accident as a result of any tube commensurate with the requirements of Reg. the tube near the top of the roll expansion degradation in the expanded portion of the Guide 1.121 for indications in the free span (with subsequent limited tube axial tube would be bounded by the existing tube of tubes and the primary to secondary displacement) would not be expected to rupture accident analysis. Tube bundle pressure boundary under normal and result in coolant release rates equal to those structural integrity will be maintained. Tube postulated accident conditions. Acceptable assumed in the USAR for a steam generator bundle leaktightness will be maintained such tube degradation for the L* criteria is any tube rupture event due to the limited gap that any postulated accident leakage from F* degradation indication with axial or nearly between the tube and tubesheet. The tubes will be negligible with regards to offsite axial cracking in the tubesheet region, more proposed plugging criterion does not doses. than the L* distance below the bottom of the adversely impact any other previously L* transition between the roll expansion and the evaluated design basis accident. Implementation of the proposed alternate unexpended tube. For tubes with axial or Leakage testing of roll expanded tubes tubesheet tube plugging criteria does not nearly axial cracks the strength of the tube indicates that for roll lengths approximately introduce changes to the plant design basis. relative to an axial load would not be equal to the F* distance, any postulated Use of the criteria does not provide a reduced below the strength required to resist faulted condition primary to secondary mechanism to result in an accident outside potential axial loads. The safety factors used leakage from F* tubes would be insignificant. of the region of the tubesheet expansion. Any in the verification of the strength of the L* Steam Generator Tube Repair Criteria hypothetical accident as a result of any tube degraded tube are consistent with the safety The presence of the tubesheet enhances degradation in the expanded portion of the factors in the ASME Boiler and Pressure steam generator tube integrity in the region tube would be bounded by the existing tube Vessel Code used in steam generator design. of the hardroll by precluding tube rupture accident analysis. The L* distance has been verified by testing deformation beyond its initial expanded 3. The proposed amendment[s] will not to be greater than the length of roll expansion outside diameter. The resistance to both tube involve a significant reduction in the margin required to preclude significant leakage rupture and tube collapse is strengthened by of safety. during normal and postulated accident the presence of the tubesheet in that region. F* conditions. The leak testing acceptance The result of the hardroll of the tube into the The use of the F* criterion has been criteria are based on the primary to tubesheet is an interference fit between the demonstrated to maintain the integrity of the secondary leakage limit in the Technical tube and the tubesheet. Tube rupture cannot tube bundle commensurate with the Specifications and the leakage assumptions ≥ occur because the contact between the tube requirements of Reg Guide 1.121 [ Bases for used in the USAR accident analyses. and tubesheet does not permit sufficient Plugging Degraded PWR Steam Generator Implementation of the proposed tubesheet ≥ movement of tube materials. In a similar Tubes ] (intended for indications in the free plugging criteria will decrease the number of manner, the tubesheet does not permit span of tubes) and the primary to secondary tubes which must be taken out of service sufficient movement of tube material to pressure boundary under normal and with tube plugs or repaired with sleeves. permit buckling collapse of the tube during postulated accident conditions. Acceptable Both plugs and sleeves reduce the RCS flow postulated LOCA loadings. tube degradation for the F* criterion is any margin, thus implementation of the alternate The type of degradation for which the L* degradation indication in the tubesheet plugging criteria will maintain the margin of criteria has been developed (cracking with an region, more than the F* distance below the flow that would otherwise be reduced in the axial or near axial orientation) has been bottom of the transition between the roll event of increased plugging or sleeving. found not to significantly reduce the axial expansion and the unexpanded tube. The Based on the above, it is concluded that the strength of a tube. An evaluation including safety factors used in the verification of the proposed change does not result in a analysis and testing has been done to strength of the degraded tube are consistent significant reduction in margin with respect determine the strength reduction for the axial with the safety factors in the ASME Boiler to plant safety as defined in the Updated loads with simulated axial and near axial and Pressure Vessel Code used in steam Safety Analysis Report or the bases of the cracks. This evaluation provided the basis for generator design. The F* distance has been Technical Specifications. the acceptance criteria for tube degradation verified by testing to be greater than the subject to the L* criteria. length of roll expansion required to preclude The NRC staff has reviewed the The length of roll expansion above L* is both tube pullout and significant leakage licensee’s analysis and, based on this sufficient to preclude significant leakage during normal and postulated accident review, it appears that the three from tube degradation located below the L* conditions. Resistance to tube pullout is standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) are distance. The existing Technical based upon the primary to secondary satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff Specification leakage rate requirements and pressure differential as it acts on the surface proposes to determine that the accident analysis assumptions remain area of the tube, which includes the tube wall amendment requests involve no unchanged in the unlikely event that cross-section, in addition to the inner significant hazards consideration. This significant leakage from this region does diameter based area of the tube. The leak occur. As noted above, tube rupture and testing acceptance criteria are based on the notice supersedes the staff’s previous pullout is not expected for tubes using the primary to secondary leakage limit in the notice which was published in the alternate plugging criteria. Technical Specifications and the leakage Federal Register February 1, 1995 (60 Any leakage out of the tube from within assumptions used in the USAR accident FR 6307). the tubesheet at any elevation in the analysis. Local Public Document Room tubesheet is fully bounded by the existing Implementation of the tubesheet plugging location: Minneapolis Public Library, steam generator tube rupture analysis criterion will decrease the number of tubes Technology and Science Department, included in the Prairie Island Updated Safety which must be taken out of service with tube Analysis Report. The proposed alternate plugs or repaired with sleeves. Both plugs 300 Nicollet Mall, Minneapolis, plugging criteria do not adversely impact any and sleeves reduce the RCS (reactor coolant Minnesota 55401 other previously evaluated design basis system) flow margin; thus, implementation of Attorney for licensee: Jay Silberg, Esq., accident. the F* criterion will maintain the margin of Shaw, Pittman, Potts, and Trowbridge, 2. The proposed amendment[s] will not flow that would otherwise be reduced in the 2300 N Street, NW, Washington, DC create the possibility of a new or different event of increased plugging or sleeving. 20037 kind of accident from any accident Based on the above, it is concluded that the previously analyzed. proposed change does not result in a NRC Project Director: Cynthia F* significant reduction in margin with respect Carpenter, Acting Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices 14025 Northern States Power Company, Local Public Document Room parameters in many accident analyses; Docket Nos. 50-282 and 50-306, Prairie location: Minneapolis Public Library, however, this proposed change does not Island Nuclear Generating Plant, Unit Technology and Science Department, remove or revise the limits on these parameters. Nos. 1 and 2, Goodhue County, 300 Nicollet Mall, Minneapolis, Additionally, it is proposed to revise TS Minnesota Minnesota 55401 2.10.4(1)(b) to clarify its requirements. Attorney for licensee: Jay Silberg, Esq., Currently TS 2.10.4(1) part (b) applies while Date of amendment requests: Shaw, Pittman, Potts, and Trowbridge, February 23, 1995 operating under the provisions of part (a) if 2300 N Street, NW, Washington, DC the plant computer incore detector alarms Description of amendment requests: 20037 become inoperable. This is incorrect in that The proposed amendments would NRC Project Director: Cynthia part (a) applies when the linear heat rate is revise the wording in the Prairie Island Carpenter, Acting being monitored by the ICI System and the technical specifications to allow linear heat rate is exceeding its limits as implementation of exemptions to the Omaha Public Power District, Docket indicated by valid detector alarms. Part (b) of schedule requirements of 10 CFR Part No. 50-285, Fort Calhoun Station,Unit this specification should apply only if the No. 1, Washington County, Nebraska linear heat rate is being monitored by the ICI 50, Appendix J. A related exemption System, is within its limits, and the plant request would grant temporary relief Date of amendment request: February computer incore detector alarms are from the requirements of 10 CFR Part 10, 1995 inoperable. 50, Appendix J, Section III.D.1.(a) which Description of amendment request: Administrative changes are also proposed requires Prairie Island Unit 2 to perform The proposed amendment to the which correct grammar and renumber/ a Type A test in the May 1995 refueling technical specifications (TSs) would relocate portions of the TS and bases to other outage. relocate the requirements for the incore TS, to correspond to the proposed change to instrumentation (ICI) system from the relocate ICI System requirements. Basis for proposed no significant Therefore, the proposed change does not hazards consideration determination: TS to the Updated Safety Analysis involve a significant increase in the As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), the Report (USAR). probability or consequences of an accident licensee has provided its analysis of the Basis for proposed no significant previously evaluated. issue of no significant hazards hazards consideration determination: (2) The proposed changes do not create the consideration, which is presented As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), the possibility of a new or different kind of below: licensee has provided its analysis of the accident from any previously evaluated. The ICI System will continue to be used to 1. The proposed amendment[s] will not issue of no significant hazards monitor TS limits on core power distribution. involve a significant increase in the consideration, which is presented There will be no physical alterations to the probability or consequences of an accident below: plant configuration, changes to setpoint previously evaluated. (1) The proposed changes do not involve values, or changes to the implementation of The proposed amendment is an a significant increase in the probability or setpoints or limits as a result of this proposed administrative change which allows consequences of an accident previously change. implementation of approved exemptions to evaluated. The proposed change to TS 2.10.4(1)(b) the regulations and by itself does not change The Incore Instrumentation (ICI) System is only clarifies its requirements. The proposed any retest schedules. used to measure core power distribution for change is more restrictive in that TS Therefore, the probability or consequences the purpose of Limiting Conditions for 2.10.4(1)(b), as currently written, could be of an accident previously evaluated are not Operation (LCO) monitoring of Technical interpreted to allow continued operation for affected by the proposed amendment. Specification (TS) limits on linear heat rate, up to seven days with the linear heat rate 2. The proposed amendment[s] will not unrodded planer radial peaking factor, exceeding its limits. The proposed change create the possibility of a new or different unrodded integrated radial peaking factor, clarifies this specification to ensure that TS kind of accident from any accident and azimuthal power tilt. The ICI System has 2.10.4(1)(a) is applied if the linear heat rate previously analyzed. no safety purpose itself; it measures is exceeded while being monitored by the ICI The proposed amendment is an parameters which have safety significance. System. TS 2.10.4(1)(a) requires that the administrative change which allows No change to the monitored parameters is linear heat rate be restored within one hour implementation of approved exemptions to proposed. The proposed changes will or a plant shutdown initiated. the regulations and by itself does not change relocate requirements on the number and Therefore, the proposed change does not any retest schedules. distribution of incore detectors used by the create the possibility of a new or different Therefore, the possibility of a new or ICI System when measuring these parameters kind of accident from any previously different kind of accident from any accident from the TS to the Updated Safety Analysis evaluated. previously evaluated would not be created by Report (USAR). Changes to the requirements (3) The proposed changes do not involve the proposed amendment. can be made without NRC approval when the a significant reduction in a 3. The proposed amendment[s] will not changes meet the criteria of 10 CFR 50.59. margin of safety. involve a significant reduction in the margin Changes to the ICI System requirements that The ICI System is used to measure core of safety do not meet the criteria of 10 CFR 50.59 must power distribution parameters which are a The proposed amendment is an be approved by the NRC by license direct measure of the margin of safety. The administrative change which allows amendment. limits on these parameters are not changed. implementation of approved exemptions to Relocation of the requirements on the ICI Therefore, the proposed change (i.e., the regulations and by itself does not change System from the TS to the USAR does not relocation of the ICI System operability any retest schedules. increase the probability or consequences of requirements to the USAR and/or plant Therefore, a significant reduction in the any accident previously analyzed because the procedures) does not involve a significant margin of safety would not be involved with ICI System is neither a precursor nor a reduction in a margin of safety. the proposed amendment. mitigator for any analyzed accident. The ICI The proposed change to TS 2.10.4(1)(b) The NRC staff has reviewed the System is used to ensure that operation helps ensure that the margin of safety is licensee’s analysis and, based on this within the LCOs for linear heat rate, maintained by clarifying when the TS is review, it appears that the three unrodded planer radial peaking factor, applicable. This clarification ensures that the unrodded integrated radial peaking factor, standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) are more restrictive actions of TS 2.10.4(1)(a) are and azimuthal power tilt is maintained. taken if the linear heat rate is exceeded while satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff However, its operation serves no mitigation being monitored by the ICI System. proposes to determine that the function associated with any USAR Section Therefore, the proposed change does not amendment requests involve no 14 accident analysis. The parameters involve a significant reduction in a margin of significant hazards consideration. measured by the ICI System are important safety. 14026 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices The NRC staff has reviewed the Delta-T channels to be inoperable with reactor trip and AFW pumps start. The licensee’s analysis and, based on this the TTD threshold power level for zero change to the Channels to Trip and Minimum review, it appears that the three seconds time adjusted to 0-percent rated Channels Operable columns is a clarifying standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) are thermal power (RTP) and by allowing change to reflect the proposed changes to the action statements and identifies that the RCS satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff the affected SG water level low-low Loop Delta-T does not provide a reactor trip proposes to determine that the channels to be placed in the tripped function. Therefore, the proposed changes to amendment request involves no condition, with one inoperable RCS the RCS Loop Delta-T function do not affect significant hazards consideration. loop Delta-T channel; and (d) change any of the accident analysis results. Local Public Document Room the Table 3.3-1 and Table 3.3-3 The proposed changes to revise Table 3.3- location: W. Dale Clark Library, 215 ‘‘Channels to Trip’’ and ‘‘Minimum 4, Functional Unit 3.c.4), and to delete cycle- South 15th Street, Omaha, Nebraska Channels Operable’’ columns to not specific TS, TS references to RM-14A and 68102 applicable (N.A.). RM-14B, and the word ‘‘analog’’ from the analog channel operation test are Attorney for licensee: LeBoeuf, Lamb, (2) The TS issued in LAs 70/69 would Leiby, and MacRae, 1875 Connecticut administrative and have no effect on plant be changed to (a) delete references to the operation. Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20009- plant vent noble gas activity monitors Therefore, the proposed changes do not 5728 (RM-14A and RM-14B) and footnote involve a significant increase in the NRC Project Director: Theodore R. references to applicability of the probability or consequences of an accident Quay containment ventilation exhaust previously evaluated. Pacific Gas and Electric Company, radiation monitors (RM-44A and RM- b. Does the change create the possibility of 44B) in TS Tables 3.3-3, 3.3-4, 3.3-5, 3.3- a new or different kind of accident from any Docket Nos. 50-275 and 50-323, accident previously evaluated? DiabloCanyon Nuclear Power Plant, 6, 4.3-2, and 4.3-3 and TS 4.9.9; and (b) The proposed change to the OPDT constant Unit Nos. 1 and 2, San Luis Obispo revise the ‘‘Trip Setpoint and Allowable K6 does not affect the assumed accident County, California Values’’ column in TS Table 3.3-4, initiation sequences. No new operating Functional Unit 3.c.4), to reference the Date of amendment requests: configuration is being imposed by the change offsite dose calculation procedure to K6 that would create a new failure December 30, 1994 (Reference LAR 94- (ODCP). scenario. No new failure modes are being 12) (3) Cycle-specific information in TS created for any plant equipment. Description of amendment requests: 4.3.2.1, TS 3.3.3.6, TS 4.4.4.1, TS 4.5.2, The proposed changes to the RCS Loop The proposed amendments would TS 3.8.1.1, TS 3.8.2.1, and TS 3.8.2.2 Delta-T function do not involve any physical revise the combined Technical modification to any plant system or change that is no longer necessary would be Specifications (TS) for the Diablo the methodology by which any safety-related deleted. Canyon Nuclear Power Plant, Unit Nos. system performs its function. (4) The word ‘‘analog’’ would be 1The proposed changes to revise Table 3.3- 1 and 2, to revise TS 2.2, 3/4.3.1, 3/ deleted from TS 4.4.9.3.1, TS 4.9.2, and 4.3.2, 3/4.3.3, 3/4.4.4, 3/4.4.9, 3/4.5.2, 3/ 4, Functional Unit 3.c.4), and to delete cycle- TS 4.10.3.2. specific TS, TS references to RM-14A and 4.8.1, 3/4.8.2, 3/4.9.2, 3/4.9.9, and 3/ Basis for proposed no significant RM-14B, and the word ‘‘analog’’ from the 4.10.3. The specific TS changes hazards consideration determination: analog channel operation test are proposed are as follows: As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), the administrative, would not result in any (1) The TS issued in License licensee has provided its analysis of the physical alteration to any plant system, and Amendments (LAs) 84/83 would be issue of no significant hazards would not be a change in the method by changed to (a) revise the value of the which any safety-related system performs its consideration, which is presented function. overpower Delta-temperature (OPDT) below: constant K6 in TS 2.2.1, Table 2.2-1, Therefore, the proposed changes do not a. Does the change involve a significant create the possibility of a new or different Note 3; (b) revise the reactor coolant increase in the probability or consequences kind of accident from any accident system (RCS) loop Delta-T function; and of an accident previously evaluated? previously evaluated. (c) make editorial corrections for The proposed change to the OPDT constant c. Does the change involve a significant clarification and consistency to TS 2.2.1 K6 is conservative and will not cause any reduction in a margin of safety? (and TS 2.2.1 Bases), TS 3/4.3.1, and TS design or analysis acceptance criteria to be The proposed change to the OPDT constant 3/4.3.2. exceeded. There is no effect on the structural K6 will not affect any accident analysis In revising the RCS loop Delta-T and functional integrity of any plant system. assumptions, initial conditions, or results. The OPDT function is part of the accident The proposed changes to the RCS Loop function, the licensee would (a) mitigation response and is not itself an incorporate the 0.99 multiplying factor Delta-T function do not affect any accident initiator for any transient. This change does analysis assumptions, initial conditions, or listed in TS 2.2.1, Table 2.2-1, Note 5, not affect the integrity of the fission product results. and TS 3/4.3.2, Table 3.3-4, Note 2, into barriers for mitigation of radiological dose The proposed changes to revise Table 3.3- constants B1 through B4; (b) change consequences as a result of an accident. 4, Functional Unit 3.c.4), and to delete cycle- ‘‘Steam Generator (SG) Water Level The proposed change to incorporate the specific TS, TS references to RM-14A and Low-Low’’ in TS 3/4.3.2, Table 3.3-3 0.99 multiplier into the TTD constants is an RM-14B, and the word ‘‘analog’’ from the and Table 4.3-2, Functional Unit 6.c, administrative change and has no effect on analog channel operation test are plant operation. The proposed change to administrative and clarify the TS. These ‘‘Auxiliary Feedwater’’ (AFW), by delete Mode 3 applicability of the RCS Loop deleting the Mode 3 applicability of the proposed changes have no effect on current Delta-T function does not affect any design operating methodologies or actions that RCS loop Delta-T function and by or analysis results. Allowing up to 4 RCS govern plant performance. adding a footnote to the Mode 3 Loop Delta-T channels to be inoperable with Therefore, the proposed changes do not applicability of the SG water level low- the TTD threshold power level for zero involve a significant reduction in a margin of low function requiring that the trip time seconds time delay adjusted to 0% RTP is safety. delay (TTD) associated with the SG conservative with respect to ESFs The NRC staff has reviewed the water level low-low channel be less [engineered safety features] and reactor trip licensee’s analysis and, based on this actuation time. Allowing the SG [steam than or equal to 464.1 seconds; (c) generator] water level low-low channels review, it appears that the three change TS 3/4.3.1, Table 3.3-1, Action affected by the inoperable RCS Loop Delta- standards of 50.92(c) are satisfied. 27, and TS 3/4.3.2, Table 3.3-3, Action T channels to be placed in the tripped Therefore, the NRC staff proposes to 29, by allowing up to four RCS loop condition is also conservative with respect to determine that the amendment requests Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices 14027 involve no significant hazards changes will not alter the operation of reliability of instrumentation as a result of consideration. equipment assumed to be available for the this change in STIs and AOTs. PECO Energy Local Public Document Room mitigation of accidents or transients by the performed reviews that confirmed these location: California Polytechnic State plant safety analysis or licensing basis. As analyses are applicable to PBAPS and that there would be no effect on the identification University, Robert E. Kennedy Library, justified in References 1 through 8, the proposed changes establish or maintain of excessive instrument setpoint drift as a Government Documents and Maps adequate assurance that components are result of increasing from monthly to quarterly Department, San Luis Obispo, California operable when necessary for the prevention the minimum interval between instrument 93407 or mitigation of accidents or transients and functional tests. The proposed required Attorney for licensee: Christopher J. that plant variables are maintained within actions ensure that actions to mitigate loss of Warner, Esq., Pacific Gas and Electric limits necessary to satisfy the assumptions single failure tolerance is initiated within 24 Company, P.O. Box 7442, San for initial conditions in the safety analyses. hours (12 hours for RPS) in accordance with Francisco, California 94120 These changes establish or modify time the results of the analyses in References 1 NRC Project Director: Theodore R. limits allowed for operation with inoperable through 8 and action to mitigate a loss of instrument function is initiated within 1 Quay instrument channels based on the analyses in References 1 through 8 and will not allow hour. Philadelphia Electric Company, Public continuous plant operation with plant The proposed changes which replace the Service Electric and Gas conditions such that a single failure will shutdown actions associated with inoperable result in a loss of any safety function. instrumentation with actions to declare the Company,Delmarva Power and Light supported system inoperable does not Company, and Atlantic City Electric Therefore, these changes will not increase the consequences of an accident previously involve a reduction in a margin of safety. The Company,Dockets Nos. 50-277 and 50- evaluated. proposed changes ensure that appropriate 278, Peach Bottom Atomic Power 2) The proposed changes do not create the compensatory measures are taken Station,Units Nos. 2 and 3, York possibility of a new or different kind of commensurate with approved TS Actions for County, Pennsylvania accident from any accident previously the affected systems and the safety analyses. evaluated. In addition, the proposed changes provide Date of application for amendments: the benefit of avoiding an unnecessary September 26, 1994 These proposed changes will not involve any physical changes to SSC, or the manner shutdown transient when appropriate Description of amendment request: in which these SSC are operated, maintained, measures are available to compensate for the The proposed TS changes extend modified, tested, or inspected. Therefore, inoperable instrumentation. surveillance test intervals and allowable these changes will not create the possibility There is no significant reduction in the margin of safety resulting from changes that out-of-service times for the testing and/ of a new or different kind of accident from reformat, renumber, and/or reword existing or repair of instrumentation that actuate any accident previously evaluated. The requirements to incorporate the changes changes in methods governing normal plant the Reactor Protection System, Primary above. Containment Isolation, Core and operation are consistent with the current The NRC staff has reviewed the safety analysis assumptions. Therefore, these Containment Cooling systems, Control licensee’s analysis and, based on this Rod Blocks, Radiation Monitoring changes will not create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any review, it appears that the three systems, and Alternate Rod Insertion/ accident previously evaluated. standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) are Recirculation Pump Trip. 3) The proposed changes do not involve a satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff Basis for proposed no significant significant reduction in a margin of safety. proposes to determine that the hazards consideration determination: The proposed TS changes increase the STIs amendment request involves no As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), the and AOTs for actuation instrumentation significant hazards consideration. licensee has provided its analysis of the based on analyses described and justified in Local Public Document Room issue of no significant hazards Licensing Topical Reports (References 2 location: Government Publications consideration, which is presented through 8) which have been evaluated in Section, State Library of Pennsylvania, below: associated Safety Evaluation Reports. These changes were incorporated into PBAPS (REGIONAL DEPOSITORY) Education 1. The proposed changes do not involve a Building, Walnut Street and significant increase in the probability or Technical Specifications consistent with consequences of an accident previously NUREG-1433. These changes can be Commonwealth Avenue, Box 1601, evaluated. classified into one of the following three Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 17105. The proposed TS changes increase the STIs categories: Attorney for licensee: J. W. Durham, and AOTs for actuation instrumentation a. Changes to the minimum STIs and AOTs Sr., Esquire, Sr. V. P. and General based on analyses described and justified in for the testing and/or repair of Counsel, Philadelphia Electric Licensing Topical Reports (References 2 instrumentation based on the results of Company, 2301 Market Street, through 8) [see licensee’s September 26, 1994 generic analyses in References 1 through 8; Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19101 application for reference information] which b. Changes to conditions, required actions, NRC Project Director: John F. Stolz have been evaluated in associated Safety and completion times needed to make Evaluation Reports. These changes were PBAPS TS requirements consistent with the Philadelphia Electric Company, Public incorporated into PBAPS Technical assumptions used in the analyses in Service Electric and Gas Specifications consistent with NUREG-1433. References 1 through 8; and, Company,Delmarva Power and Light TS requirements that govern Operability or c. Changes that reformat, renumber, and/or Company, and Atlantic City Electric routine testing of plant instruments are not reword existing requirements to incorporate Company,Dockets Nos. 50-277 and 50- the changes above. assumed to be initiators of any analyzed 278, Peach Bottom Atomic Power event because these instruments are intended All of the proposed changes will be to prevent, detect or mitigate accidents. incorporated into the PBAPS custom Station,Units Nos. 2 and 3, York Therefore, these changes will not involve an Technical Specifications using the same County, Pennsylvania increase in the probability of occurrence of approach and specific requirements used in Date of application for amendments: an accident previously evaluated. Reference 12. November 17, 1994 Additionally, these changes will not increase There is no significant reduction in the Description of amendment request: margin of safety resulting from changes to the the consequences of an accident previously The proposed changes to the Technical evaluated because the proposed change will STIs and AOTs for the testing and/or repair not involve any physical changes to plant of instrumentation based on the results of the Specifications (TS) are being requested systems, structures, or components (SSC), or analyses in References 1 through 8. These to support modifications 5384 and 5386 the manner in which these SSC are operated, analyses determined that there is no which upgrade the Main Stack and Vent maintained, modified, or inspected. The significant change in the availability and/or Stack Radiation Monitoring Systems. 14028 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices Basis for proposed no significant satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff new events. Therefore, the proposed changes hazards consideration determination: proposes to determine that the would not create the possibility of a different As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), the amendment request involves no or new kind of accident. 3. Involve a significant reduction in a licensee has provided its analysis of the significant hazards consideration. margin of safety. issue of no significant hazards Local Public Document Room The proposed decrease in RCS loop and consideration, which is presented location: Government Publications total flow rates has been analyzed and found below: Section, State Library of Pennsylvania, to have an insignificant effect on the 1. The proposed changes do not involve a (REGIONAL DEPOSITORY) Education applicable transient analyses found in the significant increase in the probability or Building, Walnut Street and FSAR. The proposed change to the wording consequences of an accident previously Commonwealth Avenue, Box 1601, of the parameter title on Table 3.2-1 is evaluated. Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 17105. editorial for clarity. Therefore, the proposed Neither the Main Stack nor the Vent Stack changes would not involve a significant Radiation Monitoring Systems serve as an Attorney for licensee: J. W. Durham, reduction in any margin of safety. initiator or contributor to any accidents Sr., Esquire, Sr. V. P. and General Therefore, based on the information previously evaluated. The systems provide Counsel, Philadelphia Electric presented above, PSE&G has concluded there indication and detection of radioactivity and Company, 2301 Market Street, is no significant hazards consideration. effluent release in the main and vent stacks. Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19101 The NRC staff has reviewed the The new systems perform the same function NRC Project Director: John F. Stolz licensee’s analysis and, based on this as the old, and have equal or better review, it appears that the three Public Service Electric & Gas Company, performance characteristics. Installation and standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) are Docket No. 50-311, Salem Nuclear operation of the new radiation monitoring satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff systems do not degrade any active or passive Generating Station, Unit No. 2, Salem proposes to determine that the equipment that responds to an accident. County, New Jersey The proposed increase in the surveillance amendment request involves no test interval of the subject radiation Date of amendment request: February significant hazards consideration. monitoring systems from 12 to 18 months is 3, 1994, supplemented September 19, Local Public Document Room consistent with vendor recommendations, 1994, and November 23, 1994 location: Salem Free Public library, 112 and is based on operating experience with Description of amendment request: West Broadway, Salem, New Jersey instrumentation of a similar design. The proposed amendment revises the 08079 Therefore, the proposed changes do not Technical Specifications to reflect a Attorney for licensee: Mark J. involve a significant increase in the reduction in the Reactor Coolant System Wetterhahn, Esquire, Winston and probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated. flow. Strawn, 1400 L Street, NW, Washington, 2. The proposed changes do not create the Basis for proposed no significant DC 20005-3502 possibility of a new or different kind of hazards consideration determination: NRC Project Director: John F. Stolz accident from any previously evaluated. As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), the Toledo Edison Company, Centerior Both modifications replace obsolete licensee has provided its analysis of the Service Company, and The Cleveland radiation monitoring equipment and have the issue of no significant hazards Electric Illuminating Company, Docket same failure modes as the existing consideration, which is presented equipment. The upgraded systems are No. 50-346, Davis-Besse Nuclear Power below: Station, Unit No. 1, Ottawa County, considered enhancements to the existing 1. Involve a significant increase in the systems and are considered neither a probability or consequences of an accident Ohio contributor nor initiator of any accidents previously analyzed. Date of amendment request: January previously evaluated. No component modification, system 30, 1995 Based on the above, the proposed changes realignment, or change in operations will do not create the possibility of a new or Description of amendment request: occur which could affect the probability of The proposed amendment would revise different kind of accident from any any accident or transient. The proposed previously evaluated. Technical Specification (TS) 4.6.1.2.a reduction in RCS loop and total flow rates and associated Bases for 3/4.6.1.2 to 3. The proposed changes do not involve a will not change the probability of a challenge significant reduction in a margin of safety. to any Engineered Safeguard Feature or other state that Type A tests for overall Neither the accuracy nor the device. The consequences of previously integrated containment leakage rate responsiveness of the existing radiation analyzed accidents have been found to shall be conducted in accordance with monitoring equipment will be degraded as a remain within acceptable licensing basis the requirements specified in Appendix result of the installation of modifications limits when the reduced flow rates are J of 10 CFR 50, as modified by NRC- 5384 and 5386. Revisions to the calibration assumed. The system transient response is and surveillance frequencies are based on approved exemptions. Additionally, TS not affected by the initial RCS flow 4.6.1.2.b would be revised to eliminate vendor information and experience with assumption, unless the initial assumption is instrumentation of similar design. The the reference to the schedule contained so low as to impair the steady-state core in TS 4.6.1.2.a. changes associated with setpoints and the cooling capability or steam generator heat lower limit of detection are in the transfer capability. This is clearly not the Basis for proposed no significant conservative direction. The upgraded main case with a 1% reduction in RCS flow. The hazards consideration determination: stack system continues to provide a non- proposed change to the wording of the As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), the safety related trip signal to Group III isolation parameter title on Table 3.2-1 is editorial for licensee has provided its analysis of the valves during purging of the containment clarity. Therefore, the proposed changes do issue of no significant hazards through the SBGTS [standby gas treatment not involve a significant increase in the consideration, which is presented system]. The revisions to parameter probability or consequences of an accident descriptions and instrument designation are below: previously analyzed. Toledo Edison has reviewed the proposed considered administrative. 2. Create the possibility of a new or change and determined that a significant Therefore, based on the above, the different kind of accident. hazards consideration does not exist because proposed changes do not involve a No component modification, system operation of the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power significant reduction in a margin of safety. realignment, or change in operating Station, Unit No. 1, in accordance with these The NRC staff has reviewed the procedure will occur which could create the changes would: licensee’s analysis and, based on this possibility of a new event not previously 1a. Not involve a significant increase in the review, it appears that the three considered. The proposed reduction in RCS probability of an accident previously standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) are loop and total flow rates will not initiate any evaluated because no accident initiators, Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices 14029 conditions or assumptions are significantly Toledo Edison Company, Centerior to reflect the extension to 21 EFPY is an affected by the proposed changes. Service Company, and The Cleveland administrative change and does not affect The proposed change would revise Electric Illuminating Company, Docket any activities or equipment in plant Technical Specification (TS) Surveillance No. 50-346, Davis-Besse Nuclear Power operation. 3. Not involve a significant reduction in a Requirement (SR) 4.6.1.2.a to allow overall Station, Unit No. 1, Ottawa County, integrated containment leakage rate (Type A) margin of safety because: (1) revision of the Ohio pressure-temperature curves and the testing to be scheduled in accordance with 10 Date of amendment request: January extended applicability of the pressurizer CFR 50 Appendix J, as modified by approved level/RCS pressure limit curves maintains exemptions, and would make associated 30, 1995 Description of amendment request: the present margin of safety from reactor administrative changes to TS SR 4.6.1.2.b vessel brittle fracture as required by 10 CFR and to TS Bases 3/4.6.1.2. As stated above, The proposed amendment would 50, Appendix G, and (2) the revision to none of these proposed changes involve provide new Reactor Coolant Pressure License Condition 2.C(3)(d) and the Bases accident initiators, conditions, or Boundary (RCPB) pressure-temperature revision are administrative and do not affect assumptions. limit curves that are applicable up to 21 any analyses which provide the basis for the 1b. Not involve a significant increase in the effective full power years (EFPY). Technical Specifications. consequences of an accident previously Basis for proposed no significant The NRC staff has reviewed the evaluated because no accident conditions or hazards consideration determination: licensee’s analysis and, based on this assumptions are affected by the proposed As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), the review, it appears that the three changes. licensee has provided its analysis of the standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) are The results of the previous Type A testing issue of no significant hazards satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff demonstrate a high degree of containment consideration, which is presented proposes to determine that the integrity. The Type B and C testing below: amendment request involves no performed since the last Type A test provides Toledo Edison had reviewed the proposed significant hazards consideration. confidence that the high degree of change and determined that a significant Local Public Document Room containment integrity will be maintained hazards consideration does not exist because location: University of Toledo Library, during the interval to the next Type A test. operation of Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Documents Department, 2801 Bancroft Station, Unit 1, in accordance with this Therefore, the proposed changes do not alter Avenue, Toledo, Ohio 43606. change would: Attorney for licensee: Jay E. Silberg, the source term, containment isolation, or 1a. Not involve a significant increase in the allowable releases, and will not increase the probability of an accident previously Esquire, Shaw, Pittman, Potts and radiological consequences of a previously evaluated because: (1) revision of the Trowbridge, 2300 N Street, N.W., evaluated accident. pressure-temperature curves and the Washington, DC 20037. 2. Not create the possibility of a new or extended applicability of the pressurizer NRC Project Director: Leif J. Norrholm different kind of accident from any accident level/RCS pressure limit curves for periods Virginia Electric and Power Company, when relief valve DH4849 is inoperable will previously evaluated because no new or Docket Nos. 50-280 and 50-281, Surry different accident initiators or assumptions continue to provide the same level of protection of the RCPB as was previously Power Station, Unit Nos. 1 and 2, Surry are introduced by the proposed changes. The County, Virginia proposed changes do not affect the design or evaluated, and (2) the revision to License Condition 2.C(3)(d) is administrative to operation of any plant system, structure, or Date of amendment request: February reflect the validity of the present analyses to component. The proposed changes do not 14, 1995 21 EFPY and (3) the revision to the Technical Description of amendment request: affect any accident initiators and are not Specification Bases initiators themselves. The proposed changes to reflect the extension to 21 EFPY is The proposed change revises Technical do not alter any accident scenarios. administrative and does not affect any Specification 4.4.D to reference the 3. Not involve a significant reduction in a previously analyzed accidents. testing requirements of 10 CFR Part 50, margin of safety. The initial conditions and 1b. Not involve a significant increase in the Appendix J, and to state that the methodologies used in the accident analyses consequences of an accident previously Nuclear Regulatory Commission- remain unchanged. As described above, the evaluated because: (1) revision of the approved exemptions to the applicable proposed changes do not significantly reduce pressure-temperature curves and the regulatory requirements are permitted. or adversely affect the confidence that the extended applicability of the pressurizer Basis for proposed no significant level/RCS pressure limit curves for periods present high degree of containment integrity hazards consideration determination: when relief valve DH4849 is inoperable will will be maintained. continue to provide the same level of As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), the The NRC staff has reviewed the protection of the RCPB as was previously licensee has provided its analysis of the licensee’s analysis and, based on this evaluated, and (2) the revision to License issue of no significant hazards review, it appears that the three Condition 2.C(3)(d) is administrative to consideration, which is presented reflect the validity of the present analyses to below: standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) are 21 EFPY and (3) the revision to the Technical Virginia Electric and Power Company has satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff Specification Bases to reflect the extension to performed an evaluation of ... the proposed proposes to determine that the 21 EFPY is administrative and does not affect administrative Technical Specification amendment request involves no any previously analyzed accidents. change, in accordance with 10 CFR significant hazards consideration. 2. Not create the possibility of a new or 50.91(a)(1) regarding no significant hazards different kind of accident from any accident considerations using the standards in 10 CFR Local Public Document Room previously evaluated because: (1) revision of 50.92(c). A discussion of these standards as location: University of Toledo Library, the pressure-temperature curves and the they relate to this ... amendment request Documents Department, 2801 Bancroft extended applicability of the pressurizer follows. Avenue, Toledo, Ohio 43606. level/RCS pressure limit curves will continue Criterion 1 - Does Not Involve a Significant to provide protection against reactor vessel Increase in the Probability or Consequences Attorney for licensee: Jay E. Silberg, failure due to brittle fracture concerns under of an Accident Previously Evaluated. Esquire, Shaw, Pittman, Potts and all postulated circumstances, and (2) the The proposed change ... revises Technical Trowbridge, 2300 N Street, N.W., revision to License Condition 2.C(3)(d) is Specification 4.4.D to reference the testing Washington, DC 20037. administrative to reflect the validity of the frequency requirements of 10 CFR 50 NRC Project Director: Leif J. Norrholm present analyses to 21 EFPY and (3) the Appendix J and to state that NRC approved revision to the Technical Specification Bases exemptions to the applicable regulatory 14030 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices requirements are permitted. The current Previously Published Notices Of Expiration date of individual notice: Technical Specification requires retests in Consideration Of Issuance Of March 31, 1995 accordance with Section III.D.1(a) of Amendments To Facility Operating Local Public Document Room Appendix J. The proposed administrative Licenses, Proposed No Significant location: Callaway County Public change simply includes the statement ‘‘as Hazards Consideration Determination, Library, 710 Court Street, Fulton, modified by NRC approved exemptions.’’ No new requirements are added, nor are any And Opportunity For A Hearing Missouri 65251. existing requirements deleted. Any specific The following notices were previously Notice Of Issuance Of Amendments To changes to the requirements of Section published as separate individual Facility Operating Licenses III.D.1(a) will require a submittal from notices. The notice content was the During the period since publication of Virginia Electric and Power Company under same as above. They were published as the last biweekly notice, the 10 CFR 50.12 and subsequent review and individual notices either because time approval by the NRC prior to Commission has issued the following did not allow the Commission to wait implementation. The proposed change is amendments. The Commission has for this biweekly notice or because the stated generically to avoid the need for determined for each of these action involved exigent circumstances. further Technical Specification changes if amendments that the application They are repeated here because the different exemptions are approved in the complies with the standards and future. biweekly notice lists all amendments requirements of the Atomic Energy Act The proposed change, in itself, does not issued or proposed to be issued affect reactor operations or accident analyses involving no significant hazards of 1954, as amended (the Act), and the and has no radiological consequences. The consideration. Commission’s rules and regulations. change provides clarification so that future For details, see the individual notice The Commission has made appropriate Technical Specifications changes will not be in the Federal Register on the day and findings as required by the Act and the necessary to correspond to applicable NRC page cited. This notice does not extend Commission’s rules and regulations in approved exemptions from the requirements the notice period of the original notice. 10 CFR Chapter I, which are set forth in of Appendix J. the license amendment. Therefore, this proposed change does not Illinois Power Company and Soyland Notice of Consideration of Issuance of involve a significant increase in the Power Cooperative, Inc., Docket No. 50- Amendment to Facility Operating probability or consequences of any accident 461, Clinton Power Station, Unit No. 1, previously evaluated. License, Proposed No Significant Criterion 2 - Does Not Create the Possibility DeWitt County, Illinois Hazards Consideration Determination, of a New or Different Kind of Accident from Date of amendment request: February and Opportunity for A Hearing in any Previously Evaluated. 14, 1995 connection with these actions was The proposed Technical Specification Brief description of amendment published in the Federal Register as amendment provides clarification to a request: The amendment request indicated. specification that paraphrases a codified proposes changes to Technical Unless otherwise indicated, the requirement. Specification 3.8.2, ‘‘AC Sources- Commission has determined that these Since the proposed change would not Shutdown;’’ 3.8.5, ‘‘DC Sources- amendments satisfy the criteria for change the design, configuration or method categorical exclusion in accordance of operation of the plant, it would not create Shutdown;’’ and 3.8.8, ‘‘Inverters- the possibility of a new or different kind of Shutdown.’’ The proposed changes with 10 CFR 51.22. Therefore, pursuant accident from any previously evaluated. would revise the operability to 10 CFR 51.22(b), no environmental Criterion 3 - Does Not Involve a Significant requirements for the Division 3 diesel impact statement or environmental Reduction in the Margin of Safety. generator and the Division 3 and 4 assessment need be prepared for these The proposed Technical Specification batteries, battery chargers, and inverters amendments. If the Commission has change is administrative and clarifies the to apply only when the high pressure prepared an environmental assessment relationship between the requirements of TS core spray system is required to be under the special circumstances 4.4.D, Appendix J, and any approved operable.Date of publication of provision in 10 CFR 51.12(b) and has exemptions to Appendix J. It does not, in made a determination based on that itself, change a safety limit or [a] Limiting individual notice in Federal Register: Condition for Operation. The NRC will February 17, 1995 (60 FR 9412). assessment, it is so indicated. directly approve any proposed change or Expiration date of individual notice: For further details with respect to the exemption to III.D.1(a) of Appendix J prior to March 20, 1995 action see (1) the applications for implementation. Local Public Document Room amendment, (2) the amendment, and (3) Therefore, this change does not involve a location: Vespasian Warner Public the Commission’s related letter, Safety significant reduction in the margin of safety. Library, 120 West Johnson Street, Evaluation and/or Environmental The NRC staff has reviewed the Clinton, Illinois 61727. Assessment as indicated. All of these licensee’s analysis and, based on this items are available for public inspection review, it appears that the three Union Electric Company, Docket No. at the Commission’s Public Document standards of 50.92(c) are satisfied. 50-483, Callaway Plant, Unit 1, Room, the Gelman Building, 2120 L Therefore, the NRC staff proposes to Callaway County, Missouri Street, NW., Washington, DC, and at the determine that the amendment request Date of amendment request: local public document rooms for the involves no significant hazards September 8, 1994 particular facilities involved. consideration. Brief description of amendment Local Public Document Room request: The amendment request Arizona Public Service Company, et al., location: Swem Library, College of proposes changes to Technical Docket No. STN 50-529, Palo Verde William and Mary, Williamsburg, Specification Section 3/4.9.1 to Nuclear Generating Station, Unit 2, Virginia 23185. establish administrative controls to Maricopa County, Arizona Attorney for licensee: Michael W. address a possible boron dilution event Date of application for amendment: Maupin, Esq., Hunton and Williams, directly from the reactor makeup water November 30, 1994, as supplemented by Riverfront Plaza, 951 E. Byrd Street, system. letter dated January 27, 1995 Richmond, Virginia 23219. Date of publication of individual Brief description of amendment: The NRC Project Director: David B. notice in Federal Register: March 1, amendment changed the pressurizer Matthews 1995 (60 FR 11151). code safety valve lift setting from 2500 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices 14031 psia to 2475 psia. The lift setting is Technical Specifications to remove the of application for amendments: July 29, being changed to permit Unit 2 to requirement to verify, every 18 months, 1992, as supplemented January 14, operate with up to 1500 plugged tubes that the control room ventilation can be 1993, and February 16, 1993 in each steam generator. manually isolated. Brief description of amendments: Date of issuance: March 1, 1995 Date of issuance: February 28, 1995 Dresden and Quad Cities Technical Effective date: March 1, 1995 Effective date: February 28, 1995 Specification Upgrade Program. Date of Amendment No.: 78 Amendment Nos.: 60 and 60 issuance: February 16, 1995Effective Facility Operating License No. NPF- Facility Operating License Nos. NPF- date: Immediately, to be implemented 74: The amendment revised the 72 and NPF-77: The amendments by December 31, 1995. Technical Specifications. revised the Technical Specifications. Amendment Nos.: 131, 125, 152, and Date of initial notice in Federal Date of initial notice in Federal 148 Register: January 4, 1995 (60 FR 496) Register: January 25, 1995 (60 FR 4930). Facility Operating License Nos. DPR- The additional information contained in The Commission’s related evaluation of 19, DPR-25, DPR-29 and DPR-30. The the January 27, 1995, supplemental the amendments is contained in a Safety amendments revised the Technical letter was clarifying in nature and thus Evaluation dated February 28, 1995. No Specifications. within the scope of the initial notice significant hazards consideration Date of initial notice in Federal and did not affect the NRC staff’s comments received: No Register: June 23, 1993 (58 FR 34071) proposed no significant hazards Local Public Document Room The Commission’s related evaluation of consideration determination. The location: Wilmington Township Public the amendments is contained in a Safety Commission’s related evaluation of the Library, 201 S. Kankakee Street, Evaluation dated February 16, 1995. No amendment is contained in a Safety Wilmington, Illinois 60481. significant hazards consideration Evaluation dated March 1, 1995.No comments received: No Commonwealth Edison Company, Local Public Document Room significant hazards consideration Docket Nos. STN 50-454 and STN 50- comments received: No. location: For Dresden, The Morris 455, Byron Station, Unit Nos. 1 and 2, Public Library, 604 Liberty Street, Local Public Document Room Ogle County, IllinoisDocket Nos. STN location: Phoenix Public Library, 12 Morris, Illinois 60450; For Quad Cities, 50-456 and STN 50-457, Braidwood The Dixon Public Library, 221 East McDowell Road, Phoenix, Arizona Station, Unit Nos. 1 and 2, Will County, 85004 Hennepin Avenue, Dixon, Illinois Illinois 61021. Boston Edison Company, Docket No. Date of application for amendments: Commonwealth Edison Company, 50-293, Pilgrim Nuclear Power August 31, 1993, as supplemented July Station,Plymouth County, Docket Nos. 50-237 and 50-249, 19, 1994. Dresden Nuclear Power Station, Units 2 Massachusetts Brief description of amendments: The and 3, Grundy County, Illinois Date of application for amendment: amendments revise the technical September 6, 1994 specifications by increasing the allowed Date of application for amendments: Brief description of amendment: The outage time for an inoperable chiller July 29, 1992, as supplemented January proposed amendment relocates the only in MODES 1 through 4, adding an 14, 1993, February 16, 1993 and January alarms for the drywell to suppression optional ACTION statement in MODES 27, 1995 chamber vacuum breaker to a different 5 and 6, and adding a surveillance Brief description of amendments: The annunicator panel. requirement for the control room July 29, 1992, application, is one of Date of issuance: February 16, 1995 ventilation system. twelve applications which have been Effective date: To be implemented prior Date of issuance: March 2, 1995 submitted by Commonwealth Edison to startup from refueling outage ι10. Effective date: March 2, 1995 Company (ComEd) in an effort to Amendment No.: 158 Amendment Nos.: 70, 70, 61 and 61 upgrade the existing custom Technical Facility Operating License No. DPR- Facility Operating License Nos. NPF- Specifications (TS) to the Boiling Water 35: Amendment revised the Technical 37, NPF-66, NPF-72 and NPF-77: The Reactor (BWR) Standard Technical Specifications. amendments revised the Technical Specifications (STS). Dresden has Date of initial notice in Federal Specifications. recently rescheduled the Unit 2 Register: October 26, 1994 (59 FR Date of initial notice in Federal refueling outage from March 4, 1995, 53839) The Commission’s related Register: January 25, 1995 (60 FR 4932). until June 1995. Currently, the evaluation of the amendment is The Commission’s related evaluation of surveillance frequency for certain contained in a Safety Evaluation dated the amendments is contained in a Safety Inservice Testing (IST) requirements No significant hazards consideration Evaluation dated March 2, 1995.No expires on February 21, 1995. The comments received: No significant hazards consideration current TSs do not make provisions for Local Public Document Room comments received: No a grace period for surveillance location: Plymouth Public Library, 11 Local Public Document Room frequencies of the IST program. In North Street, Plymouth, Massachusetts location: For Byron, the Byron Public accordance with BWR STS guidance, 02360. Library, 109 N. Franklin, P.O. Box 434, the TSs regarding IST proposed in the Byron, Illinois 61010; for Braidwood, July 29, 1992, application, allow the Commonwealth Edison Company, the Wilmington Township Public flexibility to perform these tests Docket Nos. STN 50-456 and STN 50- Library, 201 S. Kankakee Street, appropriately during refueling outages 457, Braidwood Station, Unit Nos. 1 Wilmington, Illinois (where applicable) by providing a 25 and 2, Will County, Illinois 60481.Commonwealth Edison percent extension to IST surveillance Date of application for amendments: Company, Docket Nos. 50-237 and 50- intervals. The January 27, 1995, January 5, 1994, as supplemented by 249, Dresden Nuclear Power Station, supplement requested the staff to review letters dated April 26, 1994, September Units 2 and 3, Grundy County, Illinois; and approve just that portion of the July 30, 1994, and January 12, 1995. Docket Nos. 50-254 and 50-265, Quad 29, 1992, application dealing with the Brief description of amendments: The Cities Nuclear Power Station, Units 1 implementation of the IST program in amendments change the Braidwood and 2, Rock Island County, IllinoisDate Section 3.0/4.0 of the proposed TS. 14032 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices Date of issuance: February 22, Consumers Power Company, Docket Amendment Nos.: 128 and 122 1995Effective date: February 22, 1995 No. 50-255, Palisades Plant, Van Buren Facility Operating License Nos. NPF- Amendment Nos.: 132 and 126 County, Michigan 35 and NPF-52: Amendments revised Facility Operating License Nos. DPR- Date of application for amendment: the Technical Specifications. 19 and DPR-25: The amendments October 5, 1994, as supplemented Date of initial notice in Federal revised the Technical Specifications. February 10, 20, and 22, 1995. Register: January 26, 1994 (59 FR 3743) Date of initial notice in Federal Brief description of amendment: The for Unit 1; and March 1, 1994 (59 FR Register: June 23, 1993 (58 FR 34071) amendment revises primary coolant 9785) for Unit 2 The January 27, 1995, letter did not system (PCS) pressure-temperature The March 21 and September 15, change the initial proposed no limits, power-operated relief valve 1994, and January 5, 1995, letters significant hazards consideration setting limits, and primary coolant provided additional information that determination. The Commission’s pump starting limits to accommodate did not change the initial scope of the related evaluation of the amendments is reactor vessel fluence for an additional January 10, 1994, application and the contained in a Safety Evaluation 4 effective full power years. The initial proposed no significant hazards datedFebruary 22, 1995.No significant amendment also revises the emergency consideration determination. hazards consideration comments core cooling system technical The Commission’s related evaluation received: No specifications to render two high- of the amendments is contained in a Local Public Document Room pressure safety injection pumps Safety Evaluation dated February 17, location: Morris Public Library, 604 incapable of injecting into the PCS 1995. No significant hazards Liberty Street, Morris, Illinois 60450. when the PCS is below 300°F rather consideration comments received: No than rendering both inoperable below Local Public Document Room Connecticut Yankee Atomic Power 260°F. In addition, it revises the location: York County Library, 138 East Company and Northeast Nuclear pressurizer heatup to achieve Black Street, Rock Hill, South Carolina Energy Company, Docket Nos. 50-213 consistency between design 29730 and 50-245, Haddam Neck Plant and assumptions and technical Millstone Nuclear Power Station, Unit Entergy Operations, Inc., Docket No. specifications limits. 1, Middlesex County and New London 50-313, Arkansas Nuclear One,Unit No. Date of issuance: March 2, 1995 1, Pope County, Arkansas County, Connecticut Effective date: March 2, 1995 Date of application for amendments: Amendment No.: 163 Date of amendment request: August October 31, 1994, as supplemented Facility Operating License No. DPR- 30, 1994 February 14, 1995. 20. Amendment revised the Technical Brief description of amendment: The amendment revised the Technical Brief description of amendments: The Specifications. Specifications to address the installation amendments renew the existing license Date of initial notice in Federal of two battery chargers on each 125 vdc conditions for both plants to implement Register: January 4, 1995 (60 FR 501) power train in lieu of the ‘‘swing’’ and maintain Integrated Implementation The February 10, 20, and 22, 1995, battery charger that is currently used. Schedule Program Plans (the Program submittals provided Date of issuance: February 17, 1995 Plans). The Program Plans provide a clarifyinginformation which was within the scope of the initial application and Effective date: February 17, 1995 methodology to be followed for Amendment No.: 176 scheduling plant modifications and did not affect the staff’s initial proposed no significant hazards consideration Facility Operating License No. DPR- engineering evaluations. 51. Amendment revised the Technical Date of issuance: February 23, 1995 findings. The Commission’s related evaluation of the amendment is Specifications. Effective date: February 23, 1995 Date of initial notice in Federal Amendment Nos.: 183 for Haddam contained in a Safety Evaluation dated March 2, 1995.No significant hazards Register: January 17, 1995 (60 FR 3439) Neck, 80 for Millstone 1 The Commission’s related evaluation of Facility Operating License Nos. DPR- consideration comments received: No. Local Public Document Room the amendment is contained in a Safety 61 and DPR-21. Amendments revise the location: Van Wylen Library, Hope Evaluation dated February 17, 1995.No Licenses. College, Holland, Michigan 49423. significant hazards consideration Date of initial notice in Federal comments received: No. Register: December 7, 1994 (59 FR Duke Power Company, et al., Docket Local Public Document Room 63117)The February 14, 1995, letter Nos. 50-413 and 50-414, Catawba location: Tomlinson Library, Arkansas provided clarifying information that did Nuclear Station, Units 1 and 2, York Tech University, Russellville, Arkansas not change the initial proposed no County, South Carolina 72801 significant hazards consideration Date of application for amendments: Entergy Operations, Inc., Docket No. determination. The Commission’s January 10, 1994, as supplemented 50-313, Arkansas Nuclear One,Unit No. related evaluation of the amendments is March 21 and September 15, 1994, and 1, Pope County, Arkansas contained in a Safety Evaluation dated January 5, 1995 February 23, 1995.No significant Brief description of amendments: The Date of amendment request: June 22, hazards consideration comments amendments revised Technical 1994. received: No. Specification Table 2.2-1 and TS 4.2.5 to Brief description of amendment: The Local Public Document Room allow a change in the method for amendment extends the allowable locations: Russell Library, 123 Broad measuring reactor coolant system (RCS) outage time for one inoperable train of Street, Middletown, CT 06457, for the flow rate from the calorimetric heat emergency feedwater from 36 hours to Haddam Neck Plant, and the Learning balance method to a method based on a 72 hours, clarifies the specifications and Resource Center, Three Rivers one-time calibration of the RCS cold leg their associated bases, and relocates Community-Technical College, Thames elbow differential pressure taps. information within the specifications. Valley Campus, 574 New London Date of issuance: February 17, 1995 Date of issuance: March 1, 1995 Turnpike, Norwich, CT 06360, for Effective date: To be implemented Effective date: 30 days following the Millstone Unit 1. within 30 days from the date of issuance date of issuance. Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices 14033 Amendment No.: 177 Date of issuance: March 1, 1995 Entergy Operations, Inc., System Facility Operating License No. DPR- Effective date: March 1, 1995 Energy Resources, Inc., South 51. Amendment revised the Technical Mississippi Electric Power Association, Specifications. Amendment No.: 102 and Mississippi Power & Light Date of initial notice in Federal Facility Operating License No. NPF- Company,Docket No. 50-416, Grand Register: August 17, 1994, (59 FR 38. Amendment revised the Technical Gulf Nuclear Station, Unit 1, Claiborne 42339) The Commission’s related Specifications. County, Mississippi evaluation of the amendment is Date of application for amendment: contained in a Safety Evaluation dated Date of initial notice in Federal March 1, 1995.No significant hazards Register: December 21, 1994 (59 FR April 21, 1993 Brief description of amendment: The consideration comments received: No. 65812) The Commission’s related Local Public Document Room evaluation of the amendment is amendment revised the requirement for location: Tomlinson Library, Arkansas contained in a Safety Evaluation dated control rod testing to increase the Tech University, Russellville, Arkansas March 1, 1995.No significant hazards ‘‘notch testing’’ surveillance interval for 72801 consideration comments received: No. partially withdrawn control rods from once per 7 days to once per 31 days. The Entergy Operations, Inc., Docket No. Local Public Document Room change is consistent with the format and 50-382, Waterford Steam location: University of New Orleans content of the Improved Standard ElectricStation, Unit 3, St. Charles Library, Louisiana Collection, Lakefront, Technical Specifications (NUREG-1434, Parish, Louisiana New Orleans, Louisiana 70122. Revision 0). Date of issuance: February 16, 1995 Date of amendment request: January Entergy Operations, Inc., Docket No. Effective date: February 16, 1995 19, 1995 50-382, Waterford Steam Brief description of amendment: The Amendment No: 115 ElectricStation, Unit 3, St. Charles Facility Operating License No. NPF- amendment changed the Appendix A Parish, Louisiana technical specifications (TSs) by adding 29. Amendment revises the Technical Specifications. TS 3.0.5 and its associated Bases. This Date of amendment request: August new specification will allow equipment Date of initial notice in Federal 19, 1994, as supplemented by letter Register: May 12, 1993 (58 FR 28055) removed from service or declared dated October 14, 1994. inoperable to comply with ACTIONS to The Commission’s related evaluation of be returned to service under Brief description of amendment: The the amendment is contained in a Safety administrative controls soley to perform amendment changed the Appendix A Evaluation dated February 16, 1995. No testing required to demonstrate its technical specification (TSs) by significant hazards consideration OPERABILITY or the OPERABILITY of removing the Limiting Condition For comments received: No other equipment. Operation (LCO) 3/4.3.4, the associated Local Public Document Room Date of issuance: March 1, 1995 surveillance requirements, and Bases location: Judge George W. Armstrong Effective date: March 1, 1995 information from the TSs. This Library, 220 S. Commerce Street, Amendment No.: 101 information and requirements will be Natchez, Mississippi 39120. Facility Operating License No. NPF- incorporated into the Waterford 3 Entergy Operations, Inc., System 38. Amendment revised the Technical Updated Final Safety Analysis Report Energy Resources, Inc., South Specifications. (UFSAR) and maintained under the Mississippi Electric Power Association, Date of initial notice in Federal provisions of 10 CFR 50.59. and Mississippi Power & Light Register: January 27, 1995 (60 FR 5441) Company,Docket No. 50-416, Grand The Commission’s related evaluation of Date of issuance: March 2, 1995 Gulf Nuclear Station, Unit 1, Claiborne the amendment is contained in a Safety Effective date: March 2, 1995 County, Mississippi Evaluation dated March 1, 1995.No Amendment No.: 103 significant hazards consideration Date of application for amendment: comments received: No. Facility Operating License No. NPF- July 14, 1993 Local Public Document Room 38. Amendment revised the Technical Brief description of amendment: The location: University of New Orleans Specifications. amendment revised technical Library, Louisiana Collection, Lakefront, Date of initial notice in Federal specification requirements for the hydrogen ignition system (HIS). The New Orleans, Louisiana 70122. Register: August 31, 1994 (59 FR 45023) amendment also removed several tables The additional information contained in Entergy Operations, Inc., Docket No. related to the HIS in accordance with 50-382, Waterford Steam the supplemental letter dated October guidance contained in Generic Letter ElectricStation, Unit 3, St. Charles 14, 1994, was clarifying in nature and 91-08, ‘‘Removal of Component Lists Parish, Louisiana thus, within the scope of the initial From Technical Specifications.’’ Date of amendment request: August notice and did not affect the staff’s Date of issuance: February 16, 1995 11, 1994, as supplemented by letter proposed no significant hazards Effective date: February 16, 1995 dated December 2, 1994. consideration determination. The Amendment No: 116 Brief description of amendment: The Commission’s related evaluation of the Facility Operating License No. NPF- amendment revised the Technical amendment is contained in a Safety 29. Amendment revises the Technical Specifications for the Waterford Steam Evaluation dated March 2, 1995.No Specifications. Electric Station, Unit 3, by modifying significant hazards consideration Date of initial notice in Federal the specifications having cycle-specific comments received: No. Register: September 1, 1993 (58 FR parameter limits by replacing the values 46232) The Commission’s related of those limits with a reference to a core Local Public Document Room evaluation of the amendment is operating limits report for the values of location: University of New Orleans contained in a Safety Evaluation dated those limits. These changes are in Library, Louisiana Collection, Lakefront, February 16, 1995. No significant accordance with the requirements of New Orleans, Louisiana 70122. hazards consideration comments Generic Letter 88-16. received: No 14034 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices Local Public Document Room format and content of the Improved statement for inoperable degraded grid location: Judge George W. Armstrong Standard Technical Specifications and loss of voltage relays and their Library, 220 S. Commerce at (NUREG-1434, Revision 0). associated auxiliary relays and timers. Washington, Natchez, Mississippi Date of issuance: February 16, 1995 Date of issuance: January 31, 1995 39120. Effective date: February 16, 1995 Effective date: January 31, 1995 Amendment No: 118 Amendment No.: 193 Entergy Operations, Inc., System Facility Operating License No. NPF- Facility Operating License No. DPR- Energy Resources, Inc., South 29. Amendment revises the Technical 50. Amendment revised the Technical Mississippi Electric Power Association, Specifications. Specifications. and Mississippi Power & Light Date of initial notice in Federal Date of initial notice in Federal Company,Docket No. 50-416, Grand Register: September 1, 1993 (58 FR Register: November 10, 1993 (58 FR Gulf Nuclear Station, Unit 1, Claiborne 46234) The Commission’s related 59750). The December 23, 1994, letter County, Mississippi evaluation of the amendment is provided additional information that Date of application for amendment: contained in a Safety Evaluation dated did not change the initial proposed no August 11, 1993 February 16, 1995.No significant significant hazards consideration Brief description of amendment: The hazards consideration comments determination. The Commission’s amendment deleted the requirements of received: No related evaluation of this amendment is Limiting Condition for Operation (LCO) Local Public Document Room contained in a Safety Evaluation dated 3.3.3.9 and Surveillance Requirement location: Judge George W. Armstrong January 31, 1995. No significant hazards 4.3.3.9 related to loose-part detection Library, 220 S. Commerce Street, consideration comments received: No. instrumentation. The deleted Natchez, Mississippi 39120. Local Public Document Room requirements will be relocated to Entergy Operations, Inc., System location: Government Publications documents that are controlled by the Energy Resources, Inc., South Section, State Library of Pennsylvania, licensee under the provisions of 10 CFR Mississippi Electric Power Association, Walnut Street and Commonwealth 50.59. The change is consistent with the and Mississippi Power & Light Avenue, Box 1601, Harrisburg, PA format and content of the Improved Company, Docket No. 50-416, Grand 17105. The above Notice was to be Standard Technical Specifications Gulf Nuclear Station, Unit 1, Claiborne published in the Federal Register of (NUREG-1434, Revision 0). County, Mississippi February 15, 1995. The notice that was inadvertently published at 60 FR 8762 Date of issuance: February 16, 1995 Date of application for amendment: relates to a licensing action which has Effective date: February 16, 1995 October 22, 1993, as supplemented by Amendment No: 117 not been completed. Facility Operating License No. NPF- letters dated February 10, and 14, 1995. Brief description of amendment: The 29. Amendment revises the Technical Houston Lighting & Power Company, amendment modified the testing Specifications. City Public Service Board of San frequencies for the drywell bypass test Date of initial notice in Federal Antonio, Central Power and Light and the airlock test, relocated certain Register: September 1, 1993 (58 FR Company, City of Austin, Texas, Docket drywell airlock tests from the technical 46232) The Commission’s related Nos. 50-498 and 50-499, South Texas specifications to administrative evaluation of the amendment is Project, Units 1 and 2, Matagorda procedures, and incorporates various contained in a Safety Evaluation dated County, Texas improvements from the Improved February 16, 1995. No significant Date of amendment request: Standard Technical Specifications hazards consideration comments November 7, 1994, as supplemented by (NUREG-1434, Revision 0). received: No Date of issuance: February 16, 1995 letters dated December 20, 1994, and Local Public Document Room Effective date: February 16, 1995 January 23, 1995. location: Judge George W. Armstrong Amendment No: 119 Brief description of amendments: The Library, 220 S. Commerce Street, Facility Operating License No. NPF- amendments changed the number of Natchez, Mississippi 39120. 29. Amendment revises the Technical standby diesel generators (SDGs) (emergency power source) required to Entergy Operations, Inc., System Specifications. be operable during Mode 6 with greater Energy Resources, Inc., South Date of initial notice in Federal than or equal to 23 feet of water above Mississippi Electric Power Association, Register: December 8, 1993 (58 FR the reactor vessel flange, from two to and Mississippi Power & Light 64607) The Commission’s related one. The amendment also allows Company,Docket No. 50-416, Grand evaluation of the amendment is limited substitution of an alternate Gulf Nuclear Station, Unit 1, Claiborne contained in a Safety Evaluation dated onsite emergency power source for one County, Mississippi February 16, 1995. No significant hazards consideration comments of the two required SDGs, in Mode 5, Date of application for amendment: received: No and in Mode 6 with less than 23 feet of August 11, 1993 Local Public Document Room water. In addition, certain system Brief description of amendment: The location: Judge George W. Armstrong specifications that are affected by the amendment deleted certain accident Library, 220 S. Commerce Street, changes for the emergency power source monitoring instruments from Technical Natchez, Mississippi 39120. were also changed. Specification Table 3.3.7.5-1 ‘‘Accident Date of issuance: February 14, 1995 Monitoring Instrumentation’’ and GPU Nuclear Corporation, et al., Effective date: February 14, 1995, to deleted the corresponding Surveillance Docket No. 50-289, Three Mile Island be implemented within 31 days of Requirements from Table 4.3.7.5-1, Nuclear Station, Unit No. 1, Dauphin issuance. ‘‘Accident Monitoring Instrumentation County, Pennsylvania Amendment Nos.: Unit 1 - Surveillance Requirements.’’ The Date of application for amendment: Amendment No. 34; Unit 2 - deleted requirements will be relocated May 17, 1993, as supplemented on Amendment No. 20 to documents that are controlled by the December 23, 1994 Facility Operating License Nos. NPF- licensee under the provisions of 10 CFR Brief description of amendment: The 76 and NPF-80. The amendments 50.59. The change is consistent with the amendment changes the action revised the Technical Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices 14035 Specifications.Public comments Illinois Power Company and Soyland hazards consideration comments requested as to proposed no significant Power Cooperative, Inc., Docket No. 50- received: No. hazards consideration: Yes (60 FR 5739, 461, Clinton Power Station, Unit No. 1, Local Public Document Room dated January 30, 1995). The notice DeWitt County, Illinois location: Maud Preston Palenske Memorial Library, 500 Market Street, St. provided an opportunity to submit Date of application for amendment: Joseph, Michigan 49085. comments on the Commission’s August 12, 1994, as supplemented on proposed no significant hazards October 14, 1994 and February 6, 1995. Northeast Nuclear Energy Company, et consideration determination. No Brief description of amendment: The al., Docket No. 50-423, comments have been received. The amendment modifies Clinton Power MillstoneNuclear Power Station, Unit notice also provided for an opportunity Station Technical Specification 3.6.5.1, No. 3, New London County, Connecticut to request a hearing by March 1, 1995, ‘‘Drywell,’’ to permit a one-time only Date of application for amendment: but stated that, if the Commission makes change to forego performance of the a final no significant hazards May 18, 1994 drywell bypass leakage rate test during Brief description of amendment: The consideration determination, any such the fifth refueling outage scheduled to amendment modifies the operability hearing would take place after issuance begin in March 1995. requirements for the fuel building of the amendments. Date of issuance: March 1, 1995 exhaust filter system. The amendment The Commission’s related evaluation Effective date: March 1, 1995 will result in modifications to the of the amendments, finding of exigent Amendment No.: 96 applicability, surveillance requirement, circumstances, and final determination Facility Operating License No. NPF- and bases sections of Technical of no significant hazards consideration 62. The amendment revised the Specification 3/4.9.12, ‘‘Fuel Building is contained in a Safety Evaluation Technical Specifications. Exhaust Filter System.’’ dated February 14, 1995. Date of initial notice in Federal Date of issuance: February 22, 1995 Local Public Document Room Register: September 28, 1994 (59 FR Effective date: As of the date of location: Wharton County Junior 49427). The October 14, 1994, and issuance to be implemented within30 College, J. M. Hodges Learning Center, February 6, 1995, submittals consisted days. 911 Boling Highway, Wharton, Texas of revisions and clarifications which did Amendment No.: 105 Facility Operating License No. NPF- 77488 not change the staff’s initial proposed no significant hazards consideration 49. Amendment revised the Technical IES Utilities Inc., Docket No. 50-331, determination or expand the scope of Specifications. Duane Arnold Energy Center, Linn the original notice.The Commission’s Date of initial notice in Federal County, Iowa related evaluation of the amendment is Register: June 22, 1994 (59 FR 32234) contained in a Safety Evaluation dated The Commission’s related evaluation of Date of application for amendment: March 1, 1995. No significant hazards the amendment is contained in a Safety August 15, 1994, as supplemented on consideration comments received: No Evaluation dated February 22, 1995.No December 21, 1994, and January 20, Local Public Document Room significant hazards consideration 1995. The licensee’s submittals of location: The Vespasian Warner Public comments received: No. December 21, 1994, and January 20, Library, 120 West Johnson Street, Local Public Document Room 1995, provided clarification and did not Clinton, Illinois 61727. location: Learning Resources Center, change the original no significant Three Rivers Community-Technical hazards consideration. Indiana Michigan Power Company, College, Thames Valley Campus, 574 Docket Nos. 50-315 and 50-316, Donald Brief description of amendment: The New London Turnpike, Norwich, CT C. Cook Nuclear Plant, Unit Nos. 1 and proposed amendment would revise the 06360. 2, Berrien County, Michigan Technical Specifications by increasing Pacific Gas and Electric Company, the allowable main steam isolation Date of application for amendments: Docket Nos. 50-275 and 50-323, valve (MSIV) leakage and deleting the November 18, 1994 DiabloCanyon Nuclear Power Plant, requirements applicable to the MSIV Brief description of amendments: The Unit Nos. 1 and 2, San Luis Obispo leakage control system. amendments revise Technical County,California Specification 4.0.5 to delete the wording Date of issuance: February 22, 1995 Date of application for amendments: ‘‘except where specific written relief has July 9, 1992 Effective date: February 22, 1995 and been granted by the Commission to be implemented within 90 days. Brief description of amendments: The pursuant to 10 CFR 50, Section amendments extend the operating Amendment No.: 207 50.55a(g)(6)(i).’’ This change allows the licenses for the Diablo Canyon Nuclear Facility Operating License No. DPR- licensee to implement certain 10 CFR Power Plant, Units 1 and 2 to recover or 49. Amendment revised the Technical 50.55a relief requests while the relief recapture the construction period of the Specifications. requests are being reviewed by the NRC reactors. Specifically, the amendments at the beginning of an updated interval. Date of initial notice in Federal extend the expiration date of the Unit 1 Date of issuance: February 23, 1995 license from April 23, 2008, to Register: September 14, 1994 (59 FR Effective date: February 23, 1995 47169) The Commission’s related September 22, 2021, and the expiration Amendment Nos.: 190/176 date of the Unit 2 license from evaluation of the amendment is Facility Operating License Nos. DPR- contained in a Safety Evaluation dated December 9, 2010, to April 26, 2025. 58 and DPR-74. Amendments revised Date of issuance: March 1, 1995 February 22, 1995.No significant the Technical Specifications. hazards consideration comments Effective date: March 1, 1995 Date of initial notice in Federal Amendment Nos.: 97 and 96 received: No. Register: December 21, 1994 (59 FR Facility Operating License Nos. DPR- Local Public Document Room 65817) The Commission’s related 80 and DPR-82: The amendments location: Cedar Rapids Public Library, evaluation of the amendments is revised the license. 500 First Street, S. E., Cedar Rapids, contained in a Safety Evaluation dated Date of initial notice in Federal Iowa 52401. February 23, 1995. No significant Register: July 22, 1992 (57 FR 32575) 14036 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices The Commission’s related evaluation of Brief description of amendments: The Philadelphia Electric Company, Docket the amendments is contained in a Safety amendment revises Technical Nos. 50-352 and 50-353, Limerick Evaluation dated March 1, 1995.No Specification 4.0.5, which provides the Generating Station, Units 1 and 2, significant hazards consideration requirements for inservice inspection Montgomery County, Pennsylvania comments received: Yes. Comments and testing of ASME Code components, from the San Luis Obispo Mothers for to conform to Standard Technical Date of application for amendments: Peace (MFP) and their contentions were Specifications (NUREG-1433). August 31, 1994 admitted into this proceeding. These Date of issuance: February 28, 1995 Brief description of amendments: contentions concern the adequacy of the Effective date: February 28, 1995 These amendments address Section 5, licensee’s maintenance and surveillance Amendment Nos.: 144 and 113 ‘‘Remove Temperature Requirement for Operational Condition 5 (TSCR 94-44- program and interim corrective actions Facility Operating License Nos. NPF- 0), by revising TS Table 1.2 and TS in lieu of Thermo-Lag. The Atomic 14 and NPF-22. The amendments Bases 3/4.9.11 to remove the average Safety and Licensing Board, in its initial revised the Technical Specifications. decision dated November 4, 1994 (LBP- reactor coolant temperature requirement Date of initial notice in Federal 94-35), authorized the staff to extend the in Operational Condition (OPCON) 5, Register: August 3, 1994 (59 FR 39595) DCPP operating license expiration dates. Refueling. The Commission’s related evaluation of Because a hearing was held prior to the amendments is contained in a Safety Date of issuance: January 27, 1995 license issuance, the staff does not need Evaluation dated February 28, 1995.No Effective date: January 27, to make a final no significant hazards significant hazards consideration 1995Amendment Nos. 88 and 50 consideration determination. comments received: No Local Public Document Room Facility Operating License Nos. NPF- Local Public Document Room location: California Polytechnic State 39 and NPF-85. The amendments location: Osterhout Free Library, University, Robert E. Kennedy Library, revised the Technical Specifications. Reference Department, 71 South Government Documents and Maps Date of initial notice in Federal Franklin Street, Wilkes-Barre, Department, San Luis Obispo, California Register: November 9, 1994 (59 FR Pennsylvania 18701. 93407 55884) The Commission’s related Pennsylvania Power and Light evaluation of the amendments is Pennsylvania Power and Light Company, Docket Nos. 50-387 and 50- contained in a Safety Evaluation dated Company, Docket No. 50-387, 388 Susquehanna Steam Electric January 27, 1995.No significant hazards Susquehanna Steam Electric Station, Station, Units 1 and 2, Luzerne County, consideration comments received: No Unit 1, Luzerne County, Pennsylvania Pennsylvania Local Public Document Room Date of application for amendment: Date of application for amendments: location: Pottstown Public Library, 500 July 27, 1994, as supplemented October High Street, Pottstown, Pennsylvania 27, 1994 and February 3, 1995 October 28, 1994, and supplemented by letter dated December 29, 1994 19464. Brief description of amendment: The amendment raises the authorized Power Brief description of amendments: Power Authority of The State of New Level from 3293 MWt to a new limit of These amendments change the York, Docket No. 50-286, Indian Point 3441 MWt. Technical Specifications (TS) for the Nuclear Generating Unit No. 3, two units by adding reference ι20 (Unit Westchester County, New York Date of issuance: February 22, 1995 ι Effective date: As of date of issuance 1) and reference 18 (Unit 2) to Section 6.9.3.2 as ‘‘PL-NF-90-001, Supplement Date of application for amendment: and is to be implemented prior to November 16, 1994 startup in Cycle 9, currently scheduled 1, ’Application of Reactor Analysis Brief description of amendment: The to occur in May 1995. Methods for BWR Design and Analysis: Loss of Feedwater Heating Changes and amendment revises Technical Amendment No.: 143 Use of RETRAN MOD 5.1,’ September Specifications Section 3.10.8 and the Facility Operating License No. NPF- 1994.’’ These additions reflect changes associated Bases, to reduce the 14: This amendment revised the to the methodology that the licensee is maximum allowable control rod drop Technical Specifications and license. using to perform its nuclear fuel reload time from 2.4 to 1.8 seconds. Date of initial notice in Federal analysis for the two units. Register: September 14, 1994 (59 FR Date of issuance: February 21, 1995 Date of issuance: February 28, 1995 47171) The Commission’s related Effective date: As of the date of evaluation of the amendment is Effective date: February 28, 1995 issuance to be implemented within 30 contained in a Safety Evaluation dated Amendment Nos.: 145 and 114 days. February 22, 1995.No significant Facility Operating License Nos. NPF- Amendment No.: 160 hazards consideration comments 14 and NPF-22. The amendments Facility Operating License No. DPR- received: No revised the Technical Specifications. Date of initial notice in Federal 64: Amendment revised the Technical Local Public Document Room Specifications. location: Osterhout Free Library, Register: December 21, 1994 (59 FR Reference Department, 71 South 65819) The Commission’s related Date of initial notice in Federal Franklin Street, Wilkes-Barre, evaluation of the amendments is Register: January 20, 1995 (60 FR 4203) Pennsylvania 18701. contained in a Safety Evaluation dated The Commission’s related evaluation of February 28, 1995.No significant the amendment is contained in a Safety Pennsylvania Power and Light hazards consideration comments Evaluation dated February 21, 1995.No Company, Docket Nos. 50-387 and 50- received: No significant hazards consideration 388 Susquehanna Steam Electric Local Public Document Room comments received: No Station, Units 1 and 2, Luzerne County, location: Osterhout Free Library, Local Public Document Room Pennsylvania Reference Department, 71 South location: White Plains Public Library, Date of application for amendments: Franklin Street, Wilkes-Barre, 100 Martine Avenue, White Plains, New June 23, 1994 Pennsylvania 18701. York 10610. Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices 14037 Saxton Nuclear Experimental Southern Nuclear Operating Company, the amendment is contained in a Safety Corporation, Docket No. 50-146, Saxton Inc., Docket Nos. 50-348 and 50-364, Evaluation dated February 28, 1995.No Nuclear Reactor Facility Joseph M. Farley Nuclear Plant, Units significant hazards consideration Date of application for amendment: 1 and 2, Houston County, Alabama. comments received: None August 8, 1994, as supplemented on Date of amendments request: Local Public Document Room October 28, 1994, and January 12, 1995. December 19, 1994 location: Athens Public library, South Brief description of amendment: The Brief description of amendments: The Street, Athens, Alabama 35611 amendment adds characterization as an amendments to Technical Specifications Tennessee Valley Authority, Docket authorized activity at Saxton and include: (1) a revision in Table 3.7-3 to Nos. 50-259, 50-260 and 50-296, Browns improves the wording of the technical the main steam safety valve (MSSV) Ferry Nuclear Plant, Units 1, 2, and 3, specifications. setpoint tolerance from plus or minus 1 Limestone County, Alabama Date of issuance: February 22, 1995 percent to plus or minus 3 percent, (2) Effective date: February 22, 1995 modification of the bases to 3/4.7.1.1 to Date of application for amendments: Amendment No.: 12Amended Facility increase the relieving capacity of the September 30, 1993 (TS 336) License No. DPR-4: Amendment MSSVs to at least 12,984,660 pounds Brief description of amendment: The changed the Technical Specifications per hour which corresponds to proposed changes revise and clarify the Date of initial notice in Federal approximately 112 percent of total spent fuel pool water level, temperature, Register: November 9, 1994. The secondary steam flow at 100 percent sampling, and analysis surveillance Commission’s related evaluation of the rated thermal power, (3) modifications requirements. amendment is contained in a Safety to Table 3.7-1 to reduce the allowable Date of issuance: March 2, 1995 Evaluation dated February 22, 1995.No power range neutron flux high setpoints Effective date: March 2, 1995 significant hazards consideration for multiple inoperable steam generator Amendment Nos.: 218, 334 and 192 comments received: No safety valves, and (4) an editorial Facility Operating License Nos. DPR- Local Public Document Room correction to Bases 3/4.7.1.2 to indicate 33, DPR-52 and DPR-68: Amendments location: Saxton Community Library, required auxiliary feedwater flow at revised the Technical Specifications. 911 Church Street, Saxton, ‘‘1133 psia’’ rather than ‘‘1133 psig.’’ Date of initial notice in Federal Pennsylvania 16678 Date of issuance March 1, 1995 Register: December 22, 1993 (58 FR Southern California Edison Company, Effective date: March 1, 1995 67862) The Commission’s related et al., Docket Nos. 50-361 and 50-362, Amendment Nos.: 112 and 103 evaluation of the amendment is San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station, Facility Operating License Nos. NPF- contained in a Safety Evaluation dated Unit Nos. 2 and 3, San Diego County, 2 and NPF-8. Amendments revise the March 2, 1995.No significant hazards California Technical Specifications. consideration comments received: None Local Public Document Room Date of application for amendments: Date of initial notice in Federal location: Athens Public library, South December 30, 1993, as supplemented by Register: January 4, 1995 (60 FR 505) Street, Athens, Alabama 35611 letters dated June 3, 1994, August 25, The Commission’s related evaluation of 1994, and January 3, 19, and 30, 1995. the amendments is contained in a Safety Tennessee Valley Authority, Docket Brief description of amendments: Evaluation dated March 1, 1995No Nos. 50-259, 50-260, and 50-296, These amendments revise TS 3.9.4, significant hazards consideration Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant, Units 1, 2, ‘‘Containment Building Penetrations,’’ comments received: No and 3, Limestone County, Alabama and the associated bases to allow both Local Public Document Room Date of application for amendments: doors of the containment personnel location: Houston-Love Memorial March 31, 1994 airlock to be open at the same time Library, 212 W. Burdeshaw Street, Post Brief description of amendment: For during refueling operations provided Office Box 1369, Dothan, Alabama Browns Ferry Units 1 and 3, the certain conditions are met. 36302The Commission’s related proposed changes provide for operation Date of issuance: February 28, 1995 evaluation of the amendments is Effective date: February 28, 1995 contained in a Safety Evaluation dated in the extended load line limit region Amendment Nos.: 117 and 106 March 1, 1995No significant hazards and revised rod block monitor Facility Operating License Nos. NPF- consideration comments received: No operability requirements. For all three 10 and NPF-15: The amendments Browns Ferry units, the changes delete Tennessee Valley Authority, Docket revised the Technical Specifications. a obsolete value for rated loop Nos. 50-259, 50-260, and 50-296, Date of initial notice in Federal recirculation flow rate, relocate cycle- Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant, Units 1, 2, Register: September 28, 1994 (59 FR specific equations to the Core Operating and 3, Limestone County, Alabama 49434). The additional information Limits report, and provide other contained in the January 3, 19, and 30, Date of application for amendments: miscellaneous changes. 1995, letters were clarifying in nature, September 29, 1993 Date of issuance: February 24, 1995 within the scope of the initial notice Brief description of amendment: The Effective date: February 24, 1995 and did not affect the NRC staff’s proposed changes increase the amount Amendment Nos.: 216, 232, 190 proposed no significant hazards of boron required in the standby liquid Facility Operating License Nos. DPR- consideration determination. The control system. 33, DPR-52 and DPR-68: Amendments Commission’s related evaluation of the Date of issuance: February 28, 1995 revised the Technical Specifications. amendments is contained in a Safety Effective date: February 28, 1995 Date of initial notice in Federal Evaluation dated February 28, 1995.No Amendment Nos.: 217, 233 and 191 Register: September 28, 1994 (59 FR significant hazards consideration Facility Operating License Nos. DPR- 49437) The Commission’s related comments received: No. 33, DPR-52 and DPR-68: Amendments evaluation of the amendment is Local Public Document Room revised the Technical Specifications. contained in a Safety Evaluation dated location: Main Library, University of Date of initial notice in Federal February 24, 1995.No significant California, P. O. Box 19557, Irvine, Register: June 8, 1994 (59 FR 29635) hazards consideration comments California 92713 The Commission’s related evaluation of received: None 14038 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices Local Public Document Room Local Public Document Room Facility Operating License No. DPR- location: Athens Public library, South location: University of Texas at 43. Amendment revised the Technical Street, Athens, Alabama 35611 Arlington Library, Government Specifications. Publications/Maps, 702 College, P.O. Date of initial notice in Federal Toledo Edison Company, Centerior Box 19497, Arlington, Texas 76019. Register: March 30, 1994 (59 FR 14903) Service Company, and The Cleveland The Commission’s related evaluation of Electric Illuminating Company, Docket Washington Public Power Supply the amendment is contained in a Safety No. 50-346, Davis-Besse Nuclear Power System, Docket No. 50-397, Nuclear Evaluation dated February 23, 1995.No Station, Unit No. 1, Ottawa County, Project No. 2, Benton County, significant hazards consideration Ohio Washington comments received: None. Date of application for amendment: Date of application for amendment: Local Public Document Room October 7, 1994 October 31, 1994 location: University of Wisconsin Brief description of amendment: Library Learning Center, 2420 Nicolet Eliminates redundancy in system Brief description of amendment: The Drive, Green Bay, Wisconsin 54301. leakage test requirements by revising TS amendment modifies the Techical Notice Of Issuance Of Amendments To 3/4.5.2 and its associated basis for the Specifications (TS) to (1) add two action Facility Operating Licenses And Final Emergency Core Cooling System and TS statements that would provide allowed Determination Of No Significant 3/4.6.2 and its associated basis for the outage times for either one or both of the Hazards Consideration And Containment Spray System. scram discharge volume (SDV) vent or Opportunity For A Hearing (Exigent Date of issuance: February 27, 1995 drain valves less stringent than the Public Announcement Or Emergency Effective date: February 27, 1995 and current requirements of TS 3.0.3., and Circumstances) to be implemented within 90 days. (2) change the surveillance requirements Amendment No. 195 for the SDV vent and drain valves to During the period since publication of Facility Operating License No. NPF-3. conduct the testing during shutdown the last biweekly notice, the Amendment revised the Technical conditions rather than at power as Commission has issued the following Specifications. currently required. amendments. The Commission has Date of initial notice in Federal Date of issuance: February 27, 1995 determined for each of these Register: November 9, 1994 (59 FR Effective date: February 27, 1995 amendments that the application for the 55893) The Commission’s related Amendment No.: 134 amendment complies with the evaluation of the amendment is Facility Operating License No. NPF- standards and requirements of the contained in a Safety Evaluation dated 21: The amendment revised the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended February 27, 1995.No significant Technical Specifications. (the Act), and the Commission’s rules hazards consideration comments Date of initial notice in Federal and regulations. The Commission has received: No Register: December 21, 1994 (59 FR made appropriate findings as required Local Public Document Room 65828) The Commission’s related by the Act and the Commission’s rules location: University of Toledo Library, evaluation of the amendment is and regulations in 10 CFR Chapter I, Documents Department, 2801 Bancroft contained in a Safety Evaluation dated which are set forth in the license Avenue, Toledo, Ohio 43606. February 27, 1995.No significant amendment. hazards consideration comments Because of exigent or emergency TU Electric Company, Docket Nos. 50- received: No circumstances associated with the date 445 and 50-446, Comanche Peak Steam Local Public Document Room the amendment was needed, there was Electric Station, Unit Nos. 1 and 2, location: Richland Public Library, 955 not time for the Commission to publish, Somervell County, Texas Northgate Street, Richland, Washington for public comment before issuance, its Date of amendment request: 99352 usual 30-day Notice of Consideration of November 18, 1994 (published in Issuance of Amendment, Proposed No Federal Register as November 11, 1994) Wisconsin Public Service Corporation, Significant Hazards Consideration Brief description of amendments: The Docket No. 50-305, Kewaunee Determination, and Opportunity for a proposed amendments would provide NuclearPower Plant, Kewaunee County, Hearing. for cycle-specific allowances to account Wisconsin For exigent circumstances, the for increases in the Heat Flux Hot Date of application for amendment: Commission has either issued a Federal Channel Factor between monthly February 23, 1994 Register notice providing opportunity surveillances. Brief description of amendment: The for public comment or has used local Date of issuance: March 1, 1995 amendment revises Kewaunee Nuclear media to provide notice to the public in Effective date: March 1, 1995, to be Power Plant (KNPP) Technical the area surrounding a licensee’s facility implemented within 30 days of Specification (TS) 6.8.c by removing the of the licensee’s application and of the issuance. requirement to conduct a biennial Commission’s proposed determination Amendment Nos.: Unit 1 - review of plant procedures in of no significant hazards consideration. Amendment No. 34; Unit 2 - accordance with American National The Commission has provided a Amendment No. 20 Standards Institute (ANSI) N18.7-1976, reasonable opportunity for the public to Facility Operating License Nos. NPF- Section 5.2.15. Alternate programs that comment, using its best efforts to make 87 and NPF-89. The amendments are described in the KNPP Operational available to the public means of revised the Technical Specifications. Quality Assurance Program Description communication for the public to Date of initial notice in Federal (OQAPD) will be used to ensure that respond quickly, and in the case of Register: December 7, 1994 (59 FR procedures are reviewed and telephone comments, the comments 63127) The Commission’s related maintained current. have been recorded or transcribed as evaluation of the amendments is Date of issuance: February 23, 1995 appropriate and the licensee has been contained in a Safety Evaluation dated Effective date: February 23, 1995 and informed of the public comments. March 1, 1995.No significant hazards to be implemented within 30 days. In circumstances where failure to act consideration comments received: No. Amendment No.: 115 in a timely way would have resulted, for Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices 14039 example, in derating or shutdown of a request for a hearing with respect to must consist of a specific statement of nuclear power plant or in prevention of issuance of the amendment to the the issue of law or fact to be raised or either resumption of operation or of subject facility operating license and controverted. In addition, the petitioner increase in power output up to the any person whose interest may be shall provide a brief explanation of the plant’s licensed power level, the affected by this proceeding and who bases of the contention and a concise Commission may not have had an wishes to participate as a party in the statement of the alleged facts or expert opportunity to provide for public proceeding must file a written request opinion which support the contention comment on its no significant hazards for a hearing and a petition for leave to and on which the petitioner intends to consideration determination. In such intervene. Requests for a hearing and a rely in proving the contention at the case, the license amendment has been petition for leave to intervene shall be hearing. The petitioner must also issued without opportunity for filed in accordance with the provide references to those specific comment. If there has been some time Commission’s ‘‘Rules of Practice for sources and documents of which the for public comment but less than 30 Domestic Licensing Proceedings’’ in 10 petitioner is aware and on which the days, the Commission may provide an CFR Part 2. Interested persons should petitioner intends to rely to establish opportunity for public comment. If consult a current copy of 10 CFR 2.714 those facts or expert opinion. Petitioner comments have been requested, it is so which is available at the Commission’s must provide sufficient information to stated. In either event, the State has Public Document Room, the Gelman show that a genuine dispute exists with been consulted by telephone whenever Building, 2120 L Street, NW., the applicant on a material issue of law possible. Washington, DC and at the local public or fact. Contentions shall be limited to Under its regulations, the Commission document room for the particular matters within the scope of the may issue and make an amendment facility involved. If a request for a amendment under consideration. The immediately effective, notwithstanding hearing or petition for leave to intervene contention must be one which, if the pendency before it of a request for is filed by the above date, the proven, would entitle the petitioner to a hearing from any person, in advance Commission or an Atomic Safety and relief. A petitioner who fails to file such of the holding and completion of any Licensing Board, designated by the a supplement which satisfies these required hearing, where it has Commission or by the Chairman of the requirements with respect to at least one determined that no significant hazards Atomic Safety and Licensing Board contention will not be permitted to consideration is involved. Panel, will rule on the request and/or participate as a party. The Commission has applied the petition; and the Secretary or the Those permitted to intervene become standards of 10 CFR 50.92 and has made designated Atomic Safety and Licensing parties to the proceeding, subject to any a final determination that the Board will issue a notice of a hearing or limitations in the order granting leave to amendment involves no significant an appropriate order. intervene, and have the opportunity to hazards consideration. The basis for this As required by 10 CFR 2.714, a participate fully in the conduct of the determination is contained in the petition for leave to intervene shall set hearing, including the opportunity to documents related to this action. forth with particularity the interest of present evidence and cross-examine Accordingly, the amendments have the petitioner in the proceeding, and witnesses. Since the Commission has been issued and made effective as how that interest may be affected by the made a final determination that the indicated. results of the proceeding. The petition amendment involves no significant Unless otherwise indicated, the should specifically explain the reasons hazards consideration, if a hearing is Commission has determined that these why intervention should be permitted requested, it will not stay the amendments satisfy the criteria for with particular reference to the effectiveness of the amendment. Any categorical exclusion in accordance following factors: (1) the nature of the hearing held would take place while the with 10 CFR 51.22. Therefore, pursuant petitioner’s right under the Act to be amendment is in effect. to 10 CFR 51.22(b), no environmental made a party to the proceeding; (2) the A request for a hearing or a petition impact statement or environmental nature and extent of the petitioner’s for leave to intervene must be filed with assessment need be prepared for these property, financial, or other interest in the Secretary of the Commission, U.S. amendments. If the Commission has the proceeding; and (3) the possible Nuclear Regulatory Commission, prepared an environmental assessment effect of any order which may be Washington, DC 20555, Attention: under the special circumstances entered in the proceeding on the Docketing and Services Branch, or may provision in 10 CFR 51.12(b) and has petitioner’s interest. The petition should be delivered to the Commission’s Public made a determination based on that also identify the specific aspect(s) of the Document Room, the Gelman Building, assessment, it is so indicated. subject matter of the proceeding as to 2120 L Street, NW., Washington, DC, by For further details with respect to the which petitioner wishes to intervene. the above date. Where petitions are filed action see (1) the application for Any person who has filed a petition for during the last 10 days of the notice amendment, (2) the amendment to leave to intervene or who has been period, it is requested that the petitioner Facility Operating License, and (3) the admitted as a party may amend the promptly so inform the Commission by Commission’s related letter, Safety petition without requesting leave of the a toll-free telephone call to Western Evaluation and/or Environmental Board up to 15 days prior to the first Union at 1-(800) 248-5100 (in Missouri Assessment, as indicated. All of these prehearing conference scheduled in the 1-(800) 342-6700). The Western Union items are available for public inspection proceeding, but such an amended operator should be given Datagram at the Commission’s Public Document petition must satisfy the specificity Identification Number N1023 and the Room, the Gelman Building, 2120 L requirements described above. following message addressed to (Project Street, NW., Washington, DC, and at the Not later than 15 days prior to the first Director): petitioner’s name and local public document room for the prehearing conference scheduled in the telephone number, date petition was particular facility involved. proceeding, a petitioner shall file a mailed, plant name, and publication The Commission is also offering an supplement to the petition to intervene date and page number of this Federal opportunity for a hearing with respect to which must include a list of the Register notice. A copy of the petition the issuance of the amendment. By contentions which are sought to be should also be sent to the Office of the April 14, 1995, the licensee may file a litigated in the matter. Each contention General Counsel, U.S. Nuclear 14040 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices Regulatory Commission, Washington, [Docket No. 50±346] OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES DC 20555, and to the attorney for the TRADE REPRESENTATIVE licensee. Toledo Edison Company, et al.; Notice Nontimely filings of petitions for of Withdrawal of Applications for Notice of Meeting of the Industry leave to intervene, amended petitions, Amendments to Facility Operating Policy Advisory Committee License supplemental petitions and/or requests AGENCY: Office of the United States for a hearing will not be entertained Trade Representative. absent a determination by the The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory AGENCY: Notice that the March 22, 1995 Commission, the presiding officer or the Commission (the Commission) has meeting of the Industry Policy Advisory Atomic Safety and Licensing Board that granted the request of the Toledo Edison Company, Centerior Service Company, Committee will be held from 9:30 a.m. the petition and/or request should be to 2:30 p.m. The meeting will be closed granted based upon a balancing of the and the Cleveland Electric Illuminating Company (the licensees) to withdraw its to the public from 9:30 to 1:00 p.m. The factors specified in 10 CFR meeting will be open to the public from 2.714(a)(1)(i)-(v) and 2.714(d). March 13, 1992, September 11, 1992, and February 17, 1993, applications for 1:00 p.m. to 2:30 p.m. Pennsylvania Power and Light proposed amendments to Facility SUMMARY: The Industry Policy Advisory Company, Docket No. 50-388, Operating License No. NPF–3 for the Committee will hold a meeting on SusquehannaSteam Electric Station, Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station, Unit March 22, 1995 from 9:30 a.m. to 2:30 Unit 2, Luzerne County, Pennsylvania No. 1, located in Ottawa County, Ohio. p.m. The meeting will be closed to the Date of application for amendment: The proposed amendments would public from 9:30 to 1:00 p.m. The February 7, 1995 have revised the facility technical meeting will include a review and Brief description of amendment: The specifications by changing the venting discussion of current issues which amendment changed the Technical requirements for the Reactor Coolant influence U.S. trade policy. Pursuant to Specifications to allow continued System, deleting figures in Section 5.1, Section 2155(f)(2) of Title 19 of the operation with one neutron flux monitor ‘‘Design Features—Site,’’ and revising United States Code, I have determined ≥ system channel ( B’’ channel) the Safety Features Actuation System that this portion of the meeting will be inoperable and should the remaining and Steam and Feedwater Rupture concerned with matters the disclosure channel become inoperable to allow Control System Instrumentation of which would seriously compromise continued plant operation for 7 days to Setpoints. the development by the United States restore one of the two inoperable Government of trade policy, priorities, channels. The Commission had previously negotiating objectives or bargaining Date of issuance: March 1, 1995 issued Notice of Consideration of positions with respect to the operation Effective date: March 1, 1995 Issuance of Amendment published in of any trade agreement and other Amendment No.: 115 the Federal Register on March 23, 1992 matters arising in connection with the (57 FR 10050), for the March 13, 1992, Facility Operating License No. NPF- development, implementation and 22: Amendment revised the Technical application; January 6, 1993 (58 FR 600) administration of the trade policy of the Specifications. Public comments for the September 11, 1992, application, United States. The meeting will be open requested as to proposed no significant and June 23, 1993 (58 FR 34096), for the to the public and press from 1:00 p.m. hazards consideration: No. On February February 23, 1993, application. to 2:30 p.m. when trade policy issues 8, 1995, the staff issued a Notice of However, by letter dated February 10, will be discussed. Attendance during Enforcement Discretion, which was 1995, the licensee withdrew the this part of the meeting is for immediately effective and remained in proposed changes. observation only. Individuals who are effect until this amendment was issued. For further details with respect to this not members of the committee will not The Commission’s related evaluation action, see the applications for be invited to comment. of the amendments, finding of amendment dated March 13, 1992, DATES: The meeting is scheduled for emergency circumstances, consultation September 11, 1992, and February 17, March 22, 1995, unless otherwise with the Commonwealth of 1993, and the licensee’s letter dated notified. Pennsylvania and final no significant February 10, 1995, which withdrew the ADDRESSES The meeting will be held at hazards considerations determination applications for license amendments. the Madison Hotel, located at 15th and are contained in a Safety Evaluation The above documents are available for M streets, NW., Washington, DC., unless dated March 1, 1995. public inspection at the Commission’s otherwise notified. Attorney for licensee: Jay Silberg, Esq., Public Document Room, the Gelman FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Shaw, Pittman, Potts & Trowbridge 2300 Building, 2120 L Street, NW., Michaelle Burstin, Director of Public N Street NW., Washington, D.C. 20037 Washington, DC, and at the local public Liaison, Office of the United States Local Public Document Room document room located at the Trade Representative, (202) 395–6120. location: Osterhout Free Library, University of Toledo Library, Michael Kantor, Reference Department, 71 South Documents Department, 2801 Bancroft United States Trade Representatives. Franklin Street, Wilkes-Barre, Avenue, Toledo, Ohio 43606. [FR Doc. 95–6316 Filed 3–14–95; 8:45 am] Pennsylvania 18071. Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 9th day BILLING CODE 3190±01±M NRC Project Director: John F. Stolz of March, 1995. Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 8th day of March 1995. For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission Jon B. Hopkins, POSTAL RATE COMMISSION Elinor G. Adensam, Senior Project Manager, Project Directorate Notice of Facility Visit Acting Director, Division of Reactor Projects III–3, Division of Reactor Projects III/IV, Office - III/IV, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation of Nuclear Reactor Regulation. March 10, 1995. [Doc. 95-6207 Filed 3-14-95; 8:45 am] [FR Doc. 95–6340 Filed 3–14–95; 8:45 am] Members of the Commission and its BILLING CODE 7590-01-F BILLING CODE 7590±01±M advisory staff will visit the offices of Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices 14041 WEFA in Bala Cynwyd, Pennsylvania rules and forms to David T. Copenhafer, charges, and waive user fees, on all non- on Thursday, March 16, 1995. WEFA Acting Director, Office of Information specialist ITS trades for a one-year officials will explain the process of Technology, Securities and Exchange period.2 preparation of the economic model of Commission, 450 Fifth Street NW., By a filing, which the Commission direct response advertising it developed Washington, D.C. 20549, and SEC noticed on November 10, 1993, the for the Direct Marketing Association. A Clearance Office, Office of Management Exchange extended the value charges on report of the visit will be on file in the and Budget, Paperwork Reduction non-specialist ITS trades and the waiver Docket Room of the Commission. Project (3235–0327, 3235–0328, 3235– of the non-specialist ITS user fees for a Margaret P. Crenshaw, 0329, and 3235–0425), Room 3208, New six-month period.3 The Exchange now Secretary. Executive Office Building, Washington, proposes to amend permanently its fee [FR Doc. 95–6344 Filed 3–14–95; 8:45 am] D.C. 20543. schedule to impose value charges, and waive user fees, on all non-specialist BILLING CODE 7710±FW±P Dated: March 7, 1995. Margaret H. McFarland, ITS trades as follows: Deputy Secretary. Value Charges SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE [FR Doc. 95–6355 Filed 3–14–95; 8:45 am] First $10 million per month—$.16 per COMMISSION BILLING CODE 8010±01±M $1,000 contract value Next $40 million per month—$.13 per Under Review by Office of $1,000 contract value Management and Budget [Release No. 34±35462; File No. SR±BSE± 95±1] Next $50 million per month—$.10 per Acting Agency Clearance Officer: David $1,000 contract value T. Copenhafer, (202) 942–8800 Self-Regulatory Organizations; Notice Next $100 million per month—$.08 per Upon written request copy available of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness $1,000 contract value from: Securities and Exchange of Proposed Rule Change by the Next $300 million per month—$.05 per Commission, Office of Filings and Boston Stock Exchange, Inc., Relating $1,000 contract value Information Services, Washington, to the Value Charges on Intermarket $500.1 + million per month—$.01 per D.C. 20549 Trading System Trades $1,000 contract value Maximum charge per side (non-cross) Extensions: March 8, 1995. $100.00 Form SE—File No. 270–289 Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Maximum charge per side (cross) $75.00 Form ID—File No. 270–291 Securities Exchange Act of 1934 I.T.S. User Fee—No charge for non- Form ET—File No. 270–290 (‘‘Act’’), 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1), notice is specialist firms hereby given that on February 3, 1995, Form TH—File No. 270–377 II. Self-Regulatory Organization’s the Boston Stock Exchange, Inc. (‘‘BSE’’ Notice is hereby given pursuant to the Statement of the Purpose of, and or ‘‘Exchange’’) filed with the Securities Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980 (44 Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule and Exchange Commission U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), that the Securities Change and Exchange Commission (‘‘Commission’’) the proposed rule In its filing with the Commission, the (‘‘Commission’’) has requested change as described in Items I, II, and self-regulatory organization included extension of Forms SE, ID, ET, and TH. III below, which Items have been statements concerning the purpose of These forms are used by persons filing prepared by the self-regulatory and basis for the proposed rule change information with the Commission organization. The Commission is and discussed any comments it received electronically on the EDGAR system. publishing this notice to solicit Form SE is used by electronic filers to comments on the proposed rule change on the proposed rule change. The text submit exhibits in paper format. An from interested persons. of these statements may be examined at the places specified in Item IV below. estimated 2,000 filings on Form SE are I. Self-Regulatory Organization’s The self-regulatory organization has made annually at an estimated .10 Statement of the Terms of Substance of prepared summaries, set forth in burden hours per response. the Proposed Rule Change Form ID is used to apply for EDGAR Sections A, B, and C below, of the most The Exchange seeks to make access codes. An estimated 7,000 filings significant aspects of such statements. permanent the portion of its fee on Form ID are made annually at an schedule pertaining to value charges on A. Self-Regulatory Organization’s estimated .15 burden hours per non-specialist Intermarket Trading Statement of the Purpose of, and response. System (‘‘ITS’’) trades and the waiver of Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Form ET is used to transmit electronic ITS user fees. By a filing, which the Change format documents. An estimated 120 Commission noticed on November 24, filings on Form ET are made annually 1. Purpose 1992, the Exchange amended its fee at an estimated .25 burden hours per schedule to provide for a $.003 per The purpose of the proposed rule response. share user fee on net outbound change is to amend permanently the Form TH is used to provide specialist trades, value charges of $.002 Exchange’s fee schedule regarding notification of a filer’s reliance on a per share for BSE executions up to and certain ITS fees. At the request of the temporary hardship exemption. An including 2,000 shares, and a range of Commisson, the Exchange had estimated 200 filings on Form ET are value charges per $1,000 contract values temporarily amended a portion of its made annually at an estimated .33 for all BSE executions over 2,000 proposed rule filing SR–BSE–92–9 burden hours per response. shares.1 Direct general comments to the 2 Moreover, the Exchange amended its The portion of the proposed rule change that Clearance Officer for the Securities and was amended for a one-year period was intended fee schedule to provide for value Exchange Commission at the address to replace the ITS user fee of $.003 per share on ‘‘outbound trades only.’’ below. Direct any comments concerning 1 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 31515 3 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 33184 the accuracy of the estimated average (Nov. 24, 1992), 57 FR 56937 (notice of immediate (Nov. 10, 1993), 58 FR 60709 (notice of immediate burden hours for compliance with SEC effectiveness of File No. SR–BSE–92–9). effectiveness of File No. SR–BSE–93–22). 14042 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices regarding certain ITS transactions. The submission, all subsequent proposed rule change from interested Exchange temporarily amended these amendments, all written statements persons. fees in 1992 for a one-year period and with respect to the proposed rule I. Self-Regulatory Organization’s extended these fees in 1993 for a six- change that are filed with the Statement of the Terms of Substance of Commission, and all written month period, pending the outcome of the Proposed Rule Change the Market 2000 Study.4 The affected communications relating to the fees are comprised of the value charges proposed rule change between the The CBOE proposes margin levels for instituted on all nonspecialist outbond Commission and any person, other than warrants traded on the Exchange that ITS trades, which replaces the ITS User those that may be withheld from the are based upon the value of the U.S. Fee of $.003 per share on all outbound public in accordance with the dollar in relation to the Mexican peso trades incurred by non-specialist firms. provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be (‘‘Mexican Peso Warrants’’). The text of available for inspection and copying at Amendment No. 1 to the proposed rule 2. Statutory Basis the Commission’s Public Reference change is available at the Office of the The statutory basis for this proposal is Section, 450 Fifth Street NW., Secretary, CBOE, and at the Section 6(b)(4) of the Securities Washington, DC 20549. Copies of such Commission. Exchange Act of 1934. filing will also be available for II. Self-Regulatory Organization’s B. Self-Regulatory Organization’s inspection and copying at the principal Statement of the Purpose of, and Statement on Burden on Competition office of the Exchange. All submissions Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule should refer to File No. SR–BSE–95–1 Change The fee change will impose no burden and should be submitted by April 5, In its filing with the Commission, the on competition. 1995. Exchange included statements C. Self-Regulatory Organization’s For the Commission, by the Division of concerning the purpose of and basis for Statement on Comments on the Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated Amendment No. 1 to the proposed rule Proposed Rule Change Received from authority. change and discussed any comments it Members, Participants or Others Margaret H. McFarland, received on the amendment. The text of No written comments were solicited Deputy Secretary. these statements may be examined at or received with respect to the fee [FR Doc. 95–6353 Filed 3–14–95; 8:45 am] the places specified in Item IV below. change.5 BILLING CODE 8010±01±M The CBOE has prepared summaries, set forth in Sections (A), (B), and (C) below, III. Date of Effectiveness of the of the most significant aspects of such Proposed Rule Change and Timing for statements. Commission Action [Release No. 34±35463; International Series Release No. 790; File No. SR±CBOE±95± (A) Self-Regulatory Organization’s The foregoing rule change establishes 12] Statement of the Purpose of, and or changes a due, fee, or other charge Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule imposed by the Exchange and, therefore, Self-Regulatory Organizations; Notice Change has become effective pursuant to of Filing of Amendment No. 1 to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act and Proposed Rule Change by the Chicago In the Exchange’s proposal to list and subparagraph (e) of Rule 19b–4 Board Options Exchange, Inc., trade Mexican Peso Warrants, the CBOE thereunder. At any time within 60 days Relating to Margin Levels for Currency represented that ‘‘Exchange will require of the filing of such proposed rule Warrants Based on the Value of the that customer positions in Mexican Peso change, the Commission may summarily U.S. Dollar in Relation to the Mexican Warrants be subject to the margin abrogate such rule change if it appears Peso requirements applicable to foreign to the Commission that such action is currency options.’’ 4 The Exchange is necessary or appropriate in the public March 9, 1995. now amending that proposal to specify interest, for the protection of investors, Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the objective margin levels that will be or otherwise in furtherance of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 applicable to Mexican Peso Warrants purposes of the Act. (‘‘Act’’),1 and rule 19b–4 thereunder,2 trading on the Exchange. notice is hereby given that on March 6, The Exchange represents that it has IV. Solicitation of Comments 1995, the Chicago Board Options calculated frequency distributions Interested persons are invited to Exchange, Inc. (‘‘CBOE’’ or ‘‘Exchange’’) reflecting U.S. dollar/Mexican peso submit written data, views, and filed with the Securities and Exchange returns for all one, seven, and 21 day arguments concerning the foregoing. Commission (‘‘Commission’’) periods for the period from January 2, Persons making written submissions Amendment No. 1 to the proposed rule 1992, through January 25, 1995 (‘‘three should file six copies thereof with the change as described in Items I, II, and year period’’), and for the period from Secretary, Securities and Exchange III below, which Items have been January 3, 1994, through January 25, Commission, 450 Fifth Street NW., prepared by the Exchange. The 1995 (‘‘one year period’’). The Exchange Washington, DC 20549. Copies of the Exchange filed the original proposal further represents that these with the Commission on January 27, distributions demonstrate that 97.5% of 4 The six-month extension expired in May 1994. 1995. Notice of the proposed rule all seven day returns for the three year BSE did not seek another extension until this filing. period would have been covered by 5 change appeared in the Federal Register At the time of the original filing in 1992, the 3 4.5% of the underlying peso value and Exchange solicited comments from the Fee on February 8, 1995. The Commission Committee of the Board of Governors, comprised of is publishing this notice to solicit that 95% of all seven day returns for the representatives of dealer-specialist, retail, and comments on Amendment No. 1 to the one year period would have been institutional firms, the Executive Committee, which covered by approximately 10% of the serves as the Board of Governors of the Clearing underlying peso value. Based upon Corporation, and the Board of Governors of the 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1) (1988). Exchange. See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 2 17 CFR 240.19b–4 (1991). these results, the Exchange is proposing 31515 (Nov. 24, 1992), 57 FR 56937 (notice of 3 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 35324 immediate effectiveness of File No. SR–BSE–92–9). (February 2, 1995), 60 FR 7599 (February 8, 1995). 4 Id. Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices 14043 to set the margin ‘‘add-on’’ percentage subsequent amendments, all written Exchange represents that a number of for Mexican Peso Warrants at 12% for statements with respect to the proposed midsized corporations and institutions both initial and maintenance margin, rule change, as amended, that are filed have told the Exchange that the current with a minimum add-on for out-of-the- with the Commission, and all written minimum contract value is too large for money warrants of 8%. If, as a result of communications relating to the their purposes. The Exchange, therefore, the Exchange’s routine monitoring of proposed rule change, as amended, proposed to reduce the minimum margin adequacy, the CBOE determines between the Commission and any opening transaction size for Customized that a different percentage would be person, other than those that may be FCO transactions to 200 contracts.5 appropriate, the Exchange will file a withheld from the public in accordance The Commission finds that the proposal with the Commission pursuant with the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will proposed rule change is consistent with to section 19(b) of the Act to modify the be available for inspection and copying the requirements of the Act and the margin add-on percentages applicable to in the Commission’s Public Reference rules and regulations thereunder Mexican Peso Warrants. Section, 450 Fifth Street NW., applicable to a national securities The Exchange believes that Washington, DC. Copies of such filing exchange, and, in particular, the Amendment No. 1 to the proposed rule will also be available for inspection and requirements of Section 6(b)(5) 6 in that change is consistent with section 6 of copying at the principal office of the the proposal is designed to promote just the Act, in general, and furthers the CBOE. All submissions should refer to and equitable principles of trade, to objectives of section 6(b)(5) oft he Act,5 File No. SR–CBOE–95–12 and should be prevent fraudulent and manipulative in particular, in that the proposal will submitted by April 5, 1995. acts and practices, and to protect promote just and equitable principles of For the Commission, by the Division of investors and the public interest. trade and will contribute to the Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated Specifically, the Commission believes protection of investors and the public authority.6 that the proposed rule change is interest. Margaret H. McFarland, designed to make the Customized FCO market accessible to smaller corporate (B) Self-Regulatory Organization’s Deputy Secretary. FCO users while maintaining the focus Statement on Burden on Competition [FR Doc. 95–6351 Filed 3–14–95; 8:45 am] of this market towards institutional BILLING CODE 8010±01±M The Exchange does not believe that investors. As a result, the Commission Amendment No. 1 to the proposed rule believes that the proposal may serve to change will impose any inappropriate [Release No. 34±35464; International Series add liquidity to this market which burden on competition. Release No. 791; File No. SR±Phlx±95±03] would benefit all users of Customized FCO’s. (c) Self-Regulatory Organization’s Self-Regulatory Organizations; Order Statement on Comments on the Moreover, even with lowering the Approving a Proposed Rule Change by minimum opening transaction size to Proposed Rule Change Received From the Philadelphia Stock Exchange, Inc., Members, Participants, or Others 200 contracts, the average value of an Relating to Customized Foreign opening Customized FCO transaction Written comments on Amendment Currency Options Transaction Size will be approximately $10 million.7 The No. 1 to the proposed rule change were Commission believes that this level is neither solicited nor received. March 9, 1995. On January 17, 1995, the Philadelphia sufficient to ensure that Customized III. Date of Effectiveness of the Stock Exchange, Inc. (‘‘Phlx’’ or FCO market continues to be used almost Proposed Rule Change and Timing for ‘‘Exchange’’) filed with the Securities exclusively by institutional investors. Commission Action and Exchange Commission The Commission also notes that this dollar value is equivalent to the Within 35 days of the date of (‘‘Commission’’), pursuant to Section minimum opening transaction size that publication of this notice in the Federal 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act the Commission required in approving Register or within such longer period (i) of 1934 (‘‘Act’’), 1 and Rule 19b–4 proposals by the American Stock as the Commission may designate up to thereunder, 2 a proposed rule change to Exchange,8 the Chicago Board Options 90 days of such date if it finds such reduce the minimum transaction size for Exchange,9 and the Pacific Stock longer period to be appropriate and customized foreign currency options Exchange10 for trading flexible exchange publishes its reasons for so finding or (‘‘Customized FCOs’’) from 300 to 200 options (‘‘FLEX Options’’). As a result, (ii) as to which the Exchange consents, contracts. Notice of the proposed rule the Commission believes that this the Commission will: change appeared in the Federal Register (a) By order approve such proposed on January 30, 1995. 3 No comment proposal does not raise any regulatory rule change, as amended, or letters were received on the proposed concerns that were not adequately (b) Institute proceedings to determine rule change. This order approves the addressed by the Exchange when the whether the proposed rule change, as Exchange’s proposal. On November 1, 1994, the 5 The Exchange represents that the average value amended, should be disapproved. of a 300 contract Customized FCO transaction, at Commission approved the Exchange’s prevailing exchange rates, is approximately $15 IV. Solicitation of Comments proposal to trade Customized FCOs. 4 million. Reducing the minimum opening Interested persons are invited to Presently, Phlx Rule 1069(a)(6) imposes transaction size to 200 contracts would still result submit written data, views and a 300 contract minimum for opening in an average minimum transaction value of approximately $10 million. arguments concerning Amendment No. Customized FCO transactions. The 6 15 U.S.C. 78(b)(5) (1988). 1 to the proposed rule change. Persons 7 See supra note 5. making written submissions should file 6 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12) (1994). 8 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 32781 six copies thereof with the Secretary, 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1) (1988). (August 20, 1993), 58 FR 45360 (August 27, 1993). Securities and Exchange Commission, 2 17 CFR 240.19b–4 (1992). 9 See Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 32694 450 Fifth Street NW., Washington, DC 3 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 35261 (July 29, 1993), 58 FR 41814 (August 5, 1993), and (January 23, 1995), 60 FR 5745 (January 30, 1995). 31920 (February 24, 1993), 58 FR 12280 (March 3, 20549. Copies of the submission, all 4 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 34925 1993). (November 1, 1994), 59 FR 55720 (November 8, 10 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 34364 5 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5) (1988). 1994) (‘‘Exchange Act Release No. 34925’’). (July 13, 1994), 59 FR 36813 (July 19, 1994). 14044 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices Commission approved the trading of the issuance and sale of the Contracts or Act of 1934 and as an investment Customized FCOs.11 Other Contracts. adviser under the Investment Advisers It is therefore ordered, pursuant to FILING DATE: The application was filed Act of 1940. ALIAC is a member of Section 19(b)(2) of the Act,12 that the on June 24, 1994, and amended on NASD. proposed rule change (SR–Phlx–95–03) December 23, 1994 and February 23, 4. Non-tax qualified Contracts are is hereby approved. 1995. funded through Account I and Contracts For the Commission, by the Division of HEARING OR NOTIFICATION OF HEARING: An purchased and used in connection with Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated order granting the application will be retirement plans under Sections 401(a) authority.13 issued unless the Commission orders a or 403(b) of the Internal Revenue Code, Margaret H. McFarland, hearing. Interested persons may request as amended (‘‘Code’’) are funded Deputy Secretary. a hearing by writing to the through Account II. Individual [FR Doc. 95–6352 Filed 3–14–95; 8:45 am] Commission’s Secretary and serving the Contracts qualifying for favorable BILLING CODE 8010±01±M Applicants with a copy of the request, federal income tax treatment under personally or by mail. Hearing requests Section 408 of the Code and Contracts purchased by deferred compensation [Rel. No. IC±20948; No. 812±9074] should be received by the Commission by 5:30 p.m. on April 3, 1995, and plans under Section 457 of the Code Aetna Insurance Company of America, should be accompanied by proof of may be funded through either Account et al. service on Applicants in the form of an I or Account II. 5. The Contracts may provide for, affidavit or, for lawyers, a certificate of among other things single or installment March 9, 1995. service. Hearing requests should state premium payments, or a combination of AGENCY: Securities and Exchange the nature of the writer’s interest, the the two, and deferred or immediate Commission (‘‘Commission’’ or ‘‘SEC’’). reason for the request, and the issues annuity payments on a fixed or variable ACTION: Notice of application for an contested. Persons may request basis beginning on a date elected by the order under the Investment Company notification of a hearing by writing to Contract owners and in no event later Act of 1940 (‘‘1940 Act’’). the Commission’s Secretary. than certain contractually established ADDRESSES: APPLICANTS: Aetna Insurance Company Secretary, SEC, 450 5th dates (‘‘Retirement Date’’). Additionally, of America (‘‘Aetna’’); Variable Annuity Street NW., Washington, DC 20549. Contract owners may allocate premium Account I of Aetna (‘‘Account I’’), Applicants, c/o Aetna Insurance payments to: (a) One or more of the Variable Annuity Account II of Aetna Company of America, 151 Farmington Funds available under a Contract; (b) in (‘‘Account II’’), and any other Separate Avenue, Hartford, Connecticut 06156. some Contracts to a fixed Interest Accounts established in the future by FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Option, which is part of Aetna’s general Aetna (‘‘Future Accounts,’’ and together Yvonne M. Hunold, Assistant Special account; and (c) in some Contracts to a with Accounts I and II, ‘‘Separate Counsel, or Wendy F. Friedlander, Credited Interest Option, with or Accounts’’) to support certain group and Deputy Chief, at (202) 942–0670, Office without a market value adjustment upon individual deferred variable annuity of Insurance Products (Division of redemption prior to the end of a contracts (‘‘Contracts’’) or other variable Investment Management). guaranteed term, and assets attributable annuity contracts that are substantially SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Following to such an option may be held in similar in all material respects to the is a summary of the application; the Aetna’s general account or in a non- Contracts (‘‘Other Contracts’’) and that complete application is available for a insulated, none-utilized separate may be issued in the future by Aetna; 1 fee from the Commission’s Public account of Aetna.2 Aetna Life Insurance and Annuity Reference Branch. 6. The Contracts provide for the Company (‘‘ALIAC’’), the principal Applicants’ Representations payment of a standard death benefit underwriter of the Contracts; and Any equal to the greater of (i) the cash value Member Broker-Dealer of the National 1. Aetna, a stock life insurance of the Contract account, or (ii) the sum Association of Securities Dealers, Inc. company, is a wholly-owned subsidiary of purchase payments less any (‘‘NASD’’) That May In The Future of Aetna Life Insurance and Annuity withdrawals, or (iii) the contract Serve As Principal Underwriter For The Company (‘‘ALIAC’’), which is, in turn, holder’s account value at the most Contracts (‘‘Future Underwriters’’). a wholly-owned subsidiary of Aetna recent seventh year anniversary of the Life and Casualty Company. Aetna is in RELEVANT 1940 ACT SECTIONS: Order Contract adjusted for purchase the process of qualifying to do business requested under Section 6(c) of the 1940 payments, withdrawals and amounts and obtaining licenses to sell insurance Act granting exemptions from the applied to an annuity option. The in all jurisdictions except New York. provisions of Sections 26(a)(2)(C) and Contracts also provide for the payment 2. The Separate Accounts are or will 27(c)(2) of the 1940 Act. of an enhanced death benefit equal to be established by Aetna for the purpose SUMMARY OF APPLICATION: Applicants the greater of (i) the cash value of the of funding variable annuity contracts. Contract account, or (ii) during the first seeking an order permitting the The Separate Accounts are or will be deduction of a mortality and expense year of the Contract, the amount of registered under the 1940 Act as unit premiums paid (adjusted for any risk change from the assets of the investment trusts. Assets of the Separate Separate Accounts in connection with withdrawals and any amount paid to an Accounts will be allocated among the annuity option), or (iii) during shares of one or more registered open- 11 subsequent years of the Contract, an See Exchange Act Release No. 34925, supra end investment companies (‘‘Funds’’), note 4. some of which may be managed by 2 Applicants are not requesting Commission 12 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2) (1988). ALIAC or its affiliates. review of whether the Fixed Interest Option or any 13 17 CFR 200.30–3(a)(12) (1994). 3. ALIAC is the principal underwriter other Credited Interest Option under the Contracts 1 Applicants have undertaken to amend their of the Contracts and may act as are securities required to be registered under the application during the Notice Period to include the 1933 Act. Applicants will not consider any order representation that Future Contracts will be investment adviser to some of the issued as a result of this application to be an substantially similar ‘‘in all material respects’’ to Funds. ALIAC is registered as a broker- expression of any view by the Commission on this the Contract. dealer under the Securities Exchange issue. Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices 14045 amount determined by increasing Applicants intend to rely on Rules 26a– Contracts. Applicants will rely on Rule premiums paid in prior years by a 1 and 6c–8(c) under the 1940 Act for the 6c–8 under the 1940 Act to deduct the contractually-determined factor necessary exemptive relief to permit CDSC. (adjusted for any withdrawals or any imposition of these fees. Aetna 13. A daily charge will be deducted amounts paid for an annuity option), or represents that it will monitor its from the net assets of the Separate (iv) cash value on the most recent administrative expenses and the Accounts to compensate Aetna for seventh year anniversary of the proceeds of these charges on at least an assuming certain mortality and expense Contract, adjusted for purchase annual basis to ensure compliance with risks. Aetna currently charges 0.35% for payments, withdrawals and amounts Rule 26a–1 under the 1940 Act. the expense risk, 0.75% for standard applied to an annuity option.3 10. No charge currently is deducted mortality risks, and 0.15% for the 7. Various fees and charges are for premium taxes. Aetna reserves the enhanced death benefit, or a current deducted under the Contracts. Aetna right, however, to deduct such taxes total charge of 1.25%. Aetna reserves may impose a maximum annual from cash value under the Contracts at the right to charge up to .90% on an maintenance charge of $35 under the the time such taxes are payable. Aetna annual basis for standard mortality Contracts for administrative services reserves the right to offer Other risks, in which event the charge for provided to Contract holders. Aetna Contracts that permit the deduction of mortality and expense risks would be at currently deducts a $30 annual premium taxes from cash values or a maximum annual rate of 1.40% of net maintenance charge from Cash Value on purchase payments. No charges assets. the Contract date, on each Contract currently are made for federal, state or 14. The mortality risk arises from Anniversary prior to the Retirement local taxes, other than premium taxes, Aetna’s contractual obligation to make Date, and upon termination of the that Aetna incurs or that may be annuity payments (in accordance with Contract. In addition, Aetna reserves the attributable to a Separate Account or the the annuity tables and other provisions right to deduct a daily administrative Contracts. Aetna reserves the right to in the Contracts) regardless of how long expense charge of up to 0.25%, on an deduct such taxes in the future for any any individual annuitant or all annual basis, of the net asset value of such tax or economic burden from any annuitants may live. The mortality risk the Separate Accounts, to cover its sales load payable to Aetna with respect is that an annuitant will live longer than administrative expenses during the to the Contracts. Aetna will not deduct predicted by Aetna’s actuarial accumulation period and the annuity any such taxes from the assets of the projections, thereby resulting in higher period. Of the 0.25% maximum Separate Accounts unless it has been than expected annuity payments. This administrative expense charge, Aetna specifically authorized to do so by the undertaking assures that neither an currently deducts 0.15% annually of the Commission. Applicants intend to rely annuitant’s own longevity, nor an average daily net assets of the Separate on Rule 26a–2(d) under the 1940 Act to improvement in general life expectancy, Accounts during the accumulation permit the deduction of taxes from the will adversely affect the monthly period. An administrative charge assets of a Separate Account. annuity payments that the annuitant currently is not imposed during the 11. No sales charge is deducted from will receive under the Contracts. Aetna annuity period. premium payments. Aetna reserves the also assumes a mortality risk in that 8. No charge currently is made for right to deduct a contingent deferred Aetna may be obligated to pay either a transfers of cash values among the sales charge (‘‘CDSC’’) of up to 9% of standard death benefit or an enhanced Funds or from a Fund to a Fixed or the amount withdrawn, on partial or full death benefit in excess of a contract Credited Interest Option during the Contract surrenders and withdrawals of holder’s account value. accumulation period. Aetna reserves the Account Value, and upon election of 15. The expense risk assumed by right to establish a minimum amount for certain annuity payment options, to Aetna is the risk that charges for transfers and to impose a transfer charge compensate Aetna for its distribution administration expenses, which are of up to $10 for each transfer request expenses. The CDSC is applied to guaranteed not to increase for the life of after the first twelve requests in each purchase payments and not to any the Contracts, may be insufficient to Contract year to reimburse Aetna for its increases in Account Value. The cover the actual costs of issuing and transfer administrative costs during the maximum CDSC currently is 7%, administering the Contracts or Other accumulation period. No transfer fees decreasing by up to 1% per year after Contracts. are charged during the annuity period. payment of a purchase payment until it 16. Aetna currently anticipates that, 9. No profit is anticipated from the reaches zero after seven years. The under ordinary circumstances, the maintenance charge, transfer fee and aggregate CDSC is guaranteed never to mortality and expense risk charge will administrative expense charges, which exceed 8.5% of aggregate premium be more than sufficient to cover its will not be greater than Aetna’s average payments. The CDSC may be waived costs. Accordingly, any excess will be expected cost of the services to be under certain specified circumstances. profit to Aetna and may be available to provided, defined in accordance with Amounts attributable to purchase pay distribution costs for the Contracts Rule 26a–1 under the 1940 Act. payments are considered withdrawn that are not covered by funds derived before amounts attributable to income, from the CDSC. 3 The death benefit calculations in (iii) under the and the oldest purchase payments are standard death benefit and in (ii), (iii) and (iv) considered withdrawn first when Applicants’ Legal Analysis under the enhanced death benefit apply until the Certificate Holder or annuitant reaches the death determining the amount of CDSC that 1. Applicants request exemptions benefit maximum age shown in the Contract. should be applied. under Section 6(c) from Sections Thereafter, the death benefit is only adjusted for 12. Aetna anticipates that the CDSC 26(a)(2)(C) and 27(c)(2) of the 1940 Act purchase payments, withdrawals and amounts will not generate revenues that will be to the extent necessary to permit the applied to annuity options. Currently, there is no limitation on the maximum death benefit payable sufficient to pay all its distribution deduction of a mortality and expense under the standard death benefit or the enhanced costs. Excess distribution costs, thus, risk charge from the assets of the death benefit; however, Aetna reserves the right in would be paid out of Aetna’s general Separate Accounts in connection with the future to impose a limitation on the maximum assets, which may include profits funding the Contracts and Other allowable death benefit under (iii) under the standard and under (ii), (iii) and (iv) under the derived from the mortality and expense Contracts. Applicants further request enhanced death benefit. risk charge assessed under the that such exemptive relief be extended 14046 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices to ALIAC as principal underwriter for any payment to the depositor or memorandum setting forth in detail the the Aetna Contracts and to Future principal underwriter except a methodology used in determining that Underwriters, a class consisting of reasonable fee, as the Commission may the additional risk charge of up to broker-dealers who may, in the future, prescribe, for performing bookkeeping 0.15% for the enhanced death benefit is act as principal underwriters of the and other administrative duties reasonable in relation to the risks Contracts. Applicants submit that the normally performed by the bank itself. assumed by Aetna under the Contracts. requested exemptions are necessary and 5. Applicants submit that Aetna is 8. Similarly, prior to making available appropriate in the public interest and entitled to reasonable compensation for any Other Contracts through the consistent with the protection of its assumption of mortality and expense Separate Accounts, Applicants investors and the purposes fairly risks. Applicants represent that the represent that the mortality and expense intended by the policy and provisions of mortality and expense risk charge under risk charges under such Other Contracts the 1940 Act. the Contracts with the standard death will be within the range of industry 2. Applicants state that the terms of benefit is a reasonable and proper practice for comparable contracts. Aetna the relief requested with respect to any insurance charge to compensate Aetna undertakes to maintain at its principal Other Contracts funded by the Separate for assuming certain risks under the offices, available to the Commission Accounts or distributed by any Future Contracts, including the risk that: (a) upon request, memoranda setting forth Underwriter are consistent with the annuitants under the Contracts will live in detail the products analyzed in the standards set forth in Section 6(c) of the longer as a group than has been course of, and the methodology and 1940 Act. Without the requested relief, anticipated in setting the annuity rates results of, of its comparative surveys exemptive relief would have to be guaranteed in the Contracts; (b) the cash and analyses in reaching these requested for each new separate account value will be less than the death benefit; determinations. established to fund the Other Contracts and (c) administrative expenses will be 9. Applicants acknowledge that, if a or for each Future Underwriter. Such greater than amounts derived from the profit is realized from the mortality and additional requests for exemptive relief administrative charges. Thus, expense risk charge, all or a portion of would present no issues under the 1940 Applicants assert that this charge is such profit may be available to pay Act not already addressed in this consistent with the protection of distribution expenses not reimbursed by application. The requested relief would investors. the CDSC deducted under the Contracts. eliminate the need for the filing of 6. Aetna represents that the annual Aetna has concluded that there is a redundant exemptive applications, charge of 1.25% of net assets for reasonable likelihood that the proposed thereby reducing administrative mortality and expense risks (.90% and distribution financing arrangements will expenses, maximizing efficient use of .35%, respectively) assumed by it in benefit the Separate Accounts and the resources and, thus, promoting connection with the standard death Contract holders. The basis for that competitiveness in the variable annuity benefit is within the range of industry conclusion is set forth in a market. Both the delay and the expense practice for comparable annuity memorandum which will be maintained of repeatedly seeking exemptive relief contracts. This representation is based by Aetna at its administrative offices would, Applicants assert, impair upon Aetna’s analysis of publicly and will be available to the Aetna’s ability to effectively take available information about similar Commission. advantage of business opportunities as industry products, taking into 10. Applicants represent that Other they arise. If Aetna were repeatedly to consideration such factors as current Contracts will be offered only if Aetna seek exemptive relief with respect to the charge levels, the existence of charge concludes that the proposed same issues addressed in this level guarantees, and guaranteed distribution financing arrangement will application, investors would not receive annuity rates. Applicants represent that benefit such Other Contracts and the additional protection or benefit and Aetna will maintain at its principal Separate Accounts established in could be disadvantaged by Aetna’s offices, available to the Commission, a connection with their issuance and the increased overhead. Applicants submit, memorandum setting forth in detail the Contract owners. The basis for such therefore, that the requested relief is products analyzed in the course of, and conclusion will be set forth in a appropriate in the public interest and the methodology and results of, its memorandum which will be maintained 4 consistent with the protection of comparative survey. by Aetna at its administrative offices 7. Applicants further represent that investors and the purposes fairly and will be made available to the the additional mortality risk charge of intended by the policy and provisions of Commission, upon request.6 the 1940 Act. 0.15% for the enhanced death benefit is 11. Accordingly, Applicants assert 3. Section 6(c) of the 1940 Act reasonable in relation to the risks that the deduction for the assumption of assumed under the Contracts. Based on authorizes the Commission to grant an mortality and expense risks is necessary an actuarial analysis of the cost of exemption from any provision, rule or and appropriate in the public interest providing an enhanced death benefit, it regulation of the 1940 Act to the extent and consistent with the protection of was determined that the additional that it is necessary or appropriate in the investors and the purposes fairly mortality risk charge of up to 0.15% was public interest and consistent with the intended by the policy and provisions of a reasonable charge for providing the protection of investors and the purposes the 1940 Act. fairly intended by the policy and enhanced death benefit in relation to the 12. Aetna also represents that the provisions of the 1940 Act. risks assumed by Aetna under the Separate Accounts will only invest in Contracts. Aetna will maintain at its 4. Sections 26(a)(2)(C) and 27(c)(2) of management investment companies principal offices,5 available to the the 1940 Act, in relevant part, prohibit which undertake, in the event they Commission, upon request, a a registered unit investment trust, its should adopt a plan under Rule 12b–1 depositor or principal underwriter, from to finance distribution expenses, to have 4 Applicants have undertaken to amend their selling periodic payment plan a board of directors or trustees, a certificates unless the proceeds of all application during the Notice Period to include this representation. payments, other than sales loads, are 5 Applicants have undertaken to amend their 6 Applicants have undertaken to amend their deposited with a qualified bank and application during the Notice Period to include this application during the Notice Period to include held under arrangements which prohibit representation. these representations. Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices 14047 majority of whom are not ‘‘interested applicants, in the form of an affidavit or, Series will create their portfolios in a persons’’ of the company, formulate and for lawyers, a certificate of service. similar manner using securities that are approve any such plan in accordance Hearing requests should state the nature included in other Indices. The Sponsor with Rule 12b–1. of the writer’s request, the reason for the of the Series intends that, as each Series request, and the issues contested. terminates, a new Series (‘‘New Series’’) Conclusion Persons may request notification of a based on the appropriate Index will be For the reasons set forth above, hearing by writing to the SEC’s offered for the next period. Applicants represent that the Secretary. 4. Each Series has or will have a exemptions requested to permit the ADDRESSES: Secretary, SEC, 450 Fifth contemplated date (a ‘‘Rollover Date’’) daily deduction from the assets of the Street NW., Washington, DC 20549. on which holders of units in that Series Separate Accounts of the charge for Applicants, c/o Nike Securities L.P., (the ‘‘Rollover Series’’) may at their assumption of mortality and expense 1001 Warrenville Road, Suite 3000, option redeem their units in the risks, including an enhanced death Lisle, Illinois 60532. Rollover Series and receive in return benefit, at a maximum annual rate of SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The units of a New Series which is created 1.40% of net assets, are necessary and following is a summary of the on or about the Rollover Date. appropriate in the public interest and application. The complete application 5. There is normally some overlap consistent with the protection of may be obtained for a fee at the SEC’s from year to year in the stocks having investors and the purposes fairly Public Reference Branch. the highest dividend yields in an Index intended by the policy and provisions of and, therefore, between the portfolios of the 1940 Act. Applicants’ Representations each Rollover Series and the 1. The First Trust Special Situations corresponding New Series. For example, For the Commission, by the Division of of the ten securities selected for Investment Management, pursuant to Trust (the ‘‘Trust’’), a unit investment delegated authority. trust registered under the Act, consists inclusion in Value Ten Series 5 on September 7, 1994, eight were still Margaret H. McFarland, of a number of series (‘‘Series’’), each of among the top ten dividend yielding Deputy Secretary. which will be similar but separate and designated by a different series number. stocks in the DJIA as of the date of the [FR Doc. 95–6354 Filed 3–14–95; 8:45 am] Target Equity Trust, Value Ten Series 1 amended application. BILLING CODE 8010±01±M is of one of the Series of the Trust. Nike 6. In connection with its termination, is the sponsor for each Series (the each Rollover Series sells all of its portfolio securities on an Exchange as [Release No. IC±20946; 812±9318] ‘‘Sponsor’’). Applicants request that the relief sought herein apply to any future quickly as practicable, but over a period The First Trust Special Situations Series that has the characteristics of time so as to minimize any adverse Trust, et al.; Notice of Application described below and in the application. impact on the market price. Similarly, a 2. Each Series will have a portfolio New Series acquires its portfolio March 8, 1995. which contains equity securities securities in purchase transactions on AGENCY: Securities and Exchange (‘‘Equity Securities’’) which are (i) an Exchange. This procedure creates Commission (‘‘SEC’’). actively traded (i.e., have had an average brokerage commissions on portfolio ACTION: Notice of application for daily trading volume in the preceding securities of the same issue that are exemption under the Investment six months of at least 500 shares equal borne by the holders of units of both the Company Act of 1940 (the ‘‘Act’’). in value to at least 25,000 United States Rollover Series and the New Series. dollars) on an exchange (an Applicants, therefore, request an APPLICANTS: The First Trust Special ‘‘Exchange’’) which is either (a) a exemptive order to permit any Rollover Situations Trust, Target Equity Trust, national securities exchange which Series to sell portfolio securities to a Value Ten Series 1 and subsequent meets the qualifications of section 6 of New Series and a New Series to series, and Nike Securities L.P. the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 or purchase those securities. 7. In order to minimize overreaching, (‘‘Nike’’). (b) a foreign securities exchange that the Sponsor will certify to the trustee of RELEVANT ACT SECTIONS: Order requested meets the qualifications set out in the the Rollover Series and the New Series, under sections 6(c) and 17(b) from proposed amendment to rule 12d3– within five days of each sale from a section 17(a). 1(d)(6) under the Act, as proposed by Rollover Series to a New Series, (a) that SUMMARY OF APPLICATION: the Commission,1 and that releases Applicants the transaction is consistent with the daily closing prices, and (ii) included in request an order to permit a terminating policy of both the Rollover Series and a published index (an ‘‘Index’’). series of a unit investment trust to sell the New Series, as recited in their 3. The investment objective of each portfolio securities to a new series of the respective registration statements and Series is to seek a greater total return trust. reports filed under the Act, (b) the date than the stocks comprising an entire FILING DATE: The application was filed of such transaction, and (c) the closing related Index (e.g., the Dow Jones on November 3, 1994, and was amended sales price on the Exchange for the sale Industrial Average (‘‘DJIA’’), the Hang on March 3, 1995. date of the securities subject to such Seng Index, or the Financial Times HEARING OR NOTIFICATION OF HEARING: sale. The trustee will then countersign An Industrial Ordinary Share Index). the certificate, unless, in the unlikely order granting the application will be Certain of the Series will acquire event that the trustee disagrees with the issued unless the SEC orders a hearing. approximately equal values of a closing sales price listed on the Interested persons may request a designated number of stocks in the DJIA certificate, the trustee immediately hearing by writing to the SEC’s having the highest dividend yields as of informs the Sponsor orally of any such Secretary and serving applicants with a a specified date and will hold those disagreement and returns the certificate copy of the request, personally or by stocks for a designated period. Other mail. Hearing requests should be within five days to the Sponsor with received by the SEC by 5:30 p.m. on 1 Investment Company Act Release No. 17096 corrections duly noted. Upon the April 3, 1995 and should be (Aug. 3, 1989) (proposing amendments to rule Sponsor’s receipt of a corrected accompanied by proof of service on 12d3–1). certificate, if the Sponsor can verify the 14048 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices correct price by reference to an they will comply with all of the APPLICANTS: ML Venture Partners II, L.P. independently published list of closing provisions of rule 17a–7, other than (‘‘MLCP II’’), Merrill Lynch, Pierce, sales prices for the date of the paragraph (e). Fenner & Smith Incorporated (‘‘Merrill transaction, the Sponsor will ensure that 4. Applicants represent that purchases Lynch’’), and Donaldson, Lufkin & the price of units of the New Series, and and sales between Series will be Jenrette Securities Corporation (‘‘DLJ’’). distributions to holders of the Rollover consistent with the policy of each RELEVANT ACT SECTIONS: Order requested Series with regard to redemption of Series, as only securities that otherwise under section 57(c) from section their units or termination of the would be brought and sold on the open 57(a)(2). Rollover Series, accurately reflect the market pursuant to the policy of each SUMMARY OF APPLICATION: Applicants corrected price. To the extent that the Series will be involved in the proposed request an order relating to the sale of Sponsor disagrees with the trustee’s transactions. Applicants further believe shares of common stock of Corporate corrected price, the Sponsor and the that the current practice of buying and Express, Inc. by MLVP II in an trustee will jointly determine the correct selling on the open market leads to underwriting in which Merrill Lynch sales price by reference to a mutually unnecessary brokerage fees and is and/or DLJ are members of the agreeable, independently published list therefore contrary to the general underwriting syndicate. of closing sales prices for the date of the purposes of the Act. transaction. FILING DATE: The application was filed Applicants’ Conditions on January 20, 1995. Applicants have Applicants’ Legal Analysis Applicants agree that the order agreed to file an amendment during the 1. Section 17(a) of the Act makes it granting the requested relief shall be notice period, the substance of which is unlawful for an affiliated person of a subject to the following conditions: incorporated herein. registered investment company to sell 1. Each sale of Equity Securities by a HEARING OR NOTIFICATION OF HEARING: An securities to, or purchase securities Rollover Series to a New Series will be order granting the application will be from, the company. Investment affected at the closing price of the issued unless the SEC orders a hearing. companies under common control may securities sold on the applicable Interested persons may request a be considered affiliates of one another. Exchange on the sale date, without any hearing by writing to the SEC’s Each Series will have an identical or brokerage charges or other remuneration Secretary and serving applicants with a common Sponsor, Nike. Since the except customary transfer fees, if any. copy of the request, personally or by Sponsor of each Series may be 2. The nature and conditions of such mail. Hearing requests should be considered to control each Series, it is transactions will be fully disclosed to received by the SEC by 5:30 p.m. on likely that each Series would be investors in the appropriate prospectus April 3, 1995, and should be considered an affiliate of the others. of each future Rollover Series and New accompanied by proof of service on the 2. Section 17(b) provides that the SEC Series. applicants, in the form of an affidavit or, shall exempt a proposed transaction 3. The trustee of each Rollover Series for lawyers, a certificate of service. from section 17(a) if evidence and New Series will (a) review the Hearing requests should state the nature establishes that: (a) the terms of the procedures discussed in the application of the writer’s interest, the reasons for proposed transaction are reasonable and relating to the sale of securities from a the request, and the issues contested. fair and do not involve overreaching; (b) Rollover Series to a New Series and (b) Persons who wish to be notified of a the proposed transaction is consistent make such changes to the procedures as hearing may request such notification with the policies of the registered the trustee deems necessary that are by writing to the SEC’s Secretary. investment company involved; and (c) reasonably designed to comply with ADDRESSES: the proposed transaction is consistent Secretary, SEC, 450 Fifth with the general provisions of the Act. paragraphs (a) through (d) of rule 17a– Street NW., Washington, DC 20549. Under section 6(c), the SEC may exempt 7. MLCP II and Merrill Lynch, North classes of transactions if, and to the 4. A written copy of these procedures Tower, World Financial Center, New extent that, such exemption is necessary and a written record of each transaction York, New York 10281. or appropriate in the public interest, pursuant to this order will be FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Fran and consistent with the protection of maintained as provided in rule 17a–7(f). Pollack-Matz, Senior Attorney, (202) investors and the purposes fairly For the Commission, by the Division of 942–0570, or Robert A. Robertson, intended by the policy and provisions of Investment Management, under delegated Branch Chief, (202) 942–0560 (Division the Act. Applicants believe that the authority. of Investment Management, Office of proposed transactions satisfy the Margaret H. McFarland, Investment Company Regulation). requirements of sections 6(c) and 17(b). Deputy Secretary. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The 3. Rule 17a–7 under the Act permits [FR Doc. 95–6357 Filed 3–14–95; 8:45 am] following is a summary of the registered investment companies that application. The complete application BILLING CODE 8010±01±M might be deemed affiliates solely by may be obtained for a fee from the SEC’s reason of common investment advisers, Public Reference Branch. directors, and/or officers, to purchase securities from, or sell securities, one [Release No. IC±20949; 812±9442] Applicants’ Representations another at an independently determined 1. MLVP II, a Delaware limited ML Venture Partners II, L.P. et al.; price, provided certain conditions are partnership, is a business development Notice of Application met. Paragraph (e) of the rule requires company under the Act. The investment an investment company’s board of March 9, 1995. objective of MLVP II is to seek long-term directors to adopt and monitor the AGENCY: Securities and Exchange capital appreciation by making venture procedures for these transactions to Commission (the ‘‘SEC’’). capital investments. MLVP II has five assure compliance with the rule. A unit general partners, consisting of four ACTION: Notice of application for an investment trust does not have a board individuals (the ‘‘MLVP II Individual order under the Investment Company of directors and, therefore, may not rely General Partners’’) and one managing Act of 1940 (the ‘‘Act’’). on the rule. Applicants represent that general partner, MLVP II Co. L.P. (the Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices 14049 ‘‘MLVP II Managing General Partner’’). 5. MLVP II made an initial investment of Corporate Express by MLVP II in The MLVP II Individual General in Corporate Express in May, 1992. At underwritings in which Merrill Lynch Partners include three MLVP II that time, MLVP II acquired 442,136 and/or DLJ are members of the Independent General Partners (defined shares of common stock and 760,800 underwriting syndicate.1 to be individuals who are not shares of Series A Convertible Preferred 2. Section 57(a)(2) prohibits certain ‘‘interested persons’’ of MLVP II) and Stock for $1,392,838 ($0.22 per common affiliates of a business development one general partner who is an share and $1.70 per Series A Preferred company from purchasing any security individual and who is an affiliated Share). MLVP II acquired these shares or other property on a principal basis person of the MLVP II Managing from the Management Company from the business development General Partner. The MLVP II Managing pursuant to the terms and conditions company or from any company General Partner, is a limited partnership contained in an SEC exemptive order controlled by the business development controlled by its general partner, Merrill dated May 11, 1992 (the ‘‘Blanket company, except securities of which the Lynch Venture Capital Inc. (the Exemptive Order’’) permitting co- seller is the issuer. Section 57(b) ‘‘Management Company’’). The investments between MLVP II and provides, in part, that the affiliates Management Company, an indirect certain entities managed by DLJ Capital affected by section 57(a) include any subsidiary of Merrill Lynch & Co., Inc. Corporation. In April, 1993, MLVP II ‘‘person directly or indirectly either (‘‘ML & Co.’’), performs, or arranges for acquired 153,450 shares of Series B controlling, controlled by or under the performance of, the management Convertible Preferred Stock for $537,075 common control with’’ the business and administrative services necessary ($3.50 per share) in a follow-on development company. Section 57(c) for the operation of MLVP II. On May investment in Corporate Express. MLVP provides that a person may file an 23, 1991, MLVP II, the MLVP II II’s follow-on investment in Corporate application with the SEC for an order Managing General Partner, and the Express was made in accordance with exempting a proposed transaction from Management Company retained DLJ the terms and conditions of the Blanket one or more provisions of section Capital Management Corporation (the Exemptive Order. 57(a)(1) through (3), and that the SEC 6. On September 23, 1994, 7,500,000 ‘‘Sub-Manager’’), an indirect wholly- shall issue an order if evidence shares of common stock of Corporate owned subsidiary of Donaldson, Lufkin establishes that: (a) the terms of the Express were offered to the public in an & Jenrette, Inc., to provide management proposed transaction, including the underwritten offering in which DLJ services in connection with the venture consideration to be paid or received, are acted as a managing underwriter and capital investments of MLVP II pursuant reasonable and fair and do not involve Merrill Lynch acted as an underwriter. to a Sub-Management Agreement (the overreaching of the business In connection with that offering, MLVP ‘‘Sub-Management Agreement’’). Under development company or its II exchanged its 914,250 Class A and B the Sub-Management Agreement, the shareholders or partners on the part of Preferred Shares for 914,250 shares of Sub-Manager is primarily responsible any person concerned; (b) the proposed for the venture capital investments of common stock of Corporate Express. At the same time, Corporate Express transaction is consistent with the policy MLVP II. The agreement provides that of the business development company the Sub-Manager shall, subject to the effected a one-for-two reverse split of its common stock. As a result of that split, as recited in the filings made by such overall supervision of the MLVP II company with the SEC under the Individual General Partner, ‘‘make all MLVP II exchanged its 1,356,386 shares of common stock of Corporate Express Securities Act of 1933, its registration decisions regarding Venture Capital statement and reports filed under the Investments and, among other things, for 678,193 shares of common stock. Since the initial public offering, the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and its find evaluate, structure, monitor and report to shareholders or partners; and liquidate such investments.’’ common stock of Corporate Express has traded in the NASDAQ National Market (c) the proposed transaction is 2. Merrill Lynch, a Delaware System (‘‘NASDAQ’’). In addition to the consistent with the general purposes of corporation, is the principal subsidiary purchasers in the public offering and in the Act. of ML & Co. ML & Co., a Delaware subsequent secondary market transfers, 3. Applicants believe that the corporation, is a diversified financial the stockholders of Corporate Express Management Company is controlled by services holding company which, include certain affiliates of DLJ, ML & Co. and that ML & Co. might be through its subsidiaries, provides members of management and other deemed to exercise and controlling investment and financing, insurance, employees of Corporate Express, and influence over MLVP II and Merrill real estate, and related services. other institutional investors. Lynch. Likewise, applicants believe that 3. DLJ, a Delaware corporation, is a 7. As of December 31, 1994, MLVP II the Sub-Manager is controlled by wholly-owned subsidiary of Donaldson, owned 696,234 shares, or approximately Donaldson, Lufkin & Jenrette, Inc. and Lufkin & Jenrette, Inc., a holding 2.7%, of the outstanding common stock that Donaldson, Lufkin & Jenrette, Inc. company which through its subsidiaries of Corporate Express. At such date, might be deemed to exercise a engages in investment banking, affiliates of DLJ (excluding MLVP II) controlling influence over MLVP II and merchant banking, public finance, owned 2,168,471 shares, or DLJ. As a result of these affiliations, trading, distribution, and research. approximately 8.4%. sales of securities on a principal basis Donaldson, Lufkin & Jenrette, Inc. is a 8. Although MLVP II has made no by MLVP II to Merrill Lynch and/or DLJ subsidiary of The Equitable Companies determination as to the time at which it are prohibited by section 57(a) and Incorporated. would like to sell its investment in cannot be effected unless an order is 4. Corporate Express is a distributor of Corporate Express, MLVP II is now issued under section 57(c). office supplies and products that it sells considering alternative methods of directly to large corporate customers. disposing of such investment. 1 Applicants do not believe that the proposed Corporate Express has expanded its transactions would constitute joint transactions operations significantly over the past Applicants’ Legal Analysis under section 57(a)(4) and rule 17d–1 and therefore have not requested that the order include relief three years and currently has 1. Applicants request an order under under that section and rule. Applicants recognize annualized revenues in excess of $600 section 57(c) exempting from section that the Commission expresses no opinion on this million. 57(a)(2) sales of shares of common stock issue. 14050 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices 4. Applicants believe that the underwritten offering for which Merrill Independent General Partners, to be fair statutory standards set forth above will Lynch and/or DLJ are members of the and reasonable. be satisfied with respect to the relief underwriting syndicate. 5. If the Sub-Manager, on the basis of requested. In this connection, applicants 7. MLVP II believes that the relief its evaluation described above, believe that the structure of the requested is consistent with its purpose, recommends that MLVP II sell shares in proposed transaction has been designed its stated policies and the disclosure such underwritten offering, the to insure that the terms of the made to its prospective investors. Individual General Partners shall then transaction will be fair and reasonable, Applicants also believe that the determine whether, in their view, it is will not involve overreaching on the proposed transactions are in the best in the best interests of MLVP II to sell part of any person concerned, and will interests of MLVP II to the extent that shares in such underwritten offering. eliminate the possibility of abuses of the such transactions permit MLVP II to MLVP II shall only sell shares in such potential conflict of interest. The terms liquidate portfolio securities on underwritten offering if the Individual of the proposed transaction provide that favorable terms and in a more expedited General Partners, including a majority of MLVP II will only sell shares in an manner than would otherwise be the Independent General Partners, underwritten offering in which Merrill available. determine that: Lynch and/or DLJ are members of the (i) the terms of the proposed underwriting syndicate if certain Applicants’ Conditions transaction, including the consideration conditions are met. The Sub-Manager Applicants agree that the order to be paid to MLVP II, are reasonable for MLVP II must initially evaluate the granting the requested relief shall be and fair and do not involve proposed transaction and determine to subject to the following conditions: overreaching of MLVP II or its partners recommend the sale of the investments. 1. If MLVP II is offered the on the part of any person concerned; 5. The abuses that section 57(a)(2) is opportunity to sell shares of common (ii) the proposed transaction is designed to deter are limited with stock of Corporate Express in an consistent with the policies of MLVP II respect to the proposed transactions. underwritten offering in which Merrill as indicated in its filings under the The shares of Corporate Express are Lynch and/or DLJ is a member of the Securities Act of 1933 and the Securities traded on NASDAQ and the price to be underwriting syndicate, the Sub- Exchange Act of 1934, and its reports to paid for shares in an underwritten Manager will review the terms of the its partners; and offering will approximate the trading proposed offering. The Sub-Manager (iii) participation by MLVP II in the price of such shares on NASDAQ less an will provide a written report to the proposed transaction is in the best underwriting discount. The independent General Partners which interests of the partners of MLVP II. 6. MLVP II will maintain the records underwriting terms with respect to will set forth the Sub-Manager’s required by section 57(f)(3) of the Act as MLVP II’s sale of shares must be on the recommendation as to whether MLVP II if each of the transactions permitted same terms applicable to any selling should sell shares in such underwritten under these conditions were approved shareholder participating in the offering, offering based on the Sub-Manager’s including terms applicable to affiliates by the Independent General Partners analysis of all factors it deems relevant, of ML & Co. and/or DLJ. The under section 57(f) of the Act. including the terms of the proposed underwriting terms and arrangements, underwritten offering. For the SEC, by the Division of Investment including the underwriting discount, 2. MLVP II will be given the Management, under delegated authority. will be reviewed and passed upon by Margaret H. McFarland, the Individual General Partners, and opportunity to sell shares in such Deputy Secretary. separately by the Independent General underwritten offering on at least a Partners. proportionate basis with affiliates of DLJ [FR Doc. 95–6356 Filed 3–14–95; 8:45 am] 6. Liquidity in portfolio investments and ML & Co. (if any), and on the same BILLING CODE 8010±01±M is becoming increasingly important as terms applicable to any selling MLVP II approaches the ninth year of its shareholders participating in the ten year term. The ability to sell shares offering, including terms applicable to DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION in an underwritten offering in which affiliates of DLJ and ML & Co. (if any) Merrill Lynch and/or DLJ are acting as selling shares in such offering. In this Office of the Secretary underwriters may provide liquidity not regard, the underwriting discount with Notice of Public Meeting and Request otherwise available to MLVP II. Due to respect to such offering will be no larger for Information on the Centralization its affiliation with Corporate Express than the customary underwriting and Computerization of DOT Dockets through Merrill Lynch, sales by MLVP discount charged by underwriters for II in the public market of shares of equity securities in similar transactions. AGENCIES: The Office of the Secretary Corporate Express are subject to the 3. MLVP II will only participate in (OST), the Federal Aviation volume limitations contained in rule such underwritten offering if the shares Administration (FAA), the Federal 144 under the Securities Act of 1933. In to be sold continue to be traded on Highway Administration (FHWA), the addition, because DLJ acted as managing NASDAQ or are listed on a national Federal Railroad Administration (FRA), underwriter for Corporate Express in its securities exchange, as of the date of the the Federal Transit Administration initial public offering, it is likely that offering and if the offering price is (FTA), the Maritime Administration DLJ will be the managing underwriter or determined by reference to, and (MARAD), the National Highway Traffic otherwise a member of the underwriting approximates, the price of the shares on Safety Administration (NHTSA), the syndicate in future offerings of such NASDAQ, or a national securities Research and Special Programs company’s securities. Thus, in the exchange, at the time the offering price Administration (RSPA), and the United absence of the requested relief, MLVP II is determined. States Coast Guard (USCG), DOT. will be at a substantial disadvantage 4. The underwriting terms and ACTION: Notice of public meeting. because it will be unable to liquidate its arrangements with respect to the holdings at a time when other proposed transaction must be SUMMARY: DOT is consolidating its nine institutional investors in Corporate determined by the Individual General separate docket facilities into a single, Express are selling shares in an Partners, and a majority of the central office, and initiating a transition Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices 14051 from a paper-based system to use of an eliminate duplication, improve records Federal Records Center consistent with optical ‘‘imaging’’ technology for more management, enhance docket security, standard operating procedures. efficient storage, management, and and provide easier public access by The Department’s Docket retrieval of docketed information. This creating a single point of entry. The Management Facility initially will change also will address increasing affected offices and agencies are accept only ‘‘hard’’ copy filings. space limitations, provide better working together to develop the However, to facilitate review and security, and provide a platform for consolidated docket facility and to processing now, the formal paper filing eventual electronic filing and on-line standardize docket procedures to the can be accompanied by floppy disks for public access to the docket. The extent possible. the action offices. The Department is ultimate objective is to make records As part of the consolidation effort, considering providing Optical Character accessible from outside Washington, not DOT has initiated a phased transition Recognition (OCR) capability in the just at DOT headquarters. This notice from a paper-based docket system to docket system as soon as it is feasible. announces the date, time, location, and storage of docket records in an The Department’s priority, however, is procedures for a public meeting to electronic format. This change responds to optimize the document flow into, discuss this initiative. to five different needs: to (1) Store within, and from the Department DATES: The public meeting is scheduled increasing amounts of docketed through electronic transmission. When 1:30 PM to 4:00 PM (local time) for: information; (2) provide users with the new system and its staff have the March 29, 1995; Washington, D.C. better, quicker, and easier access to that capability to handle the change, information: (3) provide more efficient electronic filing will be encouraged. ADDRESSES: The public meeting will be ways to transmit information to and Electronically-filed documents will not held at: U.S. Department of from the dockets; (4) provide users with need OCR translation. The Department Transportation, Room 2230, 400 7th the ability to perform electronic is considering adding future capabilities Street SW, Washington, D.C. 20590. searches of information in the dockets to to the system where possible, including: Individuals interested in attending the increase the efficiency and quality of (1) Use of government-approved meeting should contact Rasheed Tahir this review; and (5) provide better electronic signature; (2) electronic at 202–366–9307, no later than March security for docketed materials, which transfer of documents to the Federal 24, 1995. now may get lost or misplaced. Register and to the Federal Records FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Neil To meet the legal requirements that Center; (3) multi-media capability to Eisner, Assistant General Counsel for DOT maintain a record of all materials enable access by visually and hearing Regulation and Enforcement, Office of submitted to the dockets and produce impaired individuals; and (4) automatic General Counsel, Department of certified true copies of docketed billing of public users (through credit Transportation, (202) 366–4723, 400 7th information, the new system will store cards/bills) for filing fees and copying Street SW, Washington, DC 20590. docketed information as images on services. The timing of the transition to SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The optical disks. Images are like electronic transmission, OCR and the Secretary of Transportation has directed photographs; when stored on read-only availability of the future capabilities that the Office of the Secretary (OST) optical disks, they are permanent and will depend upon the readiness of the and the DOT operating administrations unalterable, assuring 100 percent new system to handle them and upon consolidate their separate paper-based accuracy of the records. The optical disk budgetary constraints. docket facilities into a single, central system will allow more efficient storage The Department plans a phased office and convert to an electronic and management of docketed transition to the new, centralized image-based system. This change will information, because a single disk can facility. The Office of the Secretary’s enable the Department to provide better store hundreds of documents that are (OST) docket office has already been service and access to the public and to easily available through the index. The relocated. During the transfer of OST’s government users. Currently, OST and index will provide users with the docket to the imaging system and the each operating administration has its capability for rapid retrieval and more internal connection of Department staff own separate docket facility and sophisticated cross-referencing and to the dockets on-line, hard copies will performs many duplicative docketing searching of docketed information. be maintained in the docket office until functions. Substantial building space is The system will have controlled the new system works smoothly. inefficiently allocated for public access access and security features to maintain Computer work stations in the new to the dockets. On a given day, several its integrity and to protect against docket office will be available to access facilities may be empty and one viruses and tampering. It will have the information that is electronically jammed, with public users waiting in ‘‘open architecture’’ to enable future stored. These will have an easy-to-use the hall outside. Increases in the expansion and incorporation of interface and docket staff will be number and complexity of rulemakings technological improvements. When available to help users. The docket and adjudicatory proceedings have finally implemented, it will consist of offices of the other DOT agencies will be generated a growing mountain of paper, about 5.5 million imaged records, taking sequentially consolidated into the new which, in turn, has created pressing into account the average annual amount facility. As part of this process, the space and storage problems. The of material received and the orderly docket facility will eventually be dependence on paper also perpetuates retirement of records. The agencies plan ‘‘networked’’ to Department offices. inefficiencies in information processing to backscan dockets that are currently Ultimately, the public will have on- and dissemination. Voluminous open and a limited amount of necessary line access to the docket from outside of dockets, in particular, make it difficult historical or precedential material to DOT’s docket office. The system will for users to search for and organize optical disks that can be indexed for support both Macintosh and IBM relevant information. Multiple copies of research purposes. Suggestions on what compatible equipment and provide an docketed materials must be produced information would be useful to include easy-to-use interface with pull-down and circulated to responsible offices in in the system are welcome, bearing in menus. The architecture of the network the Department. These efforts consume mind that all existing paper dockets will enable real-time response for a substantial amount of time and cannot be scanned. The remainder of accessing images, but acceptable speed resources. The consolidation will the paper dockets will be sent to the (comparable to turning the pages of a 14052 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices document) will require the use of at petitions seeking relief from specified Description of Relief Sought/ least a 486DX2–66 machine or requirements of the Federal Aviation Disposition: To extend Exemption No. Macintosh equivalent. Regulations (14 CFR Chapter I), 4504, as amended, which permits the Not only should this effort result in a dispositions of certain petitions Blue Angels pilots to conduct airshow much more efficient use of space, previously received, and corrections. rehearsals involving low-level, high- personnel, equipment, and expertise, The purpose of this notice is to improve speed, and aerobatic flight subject to but it should save the public and the the public’s awareness of, and certain conditions and limitations. government time and money in participation in, this aspect of FAA’s GRANT, February 23, 1995, analyzing information submitted to the regulatory activities. Neither publication Exemption No. 4504D docket. of this notice nor the inclusion or Docket No.: 25390 omission of information in the summary Notice of Public Meeting Petitioner: Airbus Industrie is intended to affect the legal status of Sections of the FAR Affected: 14 CFR The Department believes that users any petition or its final disposition. 145.35 will benefit from an opportunity to hear DATES: Comments on petitions received Description of Relief Sought/ a more detailed description of the new must identify the petition docket Disposition: To permit the production docket management system and to ask number involved and must be received units and associated partners of questions about it. Therefore, we are on or before April 4, 1995. Airbus to be collectively certificated holding a public meeting beginning at ADDRESSES: Send comments on any under Airbus as a U.S. foreign repair 1:30 PM and ending no later than 4:00 petition in triplicate to: Federal station to support the operation of PM (local time) on March 29, 1995, in Aviation Administration, Office of the U.S.-registered A300, A310, A320, Washington, DC. We hope that as Chief Counsel, Attn: Rule Docket (AGC– A321, A330, and A340 aircraft. people start using the system, they will 200), Petition Docket No. lllll, GRANT, February 15, 1995, point out problems and bring us new 800 Independence Avenue, SW., Exemption No. 6029 ideas on how to make the system more Washington, DC 20591. Docket No.: 26976 responsive to their needs. The petition, any comments received, Petitioner: United States Coast Guard Seating will be restricted by available and a copy of any final disposition are Sections of the FAR Affected: 14 CFR room size and will be made available on filed in the assigned regulatory docket 91.119(c) a first-come-first-served basis. If time and are available for examination in the Description of Relief Sought/ and the number of attendees permit, we Rules Docket (AGC–200), Room 915G, Disposition: To extend Exemption No. may be able to conduct one or more FAA Headquarters Building (FOB 10A), 5614, which permits the Coast Guard short tours of the new docket facility. If 800 Independence Avenue SW., to operate over other than congested the interest expressed in the tour Washington, DC 20591; telephone (202) areas at an altitude of less than 500 exceeds the capacity of our docket 267–3132. feet and, in the case of operations over facility, we will schedule additional FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. open water or sparsely populated tours. Persons interested in attending D. Michael Smith, Office of Rulemaking areas, at a distance closer than 500 should contact Rasheed Tahir at 202– (ARM–1), Federal Aviation feet to any person, vessel, vehicle, or 366–9307. Administration, 800 Indpendence structure for the purpose of rescuing Since this meeting is intended to Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20591; and aiding persons and protecting and inform the public about and to solicit telephone (202) 267–7470. saving property. GRANT, February 23, public views and questions on the new This notice is published pursuant to 1995, Exemption No. 5614A docket management system, we will paragraphs (c), (e), and (g) of § 11.27 of Docket No.: 27086 conduct it in an informal manner. Part 11 of the Federal Aviation Petitioner: Bombardier, Inc. Issued in Washington, D. C. on March 13, Regulations (14 CFR Part 11). Sections of the FAR Affected: 14 CFR 1995. 61.55(b)(2); 61.56(c)(1); 61.57(c) and Issued in Washington, DC, on March 9, Stephen H. Kaplan, 1995. (d); 61.58(c)(1) and (d); 61.63(c)(2) and (d)(2) and (3); 61.65(c), (e)(2) and General Counsel. Donald P. Byrne, (3), and (g); 61.67(d)(2); 61.157(d)(1) [FR Doc. 95–6512 Filed 3–14–95; 8:45 am] Assistant Chief Counsel for Regulations. BILLING CODE 4910±62±P and (2) and (e)(1) and (2); 61.191(c); Petitions for Exemption and appendix A, part 61 Description of Relief Sought/ Docket No.: 27956 Federal Aviation Administration Petitioner: Air Line Pilots Association Disposition: To extend Exemption No. 5617, which permits Bombardier to [Summary Notice No. PE±9521] Sections of the FAR Affected: 14 CFR appendices I and J, part 121 use FAA-approved simulators to meet certain flight experience requirements Petitions for Exemption; Summary of Corrective Action: To withdraw the of part 61 of the FAR. GRANT, Petitions Received; Dispositions of notice of this petition published in February 16, 1995, Exemption No. Petitions Issued the Federal Register on February 17, 1995. Due to an inadvertent 5617A AGENCY: Federal Aviation administrative error, on January 31, Docket No.: 27951 Administration (FAA), DOT. 1995, the FAA responded to already Petitioner: Corning Incorporated ACTION: Notice of petitions for denied petitions and published this Sections of the FAR Affected: 14 CFR exemption received and of dispositions response for comments. 25.562(b) and (c) of prior petitions. Description of Relief Sought/ Dispositions of Petitions Disposition: To allow Corning SUMMARY: Pursuant to FAA’s rulemaking Docket No.: 24052 Incorporated exemption from provisions governing the application, Petitioner: The Blue Angels performing the emergency landing processing, and disposition of petitions Sections of the FAR Affected: 14 CFR dynamic tests required by for exemption (14 CFR Part 11), this 91.117(a) and (b), 91.119(c), and §§ 25.562(b) and (c), for seating on notice contains a summary of certain 91.303(c) and (d) Corning’s Dornier 328–100 aircraft. Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices 14053 DENIAL, February 16, 1995, FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: with Standard No. 119 New Pneumatic Exemption No. 6028 Ted Bayler, Office of Vehicle Safety Tires for Vehicles other than Passenger Docket No.: 28077 Compliance, NHTSA (202–366–5306). Cars. Additionally, the petitioner claims that the vehicle complies with Standard Petitioner: Evan Joseph Farrow (through SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: his mother, Mrs. Pamela Farrow) No. 121 Air Brake Systems in that it Sections of the FAR Affected: 14 CFR Background ‘‘has drum style brakes at each wheel 121.311(b) Under 49 U.S.C. 30141(a)(1)(A) set, of a size and capacity sufficient to Description of Relief Sought/ (formerly section 108(c)(3)(A)(i)(I) of the meet the standard.’’ Disposition: To permit Evan to be National Traffic and Motor Vehicle The petitioner further contends that held on his caregiver’s lap, rather than Safety Act (the Act)), a motor vehicle the vehicle is capable of being readily being secured in an approved child that was not originally manufactured to altered to the meet the following restraint device or in an individual conform to all applicable Federal motor standards, in the manner indicated: Standard No. 106 Brake Hoses: seat with a seatbelt, while aboard an vehicle safety standards shall be refused Replacement of all existing brake hose aircraft even though he has reached admission into the United States unless his second birthday. GRANT, linings from the front connection to the NHTSA has decided that the motor pressure modulators and from the February 14, 1995, Exemption No. vehicle is substantially similar to a 6027 pressure modulators to the wheel brake motor vehicle originally manufactured assemblies with hose lining that bear Docket No.: 28099 for importation into and sale in the Petitioner: Delta Air Lines, Inc. DOT markings and have crimped end United States, certified under 49 U.S.C. fittings. Sections of the FAR Affected: 14 CFR 30115 (formerly section 114 of the Act), 25.791(a) and 121.317(a) Standard No. 108 Lamps, Reflective and of the same model year as the Devices, and Associated Equipment: (a) Description of Relief Sought/ model of the motor vehicle to be Disposition: To allow Delta to operate installation of two yellow illuminated compared, and is capable of being markers on each side of the vehicle and MD–90 aircraft with the ‘‘No readily altered to conform to all Smoking’’ signs hardwired in the ON on its from end; (b) installation of one applicable Federal motor vehicle safety yellow reflector on each side of the position. GRANT, March 1, 1995, standards. Where there is no Exemption No. 6034 vehicle; (c) installation of one red substantially similar U.S.-certified illuminated marker on each side of the [FR Doc. 95–6401 Filed 3–14–95; 8:45 am] motor vehicle, 49 U.S.C. 30141(a)(1)(B) vehicle and five red illuminated BILLING CODE 4910±13±M (formerly section 108(c)(3)(A)(i)(II) of markers on its rear end; (d) installation the Act, 15 U.S.C. 1397(c)(3)(A)(i)(II)) of one red reflector marker on each side permits a nonconforming motor vehicle of the vehicle and two red reflector National Highway Traffic Safety to be admitted into the United States if markers on its rear end; (e) installation Administration its safety features comply with, or are of one strip of 50mm (Grade DOT–C2) [Docket No. 95±17; Notice 1] capable or being altered to comply with, white/red retroreflective sheeting on all applicable Federal motor vehicle each side of the vehicle and on its rear Notice of Receipt of Petition for safety standards based on destructive end; (f) installation of two strips of Decision That Nonconforming 1985 test data of such other evidence as 50mm (Grade DOT–C2) white Dobson Horse Trailers Are Eligible for NHTSA decides to be adequate. retroreflective sheeting on the vehicle’s Importation Petitions for eligibility decisions may rear end; (g) installation of one white be submitted by either manufacturers or license plate lamp on the vehicle’s rear AGENCY: National Highway Traffic importers who have registered with and: (h) installation of two red taillamp/ Safety Administration, DOT NHTSA pursuant to 49 CFR part 592. As stoplamp/turn indicators on the ACTION: Notice of receipt of petition for specified in 49 CFR 593.7, NHTSA vehicle’s rear end. decision that nonconforming 1985 publishes notice in the Federal Register Standard No. 115 Vehicle Dobson horse trailers are eligible for of each petition that it receives, and Identification Number: Installation of a importation. affords interested an opportunity to VIN plate. comment on the petition. At the cost of Standard No. 120 Tire Selection and SUMMARY: This notice announces receipt the period, NHTSA decides, on the basis Rims for Motor Vehicles other than by the National Highway Traffic Safety of the petition and any comments that Passenger Cars: Installation of a tire Administration (NHTSA) of a petition it has received, whether the vehicle is information placard. for a decision that a 1985 Dobson horse eligible for importation. The agency Interested person are invited to trailer that was not originally then publishes this decision in the submit comments on the petition manufactured to comply with all Federal Register. described above. Comments should refer applicable Federal motor vehicle safety G&K Automotive Conversion, Inc. of to the docket number and be submitted standards is eligible for importation into Santa Ana, California (Registered to: Docket Section, National Highway the United States because it has safety Importer R–90–007) has petitioned Traffic Safety Administration, Room features that comply with, or are NHTSA to decide whether 1985 Dobson 5109, 400 Seventh Street SW., capable of being altered to comply with, horse trailers are eligible for importation Washington, DC 20590. It is requested all such standards. into the United States. The petitioner but not required that 10 copies be DATE: The closing date for comments on contends that this vehicle is eligible for submitted. the petition is April 14, 1995. importation under 49 U.S.C. All comments received before the ADDRESS: Comments should refer to the 30141(a)(1)(B) because it has safety close of business on the closing date docket number and notice number, and features that comply with, or are indicated above will be considered, and be submitted to: Docket Section, Room capable of being altered to comply with, will be available for examination in the 5109, National Highway Traffic Safety all applicable Federal motor vehicle docket at the above address both before Administration, 400 Seventh Street SW., safety standards. and after that date. To the extent Washington, DC 20590. (Docket hours Specifically, the petitioner claims that possible, comments filed after the are from 9:30 a.m. to 4 p.m.) the 1985 Dobson horse trailer complies closing date will also be considered. 14054 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices Notice of final action on the petition guideline amendments to the Congress recommendations in the report. will be published in the Federal no later than the first day of May each Specifically, the Commission requests Register pursuant to the authority year. See 28 U.S.C. 994 (o), (p). comment on the appropriateness of indicated below. Ordinarily, the Administrative adding specific offense characteristics to Authority: 49 U.S.C. 30141 (a)(1)(B) and Procedure Act rulemaking requirements § 2D1.1 to enhance sentences for (b)(1); 49 CFR 593.8; delegations of authority are inapplicable to judicial agencies; violence and other harms associated at 49 CFR 1.50 and 501.8. however, 28 U.S.C. 994(x) makes the with some crack and powder cocaine Issued on March 9, 1995. Administrative Procedure Act rule- offenses as well as some other drug Harry Thompson, making provisions of 5 U.S.C. 553 offenses. In addition, the Commission applicable to the promulgation of Acting Director, Office of Vehicle Safety seeks comment on the usefulness of Compliance. sentencing guidelines by the adding or amending commentary and Commission. [FR Doc. 95–6362 Filed 3–14–95; 8:45 am] policy statements regarding possible Section 1B1.10 of the United States departures to take account of the BILLING CODE 4910±59±M Sentencing Commission Guidelines increased harms associated with some Manual sets forth the Commission’s cocaine offenses. For example, how policy statement regarding retroactivity should the social harm associated with UNITED STATES SENTENCING of amended guideline ranges. Comment ‘‘crack houses’’ or other establishments COMMISSION is requested as to whether any of the where drugs are sold and consumed be proposed amendments should be made Sentencing Guidelines for United taken into account? The Commission retroactive under this policy statement. States Courts previously has requested commentary With the exception of proposed on what quantity ratio should be AGENCY: United States Sentencing amendment and issue for comment 4, substituted for the current 100-to-1 Commission. the issues below are derived specifically ratio. ACTION: Notice and request for public from the Commission’s Special Report In addition, the Commission seeks comment regarding proposed to Congress: Cocaine and Federal comment on the timing and scope of amendments to sentencing guidelines, Sentencing Policy, submitted to guideline amendments for cocaine policy statements, and commentary. Congress on February 28, 1995. In offenses. For example, if the addition to requesting comment on Commission proceeds with guideline SUMMARY: The Commission is these issues, the Commission invites amendments for cocaine offenses in this considering promulgating amendments suggestions for specific amendment amendment cycle, should the to the sentencing guidelines, policy language. Publication of an issue for amendments apply to drug offenses statements, and commentary. A comment reflects only the Commission’s generally or only to cocaine offenses? If synopsis of issues to be addressed is set determination that the issue is worthy of new enhancements (e.g., for use of a forth below. The Commission may public comment by interested groups firearm and victim injury) are made report amendments to the Congress on and individuals. Publication should not generally applicable to drug offenses, or before May 1, 1995. Comment is be regarded as an indication that the are other changes in the drug guidelines sought on all proposals, alternative Commission or any individual necessary (e.g., in the relative emphasis proposals, and any other aspect of the Commissioner has formed a view on the on drug quantity)? Should any of these sentencing guidelines, policy merits of the issue. changes be made retroactive to cases statements, and commentary relating to Authority. 28 U.S.C. 994 (a), (o), (p), (x). previously sentenced, and if so, how the issues below. Richard P. Conaboy, might this process best be DATES: Public comment should be Chairman. accomplished? received by the Commission no later A number of amendment proposals than April 10, 1995, to be considered by 1. Issue for Comment and issues for comment relating to drug the Commission in the promulgation of On February 28, 1995, the sentencing policy were set forth in the amendments due to the Congress by Commission issued a special report to Federal Register of January 9, 1995. See May 1, 1995. Congress on cocaine and federal 60 FR 2430. Additional issues for ADDRESSES: Public comment should be sentencing policy. The report comment raised by the Special Report sent to: United States Sentencing recommended that changes be made to on Cocaine Sentencing are set forth Commission, One Columbus Circle, NE., the current cocaine sentencing below. Suite 2–500, South Lobby, Washington, guidelines, including changes to the 2. Issue for Comment DC 20002–8002, Attention: Public 100-to-1 quantity ratio between powder Information. cocaine and crack cocaine used in In light of the Commission’s report to FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: determining sentences. The report Congress on cocaine and federal Michael Courlander, Public Information indicated that the Commission will sentencing policy and its Specialist, Telephone: (202) 273–4590. investigate the feasibility of creating recommendations regarding sentences SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The new guideline enhancements and for those convicted of simple possession United States Sentencing Commission is amending current enhancements to of crack cocaine, the Commission an independent agency in the judicial address more fully and fairly the harms requests comment on whether and how branch of the United States associated with cocaine offenses it should amend § 2D2.1 for offenses Government. The Commission is generally and, specifically, the added involving the simple possession of crack empowered under 28 U.S.C. 994(a) to harms associated with crack cocaine cocaine. promulgate sentencing guidelines and offenses. Based on these new 3. Issue for Comment policy statements for federal sentencing enhancements, the Commission intends courts. The statute further directs the to make appropriate adjustments in the The Commission invites comment as Commission to review and revise guideline quantity ratio. to whether the enhancements for drug periodically guidelines previously The Commission requests comment offenses involving underage or pregnant promulgated and authorizes it to submit regarding implementation of the individuals, which are now included in Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices 14055 § 2D1.2, should instead be made specific The Commentary to § 4B1.1 captioned as any other more specific grant of offense characteristics under § 2D1.1. ‘‘Background’’ is amended to read as statutory authority. Inclusion in § 2D1.1 would make follows: [FR Doc. 95–6330 Filed 3–14–95; 8:45 am] these enhancements applicable to all Background BILLING CODE 2210±40±P drug defendants whose relevant conduct involved juveniles or pregnant 28 U.S.C. 994(h) mandates that the individuals, regardless of whether the Commission assure that certain ‘‘career’’ DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS defendant was convicted of the offenders receive a sentence of AFFAIRS particular statutes now indexed to imprisonment ‘‘at or near the maximum § 2D1.2 (21 U.S.C. 859, 860, and 861). term authorized.’’ Section 4B1.1 Information Collection Under OMB The circuits appear to be split regarding implements this directive, with the Review: VA MATIC Change, VA Form whether conviction under one of these definition of a career offender tracking 29±0165 statutes is a prerequisite for application in large part the criteria set forth in 28 of the § 2D1.2 enhancements. (Compare AGENCY: Department of Veterans Affairs. United States v. Oppedahl, 998 F.2d 584 U.S.C. 994(h). However, in accord with ACTION: Notice. (8th Cir. 1993), with United States v. its general guideline promulgation Locklear, 24 F.3d 641 (4th Cir. 1994), authority under 28 U.S.C. 994(a)-(f) and The Department of Veterans Affairs cert. denied, 115 S. Ct. 278, 457 (1994).) its amendment authority under 28 has submitted to OMB the following U.S.C. 994(o) and (p), the Commission proposal for the collection of 4. Synopsis of Proposed Amendment has modified this definition in several information under the provisions of the This amendment inserts additional respects to focus more precisely on the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. background commentary explaining the class of recidivist offenders for whom a Chapter 35). This document lists the Commission’s rationale and authority lengthy term of imprisonment is following information: (1) The title of for § 4B1.1 (Career Offender). The appropriate and avoid ‘‘unwarranted the information collection, and the amendment responds to a decision by sentencing disparities among Department form number(s), if the United States Court of Appeals for defendants with similar records who applicable; (2) a description of the need the District of Columbia Circuit in have been found guilty of similar and its use; (3) who will be required or asked to respond; (4) an estimate of the United States v. Price, 990 F.2d 1367 criminal conduct *** .’’ 28 U.S.C. total annual reporting hours, and (D.C. Cir. 1993). In Price, the court 991(b)(1)(B). The Commission’s recordkeeping burden, if applicable; (5) invalidated application of the career refinement of this definition over time offender guideline to a defendant the estimated average burden hours per is consistent with Congress’s choice of respondent; (6) the frequency of convicted of a drug conspiracy because a directive to the Commission rather 28 U.S.C. 994(h), which the Commission response; and (7) an estimated number than a mandatory minimum sentencing of respondents. cites as the mandating authority for the statute (‘‘The [Senate Judiciary] ADDRESSES: Copies of the proposed career offender guideline, does not Committee believes that such a directive expressly refer to inchoate offenses. The information collection and supporting to the Commission will be more documents may be obtained from Trish court indicated that it did not foreclose effective; the guidelines development Commission authority to include Fineran, Veterans Benefits process can assure consistent and conspiracy offenses under the career Administration (20M30), Department of rational implementation for the offender guideline by drawing upon its Veterans Affairs, 810 Vermont Avenue Committee’s view that substantial broader guideline promulgation NW., Washington, DC 20420, (202) 273– authority in 28 U.S.C. 994(a). See also prison terms should be imposed on 6886. United States v. Mendoza-Figueroa, 28 repeat violent offenders and repeat drug Comments and questions about the F.3d 766 (8th Cir. 1994), vacated (Sept. traffickers.’’ S. Rep. No. 225, 98th Cong., items on the list should be directed to 2, 1994); United States v. Bellazerius, 24 1st Sess. 175 (1983)). VA’s OMB Desk Officer, Joseph Lackey, F.3d 698 (5th Cir.) cert. denied, 115 S. The legislative history of this NEOB, Room 10102, Washington, DC Ct. 375 (1994). Other circuits have provision suggests that the phrase 20503, (202) 395–7316. Do not send rejected the Price analysis and upheld ‘‘maximum term authorized’’ should be requests for benefits to this address. the Commission’s definition of construed as the maximum term DATES: Comments on the information ‘‘controlled substance offense.’’ The authorized by statute. See S. Rep. No. collection should be directed to the Ninth Circuit considered the legislative 225, 98th Cong., 1st Sess. 175 (1983), OMB Desk Officer on or before April 14, 1995. history to section 994(h) and 128 Cong. Rec. 26,511–12 (1982) (text of determined that the Senate Report ‘‘Career Criminals’’ amendment by Dated: March 8, 1995. clearly indicated that section 994(h) was Senator Kennedy), id. at 26,515 (brief By direction of the Secretary. not the sole enabling statute for the summary of amendment), id. at 26,517– Donald L. Neilson, career offender guidelines. United States 18 (statement of Senator Kennedy).’’. Director, Information Management Service. v. Heim, 15 F.3d 830 (9th Cir.) cert. denied, 115 S. Ct. 445 (1994). See also Additional Issue for Comment Reinstatement United States v. Hightower, 25 F.3d 182 1. VA MATIC Change, VA Form 29– The Commission invites comment on (3d Cir.), cert. denied, 115 S. Ct. 370 0165 (1994). United States v. Damerville, 27 whether, as an alternative to, or in 2. The form is used by the insured to F.3d 254 (7th Cir), cert. denied, 115 S. addition to, the proposed amendment to request VA to change the account Ct. 55 (1994). § 4B1.1, Chapter I, Part A of the number and/or financial institution Guidelines Manual should be amended Proposed Amendment from which a VA MATIC deduction to state that in its promulgation of was previously authorized. Application Note 1 of the specific guidelines, the Commission 3. Individuals or households Commentary to § 4B1.2 is intends in all cases to rely on its general 4. 1,250 hours repromulgated without change. authority under 28 U.S.C. 994(a) as well 5. 15 minutes 14056 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices 6. On occasion and to adjust VA benefit payments as and the Office of Management and 7. 5,000 respondents. prescribed by law. Otherwise, Budget, whichever is later, and end not [FR Doc. 95–6365 Filed 3–14–95; 8:45 am] information about a VA beneficiary’s more than 18 months after the receipt of SSA benefits is obtained from agreement is properly implemented by BILLING CODE 8320±01±M reporting by the beneficiary. The the parties. The involved agencies’ Data proposed matching program will enable Integrity Boards (DIB) may extend this Privacy Act of 1974; Report of VA to ensure accurate reporting of match for 12 months provided the Amended Matching Program income. agencies certify to their DIBs, within RECORDS TO BE MATCHED: The VA three months of the ending date of the AGENCY: Department of Veterans Affairs. records involved in the match are the original match, that the matching ACTION: Notice. VA system of records, Compensation, program will be conducted without change and that the matching program Notice is hereby given that the Pension, Education and Rehabilitation Records—VA (58 VA 21/22) contained has been conducted in compliance with Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) the original matching program. intends to conduct a recurring computer in the Privacy Act Issuances, 1991 matching program matching Social compilation, Volume II, pages 967–971 ADDRESSES: Interested individuals may Security Administration (SSA) benefit as amended. The SSA records consist of comment on the proposed matches by recipient records with VA pension and information from the SSA Master writing to the Director, Compensation parents’ dependency and indemnity Beneficiary Record 09–60–0090 and Pension Service (21), Department of compensation records. published at 58 FR 35302, June 30, Veterans Affairs, 810 Vermont Avenue The goal of this match is to compare 1993. NW., Washington, DC 20420. income status as reported to VA with In accordance with Title 5 U.S.C. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: benefit records maintained by SSA. subsection 552a(o)(2) and (r), copies of David G. Spivey (213B), (202) 273–7258. the agreement are being sent to both The Department of Veterans Affairs SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This (VA) plans to match records of veterans Houses of Congress and to the Office of information is required by Title 5 U.S.C. and surviving spouses and children who Management and Budget. subsection 552a(e)(12), the Privacy Act receive pension and parents who This notice is provided in accordance of 1974. A copy of this notice has been receive dependency and indemnity with the provisions of the Privacy Act provided to both Houses of Congress compensation (DIC) from VA with of 1974 as amended by Public Law 100– and the Office of Management and Social Security Administration benefit 503. Budget. records maintained by SSA. The match The match is estimated to start April with SSA will provide VA with data 1, 1995, but will start no sooner than 40 Approved: March 2, 1995. from the SSA Master Beneficiary days after publication of this Notice in Jesse Brown, Record. VA will use the data to update the Federal Register, or 40 days after Secretary of Veterans Affairs. the master records of VA beneficiaries copies of this Notice and the agreement [FR Doc. 95–6364 Filed 3–14–95; 8:45 am] receiving income dependent benefits of the parties are submitted to Congress BILLING CODE 8320±01±M 14057 Sunshine Act Meetings Federal Register Vol. 60. No. 50 Wednesday, March 15, 1995 This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER NATIONAL CREDIT UNION ADMINISTRATION OVERSEAS PRIVATE INVESTMENT contains notices of meetings published under CORPORATION the ``Government in the Sunshine Act'' (Pub. Notice of Change in Time and Place of L. 94-409) 5 U.S.C. 552b(e)(3). Meeting Board of Directors Meeting TIME AND DATE: The National Credit Union Tuesday, March 28, 1:00 p.m. (Open Portion), 1:30 p.m. (Closed Administration Board determined that BOARD OF GOVERNORS OF THE FEDERAL Portion). RESERVE SYSTEM its business requires the previously announced open meeting (Federal PLACE: Offices of the Corporation, TIME AND DATE: 11:00 a.m., Monday, Register, Vol. 60, page 13514, Monday, Twelfth Floor Board Room, 1100 New March 20, 1995. March 13, 1995) scheduled for 10:00 York Avenue, N.W., Washington, D.C. STATUS: Meeting Open to the Public PLACE: Marriner S. Eccles Federal a.m., Monday, March 13, 1995 at the from 1:00 p.m. to 1:30 p.m. Closed Reserve Board Building, C Street Doubletree Hotel, Salon III of the Ballroom, 201 Marquette NW, portion will commence at 1:30 p.m. entrance between 20th and 2lst Streets, (approx.) N.W., Washington, D.C. 20551. Albuquerque, New Mexico is changed as follows: MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED: STATUS: Closed. 1. President’s Report TIME AND DATE: 6:00 p.m., M.S.T., MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED: 2. Approval of 12/06/94 Minutes (Open Monday, March 13, 1995. Portion) 1. Personnel actions (appointments, PLACE: Hyatt Regency Albuquerque 3. Meeting schedule through September promotions, assignments, reassignments, and Hotel, Pavilion Room, 330 Tijeras NW, 1995 salary actions) involving individual Federal FURTHER MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED: Reserve System employees. Albuquerque, New Mexico 87102, (505) 2. Any items carried forward from a 842–1234. (Closed to the Public 1:30 p.m.). previously announced meeting. The previously announced matters to 1. Insurance Project in Kyrgyzstan be considered are: 2. Insurance Project in the Philippines CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION: 3. Insurance Project in the Philippines Mr. Joseph R. Coyne, Assistant to the 1. Final Interpretive Ruling and Policy 4. Finance Project in Argentina Board; (202) 452–3204. You may call Statement (IRPS) 95–1, Supervisory Review 5. Finance Project in Jamaica (202) 452–3207, beginning at Committee. 6. Insurance Project in Argentina 2. Establishment of the Position of 7. Finance Project in South America approximately 5 p.m. two business days Ombudsman. 8. Pending Major Projects before this meeting, for a recorded 9. Approval of the 12/06/94 Minutes announcement of bank and bank FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: (Closed Portion) holding company applications Becky Baker, Secretary of the Board, CONTACT PERSON FOR INFORMATION: scheduled for the meeting. Telephone (703) 518–6304. Information on the meeting may be Dated: March 10, 1995. Becky Baker, obtained from Jane Chalmers at (202) Jennifer J. Johnson, Secretary of the Board. 336–8421. Deputy Secretary of the Board. [FR Doc. 95–6547 Filed 3–13–95; 3:29 pm] Dated: March 13, 1995. [FR Doc. 95–6474 Filed 3–13–95; 10:23 am] BILLING CODE 7535±01±M Jane H. Chalmers, BILLING CODE 6210±01±P Deputy General Counsel. [FR Doc. 95–6577 Filed 3–13–95; 3:55 pm] BILLING CODE 3210±01±M 14058 Corrections Federal Register Vol. 60, No. 50 Wednesday, March 15, 1995 This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE contains editorial corrections of previously published Presidential, Rule, Proposed Rule, Food and Consumer Service Drug Enforcement Administration and Notice documents. These corrections are prepared by the Office of the Federal Child Nutrition Programs; Income William W. Malone, M.D.; Revocation of Register. Agency prepared corrections are Eligibility Guidelines Registration issued as signed documents and appear in the appropriate document categories Correction Correction elsewhere in the issue. In notice document 95–5633 beginning on page 12732, in the issue of In notice document 95–5455 Wednesday, March 8, 1995, make the appearing on page 12572 in the issue of following correction: Tuesday, March 7, 1995, make the On page 12733, in the second column, following correction: in the table entitled ‘‘Income Eligibility On page 15272, in the first column, in Guidelines’’, under the heading entitled the eighth line ‘‘AM546789’’ should ‘‘Alaska’’, in the fifth column, in the read ‘‘AM5467849’’. fourth line, ‘‘2,910’’ should read ‘‘2,920’’. BILLING CODE 1505±01±D BILLING CODE 1505±01±D federal register March 15,1995 Wednesday Notice Program: ListofDefaultedBorrowers; Health EducationAssistanceLoan Administration Health ResourcesandServices Services Health andHuman Department of Part II 14059 14060 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND scheduled payments or the equivalent Chiropractic HUMAN SERVICES from July 1, 1994 through December 31, Bond, William W., Tuscaloosa, AL, 1994. Borrowers who fall into any of the Health Resources and Services $106,283.27, Life College, Marietta, above categories are viewed by DHHS GA, Chiropractic, June 1983 Administration and DOJ, at the present time, as having Bush, Kerry L., Mobile, AL, made satisfactory arrangements to $105,479.31, Palmer College of Health Education Assistance Loan resolve the default, and have therefore Chiropractic, Davenport, IA, Program: List of Defaulted Borrowers been excluded from this publication. Chiropractic, October 1986 The list that follows presents: the AGENCY: Health Resources and Services Clay, Mark D., Birmingham, AL, defaulter’s name, latest known City and Administration, HHS. $13,359.62, Life College, Marietta, State of residence, the total amount of ACTION: Notice. GA, Chiropractic, December 1982 the HEAL debt, the school last attended Gardner, Lester, Vernon, AL, SUMMARY: The Health Resources and for which a HEAL loan was received, Services Administration (HRSA) is practice discipline, and estimated $33,492.27, Palmer College of publishing this notice of Health school separation date. This information Chiropractic, Davenport, IA, Education Assistance Loan (HEAL) is listed by State of residence for Chiropractic, June 1987 borrowers who are in default, as practice discipline. Hembree, David W., Foley, AL, required by section 709(c)(1) of the PHS Section 709(c)(2) of the Act directs $41,004.20, Life College, Marietta, Act (the Act), as amended by the Health that the information included in this GA, Chiropractic, December 1989 Professions Education Extension notice be made available to relevant Hembree, Gloria, Fairhope, AL, Amendments of 1992. Federal agencies and to schools, school $32,843.11, Life College, Marietta, GA, Chiropractic, March 1990 FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: associations, professional and specialty Director, Division of Student Assistance, associations, State licensing boards, Johnson, Albert, Cullman, AL, Bureau of Health Professions, Health hospitals with which listed borrowers $130,980.56, Life College, Marietta, Resources and Services Administration, may be associated, and other relevant GA, Chiropractic, September 1987 Parklawn Building, Room 8–48, 5600 organizations. In accordance with this McKenzie, Janell, Vincent, AL, Fishers Lane, Rockville, Maryland section of the Act, DHHS will provide $101,639.09, Life College, Marietta, 20857 (written requests only). All media to these entities, upon written request, GA, Chiropractic, March 1986 inquiries should be directed to the the information included in the Federal Quinley, Timothy E., Foley, AL, HRSA Office of Communications at Register notice along with Social $21,395.05, Palmer College of (301) 443–3376. Borrower-specific Security Account Numbers and last Chiropractic, Davenport, IA, account information, beyond that known street addresses of the borrowers Chiropractic, December 1988 included in the notice, will not be listed. Written requests should be Randolph, Jon J., Guin, AL, $31,079.96, released to any person other than the submitted to the Director, Division of Life College, Marietta, GA, borrower, without the written consent of Student Assistance, at the address Chiropractic, January 1985 the borrower. indicated above. Randolph, Kenneth J., Guin, AL, $31,990.92, Life College, Marietta, SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Section List of Defaulters 709(c)(1) of the Act (42 U.S.C. GA, Chiropractic, September 1984 292h(c)(1)) requires the Agency to Alabama Rizzuto, Richard W., Birmingham, AL, $18,266.02, Life College, Marietta, compile and publish in the Federal Allopathic Medicine Register a list of HEAL borrowers who GA, Chiropractic, March 1991 are in default. All borrowers who have Cox, Jerral W., Birmingham, AL, Swigert, Mark E., Foley, AL, $36,297.62, defaulted on HEAL loans and for whom $3,360.79, Univ of Alabama Palmer College of Chiropractic, claims have been paid by the Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, Davenport, IA, Chiropractic, June Department of Health and Human Allopathic Medicine, June 1991 1985 Kiser, Curtis, Mt Meigs, AL, Services (DHHS), from the beginning of Dentistry the program through March 31, 1994, $130,360.44, Morehouse School of are subject to inclusion in this notice. Medicine, Atlanta, GA, Allopathic Alexander, Jesse, Auburn, AL, Defaulted loans for which claims have Medicine, June 1985 $61,612.73, Georgetown University, been paid are serviced by DHHS or the Martin, Timothy L., Sheffield, AL, Washington, DC, Dentistry, May 1988 Department of Justice (DOJ). HEAL $73,696.92, East Tennessee State Brooks, Sheldon J., Birmingham, AL, borrowers in a satisfactory status with University, Johnson City, TN, $46,035.06, Loma Linda University, DHHS or DOJ in the following categories Allopathic Medicine, May 1984 Loma Linda, CA, Dentistry, June 1983 have been excluded from this listing: (1) Murphy, Stephen, Birmingham, AL, Chandler, Charles H., Anniston, AL, Those who have paid their loans in full $11,535.34, Univ of Alabama $83,975.35, Univ of Alabama subsequent to their default; (2) those Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, who received HEAL loan cancellation Allopathic Medicine, June 1991 Dentistry, June 1986 due to death or permanent and total Rodgers, Joseph K., Mobile, AL, Elliott III, Eugene L., Birmingham, AL, disability; (3) those whose loans have $60,087.08, Univ of South Alabama, $19,658.57, Univ of Alabama been repurchased from DHHS or DOJ by Mobile, AL, Allopathic Medicine, Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, a HEAL school, lender, or holder; (4) June 1989 Dentistry, June 1989 those who have been approved by Tull II, David A., Tuskegee, AL, Milledge, Darryl D K, Montgomery, AL, DHHS for deferment or forbearance; (5) $18,541.26, Univ of South Alabama, $22,081.99, Univ of Alabama those in bankruptcy who have Mobile, AL, Allopathic Medicine, Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, confirmed plans which provide for the June 1989 Dentistry, June 1990 HEAL loan(s) (and have provided Villaverde, John T., Huntsville, AL, Richardson, Dewayne, Jasper, AL, written evidence to DHHS or DOJ of $9,208.23, Univ of Miami, Miami, FL, $6,117.00, Howard University, such); and (6) those who have made six Allopathic Medicine, June 1982 Washington, DC, Dentistry, May 1990 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices 14061 West, Marvin, Montgomery, AL, Dentistry Chiropractic, Chesterfield, MO, $8,600.69, Meharry Medical College, Lien, Douglas D., Anchorage, AK, Chiropractic, April 1986 Corser, Lester J., Phoenix, AZ, Nashville, TN, Dentistry, May 1982 $173,021.69, New York University, $6,363.04, Los Angeles College of Williamson, Maria E., Huntsville, AL, New York, NY, Dentistry, June 1985 $22,941.75, Loyola University Chiropractic, Whittier, CA, Chicago, Chicago, IL, Dentistry, May Osteopathy Chiropractic, December 1982 1985 Bigelow, Loy, Anchorage, AK, Crider, Walter D., Scottsdale, AZ, $86,238.38, Western States $191,083.46, College of Osteo Med of Osteopathy Chiropractic College, Portland, OR, the Pacific, Pomona, CA, Osteopathy, Kiser, Galen, Haleyville, AL, Chiropractic, August 1988 June 1986 Crooks, Joan, Sedona, AZ, $63,537.56, $149,163.22, Univ of Health Sciences, King, Ruth A., Kenai, AK, $185,005.35, Western States Chiropractic College, Kansas City, MO, Osteopathy, May College of Osteo Med of the Pacific, 1986 Portland, OR, Chiropractic, June 1985 Pomona, CA, Osteopathy, June 1987 Davis, Jacqueline S., Apache Junction, Pharmacy Arizona AZ, $5,174.82, Palmer College of Chiropractic, Davenport, IA, Bean, Rhonda, Birmingham, AL, Allopathic Medicine $4,987.67, Xavier University of Chiropractic, March 1986 Louisiana, New Orleans, LA, Cata, Elena, Mesa, AZ, $11,772.64, Univ Dazell-Reed, Linda, Tucson, AZ, Pharmacy, May 1988 of Illinois Medical Center, Chicago, $23,643.98, Texas Chiropractic College Foundation, Pasadena, TX, Reid, Billy F., Huntsville, AL, IL, Allopathic Medicine, June 1989 Harris, Brian W., Scottsdale, AZ, Chiropractic, April 1987 $25,853.41, Mercer University, De Rosa, Arthur, Scottsdale, AZ, Atlanta, GA, Pharmacy, June 1981 $57,335.99, Wayne State University, Detroit, MI, Allopathic Medicine, June $29,365.43, Life Chiropractic College- Podiatry 1987 West, San Lorenzo, CA, Chiropractic, Koenen, Howard, Tucson, AZ, December 1988 Beverly, Carmen, Auburn, AL, Depamphilis, Greg, Tempe, AZ, $10,803.80, Pennsylvania Col of $28,670.50, Univ of California San Diego, La Jolla, CA, Allopathic $43,603.63, Life College, Marietta, Podiatric Medicine, Philadelphia, PA, GA, Chiropractic, September 1986 Podiatry, June 1980 Medicine, June 1988 Martin, Leona M., Yuma, AZ, Faber, Dana A., Chino Valley, AZ, Veterinary Medicine $154,973.09, Meharry Medical $37,068.69, Parker College of Chiropractic, Dallas, TX, Chiropractic, Butler, Brian, Opelika, AL, $5,132.82, College, Nashville, TN, Allopathic Medicine, May 1985 August 1987 Tuskegee University, Tuskegee, AL, Faber, Robert H., Chino Valley, AZ, Veterinary Medicine, May 1990 Palmer, Glen L., Tucson, AZ, $16,815.74, Univ of Kansas Medical $54,897.01, Parker College of Gardner, Kurt J., Huntsville, AL, Chiropractic, Dallas, TX, Chiropractic, Center, Kansas City, KS, Allopathic $48,035.72, Tuskegee University, April 1987 Medicine, May 1990 Tuskegee, AL, Veterinary Medicine, Failor, Richard I., Mesa, AZ, $10,383.79, Pruitt, Christopher, Phoenix, AZ, May 1983 Palmer College of Chiropractic, $28,911.97, Medical College of Ohio, Guy, Pamela D., Tuskegee, AL, Davenport, IA, Chiropractic, March $73,951.75, Tuskegee University, Toledo, OH, Allopathic Medicine, 1985 Tuskegee, AL, Veterinary Medicine, June 1991 Hendricks, Richard L., Mesa, AZ, May 1984 Silberstein, Brigitta, Fountain Hills, AZ, $42,273.67, Palmer College of Malone, Glen G., Montgomery, AL, $83,868.94, New York Medical Chiropractic, Davenport, IA, $15,391.48, Tuskegee University, College, Valhalla, NY, Allopathic Chiropractic, December 1983 Tuskegee, AL, Veterinary Medicine, Medicine, June 1985 Hodson, Philip A., Phoenix, AZ, May 1979 Chiropractic $39,102.13, Palmer College of Chiropractic, Davenport, IA, Alaska Allen Jr, Ben R., Mesa, AZ, $73,902.24, Chiropractic, March 1985 Life College, Marietta, GA, Allopathic Medicine Hornyak, John, Tucson, AZ, $29,583.80, Chiropractic, September 1983 Life College, Marietta, GA, Richards, Cynthia J., Juno, AK, Arkfield, Ted, Phoenix, AZ, $22,822.56, Chiropractic, September 1988 $13,663.91, Univ of South Dakota, Northwestern College of Chiropractic, Jones, Richard, Camp Verde, AZ, Sioux Falls, SD, Allopathic Medicine, Bloomington, MN, Chiropractic, April $71,140.85, Cleveland Chiropractic May 1989 1988 College, Kansas City, MO, Baker, Debora K., Glendale, AZ, Chiropractic Chiropractic, May 1985 $8,720.83, Cleveland Chiropractic Kelley, Gary L., Tucson, AZ, $52,360.99, Koob, Michael D., Kenai, AK, $8,859.61, College, Kansas City, MO, Palmer College of Chiropractic, Northwestern College of Chiropractic, Chiropractic, January 1983 Davenport, IA, Chiropractic, March Bloomington, MN, Chiropractic, Berger, Karl, Mesa, AZ, $61,414.78, 1986 August 1986 Palmer College of Chiropractic West, Kolb, Maryann, Tempe, AZ, $89,867.16, Lamagdeleine, Michael K., Anchorage, San Jose, CA, Chiropractic, June 1987 Life College, Marietta, GA, AK, $72,739.44, Palmer College of Brantner, Ray J., Phoenix, AZ, Chiropractic, September 1986 Chiropractic, Davenport, IA, $40,896.73, Palmer College of Lay, William G., Tucson, AZ, Chiropractic, June 1987 Chiropractic, Davenport, IA, $96,928.34, Logan College of Chiropractic, June 1985 Chiropractic, Chesterfield, MO, Clinical Psychology Buchwald, Bonnie, Tucson, AZ, Chiropractic, April 1985 Valenzuela, Debbie L., Anchorage, AK, $32,857.16, Life College, Marietta, Legate, Andre, Winslow, AZ, $67,083.26, California Sch of Prof GA, Chiropractic, September 1985 $13,564.50, Palmer College of Psych, Alhambra, CA, Clinical Budd, Carlinda L., Tucson, AZ, Chiropractic West, San Jose, CA, Psychology, July 1987 $84,194.78, Logan College of Chiropractic, September 1989 14062 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices Manos, Greg C., Tucson, AZ, Rima, Russell A., Phoenix, AZ, Nashville, TN, Allopathic Medicine, $75,872.98, Palmer College of $192,348.51, Loma Linda University, May 1985 Chiropractic, Davenport, IA, Loma Linda, CA, Dentistry, June 1984 Stannard, Janet H., Roland, AR, $57.30, Chiropractic, October 1987 Rogers, Steven J., Scottsdale, AZ, Univ of Arkansas Medical Center, Mason-Downing, Marlene, Glendale, $150,463.83, Loma Linda University, Little Rock, AR, Allopathic Medicine, AZ, $44,824.68, Cleveland Loma Linda, CA, Dentistry, March May 1985 Chiropractic College, Kansas City, 1982 Chiropractic MO, Chiropractic, May 1985 Sinnard, Mark S., Prescott, AZ, Oberstein, Bruce M., Mesa, AZ, $3,959.17, Univ of Nebraska Medical Adcox, David W., Newport, AR, $40,883.80, Life College, Marietta, Center, Omaha, NE, Dentistry, May $17,871.42, Logan College of GA, Chiropractic, December 1982 1989 Chiropractic, Chesterfield, MO, Reeves, Gary, Glendale, AZ, $4,544.27, Smith, Catherine J., Phoenix, AZ, Chiropractic, December 1989 Cleveland Chiropractic College, $108,754.15, Washington University, Barnett, Terry L., Jonesboro, AR, Kansas City, MO, Chiropractic, St Louis, MO, Dentistry, May 1989 $104,323.13, Life College, Marietta, January 1983 Wainwright, Clayton, Peoria, AZ, GA, Chiropractic, March 1986 Rich, Kenneth C., Mesa, AZ, $34,785.30, Univ of The Pacific, San Basco, Dennis G., Corning, AR, $104,584.96, Los Angeles College of Francisco, CA, Dentistry, June 1986 $98,005.77, Life College, Marietta, Chiropractic, Whittier, CA, GA, Chiropractic, December 1988 Chiropractic, April 1988 Optometry Brown, Helen, Biggers, AR, $71,787.58, Saunders, Edward M., Phoenix, AZ, Stoutsenberger, Jeffrey, Mesa, AZ, Logan College of Chiropractic, $74,580.66, Life College, Marietta, $1,937.23, Southern College of Chesterfield, MO, Chiropractic, GA, Chiropractic, September 1986 December 1986 Shellman, Joan J., Mesa, AZ, Optometry, Memphis, TN, Optometry, May 1990 Clark, Mary I., Kingston, AR, $136,498.40, Life College, Marietta, $20,128.26, Northwestern College of GA, Chiropractic, September 1984 Osteopathy Chiropractic, Bloomington, MN, Shobe Jr, Ted E., Gilbert, AZ, Dewilde, Steven, Tucson, AZ, Chiropractic, August 1984 $30,301.14, Palmer College of Ennis, James R., Clinton, AR, Chiropractic, Davenport, IA, $22,732.82, College of Osteo Med of the Pacific, Pomona, CA, Osteopathy, $95,919.70, Los Angeles College of Chiropractic, June 1983 Chiropractic, Whittier, CA, Smith, Sandra M., Phoenix, AZ, June 1986 Chiropractic, April 1988 $26,982.63, Palmer College of Gladwell, Irene, Phoenix, AZ, $94,513.88, West Virginia School of Johnson, Robert L., Eureka Springs, AR, Chiropractic, Davenport, IA, $13,412.34, Cleveland Chiropractic Chiropractic, September 1984 Osteopathic Med, Lewisburg, WV, College, Kansas City, MO, Tagg, Lyndon R., Mesa, AZ, Osteopathy, May 1983 Chiropractic, January 1983 $114,357.99, Palmer College of Smith, Susan M., Scottsdale, AZ, Kirklin, Kenton K., Trumann, AR, Chiropractic, Davenport, IA, $72,915.91, Univ of Osteo Medical & $136,069.29, Life College, Marietta, Chiropractic, September 1985 Health Science, Des Moines, IA, White, Howard D., Phoenix, AZ, Osteopathy, June 1985 GA, Chiropractic, June 1986 Mathews, Daniel G., Little Rock, AR, $54,942.09, Southern Calif CLG of Podiatry $17,143.45, Cleveland Chiropractic Chiropractic, Pico Rivera, CA, College, Kansas City, MO, Chiropractic, April 1989 Balch, David D., Tucson, AZ, Wickstrom, Todd S., Phoenix, AZ, $122,375.59, California College of Chiropractic, May 1982 $46,648.48, Cleveland Chiropractic Podiatric Medicine, San Francisco, Meskill, Richard, Fort Smith, AR, College, Kansas City, MO, CA, Podiatry, May 1981 $19,688.75, Life College, Marietta, Chiropractic, May 1988 Henry, William E., Gilbert, AZ, GA, Chiropractic, September 1983 Zalak-Goldwater, Edward G., Mesa, AZ, $50,774.16, Dr William Scholl Col of Reynolds III, Augustus M., Little Rock, $85,591.58, Southern Calif CLG of Podiatric Med, Chicago, IL, Podiatry, AR, $26,507.88, Cleveland Chiropractic, Pico Rivera, CA, May 1984 Chiropractic College, Kansas City, Chiropractic, February 1987 Nagy, Ronald A., Mesa, AZ, $6,108.13, MO, Chiropractic, September 1989 New York College of Podiatric Somerville, Laurie A., Blytheville, AR, Dentistry Medicine, New York, NY, Podiatry, $7,308.96, Los Angeles College of Chase, Mark, Phoenix, AZ, $60,282.90, June 1983 Chiropractic, Whittier, CA, Univ of The Pacific, San Francisco, Scinta, Mark C., Phoenix, AZ, Chiropractic, December 1988 CA, Dentistry, June 1984 $25,785.28, New York College of Swilley, Mark, Osceola, AR, $40,604.83, Dobrota, Jerry G., Village of Oak Creek, Podiatric Medicine, New York, NY, Logan College of Chiropractic, AZ, $94,464.51, Loma Linda Podiatry, June 1983 Chesterfield, MO, Chiropractic, University, Loma Linda, CA, December 1989 Dentistry, June 1985 Arkansas Wyly, Travis L., Little Rock, AR, Keith, Rosalyn D., Tempe, AZ, Allopathic Medicine $26,687.20, Texas Chiropractic $32,193.03, Georgetown University, College Foundation, Pasadena, TX, Washington, DC, Dentistry, May 1987 Campbell, Reginald R., Little Rock, AR, Chiropractic, May 1982 Leavey, Brett, Mesa, AZ, $75,872.17, $14,258.34, Univ of Arkansas Medical Dentistry Marquette University, Milwaukee, WI, Center, Little Rock, AR, Allopathic Dentistry, May 1988 Medicine, May 1984 Calvin, Rosetta, Pine Bluff, AR, Park, Youngmi, Sierra Vista, AZ, Hewgley, Joseph C., Rogers, AR, $57,378.92, Univ of Louisville, $53,046.95, Marquette University, $9,490.88, Univ of Arkansas Medical Louisville, KY, Dentistry, May 1987 Milwaukee, WI, Dentistry, May 1989 Center, Little Rock, AR, Allopathic Goodman, William D., Magnolia, AR, Ransdell, Kerry L., Tempe, AZ, Medicine, May 1991 $13,357.36, Univ of Tennessee $91,506.28, Washington University, St Jewell, Eldin C., Little Rock, AR, Memphis, Memphis, TN, Dentistry, Louis, MO, Dentistry, May 1985 $93,098.00, Meharry Medical College, June 1986 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices 14063 Kouri, Gary B., Fort Smith, AR, Nashville, TN, Allopathic Medicine, Dela-Johnson, Roy, Los Angeles, CA, $114,228.04, Univ of Missouri Kansas May 1982 $13,892.87, Universidad Central Del City, Kansas City, MO, Dentistry, May Balyeat, Lisa E., South Pasadena, CA, Caribe, Bayamon, PR, Allopathic 1987 $7,103.57, Univ of Texas Medical Medicine, May 1988 Layman, Kevin W., Alma, AR, Branch Galveston, Galveston, TX, Diaz-Gomez, Mario A., Riverside, CA, $103,786.59, Univ of Missouri Kansas Allopathic Medicine, June 1988 $51,521.17, Creighton University, City, Kansas City, MO, Dentistry, Becker, Donna R., Glendale, CA, Omaha, NE, Allopathic Medicine, April 1985 $30,829.44, Harvard Medical School, May 1984 Mathis, Keith A., Little Rock, AR, Boston, MA, Allopathic Medicine, Dickens, Charles L., Los Angeles, CA, $17,706.44, Univ of Texas, Houston, June 1984 $107,990.49, Meharry Medical TX, Dentistry, June 1988 Belzberg, Gary, Long Beach, CA, College, Nashville, TN, Allopathic Sherrill, Edward E., Little Rock, AR, $35,005.60, Medical College of Medicine, May 1989 $26,302.72, Univ of Missouri Kansas Wisconsin, Milwaukee, WI, Douglas, Clifford C., Redlands, CA, City, Kansas City, MO, Dentistry, May Allopathic Medicine, May 1984 $37,750.79, Loma Linda University, 1988 Bernardez, Jorge, Gardena, CA, Loma Linda, CA, Allopathic $9,657.20, Univ of California Los Medicine, June 1989 Optometry Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, Allopathic Drennan, Michael D., Cardiff by the Sea, Freeman, Gregory G., Little Rock, AR, Medicine, June 1987 CA, $4,694.17, Univ of California San $56,493.15, Southern Calif College of Bledsoe, Ralph C., Carson, CA, Diego, La Jolla, CA, Allopathic Optometry, Fullerton, CA, Optometry, $20,712.19, Brown University, Medicine, June 1985 May 1986 Providence, RI, Allopathic Medicine, Duarte, David A., Long Beach, CA, Gunn, Nanette Q., Little Rock, AR, May 1988 $79,354.97, Harvard Medical School, $210,323.75, Southern College of Blum, Brian B., San Francisco, CA, Boston, MA, Allopathic Medicine, Optometry, Memphis, TN, Optometry, $10,049.85, Univ of Texas June 1985 June 1986 Southwestern Medical Cntr, Dallas, Duncan, Monique M., Los Angeles, CA, TX, Allopathic Medicine, June 1987 Osteopathy $8,618.16, Case Western Reserve Cafaro, Virginia, San Francisco, CA, University, Cleveland, OH, Allopathic $51,118.93, Virginia Commonwealth Burnette, David B., Mountain View, AR, Medicine, August 1985 $101,869.47, West Virginia School of University, Richmond, VA, Allopathic Essey, Robert J., Los Angeles, CA, Osteopathic Med, Lewisburg, WV, Medicine, May 1986 $74,437.96, Temple University, Carrillo, Javier N., Oxnard, CA, Osteopathy, May 1985 Philadelphia, PA, Allopathic $6,363.91, Univ of Med & Dent of Medicine, May 1984 Pharmacy New Jersey, Newark, NJ, Allopathic Fletcher, Leonard, Santa Ana, CA, Medicine, June 1985 Caldwell, Eric J., Lewisville, AR, $69,140.78, Univ of Texas Hlth Sci $16,280.18, Texas Southern Carter, Eugene J., Panorama City, CA, $24,510.86, Univ of California Irvine, Cntr San Antonio, San Antonio, TX, University, Houston, TX, Pharmacy, Allopathic Medicine, May 1986 May 1990 Irvine, CA, Allopathic Medicine, May 1988 Foote, Ronald H., Hanford, CA, California Channel, Ollie V., Inglewood, CA, $25,781.71, Howard University, Washington, DC, Allopathic Allopathic Medicine $25,616.38, Univ of California Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, Allopathic Medicine, May 1985 Adams, Alfred E., Inglewood, CA, Medicine, January 1987 Garcia, Gregory, Ventura, CA, $30,471.84, Meharry Medical College, Checco, James, Redwood City, CA, $27,221.09, Univ of Illinois Medical Nashville, TN, Allopathic Medicine, $31,408.63, Cornell University Center, Chicago, IL, Allopathic May 1981 Medical College, New York, NY, Medicine, June 1989 Alexander, Marsha, Rio Vista, CA, Allopathic Medicine, May 1985 Garner, Tim G., Los Angeles, CA, $37,447.49, East Tennessee State Chretien, Paul P., Sacramento, CA, $13,452.01, Howard University, University, Johnson City, TN, $2,154.19, Univ of Massachusetts Washington, DC, Allopathic Allopathic Medicine, May 1984 Worcester, Worcester, MA, Allopathic Medicine, May 1985 Anderson, Angela, Los Angeles, CA, Medicine, June 1983 Goldfarb, Georgia, Venice, CA, $36,439.48, Creighton University, Collins, Rodney, Salinas, CA, $55,518.30, Medical College of Omaha, NE, Allopathic Medicine, $10,009.37, Howard University, Wisconsin, Milwaukee, WI, December 1985 Washington, DC, Allopathic Allopathic Medicine, May 1982 Anderson, Laura M., Los Angeles, CA, Medicine, May 1983 Haider, Wais I., Corona, CA, $29,045.56, $48,216.23, Tulane University, New Cooke, Lawrence, Laguna Niguel, CA, Univ of Colorado Health Science Orleans, LA, Allopathic Medicine, $86,180.80, Columbia University, Center, Denver, CO, Allopathic January 1986 New York, NY, Allopathic Medicine, Medicine, May 1989 Anderson, Paul, La Jolla, CA, $4,719.28, May 1987 Hamilton, Clarence, Alta Loma, CA, George Washington University, Cosio, Jose A., Los Angeles, CA, $129,582.40, Meharry Medical Washington, DC, Allopathic $193,912.81, Medical College of College, Nashville, TN, Allopathic Medicine, May 1988 Wisconsin, Milwaukee, WI, Medicine, May 1984 Arias, Caleb, Riverbank, CA, $3,503.34, Allopathic Medicine, May 1985 Harding, Robert E., Palo Alto, CA, Univ of California San Diego, La Jolla, Coyle, Douglas O., Temple City, CA, $5,716.52, Rush University, Chicago, CA, Allopathic Medicine, June 1989 $12,926.86, Univ of California San IL, Allopathic Medicine, June 1987 Avelar, Susana, San Francisco, CA, Francisco, San Francisco, CA, Harris, Arthur, Woodland Hills, CA, $104,160.78, Medical College of Allopathic Medicine, June 1983 $36,548.98, Wayne State University, Wisconsin, Milwaukee, WI, Curry, Charles M., Fresno, CA, Detroit, MI, Allopathic Medicine, June Allopathic Medicine, May 1990 $13,850.09, Meharry Medical College, 1980 Ayodele, Emmanuel A., Compton, CA, Nashville, TN, Allopathic Medicine, Harris, Henry D., Los Angeles, CA, $14,845.07, Meharry Medical College, May 1984 $54,562.46, Meharry Medical College, 14064 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices Nashville, TN, Allopathic Medicine, Louis, MO, Allopathic Medicine, May Pena, Mary M., Sacramento, CA, May 1980 1990 $33,144.97, Univ of California San Hayden, Royce D., San Diego, CA, Matalon, Ofer, Santa Rosa, CA, Diego, La Jolla, CA, Allopathic $6,549.64, Meharry Medical College, $54,246.34, Univ of Illinois Medical Medicine, June 1986 Nashville, TN, Allopathic Medicine, Center, Chicago, IL, Allopathic Perrault, Mark D., Culver City, CA, May 1984 Medicine, June 1986 $30,403.04, Michigan State Henry, Camille, San Diego, CA, May, James W., Beverly Hills, CA, University, East Lansing, MI, $83,462.67, Georgetown University, $4,008.56, Indiana University Allopathic Medicine, March 1984 Washington, DC, Allopathic Indianapolis, Bloomington, IN, Perry, Keith O., Los Angeles, CA, Medicine, May 1984 Allopathic Medicine, August 1984 $90,358.44, Finch University of Hibbert, Harold H., Stanford, CA, Mays, Archie, Long Beach, CA, Health Sciences, North Chicago, IL, $8,035.96, Stanford University, $114,073.89, Meharry Medical Allopathic Medicine, June 1983 Stanford, CA, Allopathic Medicine, College, Nashville, TN, Allopathic Peterson-Lipscomb, Anna J., Irvine, CA, June 1987 Medicine, May 1985 $37,473.84, Wright State University, Hill, Melvin N., Woodland Hills, CA, McCormack, Faith J., Modesto, CA, Dayton, OH, Allopathic Medicine, $66,557.99, Univ of Med & Dent of $129,652.07, George Washington August 1984 New Jersey, Newark, NJ, Allopathic University, Washington, DC, Phillips, Jeffrey L., Vallejo, CA, Medicine, May 1986 Allopathic Medicine, May 1989 $7,377.89, Finch University of Health Hines, Berta, Los Angeles, CA, McManus, Michael, Stockton, CA, Sciences, North Chicago, IL, $88,512.93, Meharry Medical College, $12,343.26, Univ of California Irvine, Allopathic Medicine, June 1985 Nashville, TN, Allopathic Medicine, Irvine, CA, Allopathic Medicine, June Pote III, William H.W., Loma Linda, CA, May 1982 1983 $119,441.44, Loma Linda University, Irvine, David, Loma Linda, CA, Meyer, James P., Long Beach, CA, Loma Linda, CA, Allopathic $39,146.14, Loma Linda University, $95,653.53, Georgetown University, Medicine, June 1986 Loma Linda, CA, Allopathic Washington, DC, Allopathic Powers, Arnold A., Los Angeles, CA, Medicine, June 1990 Medicine, May 1987 $9,278.39, Brown University, Johnsen, James H., Cupertino, CA, Miller, Bradley, Beverly Hills, CA, Providence, RI, Allopathic Medicine, $163,917.78, Finch University of $42,671.11, Univ of Southern June 1985 Health Sciences, North Chicago, IL, California, Los Angeles, CA, Razavi, Mahmood K., Los Angeles, CA, Allopathic Medicine, June 1987 Allopathic Medicine, June 1988 $32,488.14, Univ of Washington, Julian, Virginia, Belvedere Tiburon, CA, Moini, Kian, Emeryville, CA, $4,213.96, Seattle, WA, Allopathic Medicine, $118,644.28, Univ of California San Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, June 1988 Diego, La Jolla, CA, Allopathic TX, Allopathic Medicine, May 1988 Riley, Calvin C., Irvine, CA, $71,986.23, Medicine, June 1983 Mora, Francisco J., Canoga Park, CA, Kamel, Luca, Beverly Hills, CA, Univ of California Irvine, Irvine, CA, $65,422.68, Tufts University, Boston, $72,942.86, Univ of Miami, Miami, Allopathic Medicine, June 1985 MA, Allopathic Medicine, June 1983 Robinson, Paul, Long Beach, CA, FL, Allopathic Medicine, May 1988 Kelly, Edward L., Blue Jay, CA, Moreno, Daniel, Los Angeles, CA, $14,827.24, Univ of California Davis, $5,388.58, Loma Linda University, $35,356.87, Tufts University, Boston, Davis, CA, Allopathic Medicine, June Loma Linda, CA, Allopathic MA, Allopathic Medicine, May 1988 1990 Medicine, June 1984 Morkin, Patrick P., South Pasadena, CA, Rose, Sharon R., Northridge, CA, Kelly, Ronald K., Dixon, CA, $24,644.26, Univ of Texas Hlth Sci $11,616.92, Univ of California Irvine, $17,953.11, Univ of California Irvine, Cntr San Antonio, San Antonio, TX, Irvine, CA, Allopathic Medicine, June Irvine, CA, Allopathic Medicine, June Allopathic Medicine, May 1989 1987 1983 Mouton, Marsha, Oakland, CA, Salinas, Rafael E., Monrovia, CA, Kunihira, Dale Y., San Bernardino, CA, $38,393.97, Univ of Texas, Houston, $168,558.24, Univ of California Irvine, $44,240.58, Loma Linda University, TX, Allopathic Medicine, June 1986 Irvine, CA, Allopathic Medicine, Loma Linda, CA, Allopathic Murphy, Monica J., Los Angeles, CA, December 1986 Medicine, June 1985 $14,540.66, Morehouse School of Schlater, Theodore L., Long Beach, CA, Lamotte, Angela, Culver City, CA, Medicine, Atlanta, GA, Allopathic $13,160.39, Univ of California Irvine, $94,764.51, Univ of California Los Medicine, May 1985 Irvine, CA, Allopathic Medicine, June Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, Allopathic Nwobi, Veronica, Santa Monica, CA, 1988 Medicine, June 1989 $15,077.95, Suny Buffalo, Buffalo, Scott, Barbara T., Northridge, CA, Lawton, Michael, Yorba Linda, CA, NY, Allopathic Medicine, June 1984 $65,056.78, Texas Tech University $60,926.09, Univ of Iowa, Iowa City, Olson, Robert, Sierra Madre, CA, Health Sci Center, Lubbock, TX, IA, Allopathic Medicine, May 1983 $210,609.30, Univ of Southern Allopathic Medicine, June 1989 Li, Patrick P., San Gabriel, CA, California, Los Angeles, CA, Scott, Cheryl L., Los Angeles, CA, $132,365.47, Finch University of Allopathic Medicine, June 1984 $10,247.54, Boston University Health Sciences, North Chicago, IL, Patterson, Joseph M., Alhambra, CA, Medical Center, Boston, MA, Allopathic Medicine, June 1987 $7,695.54, Univ of South Alabama, Allopathic Medicine, June 1984 Lofton, Julie, Yorba Linda, CA, Mobile, AL, Allopathic Medicine, Shahin, Samir, Los Angeles, CA, $86,897.81, Hahnemann University, June 1987 $34,894.66, Univ of Southern Philadelphia, PA, Allopathic Patton, Marvin C., Oakland, CA, California, Los Angeles, CA, Medicine, June 1986 $35,400.42, Harvard Medical School, Allopathic Medicine, June 1983 Lopez, Stephen H., Los Angeles, CA, Boston, MA, Allopathic Medicine, Shaw, Michael G., Inglewood, CA, $4,218.70, Univ of California Irvine, June 1990 $38,837.49, Meharry Medical College, Irvine, CA, Allopathic Medicine, June Payne, David, Playa del Rey, CA, Nashville, TN, Allopathic Medicine, 1983 $10,098.83, Wayne State University, May 1985 Lui, Suk Ching J., Union City, CA, Detroit, MI, Allopathic Medicine, June Siqueiros, Rafael O., Santa Cruz, CA, $37,374.35, St Louis University, St 1985 $22,806.39, Univ of California San Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices 14065 Diego, La Jolla, CA, Allopathic Wolfrey, Wayne T., Los Angeles, CA, College, Los Angeles, CA, Medicine, June 1988 $2,560.66, Univ of Nebraska Medical Chiropractic, December 1983 Smith, Diana D., Santa Barbara, CA, Center, Omaha, NE, Allopathic Barrett, Elizabeth L., Temple City, CA, $14,741.62, Univ of California San Medicine, May 1988 $109,143.56, Los Angeles College of Francisco, San Francisco, CA, Worstell, Craig, Sunnyvale, CA, Chiropractic, Whittier, CA, Allopathic Medicine, June 1983 $93,489.70, Loma Linda University, Chiropractic, December 1986 Smith, Robert E., San Juan Capistrano, Loma Linda, CA, Allopathic Beam, David, Colton, CA, $92,240.02, CA, $70,768.12, Hahnemann Medicine, May 1987 Los Angeles College of Chiropractic, University, Philadelphia, PA, Zink, Mark T., San Bernardino, CA, Whittier, CA, Chiropractic, June 1985 Allopathic Medicine, June 1982 $20,545.34, Univ of Miami, Miami, Beaver, Richard D., Downieville, CA, Stafford, Novarro, Culver City, CA, FL, Allopathic Medicine, May 1987 $95,021.99, Texas Chiropractic $22,099.78, Meharry Medical College, College Foundation, Pasadena, TX, Nashville, TN, Allopathic Medicine, Chiropractic Chiropractic, April 1986 May 1985 Abboud, William H., Moreno Valley, Becchett, Sondra, Belmont, CA, Strachan, Alexander, San Francisco, CA, CA, $1,447.93, Los Angeles College of $55,971.92, Palmer College of $1,726.96, Columbia University, New Chiropractic, Whittier, CA, Chiropractic West, San Jose, CA, York, NY, Allopathic Medicine, May Chiropractic, December 1987 Chiropractic, March 1987 1985 Alegria, Albert J., South Pasadena, CA, Benedict, Susan, Malibu, CA, Swartz, Elena F., Riverside, CA, $85,534.77, Southern Calif Clg of $81,420.04, National College of $74,986.45, Univ of Southern Chiropractic, Pico Rivera, CA, Chiropractic, Lombard, IL, California, Los Angeles, CA, Chiropractic, January 1987 Chiropractic, June 1989 Allopathic Medicine, June 1990 Allen, Lawrence, Temecula, CA, Benkula, Jan, San Lorenzo, CA, Szubin, Richard A., San Diego, CA, $105,465.16, Southern Calif Clg of $20,104.61, Life Chiropractic $137,414.17, Case Western Reserve Chiropractic, Pico Rivera, CA, College—West, San Lorenzo, CA, University, Cleveland, OH, Allopathic Chiropractic, January 1987 Chiropractic, March 1987 Medicine, May 1987 Alvarado, Mario, Gilroy, CA, Berg, Troy L., Artesia, CA, $38,417.78, Tarver, Donald, San Francisco, CA, $51,263.21, Palmer College of Los Angeles College of Chiropractic, $23,176.54, Univ of Cincinnati, Chiropractic, Davenport, IA, Whittier, CA, Chiropractic, December Cincinnati, OH, Allopathic Medicine, Chiropractic, March 1985 1986 June 1987 Anaim, Jamal, La Mirada, CA, Berry-lowy, Christie L., Glendora, CA, Washington, Patricia, Los Angeles, CA, $15,960.35, Los Angeles College of $32,726.13, Cleveland Chiropractic $75,643.99, Georgetown University, Chiropractic, Whittier, CA, College, Los Angeles, CA, Washington, DC, Allopathic Chiropractic, April 1992 Chiropractic, December 1988 Medicine, May 1984 Anderson, Douglas W., Santa Ana, CA, Bixby, Charles K., Petaluma, CA, Watts-Hurtado, Monica V., Newhall, $129,597.35, Los Angeles College of $40,966.37, Life Chiropractic College- CA, $5,835.10, Univ of California Los Chiropractic, Whittier, CA, West, San Lorenzo, CA, Chiropractic, Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, Allopathic Chiropractic, April 1986 March 1989 Medicine, June 1989 Anderson, Michael M., Los Angeles, CA, Boron, Steven, Guerneville, CA, Webber, Barry, Burbank, CA, $60,770.83, Los Angeles College of $38,071.92, Palmer College of $70,831.24, Georgetown University, Chiropractic, Whittier, CA, Chiropractic West, San Jose, CA, Washington, DC, Allopathic Chiropractic, December 1986 Chiropractic, June 1991 Medicine, May 1982 Archuleta, Philip, San Marcos, CA, Brodsky, Barbara B., San Francisco, CA, Weil, Mitchell A., San Clemente, CA, $98,606.98, Los Angeles College of $6,727.44, Life Chiropractic College- $15,043.51, Univ of California Los Chiropractic, Whittier, CA, West, San Lorenzo, CA, Chiropractic, Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, Allopathic Chiropractic, December 1988 December 1984 Medicine, June 1980 Arishin, Michael, Los Gatos, CA, Brooke, Daniel J., Antioch, CA, Williams, Gary T., Perris, CA, $35,899.74, Palmer College of $18,202.83, Palmer College of $121,120.00, Meharry Medical Chiropractic West, San Jose, CA, Chiropractic West, San Jose, CA, College, Nashville, TN, Allopathic Chiropractic, September 1985 Chiropractic, September 1990 Medicine, May 1984 Badorek, Jack D., Costa Mesa, CA, Brooks, Steve F., Salinas, CA, Williams, Joanne, Sherman Oaks, CA, $1,479.48, Cleveland Chiropractic $28,930.62, Logan College of $7,421.18, Univ of California Irvine, College, Los Angeles, CA, Chiropractic, Chesterfield, MO, Irvine, CA, Allopathic Medicine, June Chiropractic, September 1983 Chiropractic, December 1986 1982 Bai, Chung, Glendale, CA, $5,582.43, Brown, Vincent L., Castro Valley, CA, Williams, William E., Ontario, CA, Southern Calif Clg of Chiropractic, $33,808.84, Life Chiropractic College- $20,506.07, Univ of Southern Pico Rivera, CA, Chiropractic, May West, San Lorenzo, CA, Chiropractic, California, Los Angeles, CA, 1988 June 1989 Allopathic Medicine, June 1981 Bain, Lee R., West Covina, CA, Brunstein, Angela, Fullerton, CA, Wilson, Larry J., Palo Alto, CA, $113,951.87, Life College, Marietta, $60,951.33, Los Angeles College of $127,449.83, Univ of Pittsburgh, GA, Chiropractic, December 1987 Chiropractic, Whittier, CA, Pittsburgh, PA, Allopathic Medicine, Baldry, James S., North Hollywood, CA, Chiropractic, April 1990 June 1985 $6,215.96, Cleveland Chiropractic Bunzeluk, Nancy J., Marina, CA, Wilson, Michael G., San Pedro, CA, College, Los Angeles, CA, $40,228.51, Life College, Marietta, $10,764.95, Univ of Med & Dent of Chiropractic, April 1985 GA, Chiropractic, December 1983 New Jersey, Newark, NJ, Allopathic Baldwin, Richard C., San Francisco, CA, Burch, Gregory D., Norco, CA, Medicine, June 1985 $29,570.04, Palmer College of $42,462.81, Western States Winkler, Christopher C., Oakland, CA, Chiropractic, Davenport, IA, Chiropractic College, Portland, OR, $70,838.25, St Louis University, St Chiropractic, October 1986 Chiropractic, June 1984 Louis, MO, Allopathic Medicine, May Barrack, Steven, Carlsbad, CA, Burdman, Darin L., Long Beach, CA, 1987 $45,398.20, Cleveland Chiropractic $7,229.17, Los Angeles College of 14066 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices Chiropractic, Whittier, CA, Clifford, Fred W., Palm Desert, CA, Chiropractic West, San Jose, CA, Chiropractic, December 1985 $75,974.13, Palmer College of Chiropractic, September 1989 Burkhardt, Pamela K., San Fransisco, Chiropractic, Davenport, IA, Diedrich, Curtis E., Fremont, CA, CA, $52,029.32, NorthWestern College Chiropractic, December 1985 $18,254.39, Palmer College of of Chiropractic, Bloomington, MN, Conger, Ronald E., North Hollywood, Chiropractic West, San Jose, CA, Chiropractic, April 1989 CA, $13,937.63, Cleveland Chiropractic, March 1984 Burkley, Anton Z., Oakland, CA, Chiropractic College, Los Angeles, Dieter, Lawrence A., Los Osos, CA, $78,144.52, Life Chiropractic College- CA, Chiropractic, August 1988 $91,891.67, Los Angeles College of West, San Lorenzo, CA, Chiropractic, Cook, Karen, Los Gatos, CA, $99,180.74, Chiropractic, Whittier, CA, June 1988 Palmer College of Chiropractic West, Chiropractic, April 1989 Burt, Thomas T., Walnut Creek, CA, San Jose, CA, Chiropractic, March Difiore, William, Fountain Valley, CA, $58,837.76, Life Chiropractic College- 1985 $29,587.48, Southern Calif Clg of West, San Lorenzo, CA, Chiropractic, Cook-Holmes, Peggy P., Manteca, CA, Chiropractic, Pico Rivera, CA, March 1984 $94,900.32, Cleveland Chiropractic Chiropractic, August 1986 Butterfield, Cathy L., San Jose, CA, College, Kansas City, MO, Diquattro, Scott, Cathedral City, CA, $30,312.86, Palmer College of Chiropractic, September 1984 $66,255.36, Los Angeles College of Chiropractic West, San Jose, CA, Cooksley, Michelle, Laguna Beach, CA, Chiropractic, Whittier, CA, Chiropractic, June 1987 $1,345.79, Cleveland Chiropractic Chiropractic, December 1984 Butterfield, James B., San Jose, CA, College, Los Angeles, CA, Dodenhoff, Bradley, Bakersfield, CA, $13,631.52, Palmer College of Chiropractic, July 1984 $15,225.26, Los Angeles College of Chiropractic West, San Jose, CA, Cory, Jon G., Irvine, CA, $44,905.98, Los Chiropractic, Whittier, CA, Chiropractic, March 1991 Angeles College of Chiropractic, Chiropractic, August 1984 Buvarp, Oystein, Aptos, CA, $7,648.59, Whittier, CA, Chiropractic, April 1988 Dorman, Patrick, San Diego, CA, Palmer College of Chiropractic West, Cory, Robert G., Irvine, CA, $63,514.53, $20,333.19, Texas Chiropractic San Jose, CA, Chiropractic, June 1992 Cleveland Chiropractic College, Los College Foundation, Pasadena, TX, Byington, Brad A., South Lake Tahoe, Angeles, CA, Chiropractic, August Chiropractic, December 1985 Dunbar, Charles, Poway, CA, CA, $77,888.65, Southern Calif Clg of 1986 Chiropractic, Pico Rivera, CA, Cresswell, Diana, Whittier, CA, $118,527.97, Palmer College of Chiropractic, April 1989 $41,993.42, Los Angeles College of Chiropractic West, San Jose, CA, Caballero, Jorge R., Los Angeles, CA, Chiropractic, Whittier, CA, Chiropractic, December 1988 Dvorsky, Jay, Los Angeles, CA, $80,103.07, Los Angeles College of Chiropractic, April 1990 $122,775.88, Los Angeles College of Chiropractic, Whittier, CA, Crocevera, Carolyn A., Pacific Grove, Chiropractic, Whittier, CA, Chiropractic, April 1987 CA, $13,073.74, Cleveland Cappa, Claude L., San Mateo, CA, Chiropractic, December 1986 Chiropractic College, Los Angeles, Dwelly, Bruce E., Fair Oaks, CA, $39,452.12, Palmer College of CA, Chiropractic, August 1986 $17,022.97, Palmer College of Chiropractic, Davenport, IA, Curran, Douglas, Fresno, CA, Chiropractic West, San Jose, CA, Chiropractic, June 1984 $59,675.67, Logan College of Chiropractic, December 1988 Cardwell-Lejeune, Jodi J., Sacramento, Chiropractic, Chesterfield, MO, Earth-Child, Erin I., Berkeley, CA, CA, $6,282.40, Palmer College of Chiropractic, April 1986 $10,278.59, Life Chiropractic College- Chiropractic West, San Jose, CA, Curtin, Michael M., Fairfax, CA, West, San Lorenzo, CA, Chiropractic, Chiropractic, June 1987 $12,495.43, National College of December 1986 Carr, Wayne S., Healdsburg, CA, Chiropractic, Lombard, IL, Eckel, David, Lancaster, CA, $76,495.98, $77,998.74, Western States Chiropractic, August 1988 Cleveland Chiropractic College, Los Chiropractic College, Portland, OR, Curtis, Diane, Costa Mesa, CA, Angeles, CA, Chiropractic, August Chiropractic, August 1988 $9,694.68, Cleveland Chiropractic 1986 Casey, Daniel P., Huntington Beach, CA, College, Kansas City, MO, Eli, Desiree, Aptos, CA, $28,693.03, Life $56,512.80, Cleveland Chiropractic Chiropractic, May 1982 Chiropractic College-West, San College, Los Angeles, CA, Danison, Robert L., South Lake Tahoe, Lorenzo, CA, Chiropractic, September Chiropractic, September 1985 CA, $38,126.80, Palmer College of 1989 Castillo, Joella M., San Francisco, CA, Chiropractic, Davenport, IA, Ellis, Carl, Escondido, CA, $101,838.48, $70,229.05, Palmer College of Chiropractic, March 1985 Palmer College of Chiropractic West, Chiropractic West, San Jose, CA, Davidson, James A., Boyes Hot Springs, San Jose, CA, Chiropractic, December Chiropractic, June 1986 CA, $34,900.81, Life Chiropractic 1989 Castro, Hector M., Santa Ana, CA, College-West, San Lorenzo, CA, Elsea, Steven S., Stockton, CA, $49,601.88, Life Chiropractic College- Chiropractic, June 1986 $6,403.30, Life Chiropractic College- West, San Lorenzo, CA, Chiropractic, Delallo, Joseph D., South Lake Tahoe, West, San Lorenzo, CA, Chiropractic, December 1986 CA, $54,588.36, Los Angeles College December 1985 Cates, Stephen, Laguna Hills, CA, of Chiropractic, Whittier, CA, Ely, Stephen, Fresno, CA, $33,985.11, $28,531.43, Los Angeles College of Chiropractic, April 1986 Western States Chiropractic College, Chiropractic, Whittier, CA, Desantis, Lynn M., Ramona, CA, Portland, OR, Chiropractic, March Chiropractic, December 1983 $5,505.78, Southern Calif Clg of 1985 Cheney, Julian L., Reseda, CA, Chiropractic, Pico Rivera, CA, Ervin, Laurie M., Soquel, CA, $2,328.41, Cleveland Chiropractic Chiropractic, December 1989 $16,830.51, Life Chiropractic College- College, Los Angeles, CA, Desantis, Nicholas, El Cajon, CA, West, San Lorenzo, CA, Chiropractic, Chiropractic, August 1983 $74,556.16, Southern Calif Clg of March 1986 Christensen, Casey, Whittier, CA, Chiropractic, Pico Rivera, CA, Etcheverry, John C., Pinole, CA, $82,868.28, Los Angeles College of Chiropractic, December 1987 $11,290.37, Los Angeles College of Chiropractic, Whittier, CA, Dewees, Randel K., San Jose, CA, Chiropractic, Whittier, CA, Chiropractic, December 1986 $69,454.76, Palmer College of Chiropractic, December 1988 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices 14067 Evans, Gary, Stockton, CA, $79,179.93, Chiropractic, Pico Rivera, CA, Harper, Nicholas N., Long Beach, CA, Logan College of Chiropractic, Chiropractic, December 1988 $42,809.31, Los Angeles College of Chesterfield, MO, Chiropractic, April Gilberti, Benedict, La Costa, CA, Chiropractic, Whittier, CA, 1986 $12,015.86, Cleveland Chiropractic Chiropractic, April 1984 Famalaro, John J., El Toro, CA, College, Kansas City, MO, Hatfield, Brian, Santa Monica, CA, $80,941.98, Cleveland Chiropractic Chiropractic, January 1987 $29,087.12, Life Chiropractic College- College, Los Angeles, CA, Given, Vaughn, Mission Viejo, CA, West, San Lorenzo, CA, Chiropractic, Chiropractic, December 1983 $30,445.61, Southern Calif Clg of March 1988 Fawcett III, Joe J., Fresno, CA, Chiropractic, Pico Rivera, CA, Hawley, John, Santa Barbara, CA, $57,323.73, Palmer College of Chiropractic, October 1985 $50,693.31, Cleveland Chiropractic Chiropractic, Davenport, IA, Glickman, Alex, Petaluma, CA, College, Los Angeles, CA, Chiropractic, March 1984 $24,655.40, Cleveland Chiropractic Chiropractic, December 1986 Fickel, Theodore, Montecito, CA, College, Los Angeles, CA, Hayes, Douglas, Santa Monica, CA, $59,578.28, Los Angeles College of Chiropractic, July 1985 $118,854.12, Life College, Marietta, Chiropractic, Whittier, CA, Glum, Gary, El Segundo, CA, GA, Chiropractic, September 1984 Chiropractic, December 1982 $103,440.00, Los Angeles College of Hempsey, William, Sherman Oaks, CA, Fifield, Fred, Modesto, CA, $62,015.15, Chiropractic, Whittier, CA, $19,625.65, Cleveland Chiropractic Life Chiropractic College-West, San Chiropractic, April 1984 College, Los Angeles, CA, Lorenzo, CA, Chiropractic, December Golden, Mary C., Fremont, CA, Chiropractic, August 1983 1986 $11,530.67, Life Chiropractic College- Henry, Scott, La Mesa, CA, $26,472.83, Fishkin, William, San Francisco, CA, West, San Lorenzo, CA, Chiropractic, Palmer College of Chiropractic, $10,269.78, Life Chiropractic College- October 1986 Davenport, IA, Chiropractic, March West, San Lorenzo, CA, Chiropractic, Good-Mays, Kathryn M., Reseda, CA, 1984 March 1987 $63,381.14, Parker College of Hermosillo, Francisco J., Tarzana, CA, Fitzpatrick, Patrick J., Hesperia, CA, Chiropractic, Dallas, TX, Chiropractic, $92,003.54, Southern Calif. Clg. of $66,026.74, Los Angeles College of May 1988 Chiropractic, Pico Rivera, CA, Chiropractic, Whittier, CA, Green, Sheldon S., Goleta, CA, Chiropractic, April 1987 Chiropractic, December 1987 $46,812.51, Cleveland Chiropractic Hernandez, Orestes M., Los Angeles, Flores, Otto, Santa Ana, CA, $48,090.96, College, Los Angeles, CA, CA, $39,161.76, Cleveland Southern Calif Clg of Chiropractic, Chiropractic, December 1985 Chiropractic College, Los Angeles, Pico Rivera, CA, Chiropractic, August Gregory, Todd A., Santa Maria, CA, CA, Chiropractic, December 1988 1988 $21,752.74, Life Chiropractic College- Hetherington, Jane, San Rafael, CA, Flynn, Timothy G., Palo Alto, CA, West, San Lorenzo, CA, Chiropractic, $53,852.05, Life Chiropractic College- $1,439.36, Palmer College of September 1989 West, San Lorenzo, CA, Chiropractic, Chiropractic West, San Jose, CA, Gross, Dale M., Reseda, CA, $5,673.54, September 1987 Chiropractic, September 1989 Cleveland Chiropractic College, Los Hicks, Randall, Castro Valley, CA, Forsting, Ruth A., San Francisco, CA, $5,941.18, Palmer College of Angeles, CA, Chiropractic, December $100,799.22, Life Chiropractic Chiropractic, Davenport, IA, 1983 College-West, San Lorenzo, CA, Gutierrez, John J., Stockton, CA, Chiropractic, June 1984 Chiropractic, March 1987 Fridrick, Timothy P., Sepulveda, CA, $38,083.40, Life Chiropractic College- Hileman, Kent, Hollister, CA, $39,503.11, Southern Calif Clg of West, San Lorenzo, CA, Chiropractic, $22,547.14, Cleveland Chiropractic Chiropractic, Pico Rivera, CA, December 1985 College, Los Angeles, CA, Chiropractic, April 1988 Habbart, Joseph L., Mountain View, CA, Chiropractic, August 1986 Frye, Dan A., Oceanside, CA, $3,406.04, $30,209.89, Palmer College of Hines, John, Buena Park, CA, $4,966.16, Life Chiropractic College-West, San Chiropractic West, San Jose, CA, Palmer College of Chiropractic, Lorenzo, CA, Chiropractic, September Chiropractic, June 1986 Davenport, IA, Chiropractic, June 1990 Hahn, Peter, Northridge, CA, 1983 Galba-Machuca, Debra M., Visalia, CA, $13,412.56, Los Angeles College of Hinkey, Stephen, Culver City, CA, $36,873.12, Palmer College of Chiropractic, Whittier, CA, $19,829.23, Los Angeles College of Chiropractic West, San Jose, CA, Chiropractic, December 1989 Chiropractic, Whittier, CA, Chiropractic, June 1986 Haines, Donna J., Mckinleyville, CA, Chiropractic, April 1986 Gallager, Tamara T., Chino, CA, $42,717.86, National College of Hockersmith, Kevin W., Sanger, CA, $29,704.46, Los Angeles College of Chiropractic, Lombard, IL, $99,612.46, Cleveland Chiropractic Chiropractic, Whittier, CA, Chiropractic, August 1988 College, Kansas City, MO, Chiropractic, December 1984 Halle, Thomas C., Los Angeles, CA, Chiropractic, May 1989 Gallagher, David B., Los Angeles, CA, $50,640.15, Cleveland Chiropractic Hoffman, Stuart, Santa Monica, CA, $6,463.63, Cleveland Chiropractic College, Los Angeles, CA, $6,524.47, Cleveland Chiropractic College, Los Angeles, CA, Chiropractic, December 1986 College, Los Angeles, CA, Chiropractic, December 1983 Hamby, Bobby J., Walnut, CA, Chiropractic, April 1986 Garza, Rudy, Cathedral City, CA, $11,365.63, Life College, Marietta, Holmes, Bobby B., Manteca, CA, $52,331.91, Life Chiropractic College- GA, Chiropractic, March 1986 $131,368.40, Cleveland Chiropractic West, San Lorenzo, CA, Chiropractic, Hamilton, Aaron J., Fountain Valley, College, Kansas City, MO, December 1985 CA, $16,473.08, Cleveland Chiropractic, September 1985 Gates, Thom A., Los Angeles, CA, Chiropractic College, Los Angeles, Holsinger, Matthew W., San Mateo, CA, $11,819.11, Cleveland Chiropractic CA, Chiropractic, December 1982 $62,112.08, Life Chiropractic College- College, Los Angeles, CA, Harness, William E., San Diego, CA, West, San Lorenzo, CA, Chiropractic, Chiropractic, April 1987 $19,263.24, Cleveland Chiropractic June 1990 Gidowski, Frank, Rosemead, CA, College, Kansas City, MO, Holst, Stephen S., Carmel, CA, $52,363.52, Southern Calif Clg of Chiropractic, May 1985 $57,749.78, Life Chiropractic College- 14068 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices West, San Lorenzo, CA, Chiropractic, Johnson, Shelia, Los Angeles, CA, Levernier, Laura A., Costa Mesa, CA, March 1986 $93,110.08, Cleveland Chiropractic $43,191.41, Life Chiropractic College- Holt, Kenneth, Canyon Lake, CA, College, Los Angeles, CA, West, San Lorenzo, CA, Chiropractic, $50,934.40, Southern Calif. Clg. of Chiropractic, April 1986 June 1986 Chiropractic, Pico Rivera, CA, Kahan, Robert M., Mission Viejo, CA, Levesque, Gary, Huntington Beach, CA, Chiropractic, December 1988 $20,760.16, Los Angeles College of $8,421.15, Los Angeles College of Hopkins, Mitch, Brea, CA, $59,980.43, Chiropractic, Whittier, CA, Chiropractic, Whittier, CA, Los Angeles College of Chiropractic, Chiropractic, April 1984 Chiropractic, April 1982 Whittier, CA, Chiropractic, April 1988 Kahanek, Carol A., Santa Cruz, CA, Lewis, Edward, Auburn, CA, Hopstock, Richard, La Puente, CA, $38,899.12, Western States $96,506.97, Palmer College of $54,302.07, Los Angeles College of Chiropractic College, Portland, OR, Chiropractic West, San Jose, CA, Chiropractic, Whittier, CA, Chiropractic, December 1983 Chiropractic, June 1989 Chiropractic, December 1985 Kaye, Lafe M., Newbury Park, CA, Lima, Thomas, Oakland, CA, $1,814.37, Hoskin, Jerry, Watsonville, CA, $35,825.53, Los Angeles College of Life Chiropractic College-West, San $49,470.80, Life Chiropractic College- Chiropractic, Whittier, CA, Lorenzo, CA, Chiropractic, October West, San Lorenzo, CA, Chiropractic, Chiropractic, December 1987 1985 June 1986 Kelly, Mark S., Chino, CA, $21,355.78, Lin, Ho Shiong, San Lorenzo, CA, Hosler, John J., Hollister, CA, Cleveland Chiropractic College, Los $21,806.75, Life Chiropractic College- $27,409.59, Palmer College of Angeles, CA, Chiropractic, April 1986 West, San Lorenzo, CA, Chiropractic, Chiropractic West, San Jose, CA, Klee, Mark A., Lancaster, CA, September 1987 Chiropractic, December 1984 $15,327.97, Los Angeles College of Locke, Peggy J., Santa Barbara, CA, Howard, Marty B., Hayward, CA, Chiropractic, Whittier, CA, $88,366.54, Cleveland Chiropractic $15,777.23, Life Chiropractic College- Chiropractic, July 1987 College, Los Angeles, CA, West, San Lorenzo, CA, Chiropractic, Kosak, Jerome E., Fairfield, CA, Chiropractic, April 1989 December 1986 $24,435.97, Cleveland Chiropractic Lodwig, Michael, Walnut Creek, CA, Huff, Arthur R., Pasadena, CA, College, Los Angeles, CA, $15,819.65, Palmer College of $88,185.50, Southern Calif. Clg. of Chiropractic, August 1982 Chiropractic West, San Jose, CA, Chiropractic, Pico Rivera, CA, Kotsch, Simone P., Huntington Beach, Chiropractic, October 1989 Chiropractic, April 1988 CA, $38,050.42, Los Angeles College Lopez, Luis L., Canyon Lake, CA, Huff, Guy L., Torrance, CA, $90,955.97, of Chiropractic, Whittier, CA, $79,677.62, Los Angeles College of Cleveland Chiropractic College, Los Chiropractic, December 1985 Chiropractic, Whittier, CA, Kowalski, Brian A., Newport Beach, CA, Angeles, CA, Chiropractic, December Chiropractic, April 1985 $8,131.83, Life College, Marietta, GA, Louis, Kathryn S., Santa Monica, CA, 1986 Hunt, Celia, Citrus Heights, CA, Chiropractic, October 1982 $12,984.22, Los Angeles College of Kraetzer, Nicholas, San Pedro, CA, Chiropractic, Whittier, CA, $21,462.56, Life Chiropractic College- $4,473.92, Southern Calif Clg of Chiropractic, April 1986 West, San Lorenzo, CA, Chiropractic, Chiropractic, Pico Rivera, CA, Lowe, Dane E., Poway, CA, $4,090.78, September 1989 Chiropractic, December 1987 Palmer College of Chiropractic West, Imboden, Shannon L., Los Angeles, CA, Kullrich, Regan T., Oakhurst, CA, San Jose, CA, Chiropractic, December $12,386.36, Cleveland Chiropractic $12,394.97, Cleveland Chiropractic 1983 College, Los Angeles, CA, College, Los Angeles, CA, Lunceford, Glenn, Norco, CA, Chiropractic, December 1987 Chiropractic, May 1986 $13,310.48, Life Chiropractic College- Inskeep, Norman D., San Jose, CA, Lamb, Robert, Sebastopol, CA, West, San Lorenzo, CA, Chiropractic, $103,481.62, Palmer College of $28,678.41, Los Angeles College of June 1986 Chiropractic West, San Jose, CA, Chiropractic, Whittier, CA, Lyons, Dorothy A., Coulterville, CA, Chiropractic, September 1986 Chiropractic, April 1989 $27,241.79, Cleveland Chiropractic Jasper, Chuck, San Rafael, CA, Lampman, Chuck D., Sylmar, CA, College, Los Angeles, CA, $6,067.82, Palmer College of $105,598.36, Cleveland Chiropractic Chiropractic, April 1989 Chiropractic West, San Jose, CA, College, Los Angeles, CA, Maclaren, Stacy L., Ventura, CA, Chiropractic, March 1984 Chiropractic, August 1986 $20,079.05, Life Chiropractic College- Jeffcoat, Lori M., Alameda, CA, Landemare, Henry M., Moss Beach, CA, West, San Lorenzo, CA, Chiropractic, $13,339.98, Los Angeles College of $91,251.18, Life Chiropractic College- October 1985 Chiropractic, Whittier, CA, West, San Lorenzo, CA, Chiropractic, Mahan, Michael, El Cajon, CA, Chiropractic, December 1990 June 1985 $16,668.32, Life Chiropractic College- Jette, Steven A., Petaluma, CA, Lanzarotta, Suzette, Grass Valley, CA, West, San Lorenzo, CA, Chiropractic, $8,715.66, Western States $5,745.54, Palmer College of April 1988 Chiropractic College, Portland, OR, Chiropractic, Davenport, IA, Mahar, Deborah L., Santa Ana, CA, Chiropractic, December 1983 Chiropractic, December 1982 $14,699.17, Palmer College of Johnson, Eric, Victorville, CA, Laughter, James, San Diego, CA, Chiropractic West, San Jose, CA, $86,833.48, Palmer College of $41,963.88, Western States Chiropractic, June 1984 Chiropractic West, San Jose, CA, Chiropractic College, Portland, OR, Mairet, Alain A., Menlo Park, CA, Chiropractic, March 1990 Chiropractic, March 1985 $51,833.99, Life Chiropractic College- Johnson, Kevin A., Costa Mesa, CA, Lesko, Andrew, La Habra Heights, CA, West, San Lorenzo, CA, Chiropractic, $38,933.66, Cleveland Chiropractic $38,172.68, Los Angeles College of June 1987 College, Los Angeles, CA, Chiropractic, Whittier, CA, Mallary, Peter, Santa Cruz, CA, Chiropractic, August 1990 Chiropractic, April 1987 $39,427.19, Palmer College of Johnson, Randall R., Los Angeles, CA, Levay, Mariann, Sacramento, CA, Chiropractic West, San Jose, CA, $80,046.73, Cleveland Chiropractic $64,653.56, Cleveland Chiropractic Chiropractic, September 1988 College, Los Angeles, CA, College, Kansas City, MO, Mannino-Siegel, Holly L., Whittier, CA, Chiropractic, December 1986 Chiropractic, June 1987 $20,213.68, Los Angeles College of Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices 14069 Chiropractic, Whittier, CA, Molina, Robert, West Covina, CA, Chiropractic West, San Jose, CA, Chiropractic, April 1986 $48,100.20, Cleveland Chiropractic Chiropractic, September 1983 Mark, Jeffrey, San Francisco, CA, College, Los Angeles, CA, Pacheco, Mark A., Stockton, CA, $83,834.42, Los Angeles College of Chiropractic, August 1987 $38,441.45, Cleveland Chiropractic Chiropractic, Whittier, CA, Monahan, Michael L., Carlsbad, CA, College, Los Angeles, CA, Chiropractic, April 1987 $43,364.32, Los Angeles College of Chiropractic, April 1985 Marquez, Evelyn W., South Pasadena, Chiropractic, Whittier, CA, Pallas, James J., Temecula, CA, CA, $57,937.92, Los Angeles College Chiropractic, December 1986 $64,714.41, Los Angeles College of of Chiropractic, Whittier, CA, Montgomery, Rita M., Los Angeles, CA, Chiropractic, Whittier, CA, Chiropractic, July 1986 $57,724.69, Cleveland Chiropractic Chiropractic, April 1986 Martello, Daniel M., San Francisco, CA, College, Los Angeles, CA, Palumo, Frank N., North Hills, CA, $2,209.78, Northwestern College of Chiropractic, August 1986 $20,261.32, Cleveland Chiropractic Chiropractic, Bloomington, MN, Moore, Dennis J., Long Beach, CA, College, Los Angeles, CA, Chiropractic, April 1986 $108,626.04, Los Angeles College of Chiropractic, August 1988 Martin, Diana, Los Gatos, CA, Chiropractic, Whittier, CA, Pankey, John, Alameda, CA, $28,206.23, $21,286.06, Palmer College of Chiropractic, April 1986 Palmer College of Chiropractic West, Chiropractic West, San Jose, CA, Moore, Wesley B., San Jose, CA, San Jose, CA, Chiropractic, December Chiropractic, March 1986 $37,707.76, Life Chiropractic College- 1988 Matsumae, Dean, Huntington Beach, West, San Lorenzo, CA, Chiropractic, Panza, Ernest, Chula Vista, CA, CA, $14,402.78, Los Angeles College December 1984 $14,906.92, Life College, Marietta, of Chiropractic, Whittier, CA, Moroney, Sharon, Santa Clara, CA, GA, Chiropractic, March 1991 Chiropractic, August 1989 $16,660.48, National College of Parker, Brian T., Simi Valley, CA, Maynard, Jennifer E., Glendora, CA, Chiropractic, Lombard, IL, $24,751.49, Cleveland Chiropractic $56,259.54, Southern Calif Clg of Chiropractic, August 1986 College, Los Angeles, CA, Chiropractic, Pico Rivera, CA, Moroney, William, San Mateo, CA, Chiropractic, December 1988 Chiropractic, December 1988 $21,750.44, Palmer College of Parnell, Aaron L., San Mateo, CA, McGee, Billie J., Simi Valley, CA, Chiropractic West, San Jose, CA, $36,543.46, Life Chiropractic College- $29,043.12, Cleveland Chiropractic Chiropractic, September 1986 West, San Lorenzo, CA, Chiropractic, College, Los Angeles, CA, Mullins, Marilyn E., Placentia, CA, October 1986 Chiropractic, April 1984 $48,602.31, Los Angeles College of Pascal, David S., Santa Cruz, CA, McGinn, Thomas, San Jose, CA, Chiropractic, Whittier, CA, $3,566.52, Cleveland Chiropractic $124,236.17, Palmer College of Chiropractic, April 1984 College, Los Angeles, CA, Chiropractic West, San Jose, CA, Murphy, Debbie C., Ojai, CA, Chiropractic, January 1986 Chiropractic, March 1987 $35,502.40, Los Angeles College of Pellerin, Stephen P., Ahwahnee, CA, McKinlay, George A., Orange, CA, Chiropractic, Whittier, CA, $61,528.62, Southern Calif. Clg. of $23,266.37, Cleveland Chiropractic Chiropractic, August 1986 Chiropractic, Pico Rivera, CA, College, Los Angeles, CA, Nahai, John, Concord, CA, $113,476.45, Chiropractic, April 1986 Chiropractic, August 1988 Life Chiropractic College-West, San Penney, Karen, San Bernardino, CA, McLaughlin, Robert, Sacramento, CA, Lorenzo, CA, Chiropractic, December $14,446.48, Los Angeles College of $39,905.80, Palmer College of 1985 Chiropractic West, San Jose, CA, Navai, Mehdi N., Alhambra, CA, Chiropractic, Whittier, CA, Chiropractic, December 1989 $58,876.59, Cleveland Chiropractic Chiropractic, December 1993 McLean, Lila E., San Lorenzo, CA, College, Los Angeles, CA, Perez, Jesus V., Pomona, CA, $49,153.66, Palmer College of Chiropractic, August 1988 $75,117.87, Cleveland Chiropractic Chiropractic, Davenport, IA, Nedelcove, Deborah E., La Quinta, CA, College, Los Angeles, CA, Chiropractic, June 1987 $20,200.35, Cleveland Chiropractic Chiropractic, July 1984 Melville, Carl, Crestline, CA, College, Los Angeles, CA, Peters, Deborah, Palo Alto, CA, $89,807.54, Los Angeles College of Chiropractic, December 1987 $33,515.65, Palmer College of Chiropractic, Whittier, CA, Nelson, Robert, Palm Desert, CA, Chiropractic West, San Jose, CA, Chiropractic, December 1989 $64,863.74, Cleveland Chiropractic Chiropractic, September 1990 Meriott, Robert B., San Juan Capistrano, College, Los Angeles, CA, Pfeiffer, Arlene, Huntington Beach, CA, CA, $13,818.59, Los Angeles College Chiropractic, April 1988 $7,107.92, Los Angeles College of of Chiropractic, Whittier, CA, O’Connor, Thomas J., Corte Madera, CA, Chiropractic, Whittier, CA, Chiropractic, April 1983 $7,500.84, Life Chiropractic College- Chiropractic, April 1983 Miller, Brad T., Santa Ana, CA, West, San Lorenzo, CA, Chiropractic, Pham, Greg N., Fountain Valley, CA, $16,491.61, Cleveland Chiropractic June 1984 $57,420.15, Southern Calif. Clg. of College, Los Angeles, CA, Oberstein, Lawrence, Santa Rosa, CA, Chiropractic, Pico Rivera, CA, Chiropractic, August 1990 $27,306.83, Life Chiropractic College- Chiropractic, December 1989 Miller, David, Concord, CA, $25,525.00, West, San Lorenzo, CA, Chiropractic, Pilkington, Charles, San Bernardino, Life Chiropractic College-West, San December 1984 CA, $19,225.29, Los Angeles College Lorenzo, CA, Chiropractic, December Oranen, David J., Sacramento, CA, of Chiropractic, Whittier, CA, 1989 $52,790.80, Los Angeles College of Chiropractic, December 1985 Miller, Marilyn E., San Francisco, CA, Chiropractic, Whittier, CA, Pinkerman, James, Temecula, CA, $6,091.62, Life Chiropractic College- Chiropractic, December 1984 $107,376.29, Los Angeles College of West, San Lorenzo, CA, Chiropractic, Overman, Kathleen N., Canoga Park, Chiropractic, Whittier, CA, June 1986 CA, $22,818.60, New York Chiropractic, December 1987 Mitchell, Gregory W., Los Angeles, CA, Chiropractic College, Seneca Falls, Podry, Robert J., La Canada, CA, $103,353.04, Southern Calif. Clg. of NY, Chiropractic, December 1984 $59,357.00, Southern Calif. Clg. of Chiropractic, Pico Rivera, CA, Owens, Robert B., San Fransciso, CA, Chiropractic, Pico Rivera, CA, Chiropractic, May 1988 $9,141.46, Palmer College of Chiropractic, August 1986 14070 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices Pollock, Thomas G., Santa Barbara, CA, Chiropractic, Davenport, IA, West, San Lorenzo, CA, Chiropractic, $75,668.99, Cleveland Chiropractic Chiropractic, September 1984 December 1985 College, Los Angeles, CA, Rios, Emanuel J., San Gabriel, CA, Schluter, Lyle C., Sonoma, CA, Chiropractic, April 1987 $45,323.33, Southern Calif CLG of $34,705.62, Palmer College of Portillo, Carlos, San Jose, CA, Chiropractic, Pico Rivera, CA, Chiropractic West, San Jose, CA, $15,107.79, Palmer College of Chiropractic, August 1988 Chiropractic, December 1983 Chiropractic West, San Jose, CA, Rockmael, Allan, San Francisco, CA, Schow, Kenneth M., Glendale, CA, Chiropractic, June 1986 $84,289.21, Life Chiropractic College- $32,084.08, Los Angeles College of Portugal, Gilbert M., El Toro, CA, West, San Lorenzo, CA, Chiropractic, Chiropractic, Whittier, CA, $2,192.43, Los Angeles College of September 1988 Chiropractic, December 1982 Chiropractic, Whittier, CA, Rodriguez, Consuelo A., San Gabriel, Scott, John, Modesto, CA, $123,349.96, Chiropractic, April 1986 CA, $34,195.24, Cleveland Palmer College of Chiropractic West, Postulka, Perry D., La Mesa, CA, Chiropractic College, Los Angeles, San Jose, CA, Chiropractic, September $20,974.60, Los Angeles College of CA, Chiropractic, September 1984 1985 Chiropractic, Whittier, CA, Rodriguez, Humberto J., La Mirada, CA, Sellers, Lon E., San Diego, CA, Chiropractic, December 1986 $66,279.62, Los Angeles College of $24,739.35, Cleveland Chiropractic Pride, Marcus O., Carson, CA, Chiropractic, Whittier, CA, College, Los Angeles, CA, $82,973.73, Southern Calif. Clg. of Chiropractic, April 1987 Chiropractic, August 1983 Chiropractic, Pico Rivera, CA, Rogers, Guy A., Bakersfield, CA, Shanesfelter, Charles, Saratoga, CA, Chiropractic, August 1987 $61,955.31, Southern Calif CLG of $23,251.19, Southern Calif CLG of Radetic, Pete, Pleasant Hill, CA, Chiropractic, Pico Rivera, CA, Chiropractic, Pico Rivera, CA, $38,211.22, Life Chiropractic College- Chiropractic, April 1990 Chiropractic, December 1989 West, San Lorenzo, CA, Chiropractic, Roloff, Robin, Lakewood, CA, Shapiro, Michael S., Valencia, CA, June 1986 $12,820.84, Cleveland Chiropractic $51,149.97, Los Angeles College of Rahn, Roger S., Agoura, CA, $78,491.03, College, Los Angeles, CA, Chiropractic, Whittier, CA, Los Angeles College of Chiropractic, Chiropractic, April 1988 Chiropractic, April 1985 Whittier, CA, Chiropractic, April 1988 Rolon, Zandra, Santa Cruz, CA, Sharkey, Vincent J., San Francisco, CA, Rains, Emory S., Balboa, CA, $18,887.16, Cleveland Chiropractic $4,737.17, Life Chiropractic College- $29,499.71, Los Angeles College of College, Los Angeles, CA, West, San Lorenzo, CA, Chiropractic, Chiropractic, Whittier, CA, Chiropractic, April 1989 September 1986 Shouka, Mohammed, Yorba Linda, CA, Chiropractic, April 1983 Romer, Cheryl C., Fresno, CA, $22,218.59, Los Angeles College of Ramsey, Debora A., Saugus, CA, $57,171.30, Cleveland Chiropractic Chiropractic, Whittier, CA, $31,124.97, Cleveland Chiropractic College, Los Angeles, CA, Chiropractic, December 1988 College, Los Angeles, CA, Chiropractic, December 1983 Sibley, Jane E., Tustin, CA, $63,545.24, Romo, Glen A., Walnut, CA, $5,816.38, Chiropractic, December 1985 Los Angeles College of Chiropractic, Ratliff, Cynthia, Santa Cruz, CA, Cleveland Chiropractic College, Los Whittier, CA, Chiropractic, April 1988 $49,076.95, Palmer College of Angeles, CA, Chiropractic, August Simovich, Paul, Huntington Beach, CA, Chiropractic West, San Jose, CA, 1988 $26,054.25, Los Angeles College of Chiropractic, December 1987 Rosenfeld, Jeffre B., Santa Monica, CA, Chiropractic, Whittier, CA, Rayas-Felix, Magdalena, Los Angeles, $40,151.56, Cleveland Chiropractic Chiropractic, April 1988 CA, $16,845.25, Los Angeles College College, Los Angeles, CA, Smith Jr, Carl A., Garden Grove, CA, of Chiropractic, Whittier, CA, Chiropractic, April 1986 $118,950.11, Los Angeles College of Chiropractic, April 1988 Rothenberg-Aisenberg, Mary Ellen B., Chiropractic, Whittier, CA, Reason, Richard, Goleta, CA, Chula Vista, CA, $107,111.88, Los Chiropractic, December 1987 $120,199.63, Southern Calif CLG of Angeles College of Chiropractic, Smith, Steven K., Venice, CA, Chiropractic, Pico Rivera, CA, Whittier, CA, Chiropractic, August $54,960.32, Western States Chiropractic, April 1987 1985 Chiropractic College, Portland, OR, Redd, Timothy J., San Dimas, CA, Rude, Kirby K., Pasadena, CA, Chiropractic, June 1988 $122,091.69, Southern Calif CLG of $36,104.38, Southern Calif CLG of Snavely, Danny H., Laguna Niguel, CA, Chiropractic, Pico Rivera, CA, Chiropractic, Pico Rivera, CA, $71,492.53, Los Angeles College of Chiropractic, April 1987 Chiropractic, December 1987 Chiropractic, Whittier, CA, Reed, Robert W., San Bernardino, CA, Ruiz, Henry S., Los Angeles, CA, Chiropractic, April 1986 $50,726.47, Southern Calif CLG of $114,613.71, Southern Calif CLG of Souza, Robert R., Costa Mesa, CA, Chiropractic, Pico Rivera, CA, Chiropractic, Pico Rivera, CA, $109,847.09, Los Angeles College of Chiropractic, December 1986 Chiropractic, August 1986 Chiropractic, Whittier, CA, Reilly, Ann M., Richmond, CA, Sakalis, Gregory G., Glendale, CA, Chiropractic, April 1984 $24,092.06, Life Chiropractic College- $362.40, Southern Calif CLG of Spatrisano, Bonnie, Los Banos, CA, West, San Lorenzo, CA, Chiropractic, Chiropractic, Pico Rivera, CA, $81,622.18, Cleveland Chiropractic December 1986 Chiropractic, August 1987 College, Los Angeles, CA, Reynolds, Bob, Bakersfield, CA, Sargent, John F., Los Angeles, CA, Chiropractic, August 1985 $44,649.43, Cleveland Chiropractic $70,616.79, Southern Calif CLG of Spencer, Johnnie J., Baker, CA, College, Los Angeles, CA, Chiropractic, Pico Rivera, CA, $83,735.55, Life College, Marietta, Chiropractic, August 1986 Chiropractic, August 1986 GA, Chiropractic, December 1985 Richardson, Justin W., Canoga Park, CA, Schear, Darrell, Laguna Hills, CA, Stevens, Don M., Sacramento, CA, $10,379.04, Cleveland Chiropractic $132,229.72, Cleveland Chiropractic $138,840.25, Los Angeles College of College, Los Angeles, CA, College, Los Angeles, CA, Chiropractic, Whittier, CA, Chiropractic, December 1983 Chiropractic, December 1984 Chiropractic, December 1985 Richins, Craig H., Fresno, CA, Schluter, Kathleen K., Ukiah, CA, Stevens, Michael N., Los Gatos, CA, $69,537.63, Palmer College of $24,906.36, Life Chiropractic College- $44,650.24, Palmer College of Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices 14071 Chiropractic West, San Jose, CA, Theobald, Richard C., San Diego, CA, Chiropractic, Pico Rivera, CA, Chiropractic, December 1985 $35,618.60, Palmer College of Chiropractic, April 1990 Stevens, Milton W., Pittsburg, CA, Chiropractic, Davenport, IA, Weiss, Gwenn M., Cupertino, CA, $118,833.98, Life Chiropractic Chiropractic, October 1988 $26,660.74, Palmer College of College-West, San Lorenzo, CA, Thompson, Donald D., Novato, CA, Chiropractic West, San Jose, CA, Chiropractic, March 1985 $7,811.91, Life Chiropractic College- Chiropractic, September 1986 Stevens, Tamara S., Hayward, CA, West, San Lorenzo, CA, Chiropractic, Westing, Denise, Alameda, CA, $99,699.44, Life Chiropractic College- June 1989 $29,320.09, Life Chiropractic College- West, San Lorenzo, CA, Chiropractic, Thompson, James D., Fair Oaks, CA, West, San Lorenzo, CA, Chiropractic, March 1987 $112,683.06, Palmer College of December 1987 Stewart, Jeannie, Costa Mesa, CA, Chiropractic West, San Jose, CA, White, Judith U., Newport Beach, CA, $16,077.80, Los Angeles College of Chiropractic, March 1987 $18,740.49, Southern Calif Clg of Chiropractic, Whittier, CA, Thornton, James G., Nevada City, CA, Chiropractic, Pico Rivera, CA, Chiropractic, April 1984 $3,792.89, Logan College of Chiropractic, January 1985 Stiga, John P., Santa Cruz, CA, Chiropractic, Chesterfield, MO, Whittlesey, James B., Novato, CA, $8,062.12, Life College, Marietta, GA, Chiropractic, January 1983 $24,516.74, Life Chiropractic College- Chiropractic, March 1982 Turner, Nancy N., Costa Mesa, CA, West, San Lorenzo, CA, Chiropractic, Stone, Steven, Piedmont, CA, $16,116.67, Life Chiropractic College- September 1986 $12,522.59, Life Chiropractic College- West, San Lorenzo, CA, Chiropractic, Willard, Teresa D., Long Beach, CA, west, San Lorenzo, CA, Chiropractic, December 1985 $8,205.72, Cleveland Chiropractic December 1990 Vail, Warren, Encinitas, CA, $10,551.69, College, Los Angeles, CA, Studer, Jonathan B., San Jose, CA, Life Chiropractic College-West, San Chiropractic, December 1988 $41,001.05, Palmer College of Lorenzo, CA, Chiropractic, March Williams, Duane D., Livermore, CA, Chiropractic West, San Jose, CA, 1989 $46,332.67, Palmer College of Chiropractic, December 1986 Van Gorder, Kurt F., Temecula, CA, Chiropractic, Davenport, IA, Sturgeon, Margaret M., Oakland, CA, $55,817.80, Los Angeles College of Chiropractic, September 1984 $33,727.88, Life Chiropractic College- Chiropractic, Whittier, CA, Williams, Joseph, San Diego, CA, West, San Lorenzo, CA, Chiropractic, Chiropractic, April 1989 $15,802.40, Palmer College of December 1985 Vardanian, Michael A., Fullerton, CA, Chiropractic West, San Jose, CA, Styler, Richard, Fair Oaks, CA, $47,094.43, Los Angeles College of Chiropractic, December 1984 Wymore, Patrick J., Van Nuys, CA, $9,948.57, Palmer College of Chiropractic, Whittier, CA, $70,380.64, Los Angeles College of Chiropractic West, San Jose, CA, Chiropractic, April 1985 Vareles, Richard, Sherman Oaks, CA, Chiropractic, Whittier, CA, Chiropractic, September 1989 Sullivan, Joseph, Burbank, CA, $53,917.31, Los Angeles College of Chiropractic, September 1986 Chiropractic, Whittier, CA, Yarchover, Richard, Sylmar, CA, $57,148.42, Los Angeles College of Chiropractic, December 1985 $19,230.07, Los Angeles College of Chiropractic, Whittier, CA, Vega, Javier J., Montclair, CA, Chiropractic, Whittier, CA, Chiropractic, December 1986 $11,714.02, Southern Calif Clg of Chiropractic, April 1987 Super, Douglas D J, Hayward, CA, Chiropractic, Pico Rivera, CA, Yniguez, Alma B., San Francisco, CA, $58,323.18, Life Chiropractic College- Chiropractic, December 1987 $83,078.54, Palmer College of West, San Lorenzo, CA, Chiropractic, Vessels, Steven, Loma Linda, CA, Chiropractic West, San Jose, CA, December 1990 $51,382.77, Los Angeles College of Chiropractic, May 1989 Sutton, Brian, Denuba, CA, $53,319.27, Chiropractic, Whittier, CA, Yniguez, Ramon, Sunnyvale, CA, Southern Calif Clg of Chiropractic, Chiropractic, April 1983 $18,849.52, Palmer College of Pico Rivera, CA, Chiropractic, April Viloria, Jenifer A., Los Angeles, CA, Chiropractic West, San Jose, CA, 1986 $75,132.17, Southern Calif Clg of Chiropractic, December 1985 Tamimi, Musa A., Panorama City, CA, Chiropractic, Pico Rivera, CA, Zachary, John K., Los Angeles, CA, $12,153.20, Cleveland Chiropractic Chiropractic, August 1987 $37,152.10, Southern Calif Clg of College, Los Angeles, CA, Vlaskovich Jr, William, Santa Clara, CA, Chiropractic, Pico Rivera, CA, Chiropractic, December 1987 $96,662.24, Palmer College of Chiropractic, August 1988 Taylor, Brett, Mission Viejo, CA, Chiropractic West, San Jose, CA, Zewde, Worku, Marina Del Rey, CA, $48,654.87, Southern Calif Clg of Chiropractic, June 1987 $38,981.14, Cleveland Chiropractic Chiropractic, Pico Rivera, CA, Walls-Fenwick, Jan D., San Bernardino, College, Los Angeles, CA, Chiropractic, September 1986 CA, $84,133.46, Southern Calif Clg of Chiropractic, April 1989 Taylor, John E., Placentia, CA, Chiropractic, Pico Rivera, CA, Zoodsma, Kenneth, Del Mar, CA, $9,857.99, Los Angeles College of Chiropractic, April 1988 $38,013.48, National College of Chiropractic, Whittier, CA, Walsh, Richard J., Los Angeles, CA, Chiropractic, Lombard, IL, Chiropractic, April 1982 $22,308.80, Life Chiropractic College- Chiropractic, August 1986 Taylor, Julie A., Glendale, CA, West, San Lorenzo, CA, Chiropractic, Zydervelt, Hannah H W, Pacific Grove, $28,694.67, Cleveland Chiropractic December 1986 CA, $37,319.51, Palmer College of College, Los Angeles, CA, Wanke, Glenn P., Fullerton, CA, Chiropractic, Davenport, IA, Chiropractic, April 1984 $92,975.05, Los Angeles College of Chiropractic, March 1984 Terry, William H., Fallbrook, CA, Chiropractic, Whittier, CA, $61,472.73, Los Angeles College of Chiropractic, April 1987 Clinical Psychology Chiropractic, Whittier, CA, Ward, Michael L., Mountain View, CA, Armstrong, Phyllis, Los Angeles, CA, Chiropractic, April 1984 $41,031.58, Palmer College of $21,288.72, California Sch of Prof Teter, Steven S., San Leandro, CA, Chiropractic West, San Jose, CA, Psych, Alhambra, CA, Clinical $3,276.49, Western States Chiropractic, October 1984 Psychology, May 1990 Chiropractic College, Portland, OR, Wedmeyer, Ron A., Bakersfield, CA, Behman, Patricia, Studio City, CA, Chiropractic, March 1983 $8,648.75, Southern Calif Clg of $46,587.40, California Sch of Prof 14072 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices Psych, Alhambra, CA, Clinical Harris, Carole I., San Diego, CA, Fresno, CA, Clinical Psychology, Psychology, September 1986. $20,884.14, California Sch of Prof August 1986. Block, Robbyn K., Encino, CA, Psych San Diego, San Diego, CA, McGregor, Floyd, Inglewood, CA, $76,935.34, California Sch of Prof Clinical Psychology, June 1985. $38,619.36, California Sch of Prof Psych, Alhambra, CA, Clinical Herrington, Robert L., San Diego, CA, Psych, Alhambra, CA, Clinical Psychology, July 1988. $21,450.56, California Sch of Prof Psychology, July 1987. Blomeley, Robert R., Foothill Farms, Psych San Diego, San Diego, CA, McMahon, Kathleen, El Monte, CA, CA, $8,628.14, California Sch of Prof Clinical Psychology, May 1992. $25,048.44, California Sch of Prof Psych San Diego, San Diego, CA, Howell, Nicole, Thousand Oaks, CA, Psych, Alhambra, CA, Clinical Clinical Psychology, June 1983. $108,002.25, California Sch of Prof Psychology, May 1990. Boulware, Susan S., Sausalito, CA, Psych, Alhambra, CA, Clinical Moya, Eva, Los Angeles, CA, $58,430.73, California Sch of Prof Psychology, July 1987. $29,351.20, Univ of Denver, Denver, Psych, Alameda, CA, Clinical Inesi, Gino E., San Francisco, CA, CO, Clinical Psychology, August Psychology, July 1986. $12,375.78, Pacific Graduate School 1983. Cadavid-Hannon, Ester, Culver City, CA, of Psychology, Palo Alto, CA, Clinical Musquiz, Elizabeth E., Murrieta, CA, $41,425.36, California Sch of Prof Psychology, April 1990. $6,137.45, California Sch of Prof Psych, Alhambra, CA, Clinical Jackson, Cynthia, Laguna Beach, CA, Psych, Alhambra, CA, Clinical Psychology, July 1988. $63,980.68, Fuller Theological Psychology, June 1987. Cappelletty, Gordon G., Fresno, CA, Seminary, Pasadena, CA, Clinical Pete, Patricia, San Diego, CA, $7,513.31, California Sch of Prof Psychology, June 1989. $46,037.48, California Sch of Prof Psych Fresno, Fresno, CA, Clinical Jacobs, Delores A., San Diego, CA, Psych Fresno, Fresno, CA, Clinical Psychology, August 1986. $66,000.13, California Sch of Prof Psychology, June 1988. Carleton, Raymond, San Diego, CA, Psych San Diego, San Diego, CA, Perez, Mary Ellen, Burbank, CA, $6,283.83, California Sch of Prof Clinical Psychology, May 1989. $25,547.14, Fuller Theological Psych San Diego, San Diego, CA, Jacobson, Todd, San Diego, CA, Seminary, Pasadena, CA, Clinical Clinical Psychology, May 1990. $106,465.41, California Sch of Prof Psychology, June 1988. Chalgujian, Hilda, Palm Desert, CA, Psych San Diego, San Diego, CA, Phillips, Constance, Oakland, CA, $63,970.43, California Sch of Prof Clinical Psychology, May 1989. $16,942.90, California Sch of Prof Psych Fresno, Fresno, CA, Clinical King, Gloria, San Leandro, CA, Psych, Alhambra, CA, Clinical Psychology, June 1989. $14,966.37, California Sch of Prof Psychology, May 1989. Chun, John H., San Diego, CA, Psych, Alameda, CA, Clinical Phillips, John, Oakhurst, CA, $44,811.60, California Sch of Prof Psychology, June 1990. $58,742.17, California Sch of Prof Psych San Diego, San Diego, CA, Lafitte, William, Newport Beach, CA, Psych Fresno, Fresno, CA, Clinical Clinical Psychology, May 1989. $54,822.84, California Sch of Prof Psychology, August 1986. Clark, Minola, San Diego, CA, Psych San Diego, San Diego, CA, Pust, Keith W., Lake Elsinore, CA, $92,623.19, California Sch of Prof Clinical Psychology, May 1987. $35,899.87, Biola University, La Psych San Diego, San Diego, CA, Lataille, Edward, San Diego, CA, Mirada, CA, Clinical Psychology, May Clinical Psychology, May 1991. $113,499.98, California Sch of Prof 1986. Corwin, Mary, Modesta, CA, $21,787.75, Psych San Diego, San Diego, CA, Quigley, Michael, San Mateo, CA, California Sch of Prof Psych Fresno, Clinical Psychology, May 1987. $28,792.95, Pacific Graduate School Fresno, CA, Clinical Psychology, Lender, Joyce A., Anaheim, CA, of Psychology, Palo Alto, CA, Clinical August 1986. $132,750.69, California Sch of Prof Psychology, June 1992. Cox, Charles, Palm Springs, CA, Psych, Alhambra, CA, Clinical Richardson, Katherine, Los Angeles, CA, $25,026.92, Yeshiva University, New Psychology, July 1987. $70,163.04, Biola University, La York, NY, Clinical Psychology, June Lin, Sherri, West Hollywood, CA, Mirada, CA, Clinical Psychology, June 1988. $17,367.21, California Sch of Prof 1988 Davis, Clarie L., Calipatria, CA, Psych, Alhambra, CA, Clinical Rivas, Mary L., Artesia, CA, $9,737.70, $22,172.78, California Sch of Prof Psychology, May 1990. Finch University of Health Sciences, Psych, Alhambra, CA, Clinical Loranger, Paul G., Sunset Beach, CA, North Chicago, IL, Clinical Psychology, July 1985. $51,717.73, California Sch of Prof Psychology, June 1989 Esenten, Teri A., Palos Verdes, CA, Psych, Alhambra, CA, Clinical Shields, Judith, San Diego, CA, $52,495.98, California Sch of Prof Psychology, May 1990. $82,694.39, California Sch of Prof Psych San Diego, San Diego, CA, Lyons, Lawrence, Del Mar, CA, Psych San Diego, San Diego, CA, Clinical Psychology, June 1986. $19,545.63, California Sch of Prof Clinical Psychology, May 1989 Gaston, Patricia S., Dana Point, CA, Psych San Diego, San Diego, CA, Smukler, Evie L., Sherman Oaks, CA, $138,085.68, California Sch of Prof Clinical Psychology, July 1983. $18,818.46, California Sch of Prof Psych San Diego, San Diego, CA, Mackabee, La Mildred, Los Angeles, CA, Psych, Alhambra, CA, Clinical Clinical Psychology, June 1986. $52,461.72, California Sch of Prof Psychology, July 1987 Gonzalez, Maria, Clovis, CA, $2,537.34, Psych, Alhambra, CA, Clinical Spenser, Angela C., Oceanside, CA, California Sch of Prof Psych Fresno, Psychology, May 1989. $107,447.10, California Sch of Prof Fresno, CA, Clinical Psychology, June McCaul, Brad J., Red Bluff, CA, Psych San Diego, San Diego, CA, 1990. $54,558.78, California Sch of Prof Clinical Psychology, May 1988 Gonzalez, Rocio R., Los Angeles, CA, Psych San Diego, San Diego, CA, Stanford, Jeannie, Santa Monica, CA, $45,163.78, California Sch of Prof Clinical Psychology, June 1984. $12,009.06, California Sch of Prof Psych, Alhambra, CA, Clinical McCarter, Michele A., San Diego, CA, Psych, Alhambra, CA, Clinical Psychology, July 1987. $76,864.18, California Sch of Prof Psychology, July 1987 Gullotta, Geraldine P., Escondido, CA, Psych San Diego, San Diego, CA, Steder, Sandra, San Francisco, CA, $49,944.96, California Sch of Prof Clinical Psychology, May 1987. $33,541.19, California Sch of Prof Psych San Diego, San Diego, CA, McDiarmid, Jim, Merced, CA, $5,148.76, Psych, Alameda, CA, Clinical Clinical Psychology, June 1983. California Sch of Prof Psych Fresno, Psychology, July 1988 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices 14073 Stevenson, Teresa M., Los Angeles, CA, California, Los Angeles, CA, Hoehn, James D., Newbury Park, CA, $14,976.51, California Sch of Prof Dentistry, May 1987 $84,687.68, Loma Linda University, Psych, Alhambra, CA, Clinical Edwards, Gregory C., Los Angeles, CA, Loma Linda, CA, Dentistry, June 1985 Psychology, July 1987 $27,256.32, Howard University, Honnlee, Michael, Rowland Heights, Veliquette, John J., Laguna Niguel, CA, Washington, DC, Dentistry, May 1983 CA, $3,554.29, Loyola University $141,541.72, California Sch of Prof Eslao, Caesar, Lomita, CA, $63,873.62, Chicago, Chicago, IL, Dentistry, Psych San Diego, San Diego, CA, Univ of Southern California, Los December 1990 Clinical Psychology, May 1987 Angeles, CA, Dentistry, May 1990 Hurley, Ronnie L., Carlsbad, CA, Venners, Angela, Signal Hill, CA, Formaker, James, West Hollywood, CA, $130,686.00, Washington University, $6,590.63, California Sch of Prof $35,702.22, Univ of Southern St Louis, MO, Dentistry, May 1985 Psych, Alhambra, CA, Clinical California, Los Angeles, CA, Husbands, Michael, Chino Hills, CA, Psychology, July 1988 Dentistry, May 1986 $163,482.98, Loma Linda University, Wolter, Carl, Pasadena, CA, $43,534.91, Foroutanzad, John, Los Angeles, CA, Loma Linda, CA, Dentistry, Fuller Theological Seminary, $227,211.75, Univ of The Pacific, San September 1983 Johnson, Frederic, Los Angeles, CA, Pasadena, CA, Clinical Psychology, Francisco, CA, Dentistry, June 1984 $40,703.62, Temple University, June 1985 Frybarger, Francis, Lemon Grove, CA, Wood, Carol, Santa Monica, CA, Philadelphia, PA, Dentistry, May 1992 $16,642.64, Washington University, St $82,501.86, California Sch of Prof Jones, Roger A., Santa Cruz, CA, Louis, MO, Dentistry, May 1991 Psych, Alhambra, CA, Clinical $107,178.83, Meharry Medical Garcia, Gilberto, Long Beach, CA, Psychology, December 1987 College, Nashville, TN, Dentistry, May Yurkovich, Mark, Hollywood, CA, $115,048.02, Univ of The Pacific, San 1985 $34,853.10, California Sch of Prof Francisco, CA, Dentistry, June 1989 Kelly, Andrew, Los Angeles, CA, Psych Fresno, Fresno, CA, Clinical Georgeson, Ronald M., Kerman, CA, $44,395.24, Howard University, Psychology, August 1986 $21,618.90, Loma Linda University, Washington, DC, Dentistry, May 1983 Loma Linda, CA, Dentistry, August Kent, Donald, San Francisco, CA, Dentistry 1984 $146,716.15, Univ of Southern Benavidez, Charles, Elk Grove, CA, Ghamary, Ghafoor G., San Diego, CA, California, Los Angeles, CA, $123,928.79, Univ of Southern $5,556.44, Georgetown University, Dentistry, May 1985 California, Los Angeles, CA, Washington, DC, Dentistry, May 1984 Kerstetter, Gary A., Vista, CA, Dentistry, May 1991 Goldman, Morton H., San Diego, CA, $105,593.88, Loma Linda University, Berry, Scott T., West Lake Village, CA, $13,011.13, West Virginia University, Loma Linda, CA, Dentistry, $127,737.32, Washington University, Morgantown, WV, Dentistry, July September 1983 St Louis, MO, Dentistry, May 1984 1985 Kim, Kwang-Jim, Glendale, CA, Borden, Mark G., Modesto, CA, Gomes, Marshall E., Canyon Lake, CA, $60,481.42, Univ of Southern $151,645.81, Loyola University $131,626.75, Loma Linda University, California, Los Angeles, CA, Chicago, Chicago, IL, Dentistry, May Loma Linda, CA, Dentistry, June 1985 Dentistry, May 1984 1982 Gonzales, Edward J., Los Angeles, CA, Kim, Sung O., Los Angeles, CA, Broschinsky, Clifford, Walnut Creek, $181,161.54, Boston University $72,198.40, Univ of Southern CA, $59,254.52, Univ of Missouri Medical Center, Boston, MA, California, Los Angeles, CA, Kansas City, Kansas City, MO, Dentistry, May 1988 Dentistry, May 1985 Dentistry, May 1989 Gray, Scott, Hemet, CA, $52,686.64, Klim, David D., Redlands, CA, Calloway, Vollie A., Stockton, CA, Univ of The Pacific, San Francisco, $95,539.21, Loma Linda University, $149,214.86, Meharry Medical CA, Dentistry, June 1988 Loma Linda, CA, Dentistry, June 1984 College, Nashville, TN, Dentistry, May Greene, David A., Loma Linda, CA, Kurts, Tedd R., Mountain View, CA, 1985 $201,950.89, Loma Linda University, $34,961.73, Loma Linda University, Chun, Denise, San Mateo, CA, Loma Linda, CA, Dentistry, June 1983 Loma Linda, CA, Dentistry, June 1986 Landis, Charles, Chico, CA, $4,359.21, $33,525.54, Univ of The Pacific, San Gyaami, Opanin, Grand Terrace, CA, Loma Linda University, Loma Linda, Francisco, CA, Dentistry, June 1991 $225,231.56, Loma Linda University, Clifford, Lawrence K., Santa Rosa, CA, CA, Dentistry, June 1983 Loma Linda, CA, Dentistry, June 1983 $36,576.84, Loma Linda University, Lemelle-Love, Shelia A., Poway, CA, Hall, David, Capitola, CA, $58,330.81, Loma Linda, CA, Dentistry, $88,230.71, Univ of Southern Univ of California San Francisco, San September 1980 California, Los Angeles, CA, Francisco, CA, Dentistry, June 1982 Comer, Michael J., Elk Grove, CA, Dentistry, May 1987 $34,903.81, Washington University, St Harrison, Rodney B., Montclair, CA, Lim, Jhang H., Los Angeles, CA, Louis, MO, Dentistry, May 1989 $116,942.48, Meharry Medical $101,689.04, Univ of Southern Cutts, David P., Temecula, CA, College, Nashville, TN, Dentistry, May California, Los Angeles, CA, $44,583.15, Loma Linda University, 1983 Dentistry, May 1984 Loma Linda, CA, Dentistry, June 1983 Hempel, Jeffrey D., Acton, CA, Luckey, John M., San Diego, CA, Dangerfield, Alan N., Santa Clara, CA, $28,677.01, Loma Linda University, $88,633.08, Loma Linda University, $132,484.16, Georgetown University, Loma Linda, CA, Dentistry, June 1980 Loma Linda, CA, Dentistry, June 1981 Washington, DC, Dentistry, May 1983 Henken, Edmond H., San Clemente, CA, Mann, Walter, Murrieta, CA, $5,368.29, Daniels, William W., Roseville, CA, $56,826.96, Loma Linda University, Univ of The Pacific, San Francisco, $12,444.04, Tufts University, Boston, Loma Linda, CA, Dentistry, June 1984 CA, Dentistry, June 1982 MA, Dentistry, June 1982 Hill, David, San Jose, CA, $36,254.79, Marshall, Dauna, Los Angeles, CA, Delappe, Elizabeth, San Jose, CA, Tufts University, Boston, MA, $74,131.34, Howard University, $21,313.16, Univ of Pennsylvania, Dentistry, June 1986 Washington, DC, Dentistry, May 1985 Philadelphia, PA, Dentistry, January Hnyla, Celestine A., San Diego, CA, Marth, Tedie, San Marino, CA, 1985 $147,042.18, Case Western Reserve $12,155.38, Univ of Southern Done, Byron, Anaheim, CA, University, Cleveland, OH, Dentistry, California, Los Angeles, CA, $126,319.95, Univ of Southern May 1987 Dentistry, June 1982 14074 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices McFee, Donald, Fontana, CA, Ramirez, Ralph, El Monte, CA, Spencer, Durwood, Bakersfield, CA, $29,188.00, Univ of Alabama $14,017.88, Univ of Southern $57,940.28, Univ of The Pacific, San Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, California, Los Angeles, CA, Francisco, CA, Dentistry, June 1989 Dentistry, June 1990 Dentistry, May 1985 Stewart, John R., Orange, CA, $3,247.36, McLaughlin, Harry L., San Diego, CA, Richards, Richard, Alameda, CA, Univ of The Pacific, San Francisco, $12,422.16, Univ of Southern $7,043.93, Univ of Southern CA, Dentistry, June 1985 California, Los Angeles, CA, California, Los Angeles, CA, Sullivan, John K., Tulare, CA, Dentistry, June 1984 Dentistry, May 1983 $128,377.72, Univ of The Pacific, San Medina, Jacqueline J., Los Angeles, CA, Riveroy, Isaac, Walnut, CA, Francisco, CA, Dentistry, September $16,320.07, Univ of California San $117,282.24, Boston University 1984 Francisco, San Francisco, CA, Medical Center, Boston, MA, Swen, John J., Orangevale, CA, Dentistry, June 1981 Dentistry, May 1989 $40,108.20, Loma Linda University, Memmott, Dana B., Signal Hill, CA, Roberts, Martha E., San Rafael, CA, Loma Linda, CA, Dentistry, June 1986 $11,308.99, Univ of Southern $32,332.04, Univ of California San Taylor, Tamra, San Clemente, CA, California, Los Angeles, CA, Francisco, San Francisco, CA, $38,583.46, Loma Linda University, Dentistry, May 1984 Dentistry, June 1982 Loma Linda, CA, Dentistry, June 1984 Miller, Guy M., Wrightwood, CA, Rucker, David D., San Mateo, CA, Tracy, James M., San Jose, CA, $194,037.15, Loma Linda University, $240,754.38, Univ of The Pacific, San $46,458.62, Georgetown University, Loma Linda, CA, Dentistry, December Francisco, CA, Dentistry, June 1985 Washington, DC, Dentistry, May 1979 1982 Ruffner, Timothy E., Ventura, CA, Turner, Portia D., Inglewood, CA, Miller, William, Los Angeles, CA, $155,878.56, Loma Linda University, $5,432.54, Howard University, $36,162.74, Univ of Texas Hlth Sci Loma Linda, CA, Dentistry, June 1985 Washington, DC, Dentistry, May 1986 Cntr San Antonio, San Antonio, TX, Saliano, David D., North Hollywood, Valenton, Francisco D., Sacramento, CA, Dentistry, May 1984 CA, $143,327.11, Univ of Southern $17,723.01, Univ of California San Miner, Michael W., Irvine, CA, California, Los Angeles, CA, Francisco, San Francisco, CA, $150,459.67, Tufts University, Boston, Dentistry, May 1984 Dentistry, June 1984 MA, Dentistry, June 1986 Sanchez-Spitzer, Alice, Los Angeles, Vazagov, Zachial, Arcadia, CA, Moore, Derek D., Santa Ana, CA, CA, $54,626.78, Univ of California $178,596.77, Tufts University, Boston, $11,471.41, Fairleigh Dickinson Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, MA, Dentistry, May 1988 University, Teaneck, NJ, Dentistry, Dentistry, June 1982 Vergara, Steven D., Loma Linda, CA, Santucci, Gerald, Walnut Creek, CA, May 1986 $83,568.10, Loma Linda University, Nguyen, Kien-Trinh T., San Jose, CA, $28,303.06, Univ of Southern Loma Linda, CA, Dentistry, June 1984 $9,795.90, Virginia Commonwealth California, Los Angeles, CA, Wainwright, Mark, Oakland, CA, University, Richmond, VA, Dentistry, Dentistry, May 1983 $18,042.93, Univ of Missouri Kansas May 1987 Schneider, Harry, Palm Desert, CA, Nichols, Marcus, Culver City, CA, $250,248.83, Loma Linda University, City, Kansas City, MO, Dentistry, June $42,215.07, Case Western Reserve Loma Linda, CA, Dentistry, March 1989 University, Cleveland, OH, Dentistry, 1985 Warner, Arthur, Fremont, CA, May 1984 Sevilla, Dana, Hayward, CA, $8,572.69, $49,210.60, Case Western Reserve Nowry, Remond, Valley Village, CA, Univ of California San Francisco, San University, Cleveland, OH, Dentistry, $96,421.15, Univ of Southern Francisco, CA, Dentistry, June 1988 May 1984 California, Los Angeles, CA, Sevrean, Joseph J., Pomona, CA, Weems, John, Visalia, CA, $78,939.85, Dentistry, May 1991 $2,794.31, Creighton University, Emory University, Atlanta, GA, Pattendien, Sharon J., San Francisco, Omaha, NE, Dentistry, May 1989 Dentistry, May 1986 CA, $137,101.24, Fairleigh Dickinson Shaw, Michael P., Fremont, CA, Wheadon, Scott, San Jose, CA, University, Teaneck, NJ, Dentistry, $111,810.71, Marquette University, $54,194.47, Univ of Southern May 1987 Milwaukee, WI, Dentistry, May 1983 California, Los Angeles, CA, Penn, Dennis, Carlsbad, CA, $6,148.61, Sheppard, Gordon L., Ceres, CA, Dentistry, May 1986 Tufts University, Boston, MA, $67,094.01, Univ of Southern Wright, Ronald L., Los Angeles, CA, Dentistry, June 1980 California, Los Angeles, CA, $2,567.86, Meharry Medical College, Peterson, Kirk J., Long Beach, CA, Dentistry, May 1988 Nashville, TN, Dentistry, May 1990 $66,882.10, Tufts University, Boston, Shervin, Amir H., Los Angeles, CA, Yauman, Charles C., Mountain View, MA, Dentistry, May 1987 $54,233.75, Univ of Southern CA, $11,101.31, Univ of California Pierce, John, San Diego, CA, $2,525.07, California, Los Angeles, CA, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, Univ of Missouri Kansas City, Kansas Dentistry, May 1985 Dentistry, June 1983 City, MO, Dentistry, April 1982 Shin, Hui-Yong, Los Angeles, CA, Zachary, Floyd E., Live Oak, CA, Portales, Ramon, San Pedro, CA, $58,739.09, Univ of Southern $29,692.02, Loma Linda University, $8,038.15, Ohio State University, California, Los Angeles, CA, Loma Linda, CA, Dentistry, June 1981 Columbus, OH, Dentistry, June 1985 Dentistry, May 1989 Zangeneh Dane, Zahra, Encino, CA, Price, Steve V., Los Angeles, CA, Shinsato, Wade A., Sun Valley, CA, $72,534.13, Fairleigh Dickinson $3,558.06, Univ of California Los $66,847.27, Univ of Pennsylvania, University, Teaneck, NJ, Dentistry, Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, Dentistry, Philadelphia, PA, Dentistry, June May 1989 June 1984 1987 Pryor III, Cornelius M., Los Angeles, CA, Silva, Bradley K., Dana Point, CA, Health Administration $10,727.05, Howard University, $74,272.64, New York University, Fleming, Joseph J., Hayward, CA, Washington, DC, Dentistry, May 1982 New York, NY, Dentistry, June 1984 $43,037.98, Trinity University, San Rahmati, Behnam, Laguna Hills, CA, Snipes, Steven, San Marcos, CA, Antonio, TX, Health Administration, $123,041.59, Univ of Southern $9,111.74, Univ of Southern June 1987 California, Los Angeles, CA, California, Los Angeles, CA, Martin, David D.C., San Diego, CA, Dentistry, May 1987 Dentistry, June 1981 $27,617.33, Washington University, St Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices 14075 Louis, MO, Health Administration, the Pacific, Pomona, CA, Osteopathy, California, Los Angeles, CA, May 1985 June 1989. Pharmacy, May 1988. Marshall, William E., Newbury Park, Osayamen, Matthew, San Diego, CA, Optometry CA, $148,618.99, College of Osteo $57,934.64, Univ of Southern Crandon, David, Los Alamitos, CA, Med of the Pacific, Pomona, CA, California, Los Angeles, CA, $55,338.92, Southern Calif College of Osteopathy, June 1987. Pharmacy, May 1987. Optometry, Fullerton, CA, Optometry, Maynard, Charles D., El Cajon, CA, Ramos, Juliana J., San Pedro, CA, May 1988 $13,207.69, College of Osteo Med of $40,018.53, Massachusetts College of Davidek, Rosali, Alta Loma, CA, the Pacific, Pomona, CA, Osteopathy, Pharmacy, Boston, MA, Pharmacy, $127,426.37, Southern Calif College of June 1983. May 1983. Optometry, Fullerton, CA, Optometry, Mendelson, Sol, Alta Loma, CA, Taylor, Roger R., Foster City, CA, May 1988 $31,081.37, College of Osteo Med of $46,060.25, Massachusetts College of Falletti-Borell, Giovanni, San Diego, CA, the Pacific, Pomona, CA, Osteopathy, Pharmacy, Boston, MA, Pharmacy, $76,230.65, Inter American Univ of June 1982. June 1985. PR, San Juan, PR, Optometry, June Mitchell, Ralph, Alta Loma, CA, Tran, Ba, Milpitas, CA, $5,439.97, 1984 $74,089.12, College of Osteo Med of Temple University, Philadelphia, PA, Litten, Laura L., Orange, CA, the Pacific, Pomona, CA, Osteopathy, Pharmacy, June 1987. $99,280.87, Southern Calif College of June 1991. Williams, Patricia, Los Angeles, CA, Optometry, Fullerton, CA, Optometry, Patel, Harikrushna S., Inglewood, CA, $9,136.72, Drake University, Des May 1989 $38,746.27, Univ of Osteo Medical & Moines, IA, Pharmacy, December Mast, Barry, Camarillo, CA, $34,347.18, Health Science, Des Moines, IA, 1979. Southern College of Optometry, Osteopathy, June 1989. Zalez, Carol M., Encino, CA, $15,290.30, Memphis, TN, Optometry, June 1984 Rudolph, Paul, Chino, CA, $229,993.26, Univ of The Pacific, Stockton, CA, Mayfield, Sheryl A., Redwood City, CA, Univ of Health Sciences, Kansas City, Pharmacy, April 1987. $25,777.94, Southern Calif College of MO, Osteopathy, May 1984. Optometry, Fullerton, CA, Optometry, Smythe, Gerald, Cypress, CA, $1,184.09, Podiatry June 1983 College of Osteo Med of the Pacific, Allen, Karen, San Francisco, CA, McWhinnie Jr., Clarence E., Los Pomona, CA, Osteopathy, May 1991. $122,029.02, California College of Angeles, CA, $9,103.34, Southern Urbach, Mark J., Culver City, CA, Podiatric Medicine, San Francisco, Calif College of Optometry, Fullerton, $123,098.93, Michigan State CA, Podiatry, May 1985. CA, Optometry, June 1983 University, East Lansing, MI, Burleigh, Sharon, Oakland, CA, Powell, Reed M., Hesperia, CA, Osteopathy, June 1985. $61,408.19, California College of $11,727.39, Illinois College of Podiatric Medicine, San Francisco, Optometry, Chicago, IL, Optometry, Pharmacy CA, Podiatry, May 1985 June 1980 Abe, Gregory, Tujunga, CA, $24,116.19, Cammall, David B., San Diego, CA, Schamel, Lisa E., Los Angeles, CA, Univ of Southern California, Los $28,307.04, California College of $14,651.42, Illinois College of Angeles, CA, Pharmacy, May 1988. Podiatric Medicine, San Francisco, Optometry, Chicago, IL, Optometry, Coan, Bernard, Sunnyvale, CA, CA, Podiatry, May 1986 May 1987 $6,515.14, Massachusetts College of Case, Jeffrey A., Santa Ana, CA, Steinberg, Craig, Van Nuys, CA, Pharmacy, Boston, MA, Pharmacy, $117,728.41, California College of $5,868.43, Univ of Missouri St Louis, June 1988. Podiatric Medicine, San Francisco, St Louis, MO, Optometry, May 1984. Daneshrad-Farnoosh, Angela, North CA, Podiatry, May 1985 Utnehmer, Patrick P., Temecula, CA, Hollywood, CA, $5,509.16, Univ of Chaffin, Dwight, Modesto, CA, $9,290.06, Southern Calif College of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, $205,099.97, California College of Optometry, Fullerton, CA, Optometry, Pharmacy, May 1989. Podiatric Medicine, San Francisco, June 1984. Degroot, Ruth, San Francisco, CA, CA, Podiatry, May 1982 $8,973.52, Univ of The Pacific, Dakis, Stephen S., La Jolla, CA, Osteopathy Stockton, CA, Pharmacy, April 1991. $23,228.61, Ohio College of Podiatric Carter, Merv D., Moreno Valley, CA, Duarma, Geetha, Los Angeles, CA, Medicine, Cleveland, OH, Podiatry, $59,948.58, Michigan State $20,729.72, Univ of Southern May 1987 University, East Lansing, MI, California, Los Angeles, CA, Featherstone, John, San Bruno, CA, Osteopathy, June 1987. Pharmacy, May 1990. $36,320.34, California College of Cline, Sherri L., Glendale, CA, Frick, Deborah, Santa Ana, CA, Podiatric Medicine, San Francisco, $5,933.04, Univ of North Texas Health $23,368.96, Univ of Southern CA, Podiatry, May 1993 Science Ctr, Fort Worth, TX, California, Los Angeles, CA, Fednard, Anne Marie A., Oakland, CA, Osteopathy, May 1988. Pharmacy, May 1989. $73,440.62, California College of Conger, Michelle, Pasadena, CA, Gonzales, Carol C., Glendale, CA, Podiatric Medicine, San Francisco, $168,624.42, Univ of Health Sciences, $4,583.45, Univ of Southern CA, Podiatry, June 1986 Kansas City, MO, Osteopathy, May California, Los Angeles, CA, Gandy, Paul P., San Bernardino, CA, 1986. Pharmacy, May 1986. $65,867.72, Ohio College of Podiatric Crosby, Daniel W., Upland, CA, Hedlund, Bonnie L., Fullerton, CA, Medicine, Cleveland, OH, Podiatry, $5,939.26, College of Osteo Med of the $107,363.87, Univ of Southern May 1982 Pacific, Pomona, CA, Osteopathy, California, Los Angeles, CA, Gray, David M., San Francisco, CA, June 1986. Pharmacy, May 1986. $29,130.73, California College of Hoang Xaun, Tuan A., Apo—San Olivier, Ralph, Canyon Country, CA, Podiatric Medicine, San Francisco, Francisco, CA, $12,624.15, College of $19,167.33, Univ of Southern CA, Podiatry, May 1986 Osteo Med of the Pacific, Pomona, California, Los Angeles, CA, Harman, Jeffery M., Beverly Hills, CA, CA, Osteopathy, June 1991. Pharmacy, May 1987. $7,486.94, California College of Lane, Richard R., Monrovia, CA, Omoregie, Samuel I., Los Angeles, CA, Podiatric Medicine, San Francisco, $44,858.43, College of Osteo Med of $45,617.94, Univ of Southern CA, Podiatry, May 1983 14076 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices Hartman, Gregory D., Burbank, CA, Podiatric Medicine, San Francisco, Colorado $43,530.03, California College of CA, Podiatry, May 1989 Allopathic Medicine Podiatric Medicine, San Francisco, Sullivan-Sabo, Denise D., Sacramento, CA, Podiatry, May 1982 CA, $59,374.28, California College of Bennett, Yvonne E., Littleton, CO, Hitchcock, Philip R., Highland, CA, Podiatric Medicine, San Francisco, $24,015.20, Univ of Colorado Health $101,888.34, California College of CA, Podiatry, May 1984 Science Center, Denver, CO, Podiatric Medicine, San Francisco, Waller, Marilyn J., Castro Valley, CA, Allopathic Medicine, May 1986 CA, Podiatry, May 1981 $130,896.29, California College of Busse, David D., Wheat Ridge, CO, Landrum, Keith, Palos Verdes, CA, Podiatric Medicine, San Francisco, $150,711.89, George Washington $52,618.22, Dr William Scholl Col of CA, Podiatry, May 1990 University, Washington, DC, Podiatric Med, Chicago, IL, Podiatry, Warford, Mark, Roseville, CA, Allopathic Medicine, May 1987 May 1981 $94,766.66, California College of Ferguson, Rebecca R., Snowmass, CO, Lee, Chul G., Upland, CA, $54,089.38, Podiatric Medicine, San Francisco, $36,263.80, Univ of Texas Ohio College of Podiatric Medicine, CA, Podiatry, May 1987 Southwestern Medical Cntr, Dallas, Cleveland, OH, Podiatry, May 1989 Wells, Kenneth, Chula Vista, CA, TX, Allopathic Medicine, June 1986 Lentell, Brian M., Fresno, CA, $189,769.11, California College of Flaherty, Matthew, Denver, CO, $38,754.11, California College of Podiatric Medicine, San Francisco, $17,442.87, Univ of Colorado Health Podiatric Medicine, San Francisco, CA, Podiatry, June 1986 Science Center, Denver, CO, CA, Podiatry, May 1984 Zolfaghri, Behrooz, Danville, CA, Allopathic Medicine, May 1990 Lillie, Richard W., Mission Viejo, CA, $46,518.31, California College of McEwen, Christopher C., Winter Park, $83,643.35, California College of Podiatric Medicine, San Francisco, CO, $6,445.73, Univ of Cincinnati, Podiatric Medicine, San Francisco, CA, Podiatry, May 1986 Cincinnati, OH, Allopathic Medicine, CA, Podiatry, May 1981 Zorilla, Orlando, San Gabriel, CA, June 1984 Loggins, L, Oakland, CA, $210,397.48, $167,735.57, California College of Roberts, Charles C., Aurora, CO, California College of Podiatric Podiatric Medicine, San Francisco, $76,587.79, Univ of Colorado Health Medicine, San Francisco, CA, CA, Podiatry, June 1986 Science Center, Denver, CO, Podiatry, June 1986 Public Health Allopathic Medicine, May 1985 London, Eliyahu, Crestline, CA, Wells, Victor V., Denver, CO, Adler, Eric M., La Jolla, CA, $9,797.25, $211,734.09, California College of $31,992.84, Creighton University, Yale University, New Haven, CT, Podiatric Medicine, San Francisco, Omaha, NE, Allopathic Medicine, Public Health, May 1987 CA, Podiatry, June 1986 Bernard, Cheryle, Martinez, CA, May 1984 Medina, Edwin R., Berkeley, CA, $121,687.49, Tulane University, New Chiropractic $91,217.72, California College of Orleans, LA, Public Health, May 1986 Baker, Geoffrey B., Lakewood, CO, Podiatric Medicine, San Francisco, Howell, Reynold R., San Francisco, CA, $2,460.12, Palmer College of CA, Podiatry, May 1987 $58,540.71, Loma Linda University, Chiropractic, Davenport, IA, Pineda, Joseph J., Santa Barbara, CA, Loma Linda, CA, Public Health, Chiropractic, October 1989 $190,998.76, California College of December 1981 Podiatric Medicine, San Francisco, Lemkin, Peter R., Solana Beach, CA, Bammer, Phillip L., Broomfield, CO, CA, Podiatry, May 1984 $6,159.37, Yale University, New $48,364.92, Cleveland Chiropractic Pisarski, Marshall M W, San Francisco, Haven, CT, Public Health, May 1984 College, Kansas City, MO, CA, $37,435.27, California College of Nebedum, Archibald, Los Angeles, CA, Chiropractic, December 1983 Podiatric Medicine, San Francisco, $10,665.37, Univ of California Los Burbridge, David H., Thornton, CO, CA, Podiatry, May 1985 Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, Public $41,684.38, Palmer College of Pope, David, Downey, CA, $145,930.30, Health, June 1985 Chiropractic, Davenport, IA, California College of Podiatric Velez, Janet, Moreno Valley, CA, Chiropractic, October 1988 Medicine, San Francisco, CA, $1,147.22, Yale University, New Clarke, Debbie F., Louisville, CO, Podiatry, May 1985 Haven, CT, Public Health, May 1988 $6,949.31, Life College, Marietta, GA, Sass, Michael D., Upland, CA, Williams, Pamela A., Carson, CA, Chiropractic, June 1984 $123,211.40, California College of $4,646.86, Loma Linda University, Cline, Doyle, Broomfield, CO, Podiatric Medicine, San Francisco, Loma Linda, CA, Public Health, June $27,304.24, Palmer College of CA, Podiatry, May 1988 1983 Chiropractic, Davenport, IA, Scoffield, Mark H., Fresno, CA, Chiropractic, October 1985 $68,494.77, Dr William Scholl Col of Veterinary Medicine Colby, Susan E., Colorado Springs, CO, Podiatric Med, Chicago, IL, Podiatry, Anderson-Coleman, Joy R., Los Angeles, $39,571.95, Palmer College of May 1982 CA, $7,740.34, Tuskegee University, Chiropractic, Davenport, IA, Scott, Thomas, Oakland, CA, Tuskegee, AL, Veterinary Medicine, Chiropractic, March 1986 $48,663.02, California College of May 1990 Crow, Joe, Cheraw, CO, $14,612.08, Podiatric Medicine, San Francisco, Coleman, Keith B., Los Angeles, CA, Parker College of Chiropractic, Dallas, CA, Podiatry, May 1987 $4,110.66, Tuskegee University, TX, Chiropractic, January 1990 Seymour, Stephen J., Thousand Oaks, Tuskegee, AL, Veterinary Medicine, Cunningham, Marvin D., Colorado CA, $53,244.63, California College of May 1989 Springs, CO, $20,067.11, Palmer Podiatric Medicine, San Francisco, Hurdle II, Clarence, Sacramento, CA, College of Chiropractic West, San CA, Podiatry, June 1980 $65,596.45, Tuskegee University, Jose, CA, Chiropractic, June 1986 Shaber, Sydney S., San Francisco, CA, Tuskegee, AL, Veterinary Medicine, Day, Donald D., Thornton, CO, $38,418.83, California College of May 1986 $55,260.64, Cleveland Chiropractic Podiatric Medicine, San Francisco, Pattio, Nolton, Monrovia, CA, College, Kansas City, MO, CA, Podiatry, June 1979 $21,618.72, Univ of Pennsylvania, Chiropractic, December 1983 Spaulding, Karla K., San Francisco, CA, Philadelphia, PA, Veterinary Dunevitz, Benjamin S., Denver, CO, $20,261.79, California College of Medicine, May 1983 $78,306.24, Logan College of Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices 14077 Chiropractic, Chesterfield, MO, Stjernholn, Darwin, Denver, CO, Science Center, Denver, CO, Chiropractic, January 1986 $74,361.82, Los Angeles College of Dentistry, May 1983 Foster, Valeria, Greeley, CO, $5,558.07, Chiropractic, Whittier, CA, Webb, David M., Colorado Springs, CO, Life College, Marietta, GA, Chiropractic, December 1988 $18,807.19, Creighton University, Chiropractic, March 1983 Stokka, Wayne M., Littleton, CO, Omaha, NE, Dentistry, May 1987 Garcia, Sylvester, Platteville, CO, $15,490.46, Northwestern College of $56,341.78, Los Angeles College of Chiropractic, Bloomington, MN, Optometry Chiropractic, Whittier, CA, Chiropractic, April 1989 Carrico, Gerri P., Denver, CO, Chiropractic, December 1988 Strapko, Steven W., Lakewood, CO, $37,507.84, Southern Calif College of Hendler, Michael J., Lakewood, CO, $56,181.02, Northwestern College of Optometry, Fullerton, CA, Optometry, $77,828.22, Los Angeles College of Chiropractic, Bloomington, MN, May 1988 Chiropractic, Whittier, CA, Chiropractic, April 1988 Cooley, Stephen L., Fort Collins, CO, Chiropractic, April 1988 Taylor, Kenneth, Colorado Springs, CO, $19,313.97, Pacific University, Forest Jordan, James, Castle Rock, CO, $46,149.64, Life College, Marietta, Grove, OR, Optometry, May 1984 $100,898.10, Logan College of GA, Chiropractic, September 1984 Russell, Karen M., Parker, CO, Chiropractic, Chesterfield, MO, Trainer, Anita J., Denver, CO, $111,330.29, Illinois College of Chiropractic, April 1986 $46,002.06, Logan College of Optometry, Chicago, IL, Optometry, Krebill, Michael, Colorado Springs, CO, Chiropractic, Chesterfield, MO, December 1985 $85,989.49, Logan College of Chiropractic, August 1987 Chiropractic, Chesterfield, MO, Wheeler, Edward, Arvada, CO, Pharmacy Chiropractic, August 1988 $25,231.80, Palmer College of Espinosa, Sylvia, Colorado Springs, CO, Langolf, Daniel L., Lakewood, CO, Chiropractic, Davenport, IA, $9,936.23, Univ of Southern $46,259.40, Palmer College of Chiropractic, October 1985 California, Los Angeles, CA, Chiropractic, Davenport, IA, Williams, Danny C., Parker, CO, Pharmacy, May 1989 Chiropractic, June 1986 $4,770.65, Palmer College of Martin, Kathleen L., Englewood, CO, Chiropractic, Davenport, IA, Podiatry $18,380.47, Palmer College of Chiropractic, March 1990 Heser, Robert J., Denver, CO, Chiropractic, Davenport, IA, Williams, Patsy, Greeley, CO, $5,471.42, $42,524.82, Dr William Scholl Col of Chiropractic, June 1989 Palmer College of Chiropractic, Podiatric Med, Chicago, IL, Podiatry, McClain, Van A., Golden, CO, Davenport, IA, Chiropractic, May 1984 $11,150.55, Palmer College of December 1989 Nicklas, Lisa A., Pueblo, CO, Chiropractic, Davenport, IA, Withem, Stewart, Grand Junction, CO, $18,136.29, Ohio College of Podiatric Chiropractic, June 1987 $64,829.08, Cleveland Chiropractic Medicine, Cleveland, OH, Podiatry, McClure, Lance L., Littleton, CO, College, Los Angeles, CA, June 1987 $46,745.58, Los Angeles College of Chiropractic, December 1986 Otteman, Timothy, Lakewood, CO, Chiropractic, Whittier, CA, Young, Larry N., Pueblo, CO, $81,572.34, Dr William Scholl Col of Chiropractic, April 1984 $29,430.25, Cleveland Chiropractic Podiatric Med, Chicago, IL, Podiatry, Michals, Robert, Aurora, CO, College, Kansas City, MO, May 1983 $40,532.58, Palmer College of Chiropractic, May 1985 Chiropractic, Davenport, IA, Connecticut Clinical Psychology Chiropractic, September 1984 Allopathic Medicine Morgan, Pamela, Denver, CO, $881.94, Evans, Roberta, Denver, CO, $16,904.66, Logan College of Chiropractic, California Sch. of Prof. Psych., San Cartwright, Nadine, Huntington, CT, Chesterfield, MO, Chiropractic, April Diego, San Diego, CA, Clinical $86,876.70, Brown University, 1983 Psychology, June 1983 Providence, RI, Allopathic Medicine, Ohrdorf, Ronald T., Colorado Springs, Szczypka, Denis, Denver, CO, $3,837.97, June 1985 CO, $111,425.96, Cleveland Wright State University, Dayton, OH, Franco, Wayne, Wethersfield, CT, Chiropractic College, Kansas City, Clinical Psychology, August 1986 $87,632.56, Georgetown University, MO, Chiropractic, May 1988 Washington, DC, Allopathic Orr, William, Canon City, CO, Dentistry Medicine, May 1980 $94,237.15, Palmer College of Burkart, John D., Aurora, CO, Hayden, Gina M., Westport, CT, Chiropractic, Davenport, IA, $39,491.34, Marquette University, $30,979.26, Univ of Med & Dent of Chiropractic, October 1988 Milwaukee, WI, Dentistry, May 1983 New Jersey, Newark, NJ, Allopathic Rowland, Brian, Denver, CO, $1,632.00, Hansen, Daryl G., Denver, CO, Medicine, May 1987 Life Chiropractic College-West, San $15,026.94, Univ of Colorado Health Hume, Forest, Woodbury, CT, Lorenzo, CA, Chiropractic, December Science Center, Denver, CO, $9,714.43, Univ of Kentucky, 1989 Dentistry, August 1989 Lexington, KY, Allopathic Medicine, Schmidt, Jeffrey J., Woody Creek, CO, Haviland, Philip F., Denver, CO, May 1990 $34,595.66, Western States $19,006.64, Oral Roberts University, Jackson, Garland C., Hamden, CT, Chiropractic College, Portland, OR, Tulsa, OK, Dentistry, May 1987 $230,246.71, Finch University of Chiropractic, December 1988 Lack, Ray, Arvada, CO, $57,353.28, Health Sciences, North Chicago, IL, Sensenig, Barry W., Boulder, CO, Univ of Colorado Health Science Allopathic Medicine, June 1984 $5,290.94, Western States Center, Denver, CO, Dentistry, May Jensen, Peter, Norwalk, CT, $3,048.84, Chiropractic College, Portland, OR, 1986 Dartmouth Medical School, Hanover, Chiropractic, June 1983 Tabor, Carl, Denver, CO, $70,284.90, NH, Allopathic Medicine, June 1992 Skinner, Keith, Denver, CO, $37,799.18, Tufts University, Boston, MA, Lowe, Paul R., Huntington, CT, Texas Chiropractic College Dentistry, June 1983 $46,771.84, Boston University Foundation, Pasadena, TX, Thompson, Jerrold A., Lakewood, CO, Medical Center, Boston, MA, Chiropractic, December 1990 $13,206.10, Univ of Colorado Health Allopathic Medicine, May 1986 14078 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices Meckler, Laurie, New Haven, CT, Pharmacy Washington, DC, Allopathic $40,877.32, Cornell University Poplis, Richard A., Waterbury, CT, Medicine, May 1982 Medical College, New York, NY, $12,596.07, Massachusetts College of Clark, Jeannine A., Washington, DC, Allopathic Medicine, May 1988 Pharmacy, Boston, MA, Pharmacy, $15,660.16, Georgetown University, Pavlis, Maria C., Greenwich, CT, June 1985 Washington, DC, Allopathic $54,893.07, Univ of Miami, Miami, Medicine, May 1981 FL, Allopathic Medicine, May 1991 Podiatry Clark, John J., Washington, DC, Yang, Chun, Branford, CT, $3,153.27, Church, Steven, Meriden, CT, $39,571.69, George Washington Brown University, Providence, RI, $52,210.67, New York College of University, Washington, DC, Allopathic Medicine, May 1991 Podiatric Medicine, New York, NY, Allopathic Medicine, May 1981 Podiatry, June 1984 Cuffy, Lewis, Washington, DC, Chiropractic Irrera, Stephen A., West Haven, CT, $54,746.88, Georgetown University, Anderson, Mark, Monroe, CT, $17,419.57, Ohio College of Podiatric Washington, DC, Allopathic $64,335.74, Life College, Marietta, Medicine, Cleveland, OH, Podiatry, Medicine, May 1990 GA, Chiropractic, June 1986 May 1979 Greaves, Jeanette J., Washington, DC, $54,784.29, Georgetown University, Barone, Alice, Trumbull, CT, Public Health $15,421.34, New York Chiropractic Washington, DC, Allopathic College, Seneca Falls, NY, Carter, Deborah L., New Britain, CT, Medicine, May 1985 Chiropractic, April 1989 $2,832.49, Yale University, New Johnson, Gavia E., Washington, DC, Dancer, Gena A., Greenwich, CT, Haven, CT, Public Health, May 1990 $7,628.19, Howard University, $72,393.61, Cleveland Chiropractic Winfield, Allison S., New Haven, CT, Washington, DC, Allopathic College, Los Angeles, CA, $3,309.99, Yale University, New Medicine, May 1991 Chiropractic, December 1986 Haven, CT, Public Health, May 1990 McAllister, Amazair, Washington, DC, Helenek, Anthony, Essex, CT, Veterinary Medicine $3,817.55, Howard University, $25,891.96, Life College, Marietta, Washington, DC, Allopathic Smith, Robin, Quaker Hill, CT, Medicine, May 1983 GA, Chiropractic, September 1985 $51,642.85, Ohio State University, Heppe, Cherie, Hartford, CT, $4,674.00, Owino, Stephen S., Washington, DC, Columbus, OH, Veterinary Medicine, $2,244.18, Howard University, Los Angeles College of Chiropractic, June 1987 Whittier, CA, Chiropractic, April 1993 Washington, DC, Allopathic Hudson, Donald, Hartford, CT, Delaware Medicine, May 1987 Pressley, Deborah L., Washington, DC, $78,328.25, Palmer College of Allopathic Medicine $9,045.79, Univ of Colorado Health Chiropractic, Davenport, IA, Trader, Stephanie L., Wilmington, DE, Science Center, Denver, CO, Chiropractic, December 1988 $128,028.36, Univ of Pittsburgh, Allopathic Medicine, August 1979 Trebing, William P., Greenwich, CT, Pittsburgh, PA, Allopathic Medicine, Spencer, Silvano A., Washington, DC, $6,313.78, New York Chiropractic June 1990 $7,210.75, Howard University, College, Seneca Falls, NY, Washington, DC, Allopathic Chiropractic Chiropractic, April 1984 Medicine, May 1986 Clinical Psychology De La Cuesta, Imant, Wilmington, DE, Taylor, David, Washington, DC, $35,367.82, Life Chiropractic College- $1,804.14, Howard University, Rivera, Nelson, Hartford, CT, west, San Lorenzo, CA, Chiropractic, Washington, DC, Allopathic $105,277.31, California Sch of Prof September 1990 Medicine, May 1991 Psych, Alhambra, CA, Clinical Wiggins, Denise D., Washington, DC, Psychology, July 1987 Pharmacy $80,810.75, Georgetown University, Wakeman, Edward A., Guilford, CT, Pressley, Laura, Newark, DE, Washington, DC, Allopathic $16,523.18, California Sch of Prof $34,430.04, Temple University, Medicine, May 1985 Psych Fresno, Fresno, CA, Clinical Philadelphia, PA, Pharmacy, May Psychology, June 1986 1988 Chiropractic Dentistry District of Columbia Darawshi, Jaber M., Washington, DC, $6,345.16, Cleveland Chiropractic Johnson, John M., Waterford, CT, Allopathic Medicine College, Kansas City, MO, $5,638.67, Georgetown University, Anyasodo, Patrick P U, Washington, DC, Chiropractic, May 1985 Washington, DC, Dentistry, May 1985 $137,297.48, Georgetown University, Dentistry Mason, Kyle K., Guilford, CT, $4,835.94, Washington, DC, Allopathic Univ of Oklahoma Health Sciences Medicine, May 1985 Adedara, Isaac O., Washington, DC, Center, Oklahoma City, OK, Dentistry, Baker, Daryl, Washington, DC, $65,897.72, Howard University, December 1986 $1,586.54, Howard University, Washington, DC, Dentistry, May 1990 Resendiz, Mario, Danbury, CT, Washington, DC, Allopathic Cheek Jr, Albert A., Washington, DC, $21,723.26, Univ of Illinois Medical Medicine, May 1991 $22,023.11, Howard University, Center, Chicago, IL, Dentistry, June Bartee, Dyrel P., Washington, DC, Washington, DC, Dentistry, May 1988 1986 $26,037.67, Howard University, Cruz, James J., Washington, DC, Robinson, Robyn C., New Haven, CT, Washington, DC, Allopathic $17,534.82, Georgetown University, $8,614.59, Univ of Med & Dent of Medicine, May 1988 Washington, DC, Dentistry, May 1988 New Jersey, Newark, NJ, Dentistry, Burt, Hugh A., Washington, DC, Elfter, George N., Washington, DC, May 1988 $63,335.86, Georgetown University, $23,997.15, Columbia University, Seib, Kenneth C., Branford, CT, Washington, DC, Allopathic New York, NY, Dentistry, May 1989 $22,759.48, Univ of Florida, Medicine, May 1990 Gross, Shepherd, Washington, DC, Gainesville, FL, Dentistry, December Clark, Charles H., Washington, DC, $108,581.56, Howard University, 1987 $14,593.47, Howard University, Washington, DC, Dentistry, May 1986 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices 14079 Hailstock, Marshelle, Washington, DC, University, East Lansing, MI, Indianapolis, Bloomington, IN, $9,252.98, Howard University, Osteopathy, June 1987 Allopathic Medicine, May 1986 Washington, DC, Dentistry, May 1985 Hopkins, Garland W., Washington, DC, Ellis, Stanley B., Orlando, FL, Harris, Conrad W., Washington, DC, $67,368.50, Philadelphia Col of $57,045.66, Loma Linda University, $78,560.55, Howard University, Osteopathic Medicine, Philadelphia, Loma Linda, CA, Allopathic Washington, DC, Dentistry, May 1985 PA, Osteopathy, June 1985 Medicine, May 1987 Jacobson, Douglas N., Washington, DC, Ellison, Dennard W., Jacksonville, FL, $25,043.27, Washington University, St Pharmacy $12,677.76, Univ of Florida, Louis, MO, Dentistry, May 1987 Carter, Kevin, Washington, DC, Gainesville, FL, Allopathic Medicine, Jones, Sherman, Washington, DC, $19,610.24, Howard University, May 1986 $88,638.27, Howard University, Washington, DC, Pharmacy, May 1987 Gelbard, Steven D., Fort Lauderdale, FL, Washington, DC, Dentistry, May 1989 Martin Jr, Samuel, Washington, DC, $177,534.06, Tufts University, Boston, Kelly Jr, Johnie, Washington, DC, $63,465.22, Howard University, MA, Allopathic Medicine, June 1983 $19,894.00, Georgetown University, Washington, DC, Pharmacy, May 1986 Koesterman, Charley F., Miami, FL, Washington, DC, Dentistry, May 1988 Ross, Tanya, Washington, DC, $60,094.84, Univ of North Dakota, King, James H., Washington, DC, $33,531.87, Temple University, Grand Forks, ND, Allopathic $26,142.95, Howard University, Philadelphia, PA, Pharmacy, June Medicine, May 1987 Washington, DC, Dentistry, May 1990 1986 Kunen, Frederick J., Miami, FL, Labate, Cathleen A., Washington, DC, $52,236.45, Univ of Miami, Miami, $22,407.57, Ohio State University, Podiatry FL, Allopathic Medicine, June 1982 Columbus, OH, Dentistry, June 1986 Chatmon, Deirdre, Washington, DC, Lloyd, Antoinette L., Orange Park, FL, Mack, Stephanie, Washington, DC, $44,168.82, New York College of $12,781.00, Yale University, New $13,909.17, Howard University, Podiatric Medicine, New York, NY, Haven, CT, Allopathic Medicine, May Washington, DC, Dentistry, May 1991 Podiatry, June 1989 1985 Markham, Robert R., Washington, DC, Rucker, Gail M., Washington, DC, Mowrey, James V., Pensacola, FL, $15,720.45, Howard University, $146,417.44, New York College of $17,567.60, Univ of Miami, Miami, Washington, DC, Dentistry, May 1988 Podiatric Medicine, New York, NY, FL, Allopathic Medicine, June 1986 Perry-Dodson, Elizabeth, Washington, Podiatry, June 1985 Parks, Gregory G., St Petersburg, FL, DC, $14,743.55, Howard University, Travis, Andrew F., Washington, DC, $4,905.23, Morehouse School of Washington, DC, Dentistry, December $152,894.37, New York College of Medicine, Atlanta, GA, Allopathic 1987 Podiatric Medicine, New York, NY, Medicine, May 1989 Pettaway, Reginald, Washington, DC, Podiatry, June 1987 Pinkston, Garvey R., Silver Springs, FL, $36,447.16, Howard University, $67,524.82, Univ of Miami, Miami, Washington, DC, Dentistry, May 1989 Veterinary Medicine FL, Allopathic Medicine, June 1981 Ruffin, Wayne A., Washington, DC, Reid-Quinn, Cheri A., Washington, DC, Pittman, Kenneth R., Fort Lauderdale, $36,907.50, Howard University, $44,504.08, Tuskegee University, FL, $11,706.77, Mercer University, Washington, DC, Dentistry, May 1987 Tuskegee, AL, Veterinary Medicine, Macon, GA, Allopathic Medicine, Sims, Michael A., Washington, DC, May 1983 June 1986 $27,757.67, Georgetown University, Reddick, David J., Royal Palm Beach, Washington, DC, Dentistry, May 1983 Florida FL, $38,557.49, Boston University Smith, Daniel, Washington, DC, Allopathic Medicine Medical Center, Boston, MA, $11,597.92, Howard University, Allopathic Medicine, May 1985 Washington, DC, Dentistry, May 1984 Alexander, Zandrina, Brandon, FL, Rhodes, Thomas, Beverly Hills, FL, Smith, Ellison B., Washington, DC, $18,979.64, Univ of Connecticut $12,976.91, Univ of South Florida, $26,696.55, Howard University, Health Center, Farmington, CT, Tampa, FL, Allopathic Medicine, June Washington, DC, Dentistry, May 1990 Allopathic Medicine, May 1983 1989 Smith, Vasco A., Washington, DC, Burks, Teman, Tampa, FL, $184,136.54, Rose, Stefan, Miami, FL, $60,461.83, $139,562.47, Meharry Medical Georgetown University, Washington, Univ of Miami, Miami, FL, Allopathic College, Nashville, TN, Dentistry, May DC, Allopathic Medicine, May 1984 Medicine, May 1985 1984 Cadrecha, Cheryl, Gainesville, FL, Sanchez, Wilfredo, Miami, FL, Tucker, Lawrence, Washington, DC, $13,785.23, Univ of Florida, $9,876.94, Rush University, Chicago, $16,576.71, Georgetown University, Gainesville, FL, Allopathic Medicine, IL, Allopathic Medicine, June 1987 Washington, DC, Dentistry, May 1989 June 1990 Scott, Clarence, Sanford, FL, Whitaker, Aaron T., Washington, DC, Carazo, Andres, Miami, FL, $58,066.59, $214,240.57, Georgetown University, $42,109.72, Howard University, Tulane University, New Orleans, LA, Washington, DC, Allopathic Washington, DC, Dentistry, May 1984 Allopathic Medicine, June 1987 Medicine, May 1986 Wilson, Tanya R., Washington, DC, Collins, Matthew C., Altamonte Springs, Smith, Barbara B., Coral Springs, FL, $6,181.45, Ohio State University, FL, $16,639.18, Mayo Medical School, $22,095.95, Albert Einstein Med Col Columbus, OH, Dentistry, June 1987 Rochester, MN, Allopathic Medicine, of Yeshiva Univ, Bronx, NY, May 1987 Allopathic Medicine, June 1982 Optometry Cooper, Charles R., Jacksonville, FL, Smith, George, Tampa, FL, $178,643.81, Howard, Veryl E., Washington, DC, $17,507.64, Univ of Miami, Miami, Hahnemann University, Philadelphia, $17,491.94, Pennsylvania College of FL, Allopathic Medicine, June 1983 PA, Allopathic Medicine, June 1984 Optometry, Philadelphia, PA, Darrisaw, Brian R., Daytona Beach, FL, Smith, Willielyra, Miami, FL, $7,693.65, Optometry, May 1988 $5,882.70, Cornell University Medical Wright State University, Dayton, OH, College, New York, NY, Allopathic Allopathic Medicine, June 1989 Osteopathy Medicine, May 1987 Wade, Larren, Boca Raton, FL, Carter-Miller, Loretta L., Washington, Dreier, Yolanda J., Tampa, FL, $20,550.57, Univ of Miami, Miami, DC, $2,610.55, Michigan State $8,464.30, Indiana University FL, Allopathic Medicine, May 1990 14080 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices Chiropractic Carageorge, Dawn C., Tampa, FL, Garver, Gordon B., St Augustine, FL, Anderson, Barry, Tampa, FL, $1,907.90, $33,663.98, Life College, Marietta, $29,258.35, Life College, Marietta, Northwestern College of Chiropractic, GA, Chiropractic, June 1989 GA, Chiropractic, June 1982 Bloomington, MN, Chiropractic, Carpenter, Richard, Tampa, FL, Giallanzo, Tom, Dania, FL, $111,750.07, $81,001.41, Life College, Marietta, December 1982 Palmer College of Chiropractic West, Bailey, Darrell E., Lynn Haven, FL, GA, Chiropractic, March 1986 San Jose, CA, Chiropractic, December Carrancejie, Monica, Tampa, FL, $20,097.83, Life College, Marietta, 1985 $76,529.78, Life College, Marietta, GA, Chiropractic, March 1989 Glasgow, James, Stuart, FL, $24,960.39, Baker III, James W., Jacksonville, FL, GA, Chiropractic, December 1986 Northwestern College of Chiropractic, Caudill, Curtis, St. Petersburg, FL, $60,198.00, Life College, Marietta, Bloomington, MN, Chiropractic, April $14,279.76, Life College, Marietta, GA, Chiropractic, December 1986 1984 GA, Chiropractic, September 1983 Barner, Russell, Tampa, FL, Glogower, Audie, West Palm Beach, FL, Cohen, Scott, Hollywood, FL, $60,907.51, New York Chiropractic $141,142.76, Life College, Marietta, $31,984.16, Life College, Marietta, College, Seneca Falls, NY, GA, Chiropractic, December 1986 GA, Chiropractic, December 1990 Chiropractic, August 1986 Bartnett, Edmond E., North Miami Constantinoff, Karen, Cape Coral, FL, Beach, FL, $63,097.87, Life College, $6,641.63, Life College, Marietta, GA, Goforth, James, Jackson, FL, $39,853.74, Marietta, GA, Chiropractic, March Chiropractic, June 1983 Palmer College of Chiropractic, 1985 Dejesus, Jose A., Miami, FL, $17,498.26, Davenport, IA, Chiropractic, October Bennett, David, Ormond Beach, FL, Logan College of Chiropractic, 1986 $9,283.00, Life College, Marietta, GA, Chesterfield, MO, Chiropractic, Gordon, Gay L., Sebastian, FL, Chiropractic, September 1985 January 1984 $14,815.33, Life College, Marietta, Bennett, Regina V., Clearwater, FL, Dejesus-Kock, Iris M., Miami, FL, GA, Chiropractic, December 1983 $135,472.06, Life College, Marietta, $10,580.81, Logan College of Guy, Geoffrey C., Englewood, FL, GA, Chiropractic, March 1986 Chiropractic, Chesterfield, MO, $17,731.59, Life College, Marietta, Berry, Virgil, Starke, FL, $97,315.69, Chiropractic, April 1983 GA, Chiropractic, June 1983 Cleveland Chiropractic College, Densmore, Robert D., Tampa, FL, Hall, Patricia, Homestead, FL, Kansas City, MO, Chiropractic, May $24,570.45, Texas Chiropractic $23,413.33, New York Chiropractic 1986 College Foundation, Pasadena, TX, College, Seneca Falls, NY, Blackman, Gregory D., Port St Lucie, FL, Chiropractic, December 1984 Chiropractic, December 1984 $14,507.85, Life College, Marietta, Diesen, James D., Orange Park, FL, Halley, James E., Port Richey, FL, GA, Chiropractic, June 1982 $62,100.84, Logan College of $46,723.93, Cleveland Chiropractic Boley, Glenn E., Coral Springs, FL, Chiropractic, Chesterfield, MO, College, Kansas City, MO, $45,336.23, National College of Chiropractic, April 1988 Chiropractic, August 1987 Chiropractic, Lombard, IL, Dinofer, Jeffrey, Miami, FL, $44,998.67, Hardwick, James F., Altamonte Springs, Chiropractic, April 1988 Life College, Marietta, GA, FL, $106,957.67, Life College, Born, Kenice A., Clearwater, FL, Chiropractic, March 1989 Marietta, GA, Chiropractic, December $58,990.31, National College of Douglas, Bonnie J., Largo, FL, 1986 Chiropractic, Lombard, IL, $49,264.97, Life College, Marietta, Haut, Ruth A., Kissimmee, FL, Chiropractic, August 1986 GA, Chiropractic, September 1984 $60,562.87, Texas Chiropractic Boshes, Perri D., Boca Raton, FL, Draluck, Dean, Margate, FL, $17,906.76, College Foundation, Pasadena, TX, $17,784.77, Life College, Marietta, Life College, Marietta, GA, Chiropractic, May 1984 GA, Chiropractic, December 1984 Chiropractic, September 1989 Holzer, Richard R., Hollywood, FL, Boyer, Glenn, Hollywood, FL, Dungan, Kim V., Sunrise, FL, $49,211.88, Life College, Marietta, $8,461.32, Life College, Marietta, GA, $57,656.57, Life College, Marietta, GA, Chiropractic, December 1984 Chiropractic, December 1984 GA, Chiropractic, June 1984 Hundley, Kenneth L., Panama City, FL, Brimm, Willard, Tampa, FL, $54,633.70, Erickson, Brock T., Delray Beach, FL, $141,318.26, Life College, Marietta, Cleveland Chiropractic College, $8,079.35, Life College, Marietta, GA, GA, Chiropractic, September 1985 Kansas City, MO, Chiropractic, Chiropractic, September 1990 Jennings, Peggy P., Gainesville, FL, September 1985 Etienne, Ivan, Miami, FL, $14,515.69, $39,931.35, Texas Chiropractic Brousseau, Wayne, Casselberry, FL, National College of Chiropractic, College Foundation, Pasadena, TX, $15,724.32, Life College, Marietta, Lombard, IL, Chiropractic, May 1983 GA, Chiropractic, June 1983 Fabricant, Michael M., Davie, FL, Chiropractic, May 1984 Brown, Michael L., Fort Pierce, FL, $59,596.34, Cleveland Chiropractic Kern, Mark S., Fort Myers, FL, $64,106.15, Life College, Marietta, College, Kansas City, MO, $25,027.40, Life College, Marietta, GA, Chiropractic, September 1989 Chiropractic, May 1984 GA, Chiropractic, June 1983 Buskirk, Dayna E., Gainesville, FL, Falowski, Frances, Fort Lauderdale, FL, Kincy, Gary, Key West, FL, $34,947.24, $48,384.10, Life College, Marietta, $145,583.72, Life College, Marietta, Texas Chiropractic College GA, Chiropractic, March 1987 GA, Chiropractic, September 1985 Foundation, Pasadena, TX, Calrissian, Lando, Milton, FL, Fine, Mitchell L., Laurel Hill, FL, Chiropractic, April 1989 $15,992.32, Life College, Marietta, $14,939.02, Life College, Marietta, Klejnot, Timothy A., Palm Harbor, FL, GA, Chiropractic, March 1990 GA, Chiropractic, December 1983 $80,624.39, Life College, Marietta, Campanale, Paul R., Jacksonville, FL, Fountain, Rodney E., Fort Myers, FL, GA, Chiropractic, June 1989 $25,744.65, New York Chiropractic $116,071.13, Texas Chiropractic Kolarik, Thomas T., Temple Terrace, FL, College, Seneca Falls, NY, College Foundation, Pasadena, TX, $65,723.88, Life College, Marietta, Chiropractic, April 1984 Chiropractic, May 1984 GA, Chiropractic, September 1984 Campo, John I., Tampa, FL, $97,552.31, Garone, Joseph J., Miramar, FL, Kornacki, Kerry E., Jacksonville, FL, National College of Chiropractic, $45,980.89, Palmer College of $34,284.38, Cleveland Chiropractic Lombard, IL, Chiropractic, August Chiropractic, Davenport, IA, College, Kansas City, MO, 1986 Chiropractic, December 1984 Chiropractic, September 1986 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices 14081 Krista, Geraldine M., Orange City, FL, College, Kansas City, MO, Walker, Duane, Jacksonville, FL, $114,446.82, Life College, Marietta, Chiropractic, September 1983 $64,592.90, Life College, Marietta, GA, Chiropractic, September 1985 Rosemont, Joann L., Jensen Beach, FL, GA, Chiropractic, September 1986. Lada, Richard, Citrus Springs, FL, $6,996.07, Palmer College of Walters, Clark C., Dunedin, FL, $43,681.06, Life College, Marietta, Chiropractic, Davenport, IA, $51,381.77, Life College, Marietta, GA, Chiropractic, March 1990 Chiropractic, June 1984 GA, Chiropractic, June 1985. Langheier, David D., Clearwater, FL, Ross, Lawrence, Fort Pierce, FL, Whipkey, Douglas G., Jensen Beach, FL, $32,350.98, Life College, Marietta, $57,171.69, Life College, Marietta, $39,386.63, Cleveland Chiropractic GA, Chiropractic, September 1983 GA, Chiropractic, December 1984 College, Kansas City, MO, Levin, Nancy, Palm Beach Gardens, FL, Rossrucker, Kenneth S., Altamonte Chiropractic, May 1989. $48,531.59, Life College, Marietta, Springs, FL, $52,444.75, Life College, Wieland, David M., St Petersburg, FL, GA, Chiropractic, September 1984 Marietta, GA, Chiropractic, December $53,036.90, National College of Levine, Jeffrey D., Orlando, FL, 1982 Chiropractic, Lombard, IL, $42,254.46, Life College, Marietta, Santa Cruz, Matthew E., Tampa, FL, Chiropractic, August 1983. GA, Chiropractic, September 1985 $40,632.55, Texas Chiropractic Wilkins Jr, Ellison W., Palm Beach, FL, Liebman, Jay M., Hallandale, FL, College Foundation, Pasadena, TX, $38,324.29, Los Angeles College of $128,451.86, Life College, Marietta, Chiropractic, May 1983 Chiropractic, Whittier, CA, GA, Chiropractic, March 1985 Schlapper, Gary, Deland, FL, Chiropractic, August 1984. Machara, Katherine, Deltona, FL, $65,369.07, Cleveland Chiropractic Wynne, Conrad, Deltona, FL, $120,619.14, Life College, Marietta, College, Kansas City, MO, $21,782.36, Cleveland Chiropractic GA, Chiropractic, December 1986 Chiropractic, May 1984 College, Kansas City, MO, Mane, Walter, Miami, FL, $103,936.80, Schnell, Donald, Sarasota, FL, Chiropractic, January 1990. Logan College of Chiropractic, $12,089.68, Palmer College of Yenzer Jr, James, New Smyrna Beach, Chesterfield, MO, Chiropractic, April Chiropractic, Davenport, IA, FL, $150,535.66, Life College, 1985 Chiropractic, June 1992 Marietta, GA, Chiropractic, December Marcus, Alex, Orlando, FL, $16,157.47, Shapiro, Abe, Pompano Beach, FL, 1985. Life College, Marietta, GA, $7,259.95, Northwestern College of Zulovitz, Mark J., Vero Beach, FL, Chiropractic, June 1984 Chiropractic, Bloomington, MN, $69,201.82, Life College, Marietta, Marsh, Garth, Treasure Island, FL, Chiropractic, September 1990 GA, Chiropractic, December 1986. $11,104.21, Life College, Marietta, Siverling, Gerald G., Brandon, FL, GA, Chiropractic, June 1991 $40,127.84, Texas Chiropractic Clinical Psychology McElhinney, Thomas E., St Augustine, College Foundation, Pasadena, TX, Aufderheide, Dean H., Fort Walton, FL, FL, $75,973.19, Life College, Marietta, Chiropractic, May 1983 $16,549.14, Fuller Theological GA, Chiropractic, March 1989 Smith, Mark A., Cape Coral, FL, Seminary, Pasadena, CA, Clinical McLerren, Todd, Jacksonville, FL, $18,896.78, National College of Psychology, June 1988. $35,513.89, Palmer College of Chiropractic, Lombard, IL, Don-pedro, Eric G., Orlando, FL, Chiropractic, Davenport, IA, Chiropractic, April 1985 $42,362.31, American Sch of Chiropractic, June 1989 Smith, Richard, Pembroke Pines, FL, Professional Psychology, Chicago, IL, Meunier, Edward J., Fort Lauderdale, $38,409.97, Life College, Marietta, Clinical Psychology, November 1984. FL, $142,718.85, Life College, GA, Chiropractic, September 1989 Gomez, Gabriella, North Miami Beach, Marietta, GA, Chiropractic, August South, Steve C., Fort Myers Beach, FL, FL, $11,745.90, Nova Southeastern 1985 $24,616.48, Cleveland Chiropractic University, Ft Lauderdale, FL, Morris Jr, David O., Tampa, FL, College, Kansas City, MO, Clinical Psychology, May 1988. $106,686.63, Life College, Marietta, Chiropractic, September 1984 Hall, Pamela A., Fort Lauderdale, FL, GA, Chiropractic, December 1988 Stallings, Spichael L., Panama City, FL, $92,744.78, Florida Institute of Moses, Robert, Jacksonville, FL, $43,432.21, Life College, Marietta, Technology, Melbourne, FL, Clinical $57,790.81, Life College, Marietta, GA, Chiropractic, December 1983 Psychology, June 1987. GA, Chiropractic, December 1984 Tepperberg, Phillip S., Tavernier, FL, Klein, Jean, North Miami Beach, FL, Pena, Fred, Winter Park, FL, $23,482.51, $40,109.61, Los Angeles College of $27,422.28, Nova Southeastern Palmer College of Chiropractic, Chiropractic, Whittier, CA, University, Ft Lauderdale, FL, Davenport, IA, Chiropractic, June Chiropractic, April 1983 Clinical Psychology, December 1985. 1988 Thiel, Margaret A., St Petersburg, FL, Lamboi, Sangoi, Tampa, FL, $41,300.39, Price, Douglas A., Tampa, FL, $60,807.76, Life College, Marietta, Univ of Florida, Gainesville, FL, $67,494.01, Life College, Marietta, GA, Chiropractic, September 1988 Clinical Psychology, December 1987. GA, Chiropractic, June 1983 Thomas, Bruce L., St Petersburg, FL, Mims, Debbie, Melbourne, FL, Robinson, Bruce, Cocoa Beach, FL, $96,317.24, Life College, Marietta, $44,930.14, Florida Institute of $89,188.45, Life College, Marietta, GA, Chiropractic, March 1989 Technology, Melbourne, FL, Clinical GA, Chiropractic, June 1986 Thompson, Rubin, Miami, FL, Psychology, June 1988. Robitaille, Richard R., Apopka, FL, $6,947.91, Palmer College of Noel, Sheldon S., Miami Beach, FL, $93,389.19, Life College, Marietta, Chiropractic, Davenport, IA, $37,002.60, American Sch of GA, Chiropractic, December 1984 Chiropractic, October 1982. Professional Psychology, Chicago, IL, Rodriguez, Frank, Longwood, FL, Thornton, Loren, Fruitland Park, FL, Clinical Psychology, November 1985. $87,417.70, Los Angeles College of $121,833.60, Life College, Marietta, Chiropractic, Whittier, CA, GA, Chiropractic, March 1986. Dentistry Chiropractic, December 1985 Vitow, Barry, Boca Raton, FL, Blehl, Thomas, Orlando, FL, $15,949.39, Rodriguez, Marlene, Miami, FL, $70,235.88, Life College, Marietta, Boston University Medical Center, $25,503.87, Life College, Marietta, GA, Chiropractic, June 1984. Boston, MA, Dentistry, June 1981. GA, Chiropractic, March 1988 Walburn, Keith J., Tampa, FL, Bruyning, Edwin F., Miami, FL, Rodriguez, Pedro P., Miami, FL, $42,531.06, Life College, Marietta, $100,847.74, Tufts University, Boston, $10,506.33, Cleveland Chiropractic GA, Chiropractic, December 1983. MA, Dentistry, June 1989. 14082 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices Christopoulos, Steve, St Petersburg, FL, College, Nashville, TN, Dentistry, May Med, Lewisburg, WV, Osteopathy, $10,154.89, Boston University 1982 June 1981 Medical Center, Boston, MA, Urban, Curt K., Barefoot Bay, FL, Majauskas, Retrantas, West Palm Beach, Dentistry, June 1986. $99,079.93, Marquette University, FL, $225,442.61, Univ of Health Coello, Carlos A., Boca Raton, FL, Milwaukee, WI, Dentistry, May 1983 Sciences, Kansas City, MO, $154,055.13, Washington University, Ward, Rodney R., Apopka, FL, Osteopathy, May 1985 St Louis, MO, Dentistry, May 1989. $12,232.07, Loma Linda University, Morris, Dareld, Fort Myers, FL, Concepcion, Jorge L., Miami, FL, Loma Linda, CA, Dentistry, $107,787.39, Nova Southeastern $74,965.37, Boston University September 1983 University, North Miami Beach, FL, Medical Center, Boston, MA, Wiggins, Kenneth, Hialeah, FL, Osteopathy, June 1991 Dentistry, May 1989. $4,322.51, Meharry Medical College, Perrotti, Anthony, Penbroke Pines, FL, Dacosta, Michael P., Miami, FL, Nashville, TN, Dentistry, May 1993 $139,805.86, Nova Southeastern $13,475.59, Univ of The Pacific, San Wilson, Edward R., Clearwater, FL, University, North Miami Beach, FL, Francisco, CA, Dentistry, June 1983. $112,686.61, Indiana University Osteopathy, June 1987 Gerlecz, Steven, Lynn Haven, FL, Indianapolis, Bloomington, IN, Stephenson, Brenda, Hallandale, FL, $35,347.73, Univ of Missouri Kansas Dentistry, July 1986 $158,789.95, Kirksville Col of City, Kansas City, MO, Dentistry, Osteopathic Medicine, Kirksville, Optometry April 1985. MO, Osteopathy, June 1986 Hammonds, Michael, Port Charlotte, FL, Cummings, Michael A., Tampa, FL, Tooker, Bruce, Panama City, FL, $140,561.63, Univ of Louisville, $23,990.29, New England College of $122,159.47, Nova Southeastern Louisville, KY, Dentistry, August Optometry, Boston, MA, Optometry, University, North Miami Beach, FL, 1984. March 1985 Osteopathy, June 1987 Ho, Tram B., St Petersburg, FL, Gardner, Edmond, Cooper City, FL, Webb, Paul, Dania, FL, $168,025.98, $8,841.04, Virginia Commonwealth $164,570.52, Illinois College of Nova Southeastern University, North University, Richmond, VA, Dentistry, Optometry, Chicago, IL, Optometry, Miami Beach, FL, Osteopathy, June May 1993. May 1983 1986 Johnson, Eric, Vero Beach, FL, Kostantinov, Peter, Clearwater, FL, Williams, Edward, Sunrise, FL, $24,483.15, Univ of Detroit Mercy, $7,469.80, New England College of $256,451.10, Nova Southeastern Detroit, MI, Dentistry, May 1989. Optometry, Boston, MA, Optometry, University, North Miami Beach, FL, Koshman, Brent D., Key West, FL, May 1992 Osteopathy, June 1985 $58,839.37, Univ of The Pacific, San Neal, Terry L., Melbourne, FL, Francisco, CA, Dentistry, August $2,944.41, Southern College of Pharmacy 1982. Optometry, Memphis, TN, Optometry, Butler, Eddie J., Terra Cela, FL, Luis, Jacqueline, Miami, FL, $4,082.98, June 1984 $69,597.81, Mercer University, Univ of Florida, Gainesville, FL, Williams, Gary, Jacksonville, FL, Atlanta, GA, Pharmacy, June 1981 Dentistry, May 1990 $67,637.53, Southern College of Copeland-Collier, Kathryn K., St Mandracchia, Philip A., Hollywood, FL, Optometry, Memphis, TN, Optometry, Petersburg, FL, $19,529.79, Univ of $18,269.85, New York University, May 1989 Florida, Gainesville, FL, Pharmacy, March 1980 New York, NY, Dentistry, June 1982 Osteopathy McClure, Brian C., Jupiter, FL, Grice, Arnitta J., Havana, FL, $2,859.73, $8,268.97, Univ of Florida, Agre, Norman, Fort Lauderdale, FL, Texas Southern University, Houston, Gainesville, FL, Dentistry, May 1989 $101,089.89, Univ of Health Sciences, TX, Pharmacy, May 1989 Moore, Kimberly, Orlando, FL, Kansas City, MO, Osteopathy, May Spogen, Frederick C., Cocoa Beach, FL, $49,675.06, Univ of Missouri Kansas 1985 $8,328.92, Massachusetts College of City, Kansas City, MO, Dentistry, May Austin, Jerry, Dania, FL, $74,850.17, Pharmacy, Boston, MA, Pharmacy, 1985 Nova Southeastern University, North June 1982 Mora, Alfred, Port St. Lucie, FL, Miami Beach, FL, Osteopathy, June Podiatry $149,019.04, Marquette University, 1989 Milwaukee, WI, Dentistry, May 1987 Baker, Betty J., Miami, FL, $224,850.16, Amanambu, Eugene, Hialeah, FL, Olah, Dian M., St. Petersburg, FL, Nova Southeastern University, North $98,430.92, Barry University— $50,680.17, Univ of Florida, Miami Beach, FL, Osteopathy, June Podiatric Med, Miami Shores, FL, Gainesville, FL, Dentistry, May 1985 1988 Podiatry, May 1990 Oppenheimer, John H., St. Petersburg, Beers, Richard H., Winter Park, FL, Benitez-Negron, Enrique, Miami, FL, FL, $163,366.54, Marquette $11,963.64, Univ of Health Sciences, $134,779.25, Univ of Osteo Medical & University, Milwaukee, WI, Dentistry, Kansas City, MO, Osteopathy, May Health Science, Des Moines, IA, May 1989 1985 Podiatry, June 1989 Perlman, Bruce C., West Palm Beach, Crutcher, Timothy T., Sarasota, FL, Bolanio, Maritza, Miami, FL, FL, $28,442.05, Emory University, $47,256.71, Nova Southeastern $100,387.66, Ohio College of Podiatric Atlanta, GA, Dentistry, June 1982 University, North Miami Beach, FL, Medicine, Cleveland, OH, Podiatry, Redmon, Maria I., Pensacola, FL, Osteopathy, June 1987 May 1989 $42,386.01, Marquette University, Hannum III, Robert J., Tampa, FL, Costanzo, Anthony, St Petersburg, FL, Milwaukee, WI, Dentistry, May 1988 $9,337.84, Philadelphia Col of $124,027.46, New York College of Rojas, Eduardo, Orlando, FL, Osteopathic Medicine, Philadelphia, Podiatric Medicine, New York, NY, $111,211.71, Marquette University, PA, Osteopathy, June 1987 Podiatry, June 1986 Milwaukee, WI, Dentistry, May 1990 Heisler, Hope J., Cape Coral, FL, Delgado, Jorge, Miami, FL, $36,474.82, Setien, Anna M., Miami, FL, $32,203.28, $18,291.85, Oklahoma State Barry University—Podiatric Med, Washington University, St. Louis, University, Tulsa, OK, Osteopathy, Miami Shores, FL, Podiatry, MO, Dentistry, May 1992 May 1989 December 1990 Thomas, Robert, Mary Esther, FL, Lyons, Glynnis J., Tampa, FL, $6,983.17, Fine, David D., Oakland Park, FL, $158,463.90, Meharry Medical West Virginia School of Osteopathic $88,320.65, Ohio College of Podiatric Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices 14083 Medicine, Cleveland, OH, Podiatry, Nashville, TN, Allopathic Medicine, Smith, Charles, St Marys, GA, May 1984 May 1982 $40,507.75, Tufts University, Boston, Gennett, Gregory, Naples, FL, Cain, Alicia A., Jonesboro, GA, MA, Allopathic Medicine, May 1988 $57,422.35, New York College of $1,131.41, Meharry Medical College, Staples Horne, Michelle J., Decatur, GA, Podiatric Medicine, New York, NY, Nashville, TN, Allopathic Medicine, $7,076.10, Morehouse School of Podiatry, June 1987 May 1980 Medicine, Atlanta, GA, Allopathic Imani, Ibn, Miami, FL, $98,650.10, Barry Carroll, Otto, Atlanta, GA, $164,278.44, Medicine, May 1990 University—Podiatric Med, Miami Oral Roberts University, Tulsa, OK, Stull, Tina, Stone Mountain, GA, Shores, FL, Podiatry, May 1991 Allopathic Medicine, May 1986 $8,575.81, Emory University, Atlanta, Peiss, Stuart, Tequesta, FL, $24,909.23, Chappell, Daniel, Fort Oglethorpe, GA, GA, Allopathic Medicine, May 1988 Dr William Scholl Col of Podiatric $79,780.70, Univ of Miami, Miami, Watson Jr, Henry, Atlanta, GA, Med, Chicago, IL, Podiatry, May 1984 FL, Allopathic Medicine, May 1984 $26,906.09, Meharry Medical College, Cockrell, Gail Y., Lithonia, GA, Reed, Bruce, Tampa, FL, $130,223.03, Nashville, TN, Allopathic Medicine, $2,818.73, Univ of Cincinnati, Dr William Scholl Col of Podiatric May 1980 Cincinnati, OH, Allopathic Medicine, Med, Chicago, IL, Podiatry, May 1987 Woody, Edith K., Atlanta, GA, Samuels, Petrona P., Fort Lauderdale, June 1983 Grant, Patricia, Decatur, GA, $17,116.95, $26,178.08, Ohio State University, FL, $156,695.69, New York College of Columbus, OH, Allopathic Medicine, Podiatric Medicine, New York, NY, Morehouse School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA, Allopathic Medicine, December 1982 Podiatry, June 1986 Yarde, William L., Jonesboro, GA, Smith, Larry L., Tallahassee, FL, May 1992 $110,299.19, Morehouse School of $39,439.77, Dr William Scholl Col of Harper, Jennifer, Atlanta, GA, Medicine, Atlanta, GA, Allopathic Podiatric Med, Chicago, IL, Podiatry, $220,348.55, Morehouse School of Medicine, May 1985 May 1988 Medicine, Atlanta, GA, Allopathic Wright, Victor, Valrico, FL, $14,725.63, Medicine, June 1985 Chiropractic Horne, Hilton M., Quitman, GA, Dr William Scholl Col of Podiatric Ackermann, Anne E., Marietta, GA, Med, Chicago, IL, Podiatry, May 1983 $41,594.16, Meharry Medical College, Nashville, TN, Allopathic Medicine, $52,432.65, Life College, Marietta, Public Health May 1979 GA, Chiropractic, September 1984 Butler, David, Land O Lakes, FL, Isaacs, Rolin W., Atlanta, GA, Ackermann, Brian J., Marietta, GA, $7,287.98, Univ of Oklahoma Health $58,301.40, Morehouse School of $51,164.74, Life College, Marietta, Sciences Center, Oklahoma City, OK, Medicine, Atlanta, GA, Allopathic GA, Chiropractic, September 1984 Public Health, December 1991 Medicine, June 1985 Agee, Mark, Marietta, GA, $53,453.96, Montgomery, John M., Orange Park, FL, Majeed, Ishaq I., Atlanta, GA, Life College, Marietta, GA, $8,160.18, Yale University, New $87,790.34, Morehouse School of Chiropractic, December 1984 Haven, CT, Public Health, May 1984 Medicine, Atlanta, GA, Allopathic Ali, Abdirazak A., College Park, GA, Papillon, Frank H., North Miami, FL, Medicine, May 1987 $23,433.71, Life College, Marietta, $9,282.58, Univ of Illinois At Chicago, Maynard, Lawrence, Atlanta, GA, GA, Chiropractic, June 1990 Chicago, IL, Public Health, August $3,131.97, Univ of Massachusetts Ash, Carla L., Marietta, GA, $86,481.47, 1986 Worcester, Worcester, MA, Allopathic Life College, Marietta, GA, Medicine, June 1986 Chiropractic, September 1986 Veterinary Medicine Mcghee, James E., Stone Mountain, GA, Bakels, James E., Marietta, GA, Howard, Susan, Gainesville, FL, $4,019.93, Emory University, Atlanta, $22,268.49, Life College, Marietta, $79,155.40, Univ of Florida, GA, Allopathic Medicine, May 1988 GA, Chiropractic, September 1990 Gainesville, FL, Veterinary Medicine, Meyer, Richard, Marietta, GA, Barner, Robert, Marietta, GA, May 1988 $53,944.30, Loma Linda University, $52,577.49, Life College, Marietta, Loma Linda, CA, Allopathic GA, Chiropractic, December 1983 Georgia Medicine, June 1985 Bell, Clayton, Riverdale, GA, Millon, Jeffrey, Lithonia, GA, Allopathic Medicine $123,028.36, Life College, Marietta, $40,927.85, Meharry Medical College, GA, Chiropractic, September 1987 Barnes, William T., Macon, GA, Nashville, TN, Allopathic Medicine, Berman, David H., Marietta, GA, $18,201.69, Mercer University, August 1985 Macon, GA, Allopathic Medicine, Nelson, Robert, Gray, GA, $4,599.29, $123,052.47, Life College, Marietta, June 1990 Meharry Medical College, Nashville, GA, Chiropractic, March 1987 Beasley, Mary, Atlanta, GA, $87,421.01, TN, Allopathic Medicine, May 1979 Bernius, Gregory L., Peachtree City, GA, Emory University, Atlanta, GA, Patterson, Lea T., Atlanta, GA, $68,828.41, Palmer College of Allopathic Medicine, May 1987 $8,975.57, Morehouse School of Chiropractic, Davenport, IA, Bennett, John G., Marietta, GA, Medicine, Atlanta, GA, Allopathic Chiropractic, June 1988 $35,592.64, Medical College of Medicine, May 1990 Billstrom, Richard, Marietta, GA, Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, Rachel, Everett D., Stone Mountain, GA, $88,395.30, Life College, Marietta, Allopathic Medicine, June 1980 $4,997.84, Univ of Alabama GA, Chiropractic, December 1986 Bowen-Hay, Winston B., Norcross, GA, Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, Bishop Jr., William B., Cartersville, GA, $99,987.80, Morehouse School of Allopathic Medicine, June 1989 $22,807.28, Life College, Marietta, Medicine, Atlanta, GA, Allopathic Salimonu, Olidele K., Decatur, GA, GA, Chiropractic, June 1988 Medicine, May 1991 $53,427.85, Univ of Illinois Medical Blake, Lisa M., Decatur, GA, $82,369.91, Brown, Darren W., Doraville, GA, Center, Chicago, IL, Allopathic New York Chiropractic College, $3,979.43, Wright State University, Medicine, June 1987 Seneca Falls, NY, Chiropractic, April Dayton, OH, Allopathic Medicine, Samarasinghe, Ajit, Atlanta, GA, 1988 June 1986 $5,236.68, Meharry Medical College, Bleyaert, Lamont L., Woodstock, GA, Burrowes, Celio, Atlanta, GA, Nashville, TN, Allopathic Medicine, $55,550.76, Life College, Marietta, $83,969.84, Meharry Medical College, May 1990 GA, Chiropractic, September 1985 14084 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices Bohr, Corinne E., Alpharetta, GA, Cosmelli, Patricia, Marietta, GA, Greene, Silas R., Macon, GA, $63,426.80, Life College, Marietta, $3,975.80, Life College, Marietta, GA, $32,484.23, Life College, Marietta, GA, Chiropractic, June 1986 Chiropractic, December 1986 GA, Chiropractic, June 1984 Breazeale, Michael, Marietta, GA, Cox, Harold D., Marietta, GA, Gross, Thomas, Cartersville, GA, $120,675.42, Life College, Marietta, $131,801.29, Palmer College of $65,548.58, Life College, Marietta, GA, Chiropractic, March 1987 Chiropractic West, San Jose, CA, GA, Chiropractic, December 1983 Brooks, William, Decatur, GA, Chiropractic, March 1987 Hall, John L., Cartersville, GA, $62,942.69, Life College, Marietta, Crawford, Franklin R., Marietta, GA, $122,359.54, Life College, Marietta, GA, Chiropractic, March 1984 $58,193.86, Life College, Marietta, GA, Chiropractic, June 1987 Brown, George A., Smyrna, GA, GA, Chiropractic, December 1984 Hejeij, Wassim H., Morrow, GA, $8,504.68, Cleveland Chiropractic Crimes, Patricia T., Duluth, GA, $11,159.69, Life College, Marietta, College, Kansas City, MO, $71,673.34, Life College, Marietta, GA, Chiropractic, December 1991 Chiropractic, September 1990 GA, Chiropractic, December 1986 Holewinski, Kenneth, Marietta, GA, Brown, Wilbur E., Dunwoody, GA, Crosswhite, Larry K., Oakwood, GA, $34,945.40, Life College, Marietta, $11,705.31, Palmer College of $123,588.33, Life College, Marietta, GA, Chiropractic, September 1984 Chiropractic, Davenport, IA, GA, Chiropractic, September 1986 Horsley, Ronald G., Kennewaw, GA, Chiropractic, June 1984 Culver, Toni Y., Atlanta, GA, $37,049.52, Life College, Marietta, Burleson, David A., Marietta, GA, $58,363.47, Life College, Marietta, GA, Chiropractic, June 1985 $22,930.00, Life College, Marietta, GA, Chiropractic, June 1985 Hoyt, John A., Atlanta, GA, $7,551.32, GA, Chiropractic, September 1984 Day, Philip P., Savannah, GA, Life College, Marietta, GA, Burnett, Diane G., Atlanta, GA, $68,183.27, Life College, Marietta, Chiropractic, March 1988 $10,807.37, Life College, Marietta, GA, Chiropractic, December 1986 Hush, George G., Smyrna, GA, GA, Chiropractic, December 1986 Deopp, William N., Marietta, GA, $47,967.55, Life College, Marietta, Byrd, Ricardau R., Atlanta, GA, $46,453.37, Life College, Marietta, GA, Chiropractic, December 1986 $27,852.19, Life College, Marietta, GA, Chiropractic, June 1985 Iraci, Cynthia L., Waleska, GA, GA, Chiropractic, September 1982 Downes, John, Kennesaw, GA, $101,241.61, Life College, Marietta, Caporaso, Nicholas, Lawrenceville, GA, $110,800.07, Life College, Marietta, GA, Chiropractic, June 1986 $30,301.38, Life College, Marietta, GA, Chiropractic, September 1986 Jackson, Jerry, Marietta, GA, $46,898.80, GA, Chiropractic, June 1988 Duker, John, Conyers, GA, $115,424.31, Life College, Marietta, GA, Carpenter, Jacob O., Decatur, GA, Life College, Marietta, GA, Chiropractic, December 1988 Judd, Ronald K., Jasper, GA, $49,301.73, $17,467.79, Life College, Marietta, Chiropractic, March 1987 Earley, Kenneth S., Lawrenceville, GA, Life College, Marietta, GA, GA, Chiropractic, September 1985 Cassan, Steven S., Canton, GA, $62,727.19, Life College, Marietta, Chiropractic, March 1984 Justice, James, Lawrenceville, GA, $29,388.54, Life College, Marietta, GA, Chiropractic, December 1987 Elkins, Richard, Marietta, GA, $139,398.22, Life College, Marietta, GA, Chiropractic, March 1985 $31,284.51, Life College, Marietta, GA, Chiropractic, June 1985 Catalfo, Tim, Roswell, GA, $78,574.44, GA, Chiropractic, June 1989 Kay, Alicia E., Atlanta, GA, $42,821.23, Life College, Marietta, GA, Farley, James J., Marietta, GA, Life College, Marietta, GA, Chiropractic, September 1988 $50,333.80, Life College, Marietta, Chiropractic, June 1984 Cavaliere, Frances F., Marietta, GA, GA, Chiropractic, September 1986 King, David, Smyrna, GA, $32,963.99, $80,763.65, Life College, Marietta, Farmer, Henry C., Cedartown, GA, Life College, Marietta, GA, GA, Chiropractic, September 1984 $38,202.64, Life College, Marietta, Chiropractic, September 1985 Chochla, Thomas N., Marietta, GA, GA, Chiropractic, March 1985 Klubenspies, John, Lilburn, GA, $74,734.10, Life College, Marietta, Ficco, David S., Duluth, GA, $70,723.83, $84,756.79, Life College, Marietta, GA, Chiropractic, September 1988 Life College, Marietta, GA, GA, Chiropractic, September 1986 Cicala, Carmine J., Marietta, GA, Chiropractic, December 1986 Kowalske, Philip P., Marietta, GA, $82,903.90, Life College, Marietta, Fisher, Michael, Marietta, GA, $123,017.60, Life College, Marietta, GA, Chiropractic, March 1987 $30,007.17, Life College, Marietta, GA, Chiropractic, December 1986 Cirou, Barbara L., Athens, GA, GA, Chiropractic, March 1989 Kozel, Noreen V., Powder Springs, GA, $8,647.06, Life College, Marietta, GA, Fordiani, Thomas R., Marietta, GA, $4,927.18, Life College, Marietta, GA, Chiropractic, March 1982 $143,069.48, Life College, Marietta, Chiropractic, June 1990 Clark, Richard, Folkston, GA, GA, Chiropractic, September 1986 Kyle, George, Lawrenceville, GA, $95,929.42, Life College, Marietta, Francis, Michael J., Jonesboro, GA, $53,570.41, Life College, Marietta, GA, Chiropractic, March 1985 $50,955.58, Life College, Marietta, GA, Chiropractic, March 1983 Clay, Cassius C., Atlanta, GA, GA, Chiropractic, June 1986 Lambert-Kemlage, Sharon A., Marietta, $29,308.66, Life College, Marietta, Galzarano, Carole, Marietta, GA, GA, $98,288.54, Life College, GA, Chiropractic, June 1983 $68,862.92, Life College, Marietta, Marietta, GA, Chiropractic, March Collins Jr., Cecil E., Canton, GA, GA, Chiropractic, June 1987 1986 $60,016.38, Life College, Marietta, Gay, Warner, Marietta, GA, $31,512.73, Lee, Carole, Acworth, GA, $24,527.34, GA, Chiropractic, June 1985 Life College, Marietta, GA, Life College, Marietta, GA, Conard, Arden M., Marietta, GA, Chiropractic, March 1983 Chiropractic, December 1983 $20,509.28, Life College, Marietta, Gill, Joseph, Fayetteville, GA, Lister, Rufus G., Marietta, GA, GA, Chiropractic, June 1984 $130,252.66, Life College, Marietta, $44,094.15, Life College, Marietta, Cook, Robert, Tennille, GA, $68,134.49, GA, Chiropractic, March 1987 GA, Chiropractic, June 1988 Palmer College of Chiropractic, Gotkin, Stuart S., Marietta, GA, Lowman, John R., Marietta, GA, Davenport, IA, Chiropractic, March $57,556.55, Life College, Marietta, $66,264.05, Life College, Marietta, 1985 GA, Chiropractic, December 1985 GA, Chiropractic, June 1986 Cooper, Robert N., Marietta, GA, Green, Stephen, Kennesaw, GA, Lubnewski, Peter P., Smyrna, GA, $8,168.66, Life College, Marietta, GA, $70,668.31, Life College, Marietta, $99,032.18, Life College, Marietta, Chiropractic, December 1990 GA, Chiropractic, December 1985 GA, Chiropractic, September 1983 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices 14085 Mahar, Dale, Marietta, GA, $41,201.85, Noble, Craig J., Kennesaw, GA, Scampole, James, Kernsaw, GA, Life College, Marietta, GA, $120,782.80, Life College, Marietta, $59,875.02, Life College, Marietta, Chiropractic, March 1984 GA, Chiropractic, September 1986 GA, Chiropractic, September 1985 Marcum, Craig, Morrow, GA, $4,918.53, Ogbuchi, Sampson N., Doraville, GA, Schreffler, Keith, Marietta, GA, Life College, Marietta, GA, $7,621.88, Life College, Marietta, GA, $21,547.52, Life College, Marietta, Chiropractic, June 1991 Chiropractic, March 1991 GA, Chiropractic, June 1991 Marsh, Jeffrey C., Marietta, GA, Owens, James R., Atlanta, GA, Seabolt, Alan A., Marietta, GA, $99,684.55, Life College, Marietta, $12,377.54, Life College, Marietta, $117,537.17, Life College, Marietta, GA, Chiropractic, June 1989 GA, Chiropractic, March 1992 GA, Chiropractic, October 1986 Martin Jr, John W., Canton, GA, Palffy, Victor T., Atlanta, GA, Seigle, Marcus, Atlanta, GA, $26,013.41, $78,107.88, Life College, Marietta, $139,572.98, Life College, Marietta, Life College, Marietta, GA, GA, Chiropractic, September 1986 GA, Chiropractic, March 1986 Chiropractic, December 1986 Martin, Craig S., Dublin, GA, Palmer, Albert A A, Marietta, GA, Severson, Charles, Marietta, GA, $57,081.04, Life College, Marietta, $15,710.16, Cleveland Chiropractic $37,317.94, Life College, Marietta, GA, Chiropractic, June 1989 College, Kansas City, MO, GA, Chiropractic, December 1982 Mason, George G M, Decatur, GA, Chiropractic, May 1989 Sheick, Steven A., Smyrna, GA, $16,411.08, Logan College of Palmer, Becky A., Marietta, GA, $106,497.54, Life College, Marietta, Chiropractic, Chesterfield, MO, GA, Chiropractic, September 1986 Chiropractic, April 1989 $71,097.66, Life College, Marietta, GA, Chiropractic, March 1986 Siegle, Raymond J., Atlanta, GA, Massengale, Gregory L., Marietta, GA, $3,082.21, Life College, Marietta, GA, $94,865.89, Life College, Marietta, Patterson, Jerry E., Smyrna, GA, $24,010.68, Life College, Marietta, Chiropractic, June 1991 GA, Chiropractic, March 1986 Sieradzki, Rex A., Atlanta, GA, Mayles, Sandra, Dalton, GA, $68,591.79, GA, Chiropractic, September 1984 Patterson, Mark A., Marietta, GA, $64,931.45, Life College, Marietta, Life College, Marietta, GA, GA, Chiropractic, September 1986 Chiropractic, December 1983 $99,652.08, Life College, Marietta, GA, Chiropractic, December 1987 Siminski, Larry T., Atlanta, GA, McCormick, Robert J., Marietta, GA, $109,738.59, Life College, Marietta, $31,757.80, Life College, Marietta, Paul, Roger W., Stone Mountain, GA, $115,762.89, Life College, Marietta, GA, Chiropractic, June 1988 GA, Chiropractic, June 1986 Small, Tammie, Smyrna, GA, McMahon, Joseph A., Marietta, GA, GA, Chiropractic, September 1985 $68,373.48, Life College, Marietta, $8,462.79, Life College, Marietta, GA, Pavkov, Gary G., Kennesaw, GA, GA, Chiropractic, September 1989 $48,401.75, Life College, Marietta, Chiropractic, April 1991 Snyder, Richard K., Acworth, GA, McQuaig, John, Stone Mountain, GA, GA, Chiropractic, March 1987 $31,942.31, Life College, Marietta, $3,016.75, Logan College of Penn Jr, Paul P., Atlanta, GA, GA, Chiropractic, December 1983 Chiropractic, Chesterfield, MO, $60,331.14, Life College, Marietta, Spears, George, Marietta, GA, Chiropractic, September 1983 GA, Chiropractic, June 1984 $82,729.26, Life College, Marietta, Mercks, James L., Marietta, GA, Perrier, Debra D., Cedartown, GA, $133,318.65, Life College, Marietta, GA, Chiropractic, December 1985 $21,428.03, Life College, Marietta, Spears, Roseann N., Kennesaw, GA, GA, Chiropractic, March 1986 GA, Chiropractic, June 1985 $130,880.58, Life College, Marietta, Merrit, Marvin, Lawrenceville, GA, Polishuk, Andre A., Smyrna, GA, $22,153.87, Life College, Marietta, GA, Chiropractic, September 1986 $113,795.46, Life College, Marietta, Spiva, Walter E., Blairsville, GA, GA, Chiropractic, March 1985 GA, Chiropractic, January 1984 Moeckel, Timothy, Atlanta, GA, $125,008.76, Life College, Marietta, Pristash, Michael R., Marietta, GA, GA, Chiropractic, September 1986 $57,225.88, Life College, Marietta, $93,260.29, Life College, Marietta, GA, Chiropractic, September 1985 Spivey, Douglas D., Doraville, GA, GA, Chiropractic, September 1984 $58,753.35, Life College, Marietta, Monical, William, Marietta, GA, Rawlins, Joel J., Smyrna, GA, $49,252.25, Life College, Marietta, GA, Chiropractic, December 1986 $116,025.23, Life College, Marietta, Thomas, Gordon A., Atlanta, GA, GA, Chiropractic, September 1988 GA, Chiropractic, September 1986 Morgan, Charles C., Marietta, GA, $66,429.63, Life College, Marietta, Reymann, William M., Marietta, GA, $92,653.35, Life College, Marietta, GA, Chiropractic, September 1985 $7,164.80, Life College, Marietta, GA, GA, Chiropractic, June 1986 Traff, Randall, Marietta, GA, $4,349.56, Chiropractic, March 1986 Moritz, Gregory M., Powder Springs, Life College, Marietta, GA, GA, $83,140.08, Life College, Rivera, Antonio, Atlanta, GA, Chiropractic, March 1991 Marietta, GA, Chiropractic, December $21,651.43, Life College, Marietta, Troutman Jr, William D., Atlanta, GA, 1984 GA, Chiropractic, June 1983 $51,880.23, Life College, Marietta, Mosley, James, Columbus, GA, Robideau, Robert R., Roswell, GA, GA, Chiropractic, October 1983 $44,527.07, Northwestern College of $56,937.22, Life College, Marietta, Troutman, William W., Atlanta, GA, Chiropractic, Bloomington, MN, GA, Chiropractic, September 1985 $28,837.12, Life College, Marietta, Chiropractic, August 1985 Rowland, Jimmy H., Warner Robins, GA, Chiropractic, January 1983 Mueller, William J., Dunwoody, GA, GA, $64,614.07, Life College, Tucker, Ron, Atlanta, GA, $23,157.86, $59,443.34, Life College, Marietta, Marietta, GA, Chiropractic, December Life Chiropractic College-West, San GA, Chiropractic, September 1983 1986 Lorenzo, CA, Chiropractic, June 1987 Nadel, Glenn R., Marietta, GA, Rutkowski, Morris E., Marietta, GA, Tutt, Gwendolyn M., Roswell, GA, $18,050.99, Life College, Marietta, $90,654.73, Life College, Marietta, $66,216.68, Life College, Marietta, GA, Chiropractic, April 1989 GA, Chiropractic, December 1985 GA, Chiropractic, June 1983 Nappi, Neil A., Marietta, GA, Sarabadan, Davood, Atlanta, GA, Vescuso, John A., Marietta, GA, $47,489.94, Life College, Marietta, $52,941.33, Life College, Marietta, $101,985.23, Life College, Marietta, GA, Chiropractic, June 1984 GA, Chiropractic, September 1986 GA, Chiropractic, September 1986 Nicholson Jr, James E., Marietta, GA, Scala, Timothy T., Marietta, GA, Vlahos, James G., Norcross, GA, $106,426.57, Life College, Marietta, $30,937.21, Life College, Marietta, $102,374.81, Life College, Marietta, GA, Chiropractic, April 1985 GA, Chiropractic, September 1984 GA, Chiropractic, September 1985 14086 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices Walker, James E., Marietta, GA, Hammock, Mark M., Decatur, GA, Okosun, Edobor M., College Park, GA, $153,831.59, Life College, Marietta, $40,807.66, Howard University, $64,189.81, Mercer University, GA, Chiropractic, September 1985 Washington, DC, Dentistry, May 1989 Atlanta, GA, Pharmacy, August 1984 Wallace, Mark R., Mableton, GA, Holiday, Harry, Statesboro, GA, Osakue, Stephen O., Atlanta, GA, $51,389.78, Life College, Marietta, $91,149.20, Meharry Medical College, $38,045.26, Mercer University, GA, Chiropractic, December 1986 Nashville, TN, Dentistry, May 1985 Atlanta, GA, Pharmacy, June 1986 Warrick, Wayne D., Kennesaw, GA, Jackson, Lester, Savannah, GA, Sciple, Charles, Atlanta, GA, $59,436.56, Life College, Marietta, $56,263.93, Meharry Medical College, $68,891.16, Mercer University, GA, Chiropractic, March 1987 Nashville, TN, Dentistry, May 1985 Atlanta, GA, Pharmacy, June 1987 Weatherly, William, Atlanta, GA, Kuhlmay, Klaus, Atlanta, GA, Washington, Gwendlyn A., Decatur, GA, $46,040.69, Life College, Marietta, $12,120.37, Emory University, $33,714.42, Mercer University, GA, Chiropractic, June 1983 Atlanta, GA, Dentistry, May 1987 Atlanta, GA, Pharmacy, June 1988 Wellman, Fred, Smyrna, GA, Lester, Jack, Lithonia, GA, $124,269.89, Wiggins III, William, Marietta, GA, $16,874.21, Life College, Marietta, Meharry Medical College, Nashville, $19,193.33, Mercer University, GA, Chiropractic, December 1983 TN, Dentistry, May 1986 Atlanta, GA, Pharmacy, June 1982 Williams, D’oyen A., Stone Mountain, Mcdonald, Kenneth, Atlanta, GA, Wingate, Ronald, Atlanta, GA, GA, $111,719.83, Life College, $10,619.02, Virginia Commonwealth $5,701.65, Mercer University, Atlanta, Marietta, GA, Chiropractic, December University, Richmond, VA, Dentistry, GA, Pharmacy, May 1989 1984 May 1991 Yarian, Eldon L., Dunwoody, GA, Mosley, Nicholas A., Redan, GA, Podiatry $13,833.03, Life College, Marietta, $119,738.19, Meharry Medical Kalali, Saeed, Marietta, GA, $3,808.48, GA, Chiropractic, March 1984 College, Nashville, TN, Dentistry, May New York College of Podiatric Zakrzewski, David, Marietta, GA, 1983 $29,972.56, Life College, Marietta, Scott, Renee R., Atlanta, GA, Medicine, New York, NY, Podiatry, GA, Chiropractic, August 1988 $130,280.50, Meharry Medical June 1990 Zonder, Stuart S., Acworth, GA, College, Nashville, TN, Dentistry, May Kustich, Susan, Augusta, GA, $79,282.57, Life College, Marietta, 1986 $98,332.42, New York College of GA, Chiropractic, December 1985 Podiatric Medicine, New York, NY, Osteopathy Podiatry, June 1989 Clinical Psychology Celestin, Alexander J., Savannah, GA, Orji, John E., Atlanta, GA, $64,990.96, Daniels, Gregory C., Atlanta, GA, $123,083.66, New York College of Univ of Osteo Medical & Health $59,879.93, Georgia State University, Osteopathic Medicine, Old Westbury, Science, Des moines, IA, Podiatry, Atlanta, GA, Clinical Psychology, NY, Osteopathy, June 1987 June 1991 June 1987 Storm, Mark, Cumming, GA, $65,177.94, Kroupa, Carol, Roswell, GA, $54,362.41, Pharmacy Ohio College of Podiatric Medicine, California Sch of Prof Psych Fresno, Adu-Agyei, Yaw, Atlanta, GA, Cleveland, OH, Podiatry, May 1990 $10,631.90, Mercer University, Fresno, CA, Clinical Psychology, June Public Health 1989 Atlanta, GA, Pharmacy, June 1985 Afrane, Barima B., Decatur, GA, Cox, Robert M., Atlanta, GA, Dentistry $9,421.55, Univ of Southern $109,926.96, Loma Linda University, Allred, Robert, Lithonia, GA, California, Los Angeles, CA, Loma Linda, CA, Public Health, $188,777.17, Emory University, Pharmacy, May 1986 September 1981 Atlanta, GA, Dentistry, May 1987 Clancy-Knierien, Kimberely A., Bowers-Phillips, Donna M., Savannah, Marietta, GA, $1,422.83, Mercer Veterinary Medicine GA, $51,913.87, Howard University, University, Atlanta, GA, Pharmacy, Brown, Mazola H., Atlanta, GA, Washington, DC, Dentistry, May 1984 June 1987 $35,208.37, Tuskegee University, Brown, Geoffrey C., Atlanta, GA, Edeh, Onyemaechi A., Atlanta, GA, Tuskegee, AL, Veterinary Medicine, $9,414.98, Meharry Medical College, $56,209.89, Mercer University, May 1983 Nashville, TN, Dentistry, May 1985 Atlanta, GA, Pharmacy, June 1983 Friedlander, Michael A., Roswell, GA, Carter, James E., Alpharetta, GA, Felton, Norman N., Decatur, GA, $25,861.26, Tuskegee University, $10,135.39, Medical College of $32,667.74, Mercer University, Tuskegee, AL, Veterinary Medicine, Georgia, Augusta, GA, Dentistry, June Atlanta, GA, Pharmacy, June 1983 May 1990 1987 Hailesalassie, Hapte H., College Park, Mcfield, Gizele, Bethlehem, GA, Comer, Barry B., Decatur, GA, GA, $41,698.36, Mercer University, $83,843.02, Tuskegee University, $105,941.01, Emory University, Atlanta, GA, Pharmacy, June 1987 Tuskegee, AL, Veterinary Medicine, Atlanta, GA, Dentistry, May 1984 Hall, Carolyn, Doraville, GA, May 1982 Comer, Julia R., Decatur, GA, $16,056.93, Mercer University, Slaughter, Edwin L., Atlanta, GA, $134,713.74, Emory University, Atlanta, GA, Pharmacy, June 1989 $22,353.15, Tuskegee University, Atlanta, GA, Dentistry, May 1986 Hanson, Aubrey M., Decatur, GA, Tuskegee, AL, Veterinary Medicine, Fortson Jr, Henry D., Thomasville, GA, $42,432.87, Mercer University, May 1982 $192,821.78, Meharry Medical Atlanta, GA, Pharmacy, June 1982 Waller, Walton, Marietta, GA, College, Nashville, TN, Dentistry, May Jackson, Lenell R., College Park, GA, $13,658.28, Tuskegee University, 1984 $24,995.07, Mercer University, Tuskegee, AL, Veterinary Medicine, Gold, Robert S., Atlanta, GA, Atlanta, GA, Pharmacy, August 1987 May 1990 $171,294.03, Boston University Lawrence, Doris, Austell, GA, Medical Center, Boston, MA, $24,977.44, Mercer University, Hawaii Dentistry, May 1988 Atlanta, GA, Pharmacy, May 1985 Hall, John E., Atlanta, GA, $77,596.16, Lowe, Stephanie, Decatur, GA, Allopathic Medicine Meharry Medical College, Nashville, $28,077.46, Mercer University, Battaglia, Joseph, Kihei, HI, $18,854.59, TN, Dentistry, May 1982 Atlanta, GA, Pharmacy, June 1989 Univ of Illinois Medical Center, Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices 14087 Chicago, IL, Allopathic Medicine, Davenport, IA, Chiropractic, Health Sciences, North Chicago, IL, June 1987 September 1984 Allopathic Medicine, June 1987 Baum, Kenneth J., Honolulu, HI, Herem, Larry A., Burley, ID, $72,796.95, Garibay, Carlos, Homewood, IL, $79,639.34, Univ of Med & Dent of Palmer College of Chiropractic, $34,923.76, Rush University, Chicago, New Jersey, Newark, NJ, Allopathic Davenport, IA, Chiropractic, June IL, Allopathic Medicine, June 1982 Medicine, May 1985 1985 Gebo, Paul D., Arlington Heights, IL, Gluck, Daniel S., Haleiwa, HI, Holmes, Clarence J., Rathdrum, ID, $16,688.36, Univ of Illinois Medical $208,007.99, Tufts University, Boston, $19,566.50, Life Chiropractic College- Center, Chicago, IL, Allopathic MA, Allopathic Medicine, May 1982 West, San Lorenzo, CA, Chiropractic, Medicine, June 1987 Zasi, Alan, Lihue, HI, $75,948.52, December 1984 Glenn, Byron, Carbondale, IL, Washington University, St Louis, MO, Young, Kerry V., Idaho Falls, ID, $120,189.55, Univ of Illinois Medical Allopathic Medicine, May 1987. $55,562.32, Logan College of Center, Chicago, IL, Allopathic Medicine, August 1987 Chiropractic Chiropractic, Chesterfield, MO, Chiropractic, December 1987 Griffin-Berry, Carol L., Chicago, IL, Bennett, Hugh, Honolulu, HI, $5,503.39, $6,375.28, Univ of Illinois Medical Cleveland Chiropractic College, Clinical Psychology Center, Chicago, IL, Allopathic Kansas City, MO, Chiropractic, May Furgason, Margaret A., St Maries, ID, Medicine, June 1989 1989 $52,756.92, California Sch of Prof Hashemi, Kamran, Chicago, IL, Corn, Byron K., Waianae, HI, Psych San Diego, San Diego, CA, $153,696.64, Northwestern $36,102.00, Palmer College of Clinical Psychology, June 1984 University, Chicago, IL, Allopathic Chiropractic, Davenport, IA, Medicine, June 1987 Chiropractic, March 1984 Optometry Hernandez, Jose J., Chicago, IL, Ferguson, Gary, Honolulu, HI, Murray, Richard, Boise, ID, $52,383.51, $43,132.46, Univ of Illinois Medical Center, Chicago, IL, Allopathic $58,064.78, Northwestern College of Pacific University, Forest Grove, OR, Medicine, June 1984 Chiropractic, Bloomington, MN, Optometry, May 1987 Chiropractic, August 1988 Keyes, Kemmes, Chicago, IL, Johanning, Jeanine J M, Kihei, HI, Illinois $44,403.16, Wright State University, Dayton, OH, Allopathic Medicine, $43,787.31, Logan College of Allopathic Medicine Chiropractic, Chesterfield, MO, June 1983 Chiropractic, August 1986 Armetta, Karen A., Naperville, IL, Kizaire, Danielle C., Chicago, IL, Rider, Ward E., Kailua, HI, $8,744.54, $24,804.90, Rush University, Chicago, $13,863.25, Loyola University Cleveland Chiropractic College, Los IL, Allopathic Medicine, October 1985 Chicago, Maywood, IL, Allopathic Angeles, CA, Chiropractic, December Bacon, Cutia W., Chicago, IL, $5,534.90, Medicine, June 1984 Kushner, Brad D., Waukegan, IL, 1983 Univ of Illinois Medical Center, Wallace, Owen, Honolulu, HI, Chicago, IL, Allopathic Medicine, $124,692.19, Finch University of $13,188.59, Life College, Marietta, June 1991 Health Sciences, North Chicago, IL, GA, Chiropractic, September 1984 Beckett, James E., Des Plaines, IL, Allopathic Medicine, October 1987 $59,779.25, Hahnemann University, Lessin, Barry D., Chicago, IL, Dentistry Philadelphia, PA, Allopathic $63,421.38, Univ of Wisconsin Knickelbine, Mark T., Honolulu, HI, Medicine, June 1981 Madison, Madison, WI, Allopathic $31,662.78, Marquette University, Burns, Peter, Chicago, IL, $4,135.92, Medicine, May 1983 Little, Carlton, Chicago, IL, $84,914.56, Milwaukee, WI, Dentistry, May 1982 Rush University, Chicago, IL, Riter, Cecil, Honolulu, HI, $18,529.10, Allopathic Medicine, June 1990 Medical College of Ohio, Toledo, OH, Allopathic Medicine, June 1989 Loma Linda University, Loma Linda, Cherry, Nanci S., Chicago, IL, Martin, Noelle, Chicago, IL, $68,335.48, CA, Dentistry, June 1985 $96,694.82, Michigan State Medical College of Ohio, Toledo, OH, University, East Lansing, MI, Optometry Allopathic Medicine, June 1991 Allopathic Medicine, December 1987 Mitchell, Kevin A., Chicago, IL, Stine, Gordon J., Lihue, HI, $34,432.64, Cooper, April D., Hazel Crest, IL, $26,576.98, Southern Illinois Univ, Pacific University, Forest Grove, OR, $69,837.77, Univ of Illinois Medical Springfield, IL, Allopathic Medicine, Optometry, May 1990 Center, Chicago, IL, Allopathic May 1987 Osteopathy Medicine, June 1989 OH, Kyu, Chicago, IL, $32,233.61, Univ Dehn, Roger, Crystal Lake, IL, of Illinois Medical Center, Chicago, Denney, Teresa, Honolulu, HI, $10,664.30, Univ of Illinois Medical $132,945.82, College of Osteo Med of IL, Allopathic Medicine, June 1991 Center, Chicago, IL, Allopathic Pate, Michael D., Des Plaines, IL, the Pacific, Pomona, CA, Osteopathy, Medicine, June 1989 $38,759.66, Indiana University June 1983 Falater, Laura L., Chicago, IL, Indianapolis, Bloomington, IN, Reppy, Robert R., Kailua, HI, $68,722.79, Finch University of Allopathic Medicine, May 1985 $181,816.82, College of Osteo Med of Health Sciences, North Chicago, IL, Patterson-Jones, Sharon B., Chicago, IL, the Pacific, Pomona, CA, Osteopathy, Allopathic Medicine, June 1987 $43,764.29, Univ of Illinois Medical June 1986 Fields, Jessie J., Chicago, IL, $24,456.27, Center, Chicago, IL, Allopathic Idaho Medical College of Pennsylvania, Medicine, June 1983 Philadelphia, PA, Allopathic Phillips, Richard O., Chicago, IL, Chiropractic Medicine, June 1982 $148,824.91, Univ of Illinois Medical Buckles, Bobby R., Boise, ID, Forde, Daron D., Westmont, IL, Center, Chicago, IL, Allopathic $57,549.52, Western States $90,773.34, Univ of Illinois Medical Medicine, June 1988 Chiropractic College, Portland, OR, Center, Chicago, IL, Allopathic Popoola, Freddie M., Chicago, IL, Chiropractic, June 1987 Medicine, June 1988 $171,027.76, Medical College of Gott, George, Boise, ID, $73,018.54, Friedman, Rochelle, Chicago, IL, Wisconsin, Milwaukee, WI, Palmer College of Chiropractic, $53,316.53, Finch University of Allopathic Medicine, December 1983 14088 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices Pursell, Susan, Chicago, IL, $14,588.76, Davis, Keith A., Chicago, IL, $58,997.27, Chiropractic, Davenport, IA, Boston University Medical Center, National College of Chiropractic, Chiropractic, March 1987. Boston, MA, Allopathic Medicine, Lombard, IL, Chiropractic, April 1987. Patterson, Farris, Maywood, IL, May 1990 Dehn, Donald C., Rockford, IL, $26,381.39, National College of Reese, Elaine Thurmond, Dixmoor, IL, $29,157.63, National College of Chiropractic, Lombard, IL, $35,019.14, Univ of Illinois Medical Chiropractic, Lombard, IL, Chiropractic, April 1984. Center, Chicago, IL, Allopathic Chiropractic, May 1983. Penze, Robert, Arlington Heights, IL, Medicine, June 1984 Denetry, Donald J., Forest Park, IL, $24,643.45, National College of Salomom, Alix, Chicago, IL, $62,645.77, $19,012.62, National College of Chiropractic, Lombard, IL, Meharry Medical College, Nashville, Chiropractic, Lombard, IL, Chiropractic, April 1988. TN, Allopathic Medicine, May 1988 Chiropractic, April 1982. Pettit, David C., Moline, IL, $66,689.39, Singleton, Edward L., Olympia Fields, Eicke, Christine, Chicago, IL, Palmer College of Chiropractic, IL, $2,264.74, Univ of Illinois Medical $22,236.86, National College of Davenport, IA, Chiropractic, October Center, Chicago, IL, Allopathic Chiropractic, Lombard, IL, 1989. Medicine, June 1981 Chiropractic, April 1988. Reynolds, Betty, Jacksonville, IL, Somerville, Phillip P., Palatine, IL, Floriez, Anita D., Moline, IL, $3,254.24, Logan College of $20,379.31, Univ of Illinois Medical $14,993.36, Palmer College of Chiropractic, Chesterfield, MO, Center, Chicago, IL, Allopathic Chiropractic, Davenport, IA, Chiropractic, December 1992. Medicine, June 1986 Chiropractic, October 1985. Rieck-Rosecrans, Cathy, Wheaton, IL, Thompson, Anthony W., Chicago, IL, Gauthier III, George W., Wheaton, IL, $27,289.56, National College of $58,180.24, Rush University, Chicago, $19,441.20, National College of Chiropractic, Lombard, IL, IL, Allopathic Medicine, January 1986 Chiropractic, Lombard, IL, Chiropractic, August 1985. Troxler, Harold B., Chicago, IL, Chiropractic, August 1989. Sandburg, Donald D., Barrington, IL, $136,060.47, Meharry Medical Hansen, Michael, Park Forest, IL, $86,325.92, National College of College, Nashville, TN, Allopathic $43,127.57, Logan College of Chiropractic, Lombard, IL, Medicine, May 1984 Chiropractic, Chesterfield, MO, Chiropractic, April 1987. Sayre, Bruce, Chicago, IL, $16,745.90, West, Clifton B., Chicago, IL, Chiropractic, April 1985. Johnson, John F., Rock Island, IL, Palmer College of Chiropractic, $231,200.88, Meharry Medical $8,772.38, Palmer College of Davenport, IA, Chiropractic, October College, Nashville, TN, Allopathic Chiropractic, Davenport, IA, 1985. Medicine, May 1985 Chiropractic, October 1989. Sierra, Caroline, East Moline, IL, Whittington, Darryll, Vernon Hills, IL, Jordan, James R., Calumet City, IL, $46,590.96, Palmer College of $5,926.96, Univ of Arkansas Medical $56,567.74, National College of Chiropractic, Davenport, IA, Center, Little Rock, AR, Allopathic Chiropractic, Lombard, IL, Chiropractic, March 1986. Medicine, May 1990 Chiropractic, August 1983. Skonie, Roger, Aurora, IL, $15,401.68, Williams, Johnnie, Chicago, IL, Kaminsky, Arthur, Arlington Heights, National College of Chiropractic, $27,809.57, Univ of Illinois Medical IL, $62,704.62, Cleveland Chiropractic Lombard, IL, Chiropractic, April 1991. Center, Chicago, IL, Allopathic College, Kansas City, MO, Slavin, Mark B., Schaumburg, IL, Medicine, June 1985 Chiropractic, May 1990. $15,199.04, National College of Williams, Karol, Chicago, IL, King-Duarte, Doreen I., Carol Stream, IL, Chiropractic, Lombard, IL, $119,991.50, Finch University of $15,834.88, National College of Chiropractic, August 1986. Health Sciences, North Chicago, IL, Chiropractic, Lombard, IL, Smith, Gary D., Gurnee, IL, $94,813.13, Allopathic Medicine, June 1981 Chiropractic, August 1986. Logan College of Chiropractic, Wilson, Evelyn, Chicago, IL, $72,211.26, Mash, Harold J., Chicago, IL, Chesterfield, MO, Chiropractic, Morehouse School of Medicine, $138,698.43, Palmer College of August 1985 Atlanta, GA, Allopathic Medicine, Chiropractic, Davenport, IA, Smith, Myra B., Niles, IL, $68,442.32, June 1985 Chiropractic, October 1987. National College of Chiropractic, Woodridge, Charles, Maywood, IL, Mccarthy, Thomas, Moline, IL, Lombard, IL, Chiropractic, August $137,577.27, Finch University of $16,512.27, Palmer College of 1985 Health Sciences, North Chicago, IL, Chiropractic, Davenport, IA, Smith-Burton, Cythia C W, Chicago, IL, Allopathic Medicine, June 1984. Chiropractic, December 1988. $74,971.83, Cleveland Chiropractic Wuertz, Christopher, Western Springs, Moffett, Douglas A., Homewood, IL, College, Kansas City, MO, IL, $12,191.57, Univ of Illinois $11,377.18, National College of Chiropractic, September 1985 Medical Center, Chicago, IL, Chiropractic, Lombard, IL, Soares, Luiz, Chicago, IL, $106,370.75, Allopathic Medicine, June 1984. Chiropractic, December 1987. Palmer College of Chiropractic, Chiropractic Moreno, Florencio, Aurora, IL, Davenport, IA, Chiropractic, March $18,064.03, Palmer College of 1988 Cienkus, Regina M., Berwyn, IL, Chiropractic, Davenport, IA, Stratton, Mark W., Du Quoin, IL, $15,050.53, National College of Chiropractic, September 1989. $56,029.98, Logan College of Chiropractic, Lombard, IL, Mullinax, Jeffrey S., Schaumburg, IL, Chiropractic, Chesterfield, MO, Chiropractic, August 1986. $9,425.87, Logan College of Chiropractic, December 1985 Cully Jr, Milton A., Cary, IL, $49,171.13, Chiropractic, Chesterfield, MO, Stuart Jr, William E., Chicago, IL, Palmer College of Chiropractic, Chiropractic, September 1982. $45,746.53, Palmer College of Davenport, IA, Chiropractic, June Naddaf, Jamileh K., Newton, IL, Chiropractic, Davenport, IA, 1987. $109,165.23, Cleveland Chiropractic Chiropractic, June 1986 Darnell, Kevin R., Mt Vernon, IL, College, Kansas City, MO, Sutanto, Sugeng, Downers Grove, IL, $35,264.68, Logan College of Chiropractic, May 1988. $70,880.17, Cleveland Chiropractic Chiropractic, Chesterfield, MO, Oslay, Russell C., Ashton, IL, College, Kansas City, MO, Chiropractic, December 1986. $14,489.01, Palmer College of Chiropractic, May 1988 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices 14089 Thurston, Gregory G., Algonquin, IL, Covek, Robert J., Grayslake, IL, Pumilia, Pacita M., Rockford, IL, $87,815.96, Texas Chiropractic $3,800.73, Loyola University Chicago, $103,548.25, Marquette University, College Foundation, Pasadena, TX, Chicago, IL, Dentistry, May 1986 Milwaukee, WI, Dentistry, May 1989 Chiropractic, December 1984 Cox, Kerwin C., Chicago, IL, Sagall, Alfred D., Highland Park, IL, Valvo, Nila L., Glen Ellyn, IL, $4,546.58, $118,979.53, Univ of Oklahoma $192,341.44, Marquette University, National College of Chiropractic, Health Sciences Center, Oklahoma Milwaukee, WI, Dentistry, May 1986 Lombard, IL, Chiropractic, December City, OK, Dentistry, April 1989 Salmon, Kevin, Palos Heights, IL, 1982 Dwyer, Grace, Chicago, IL, $11,373.98, $21,134.96, Loyola University Vernon, Earl, Waukegan, IL, $6,868.39, Univ of Illinois Medical Center, Chicago, Chicago, IL, Dentistry, May Palmer College of Chiropractic, Chicago, IL, Dentistry, June 1987 1991 Davenport, IA, Chiropractic, June Eubanks-Green, Paula J., Chicago, IL, Tucker, Darold, Chicago, IL, $78,415.95, 1991 $23,245.13, Loyola University Howard University, Washington, DC, Wheeler, Cynthia L., Belleville, IL, Chicago, Chicago, IL, Dentistry, May Dentistry, May 1983 $65,231.86, Logan College of 1982 Vitello, Thomas B., Chicago, IL, Chiropractic, Chesterfield, MO, Exum, Clyde J R, Chicago, IL, $2,957.36, $59,614.10, Loyola University Chiropractic, August 1988 Howard University, Washington, DC, Chicago, Chicago, IL, Dentistry, May Willey, Karyn L., Woodridge, IL, Dentistry, May 1983 1984 $2,060.25, National College of Foote, Frederick, Chicago, IL, Walton, David D., Chicago, IL, Chiropractic, Lombard, IL, $219,059.33, Meharry Medical $10,221.69, Univ of Illinois Medical Chiropractic, December 1985 College, Nashville, TN, Dentistry, July Center, Chicago, IL, Dentistry, August Yoos, Deborah D., Grayville, IL, 1983 1985 $35,140.94, Palmer College of Gladden, Benjamin, Rockford, IL, Ware, Rita, Calumet City, IL, $34,127.56, Chiropractic, Davenport, IA, $18,318.26, Univ of Illinois Medical Southern Illinois Univ Edwardsville, Chiropractic, March 1986 Center, Chicago, IL, Dentistry, August Edwardsville, IL, Dentistry, June 1989 1988 Wells, Christopher C., Chicago, IL, Clinical Psychology Gover, Bryan K., Skokie, IL, $5,482.89, Univ of Illinois Medical Angevine, Jeffrey L., Chicago, IL, $112,622.59, Marquette University, Center, Chicago, IL, Dentistry, June $3,599.05, Illinois Institute of Milwaukee, WI, Dentistry, May 1989 1983 Technology, Chicago, IL, Clinical Hansen, Kathy M., Hanover Park, IL, White, Bernadine R., Godfrey, IL, Psychology, May 1987 $3,644.05, Loyola University Chicago, $5,162.94, Southern Illinois Univ Bass, Michael E., Chicago, IL, Chicago, IL, Dentistry, May 1984 Edwardsville, Edwardsville, IL, $34,178.37, American Sch of Harris, Carl M., Chicago, IL, $45,847.67, Dentistry, June 1989 Professional Psychology, Chicago, IL, Univ of Illinois Medical Center, Whitfield, Glen A., Edgemont, IL, Clinical Psychology, June 1993 Chicago, IL, Dentistry, June 1980 $41,295.40, Georgetown University, Ozols, Valdis V., Lisle, IL, $34,347.97, Herron, Devere, Chicago, IL, $76,824.09, Washington, DC, Dentistry, May 1988 Univ of Tennessee, Knoxville, TN, Howard University, Washington, DC, Yuen, Ka W., Chicago, IL, $6,637.68, Clinical Psychology, June 1989 Dentistry, May 1985 Univ of Illinois Medical Center, Howlett, Brian K., Chicago, IL, Chicago, IL, Dentistry, June 1990 Dentistry $4,184.06, Howard University, Zackey, Tyson, Chicago, IL, $8,949.97, Alexander, Jada, Chicago, IL, Washington, DC, Dentistry, May 1992 Northwestern Univ, Chicago, IL, $74,011.52, Meharry Medical College, Jennings, Lenora, Chicago, IL, $2,705.25, Dentistry, May 1987 Nashville, TN, Dentistry, May 1984 Univ of Illinois Medical Center, Azarpira, Mohammad H., Chicago, IL, Chicago, IL, Dentistry, June 1985 Optometry $125,418.25, Loyola University Jimerson, Ruthie M., Burnham, IL, Bourboukas, Nick, Chicago, IL, Chicago, Chicago, IL, Dentistry, May $192,868.55, Meharry Medical $6,121.68, Illinois College of 1987 College, Nashville, TN, Dentistry, May Optometry, Chicago, IL, Optometry, Baldare, David R., Chicago, IL, 1987 May 1987 $67,181.30, Loyola University Johnson, Quincy L., Maywood, IL, Keeler-Dwyer, Cynthia L., Chicago, IL, Chicago, Chicago, IL, Dentistry, May $66,616.32, Univ of Illinois Medical $46,066.34, Illinois College of 1988 Center, Chicago, IL, Dentistry, May Optometry, Chicago, IL, Optometry, Bellucci, Joan, Vernon Hills, IL, 1989 May 1990 $102,847.60, Marquette University, Jones, Perkins S., Springfield, IL, Lielzuika, Kaija, Chicago, IL, Milwaukee, WI, Dentistry, May 1989 $89,346.00, Howard University, $34,914.05, Illinois College of Berman, Daniel, Chicago, IL, $73,049.29, Washington, DC, Dentistry, May 1983 Optometry, Chicago, IL, Optometry, Temple University, Philadelphia, PA, Kashani, Mortaza, Hillside, IL, May 1989 Dentistry, June 1987 $37,617.75, Marquette University, Nath, Kailash, Clarendon Hills, IL, Broussard, Mark, Palatine, IL, Milwaukee, WI, Dentistry, May 1991 $78,565.57, New England College of $12,903.09, Louisiana St Univ Med Kinell, Carl S., Blue Island, IL, Optometry, Boston, MA, Optometry, Ctr, New Orleans, LA, Dentistry, May $117,022.57, Marquette University, May 1987 1986 Milwaukee, WI, Dentistry, May 1986 Buggs, Keith K., Rockford, IL, $4,899.08, Kraut, Donald A., Chicago, IL, Osteopathy Meharry Medical College, Nashville, $27,129.04, Northwestern University, Bruton, Joseph, Oak Park, IL, TN, Dentistry, May 1986 Chicago, IL, Dentistry, June 1985 $83,192.83, Univ of Osteo Medical & Burnett, Doralia A., Richton Park, IL, Pina, Linda, Cicero, IL, $1,151.38, Univ Health Science, Des Moines, IA, $124,350.37, Marquette University, of Illinois Medical Center, Chicago, Osteopathy, June 1990 Milwaukee, WI, Dentistry, May 1990 IL, Dentistry, June 1985 Chaudhuri, Suyro, Bloomington, IL, Bybee, William D., East Moline, IL, Pumilia, Cathryn A., Rockford, IL, $41,849.10, Univ of Health Sciences, $12,092.76, Univ of Texas, Houston, $130,785.64, Marquette University, Kansas City, MO, Osteopathy, May TX, Dentistry, May 1988 Milwaukee, WI, Dentistry, May 1990 1988 14090 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices Johnson, Randall, Lake Forest, IL, Handy, Myra, Evanston, IL, $131,449.04, Lewin, Karen S., Chicago, IL, $16,720.45, Univ of Osteo Medical & Dr William Scholl Col of Podiatric $13,268.23, Yale University, New Health Science, Des Moines, IA, Med, Chicago, IL, Podiatry, May 1986 Haven, CT, Public Health, May 1983 Osteopathy, June 1989 Harcus, James M., Chicago, IL, Veterinary Medicine Superson-Malachinski, Wynne, $37,480.49, Dr William Scholl Col of Bolingbrook, IL, $16,041.39, Podiatric Med, Chicago, IL, Podiatry, Kahn, Mark D., Richton Park, IL, Midwestern University, Downers May 1981 $7,150.55, Tuskegee University, Grove, IL, Osteopathy, June 1980 Hochman, Daryl D., Chicago, IL, Tuskegee, AL, Veterinary Medicine, $2,703.68, Dr William Scholl Col of May 1987 Pharmacy Podiatric Med, Chicago, IL, Podiatry, Storslee, Barbara, Orland Park, IL, Grimmette, Ronald D., Chicago, IL, May 1986 $10,610.18, Iowa State University, $8,558.63, Xavier University of Hrywnak, Severko, Chicago, IL, Ames, IA, Veterinary Medicine, May Louisiana, New Orleans, LA, $29,940.05, Dr William Scholl Col of 1989 Pharmacy, May 1989 Podiatric Med, Chicago, IL, Podiatry, Indiana Ohaeri, Christiana, South Holland, IL, May 1982 $3,607.87, Drake University, Des Jacobson, Ronald, Spring Grove, IL, Allopathic Medicine Moines, IA, Pharmacy, May 1989 $33,438.16, Dr William Scholl Col of Podiatric Med, Chicago, IL, Podiatry, Bell, Charles, Munster, IN, $20,627.73, Powell, Alexander, Chicago, IL, Meharry Medical College, Nashville, $53,913.67, Univ of Illinois Medical May 1983 Jenkins, Jondelle B., Chicago, IL, TN, Allopathic Medicine, May 1982 Center, Chicago, IL, Pharmacy, June Cezar, Mahdi, Indianapolis, IN, 1985 $121,782.03, Dr William Scholl Col of Podiatric Med, Chicago, IL, Podiatry, $18,150.53, Meharry Medical College, Wright, Jonathan W., Chicago, IL, Nashville, TN, Allopathic Medicine, $10,864.00, Drake University, Des May 1983 Lemoine, Hannelore, Chicago, IL, May 1990 Moines, IA, Pharmacy, December Donathan, Robert, Brazil, IN, $8,388.41, 1985 $61,069.48, Dr William Scholl Col of Podiatric Med, Chicago, IL, Podiatry, Creighton University, Omaha, NE, Podiatry May 1980 Allopathic Medicine, May 1990 Mikos, Ronald A., Skokie, IL, Lewis, George M., Indianapolis, IN, Amudoaghan, Walnette C., Chicago, IL, $70,595.07, Univ of Massachusetts $161,021.25, Ohio College of Podiatric $14,364.77, Dr William Scholl Col of Podiatric Med, Chicago, IL, Podiatry, Worcester, Worcester, MA, Allopathic Medicine, Cleveland, OH, Podiatry, Medicine, June 1982 May 1985 May 1982 Miller, Ellis A., Winthrop Harbor, IL, Rodman, Karen D., Indianapolis, IN, Beaver, Bart, Chicago, IL, $75,659.87, Dr $13,967.55, Univ of Pittsburgh, William Scholl Col of Podiatric Med, $6,013.03, Ohio College of Podiatric Medicine, Cleveland, OH, Podiatry, Pittsburgh, PA, Allopathic Medicine, Chicago, IL, Podiatry, May 1990 June 1986 Beck III, Welby S., Chicago, IL, May 1985 Murphy, Stephen J., Chicago, IL, Williams, David L., Indianapolis, IN, $172,955.95, Dr William Scholl Col of $129,398.89, Dr William Scholl Col of $164,702.31, Meharry Medical Podiatric Med, Chicago, IL, Podiatry, Podiatric Med, Chicago, IL, Podiatry, College, Nashville, TN, Allopathic May 1986 May 1982 Medicine, May 1984 Brown, Stephen H., Chicago, IL, Nau, Edgard, Chicago, IL, $111,754.67, $80,602.69, Dr William Scholl Col of Chiropractic Dr William Scholl Col of Podiatric Podiatric Med, Chicago, IL, Podiatry, Med, Chicago, IL, Podiatry, May 1986 Maxfield-Brown, Bobbi, Evansville, IN, May 1988 O’Lleary, James J., La Grange, IL, $91,130.76, Logan College of Collins, Henry L., Chicago, IL, $15,339.49, Dr William Scholl Col of Chiropractic, Chesterfield, MO, $99,405.62, Dr William Scholl Col of Podiatric Med, Chicago, IL, Podiatry, Chiropractic, December 1986 Podiatric Med, Chicago, IL, Podiatry, May 1984 Meeks, Dana E., Newburgh, IN, May 1987 Porada, Stanley L., Tinley Park, IL, $35,286.32, Palmer College of Crawford, James, Chicago, IL, $65,468.77, Dr William Scholl Col of Chiropractic, Davenport, IA, $164,076.03, Dr William Scholl Col of Podiatric Med, Chicago, IL, Podiatry, Chiropractic, September 1983 Podiatric Med, Chicago, IL, Podiatry, May 1989 Reed, Nelson, Fort Wayne, IN, May 1982 Shaw, Michael, Rogers Park, IL, $71,197.54, Logan College of Dixon, David A., Chicago, IL, $58,637.89, Dr William Scholl Col of Chiropractic, Chesterfield, MO, $115,687.34, Dr William Scholl Col of Podiatric Med, Chicago, IL, Podiatry, Chiropractic, August 1987 Podiatric Med, Chicago, IL, Podiatry, May 1988 Refkin, Joseph J P, Indianapolis, IN, May 1989 Stevenson, Robert, Chicago, IL, $16,490.27, National College of Flanagan, John, Chicago, IL, $88,961.93, $61,024.92, Univ of Osteo Medical & Chiropractic, Lombard, IL, Dr William Scholl Col of Podiatric Health Science, Des Moines, IA, Chiropractic, August 1987 Med, Chicago, IL, Podiatry, May 1987 Podiatry, May 1991 Vandenburgh, Peggy S., Indianapolis, Foster, Terri L., Matteson, IL, Tucker, Carol, Chicago, IL, $144,939.53, IN, $73,504.13, Palmer College of $156,277.61, Univ of Osteo Medical & Dr William Scholl Col of Podiatric Chiropractic, Davenport, IA, Health Science, Des Moines, IA, Med, Chicago, IL, Podiatry, May 1988 Chiropractic, December 1985 Podiatry, June 1987 Whitfield, Carolyn, Homewood, IL, Wykoff, Richard A., Lawrenceburg, IN, Green, Gregory N., Chicago, IL, $108,307.10, Dr William Scholl Col of $123,632.88, Life College, Marietta, $29,319.34, Dr William Scholl Col of Podiatric Med, Chicago, IL, Podiatry, GA, Chiropractic, June 1985 Podiatric Med, Chicago, IL, Podiatry, May 1986 May 1983 Dentistry Hall, Michael G., Westchester, IL, Public Health Arch, Joseph A., Indianapolis, IN, $77,914.40, Dr William Scholl Col of Biosah, Ada, Chicago, IL, $24,485.22, $6,153.80, Indiana University Podiatric Med, Chicago, IL, Podiatry, Univ of Texas, Houston, TX, Public Indianapolis, Bloomington, IN, May 1986 Health, May 1990 Dentistry, May 1985 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices 14091 Arnett, Shannon L., Kendallville, IN, College of Chiropractic, Davenport, Volk, Anthony, Davenport, IA, $18,207.70, Indiana University IA, Chiropractic, October 1986 $19,932.76, Palmer College of Indianapolis, Bloomington, IN, Crawford, James, Dubuque, IA, Chiropractic, Davenport, IA, Dentistry, May 1989 $49,614.09, Cleveland Chiropractic Chiropractic, October 1985 Baker, Michael, Indianapolis, IN, College, Los Angeles, CA, Walters, Brian D., Davenport, IA, $11,997.33, Univ of Missouri Kansas Chiropractic, August 1987 $69,021.87, Palmer College of City, Kansas City, MO, Dentistry, May Giroush, Gamal G., Davenport, IA, Chiropractic, Davenport, IA, 1991 $37,677.73, Palmer College of Chiropractic, December 1986 Kirk, James E., Portage, IN, $35,037.17, Chiropractic, Davenport, IA, Woiwood, David V., Carlisle, IA, Loyola University Chicago, Chicago, Chiropractic, March 1987 $71,869.71, Palmer College of IL, Dentistry, May 1985 Heer, Joel M., Dubuque, IA, $11,597.12, Chiropractic, Davenport, IA, Price, David G., Valparaiso, IN, Palmer College of Chiropractic, Chiropractic, June 1985 Davenport, IA, Chiropractic, October $102,803.59, Loyola University Dentistry Chicago, Chicago, IL, Dentistry, May 1983 1990 Heese, Kit L., West Des Moines, IA, Dye, Ralph M., Des Moines, IA, Stojkovich, Lou, St John, IN, $74,886.71, $20,517.02, Logan College of $109,125.92, Loma Linda University, Marquette University, Milwaukee, WI, Chiropractic, Chesterfield, MO, Loma Linda, CA, Dentistry, June 1986 Dentistry, May 1990 Chiropractic, December 1986 Kempema, Pamela, Prairie City, IA, Heyl, Susan J., Bettendorf, IA, $9,012.79, Univ of Michigan, Ann Osteopathy $12,324.79, Palmer College of Arbor, MI, Dentistry, May 1988 Chiropractic, Davenport, IA, French, Talmas T., Cedar Lake, IN, Osteopathy $216,483.22, Midwestern University, Chiropractic, December 1989 Downers Grove, IL, Osteopathy, June Hicks, Timothy G., Orange City, IA, Jacobson, Steve, West Des Moines, IA, 1986 $27,639.33, Palmer College of $131,634.91, Univ of Osteo Medical & Chiropractic, Davenport, IA, Health Science, Des Moines, IA, Podiatry Chiropractic, June 1989 Osteopathy, May 1991 Beatty, Deborah, Indianapolis, IN, Hobbins, Jennifer J., Davenport, IA, Spector, Mark, Des Moines, IA, $25,082.49, Dr William Scholl Col of $1,833.41, Palmer College of $144,323.02, Univ of Osteo Medical & Podiatric Med, Chicago, IL, Podiatry, Chiropractic, Davenport, IA, Health Science, Des Moines, IA, May 1993 Chiropractic, March 1987 Osteopathy, June 1988 Fair, Benny, Fort Wayne, IN, Holford, Joe E., Council Bluffs, IA, Van Patten, Merri, Sioux City, IA, $120,738.64, Dr William Scholl Col of $80,012.57, Cleveland Chiropractic $41,813.06, Univ of Osteo Medical & Podiatric Med, Chicago, IL, Podiatry, College, Kansas City, MO, Health Science, Des Moines, IA, May 1990 Chiropractic, May 1986 Osteopathy, June 1990 Marlatt, Stephanie, Michigan City, IN, LeBlanc, Michael M., Davenport, IA, Pharmacy $81,311.15, Dr William Scholl Col of $30,998.04, Palmer College of Chiropractic, Davenport, IA, Benson, Thersa L., Des Moines, IA, Podiatric Med, Chicago, IL, Podiatry, $10,504.28, Drake University, Des May 1987 Chiropractic, June 1984 McDonald, James, Davenport, IA, Moines, IA, Pharmacy, May 1990 Rogers, Laurence C., Rochester, IN, Moss, Edward G., Des Moines, IA, $29,927.21, Dr William Scholl Col of $2,211.41, Logan College of Chiropractic, Chesterfield, MO, $74,854.95, Drake University, Des Podiatric Med, Chicago, IL, Podiatry, Moines, IA, Pharmacy, May 1989 May 1980 Chiropractic, September 1982 Smith, Jonathan, Decatur, IN, Meike, Alan, Davenport, IA, $694.24, Podiatry Palmer College of Chiropractic, $24,297.00, Dr William Scholl Col of Davis, Anthony D., Des Moines, IA, Podiatric Med, Chicago, IL, Podiatry, Davenport, IA, Chiropractic, October 1993 $127,896.83, Ohio College of Podiatric May 1988 Medicine, Cleveland, OH, Podiatry, Williams, David L., Indianapolis, IN, Moore, Douglas B., Davenport, IA, $30,201.37, Palmer College of May 1989 $30,395.43, Dr William Scholl Col of Chiropractic, Davenport, IA, Del Prado, Rick, Waterloo, IA, Podiatric Med, Chicago, IL, Podiatry, Chiropractic, October 1987 $111,532.64, Univ of Osteo Medical & May 1984 Paper, Nicole N., Davenport, IA, Health Science, Des Moines, IA, Wojnaroski, Joseph P., Lake Station, IN, $17,908.15, Palmer College of Podiatry, June 1990 $11,135.57, Dr William Scholl Col of Chiropractic, Davenport, IA, Gardner, Sandra M., Des Moines, IA, Podiatric Med, Chicago, IL, Podiatry, Chiropractic, June 1988 $166,452.97, Ohio College of Podiatric May 1982 Schaeffer, Wally, Coralville, IA, Medicine, Cleveland, OH, Podiatry, Iowa $21,977.82, Palmer College of May 1987 Chiropractic, Davenport, IA, Pryharski, Laureen A., Jefferson, IA, Allopathic Medicine Chiropractic, September 1984 $166,258.68, Univ of Osteo Medical & Pierson, Ronald R., Coralville, IA, Schaeuble, Gary S., Cedar Rapids, IA, Health Science, Des Moines, IA, $33,600.02, Univ of Southern $15,941.23, Palmer College of Podiatry, June 1989 California, Los Angeles, CA, Chiropractic, Davenport, IA, Veterinary Medicine Allopathic Medicine, May 1986 Chiropractic, October 1986 Schaus, Scott S., Ames, IA, $21,762.50, Sigh, Edward R., Davenport, IA, Wilson, Arach J., Ames, IA, $8,995.29, Northeastern Ohio Universities, $57,032.72, Cleveland Chiropractic Tuskegee University, Tuskegee, AL, Rootstown, OH, Allopathic Medicine, College, Kansas City, MO, Veterinary Medicine, May 1979 May 1988 Chiropractic, May 1984 Kansas Szekely, Kevin, State Center, Australia, Chiropractic $40,797.95, Palmer College of Allopathic Medicine Bockstedt-Middleton, Louise M., Chiropractic, Davenport, IA, Atlas, William, Overland Park, KS, Davenport, IA, $22,077.83, Palmer Chiropractic, March 1985 $58,707.00, Univ of Texas Hlth Sci 14092 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices Cntr San Antonio, San Antonio, TX, College, Kansas City, MO, Dentistry Allopathic Medicine, May 1989 Chiropractic, August 1983 Fobbs, Michel M., Atchison, KS, Ayika, Paul B., Lawrence, KS, Jay, Doyle W., Lebo, KS, $86,779.59, $6,331.00, Howard University, $18,489.02, Univ of Texas Hlth Sci Palmer College of Chiropractic, Washington, DC, Dentistry, May 1984 Cntr San Antonio, San Antonio, TX, Davenport, IA, Chiropractic, June Allopathic Medicine, May 1989 1986 Morris, Lynda, Overland Park, KS, Hudgins, Mark, Lenexa, KS, $28,440.31, Mathiesen, Douglas A., Shawnee $75,573.60, Washington University, St Univ of Kansas Medical Center, Mission, KS, $135,732.35, Cleveland Louis, MO, Dentistry, September 1989 Kansas City, KS, Allopathic Medicine, Chiropractic College, Kansas City, Rieck, Paul G., Olathe, KS, $11,330.53, May 1990 MO, Chiropractic, September 1985 Univ of Missouri Kansas City, Kansas Richmond, Joseph J., Kansas City, KS, Neely, Timothy W., Topeka, KS, City, MO, Dentistry, April 1983 $63,628.76, Finch University of $37,021.70, Cleveland Chiropractic Osteopathy Health Sciences, North Chicago, IL, College, Kansas City, MO, Allopathic Medicine, June 1983 Chiropractic, January 1990 Fields, Allen, Overland Park, KS, Schaper, David, Cherryvale, KS, O’leary, Molly M., Prairie Village, KS, $13,386.41, Univ of Health Sciences, $37,616.91, Univ of Kansas Medical $84,783.99, Cleveland Chiropractic Kansas City, MO, Osteopathy, May Center, Kansas City, KS, Allopathic College, Kansas City, MO, 1992 Medicine, May 1990 Chiropractic, December 1987 Kentucky Williams, Teri L., Shawnee Mission, KS, Rahman-Setayesh, Ali, Topeka, KS, $7,709.89, Univ of Kansas Medical $68,263.31, Logan College of Allopathic Medicine Center, Kansas City, KS, Allopathic Chiropractic, Chesterfield, MO, Ardul-Majid, Razia S., Covington, KY, Medicine, May 1990 Chiropractic, December 1989 $3,424.87, Univ of Louisville, Schellenger, Yvonne Y., Newton, KS, Louisville, KY, Allopathic Medicine, Chiropractic $84,688.10, Cleveland Chiropractic Amon, Julie A., Netawaka, KS, College, Kansas City, MO, May 1990 $18,611.54, Cleveland Chiropractic Chiropractic, September 1984 Bedford, Phillip, Covington, KY, College, Kansas City, MO, Schinstock, Julia A., Hoisington, KS, $41,701.78, Univ of Louisville, Chiropractic, May 1984 $67,248.62, Cleveland Chiropractic Louisville, KY, Allopathic Medicine, Bond, James R., Derby, KS, $114,652.04, College, Kansas City, MO, October 1984 Cleveland Chiropractic College, Chiropractic, September 1986 Brown, Henry H., Louisville, KY, Kansas City, MO, Chiropractic, May Strozier, Mark, Shawnee Mission, KS, $6,852.62, Univ of Louisville, 1987 $91,086.50, Cleveland Chiropractic Louisville, KY, Allopathic Medicine, Breese, Audrey, Lenexa, KS, $91,681.56, College, Kansas City, MO, May 1987 Cleveland Chiropractic College, Chiropractic, May 1989 Burns, Mark V., Louisville, KY, Kansas City, MO, Chiropractic, Wagner, John P., Newton, KS, $2,283.70, Univ of Louisville, January 1987 $41,128.20, Palmer College of Louisville, KY, Allopathic Medicine, Buck, Larry A., Wichita, KS, $94,342.15, Chiropractic, Davenport, IA, May 1988 Cleveland Chiropractic College, Chiropractic, December 1985 Collins, Jennifer, Catlettsburg, KY, Kansas City, MO, Chiropractic, Weatherhed, Karl D., Concordia, KS, $20,484.88, Univ of Miami, Miami, September 1986 $41,852.60, Cleveland Chiropractic FL, Allopathic Medicine, May 1986 Capilli, Michael, Kansas City, KS, College, Kansas City, MO, Frierson, Leonard, Louisville, KY, $25,993.81, Cleveland Chiropractic Chiropractic, August 1985 $28,603.66, Univ of Louisville, College, Kansas City, MO, Wharran, David, Liberal, KS, Louisville, KY, Allopathic Medicine, Chiropractic, May 1987 $11,074.55, Cleveland Chiropractic May 1989 Cody, Ronald J., Valley Center, KS, College, Kansas City, MO, Hagan, Elizabeth A., Louisville, KY, $123,616.42, Cleveland Chiropractic Chiropractic, December 1983 $15,902.45, Univ of Louisville, College, Kansas City, MO, Wheeler, Randy, Haysville, KS, Louisville, KY, Allopathic Medicine, Chiropractic, December 1986 $100,942.03, Cleveland Chiropractic May 1989 Coffland, Robert, Iola, KS, $56,530.23, College, Kansas City, MO, Kerr, Bryant B., Louisville, KY, Cleveland Chiropractic College, Chiropractic, May 1986 Kansas City, MO, Chiropractic, May Wheeler, Samuel, Maize, KS, $6,113.85, Univ of Louisville, 1985 $112,872.52, Cleveland Chiropractic Louisville, KY, Allopathic Medicine, Corley, Gary E., Eskridge, KS, College, Kansas City, MO, May 1986 $52,035.73, Cleveland Chiropractic Chiropractic, May 1987 Peasley, Ken, Columbia, KY, $62,918.41, College, Kansas City, MO, Wilson, Eileen, Prarrie Village, KS, Ponce School of Medicine, Ponce, PR, Chiropractic, September 1988 $56,091.29, Cleveland Chiropractic Allopathic Medicine, June 1984 Gay, Mark, Clearwater, KS, $60,686.97, College, Kansas City, MO, Chiropractic Cleveland Chiropractic College, Chiropractic, May 1986 Kansas City, MO, Chiropractic, Wilson, Jeff A., Topeka, KS, $42,184.01, Aromola, Joseph J., Hebron, KY, January 1990 Cleveland Chiropractic College, $31,493.44, Palmer College of Gieschen, John, Overland Park, KS, Kansas City, MO, Chiropractic, May Chiropractic, Davenport, IA, $17,216.58, Cleveland Chiropractic 1990 Chiropractic, June 1986 College, Kansas City, MO, Woody, Larry L., Olathe, KS, Humphrey, Cheryl K., York, KY, Chiropractic, May 1983 $14,220.69, Cleveland Chiropractic $7,141.13, Los Angeles College of Hoss, Angela, Sharon Springs, KS, College, Kansas City, MO, Chiropractic, Whittier, CA, $22,216.23, Parker College of Chiropractic, August 1983 Chiropractic, April 1988 Chiropractic, Dallas, TX, Chiropractic, Ziemba, Mitchell B., Lenexa, KS, Jewett, Charles, Versailles, KY, December 1986 $62,178.40, Cleveland Chiropractic $54,289.37, Palmer College of Hoyt, Ruth R., Overland Park, KS, College, Kansas City, MO, Chiropractic, Davenport, IA, $40,000.70, Cleveland Chiropractic Chiropractic, September 1988 Chiropractic, December 1989 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices 14093 Phillips, Brian, Louisville, KY, Dixon, Armand, New Orleans, LA, Lafleur, Allen R., Kenner, LA, $105,109.20, Life College, Marietta, $44,863.77, Meharry Medical College, $119,343.69, Life College, Marietta, GA, Chiropractic, December 1987 Nashville, TN, Allopathic Medicine, GA, Chiropractic, December 1983 May 1993 Miller, Kevin, Baton Rouge, LA, Dentistry Fedoroff, Ivan I., New Orleans, LA, $78,483.76, Western States Bentley, Bobetta, Neon, KY, $4,555.92, $2,197.77, Louisiana St Univ Med Ctr Chiropractic College, Portland, OR, Univ of Louisville, Louisville, KY, New Orleans, New Orleans, LA, Chiropractic, December 1988 Dentistry, May 1988 Allopathic Medicine, May 1985 Moran, Kevin A., Metairie, LA, Emnett, William P., Lexington, KY, Geary, David M., Lafayette, LA, $17,259.35, Palmer College of $26,686.13, Univ of Kentucky, $93,886.29, Creighton University, Chiropractic, Davenport, IA, Lexington, KY, Dentistry, May 1980 Omaha, NE, Allopathic Medicine, Chiropractic, March 1984 Faison, Willie R., Louisville, KY, May 1985 Salczenko, Jeffrey G., Bossier City, LA, $205,044.01, Meharry Medical Ishmael, Francis J., Baton Rouge, LA, $51,971.41, Palmer College of College, Nashville, TN, Dentistry, $3,461.13, Louisiana St Univ Med Ctr Chiropractic, Davenport, IA, December 1985 New Orleans, New Orleans, LA, Chiropractic, December 1987 Ford, Patricia J., Louisville, KY, Allopathic Medicine, May 1986 Schwaiger, Mark, Gretna, LA, $7,508.33, $257.35, Univ of Louisville, Mahner, John P., Dequincy, LA, Life College, Marietta, GA, Louisville, KY, Dentistry, May 1985 $17,186.10, Louisiana St Univ Med Chiropractic, April 1983 Green, Judith G., Louisville, KY, Ctr New Orleans, New Orleans, LA, Dentistry $129,926.29, Univ of Louisville, Allopathic Medicine, May 1992 Baranco, Patricia, Baton Rouge, LA, Louisville, KY, Dentistry, May 1987 Molden, Gregory L., New Orleans, LA, Holman, Stanley, Louisville, KY, $244,269.86, Meharry Medical $109,304.96, Medical College of Ohio, $27,403.08, Meharry Medical College, College, Nashville, TN, Dentistry, May Toledo, OH, Allopathic Medicine, Nashville, TN, Dentistry, May 1985 1985 June 1984 Labordeaux, Herbert W., Louisville, KY, Byrd, Daryl, New Orleans, LA, $2,421.94, Univ of Louisville, Orsulak, Joseph, Bossier City, LA, $132,832.68, Meharry Medical Louisville, KY, Dentistry, May 1990 $8,040.42, Louisiana St Univ Med Ctr College, Nashville, TN, Dentistry, May Preston, Michael R., Hagerhill, KY, Shreveport, Shreveport, LA, 1986 $88,160.37, Univ of Kentucky, Allopathic Medicine, May 1988 Hill, William, New Orleans, LA, Lexington, KY, Dentistry, May 1987 Redmann, Greg A., Metairie, LA, $17,353.62, Louisiana St Univ Med Turnbow, Thomas P., Hickman, KY, $6,635.41, Univ of Texas Hlth Sci Ctr, New Orleans, LA, Dentistry, May $53,317.33, Univ of Tennessee Cntr San Antonio, San Antonio, TX, 1989 Memphis, Memphis, TN, Dentistry, Allopathic Medicine, May 1987 Langford, Cynthia M., Rosepine, LA, June 1989 Saloy, Melanie, New Orleans, LA, $224,403.61, Marquette University, $126,417.05, Meharry Medical Milwaukee, WI, Dentistry, May 1988 Health Administration College, Nashville, TN, Allopathic Reed, David, Algeria, LA, $136,506.11, Gazall, Victor J., Louisville, KY, Medicine, May 1987 Meharry Medical College, Nashville, $41,748.60, St Louis University, St Seyfarth Jr, Huey A., Baton Rouge, LA, TN, Dentistry, May 1985 Louis, MO, Health Administration, $19,994.57, Univ of Oklahoma Health Osteopathy May 1986 Sciences Center, Oklahoma City, OK, Allopathic Medicine, June 1986 Floyd, James P., Shreveport, LA, Optometry Spears, Clifton, Alexandria, LA, $124,504.16, Nova Southeastern Watkins, Thomas W., Campbellsville, $89,782.61, Meharry Medical College, University, North Miami Beach, FL, KY, $53,409.97, Southern College of Nashville, TN, Allopathic Medicine, Osteopathy, June 1989 Optometry, Memphis, TN, Optometry, May 1987 Newton, Steven R., Baton Rouge, LA, May 1990 Watford, Eric E., Gonzales, LA, $14,059.48, Univ of Med & Dent of New Jersey, Newark, NJ, Osteopathy, Osteopathy $113,032.65, Meharry Medical College, Nashville, TN, Allopathic May 1983 Fiorella-Holder, Michelle, Louisville, Medicine, May 1984 Pharmacy KY, $212,329.21, Univ of Osteo Weist, Gregory J., Baton Rouge, LA, Aruna, Augustine S., New Orleans, LA, Medical & Health Science, Des $15,200.89, Louisiana St Univ Med Moines, IA, Osteopathy, June 1987 $1,506.62, Creighton University, Ctr New Orleans, New Orleans, LA, Omaha, NE, Pharmacy, December Podiatry Allopathic Medicine, May 1985 1988 Hedden, Dianne, Owensboro, KY, Chiropractic Smith, Darryl, New Orleans, LA, $6,306.09, Xavier University of $32,111.18, Ohio College of Podiatric Carter, Ronald M., St Rose, LA, Medicine, Cleveland, OH, Podiatry, Louisiana, New Orleans, LA, $38,119.13, Palmer College of Pharmacy, May 1983 May 1990 Chiropractic, Davenport, IA, Louisiana Chiropractic, December 1985 Podiatry Duff, Robert, New Orleans, LA, Bourque, Lawles J., Lafayette, LA, Allopathic Medicine $88,583.37, Parker College of $7,671.10, Ohio College of Podiatric Burt, Eric S., Monroe, LA, $5,177.56, Chiropractic, Dallas, TX, Chiropractic, Medicine, Cleveland, OH, Podiatry, Louisiana St Univ Med Ctr January 1990 May 1992 Shreveport, Shreveport, LA, Guillory, Laura, Chalmette, LA, Goodrow, Andrew J., New Orleans, LA, Allopathic Medicine, May 1989 $48,870.11, Life College, Marietta, $167,936.88, California College of Coleman, James, Shreveport, LA, GA, Chiropractic, June 1984 Podiatric Medicine, San Francisco, $19,438.66, Univ of California Davis, Kritko, Anthony, Metairie, LA, CA, Podiatry, June 1986 Davis, CA, Allopathic Medicine, June $15,147.75, Life College, Marietta, Jordan, Joyce M., New Orleans, LA, 1980 GA, Chiropractic, September 1983 $192,098.59, Ohio College of Podiatric 14094 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices Medicine, Cleveland, OH, Podiatry, Washington, DC, Allopathic Baltimore, Baltimore, MD, Allopathic May 1983 Medicine, May 1988 Medicine, May 1990 Morreale, Angelo, Natchitoches, LA, Briley, Michele D., Suitland, MD, Patrick, George V., Columbia, MD, $55,934.46, Ohio College of Podiatric $13,008.64, Howard University, $26,909.53, Medical College of Ohio, Medicine, Cleveland, OH, Podiatry, Washington, DC, Allopathic Toledo, OH, Allopathic Medicine, May 1984 Medicine, May 1985 June 1990 Buahin, Kwame, Baltimore, MD, Ramos, Lydia I., Gaithersburg, MD, Public Health $17,560.87, Columbia University, $31,728.32, Georgetown University, Branton, Marilyn S., Pearl River, LA, New York, NY, Allopathic Medicine, Washington, DC, Allopathic $47,431.14, Tulane University, New May 1989 Medicine, May 1986 Orleans, LA, Public Health, May 1986 Cooper Jr, John D., Rockville, MD, Sears, Terri A., Greenbelt, MD, Gex, Michelle, New Orleans, LA, $2,012.72, Suny Buffalo, Buffalo, NY, $15,422.68, Howard University, $6,289.63, Tulane University, New Allopathic Medicine, June 1988 Washington, DC, Allopathic Orleans, LA, Public Health, May 1984 Crarey, Patrick E., Upper Marlboro, MD, Medicine, May 1984 Metoyer, Elisha J., New Orleans, LA, $63,920.87, Georgetown University, Shelby, Gloria D., Capitol Heights, MD, $3,017.76, Tulane University, New Washington, DC, Allopathic $18,147.61, Howard University, Orleans, LA, Public Health, May 1989 Medicine, May 1983 Washington, DC, Allopathic Roohani, Maurine, New Orleans, LA, Daniels Iii, Fernando, Upper Marlboro, Medicine, May 1984 $37,912.64, Tulane University, New MD, $29,873.24, Meharry Medical Tedford, William, Silver Spring, MD, Orleans, LA, Public Health, May 1988 College, Nashville, TN, Allopathic $14,034.51, Michigan State Medicine, May 1987 University, East Lansing, MI, Maine Eudaric, Philippe M., Baltimore, MD, Allopathic Medicine, June 1988 Allopathic Medicine $34,465.15, Univ of Texas Hlth Sci Turner, Sherri A., Silver Spring, MD, Cntr San Antonio, San Antonio, TX, $30,777.75, Tufts University, Boston, Benjamin, James, Presque Isle, ME, Allopathic Medicine, May 1988 MA, Allopathic Medicine, May 1980 $35,000.00, Howard University, Franklin, Janet L., Rockville, MD, Wagner, Robert J., Baltimore, MD, Washington, DC, Allopathic $10,299.08, Georgetown University, $59,523.08, Albany Medical College, Medicine, May 1983 Washington, DC, Allopathic Albany, NY, Allopathic Medicine, McChesney, Guy H., Bangor, ME, Medicine, May 1984 May 1989 West, Denise G., Baltimore, MD, $4,689.21, Yale University, New Hill, Leo D., Cheverly, MD, $16,239.20, $20,839.58, Univ of Maryland Haven, CT, Allopathic Medicine, May Temple University, Philadelphia, PA, Baltimore, Baltimore, MD, Allopathic 1989 Allopathic Medicine, June 1989 Hogan, John W., Fort Washington, MD, Medicine, May 1987 Chiropractic Wheeler, Jacquelyn L., Baltimore, MD, $539.74, Howard University, Alexander-Kirton, Stephen, Calais, ME, $185,533.20, Meharry Medical Washington, DC, Allopathic $52,659.08, Cleveland Chiropractic College, Nashville, TN, Allopathic Medicine, May 1982 College, Kansas City, MO, Medicine, May 1986 Kennedy, Grace, Baltimore, MD, Chiropractic, September 1983 Whittingham, Wayne L., Riverdale, MD, $65,501.43, Medical College of Lovell, Stephen, Bangor, ME, $9,920.21, Howard University, Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, $22,269.35, Logan College of Washington, DC, Allopathic Allopathic Medicine, June 1985 Chiropractic, Chesterfield, MO, Medicine, May 1988 Lent, Michael, Hyattsville, MD, Wilder, Deborah, Silver Spring, MD, Chiropractic, April 1986 $10,772.06, Univ of California San Williamson, Tim, Portland, ME, $98,315.48, Georgetown University, Francisco, San Francisco, CA, Washington, DC, Allopathic $93,778.18, Life College, Marietta, Allopathic Medicine, June 1982 GA, Chiropractic, June 1987 Medicine, May 1989 Lynch, Ray A., Columbia, MD, Williams, Lorraine, Silver Spring, MD, Winkler, Stephen D., Bangor, ME, $25,415.94, Howard University, $57,206.78, Logan College of $5,232.08, Howard University, Washington, DC, Allopathic Washington, DC, Allopathic Chiropractic, Chesterfield, MO, Medicine, May 1989 Chiropractic, April 1986 Medicine, May 1989 Marshall, John T., Hillcrest Heights, Young, Howard, Baltimore, MD, Dentistry MD, $84,864.65, Marshall University, $96,210.16, Albany Medical College, Huntington, WV, Allopathic Dentremont, Franklin, Bangor, ME, Albany, NY, Allopathic Medicine, Medicine, June 1986 May 1989 $12,860.49, Tufts University, Boston, McKinney Jr, Thornton, Bladensburg, MA, Dentistry, June 1980 MD, $68,044.16, Georgetown Chiropractic Pick, Charles E., Waterville, ME, University, Washington, DC, Faurote, Pamella R., Wheaton, MD, $11,082.76, Case Western Reserve Allopathic Medicine, May 1990 $12,609.74, Cleveland Chiropractic University, Cleveland, OH, Dentistry, Miles, Robert L., Elk Ridge, MD, College, Los Angeles, CA, May 1985 $159,709.49, Meharry Medical Chiropractic, December 1983 Veterinary Medicine College, Nashville, TN, Allopathic Gordon, Robert K., Snow Hill, MD, Medicine, May 1985 $86,381.68, Cleveland Chiropractic Raiten-Kasoff, Joan K., Bangor, ME, Mines, Sakilba C., Silver Spring, MD, College, Kansas City, MO, $27,851.36, Univ of Pennsylvania, $46,438.59, Hahnemann University, Chiropractic, May 1987 Philadelphia, PA, Veterinary Philadelphia, PA, Allopathic Hughes, Charles, Baltimore, MD, Medicine, May 1986 Medicine, June 1983 $143,298.00, Life College, Marietta, Maryland Mosely, Victoria, Baltimore, MD, GA, Chiropractic, March 1987 $135,335.97, Tufts University, Boston, McCracken, Rosalind A., Chevy Chase, Allopathic Medicine MA, Allopathic Medicine, May 1984 MD, $17,879.05, Life Chiropractic Barber, Steven, Silver Spring, MD, Park, Won S., Baltimore, MD, College-West, San Lorenzo, CA, $40,010.48, Howard University, $12,999.29, Univ of Maryland Chiropractic, March 1988 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices 14095 Smith, Rusty A., City Unknown, MD, Van Story-Lewis, Patricia E., Adelphi, Baltimore, MD, Public Health, January $3,829.88, Palmer College of MD, $31,706.47, Howard University, 1991 Chiropractic West, San Jose, CA, Washington, DC, Dentistry, May 1981 Pieh, Michael, Rockville, MD, Chiropractic, March 1988 Williams, Laura A., Temple Hills, MD, $16,074.54, Tulane University, New $40,272.46, Howard University, Orleans, LA, Public Health, May 1988 Dentistry Washington, DC, Dentistry, May 1987 Brantley, Carl C., Mt Rainier, MD, Wilson, Debra D., Baltimore, MD, Veterinary Medicine $12,916.11, Howard University, $57,109.98, Univ of Maryland Barksdale, Daryl L., Frederick, MD, Washington, DC, Dentistry, May 1989 Baltimore, Baltimore, MD, Dentistry, $4,903.57, Tuskegee University, Brown, Irene E., Silver Spring, MD, May 1984 Tuskegee, AL, Veterinary Medicine, $130,911.64, Meharry Medical May 1987 Osteopathy College, Nashville, TN, Dentistry, May Kidd, Nettie J., Silver Spring, MD, 1987 Poljan, Mary K., Frostburg, MD, $8,210.97, Tuskegee University, Coleman, Michele, Lanham, MD, $9,372.14, Michigan State University, Tuskegee, AL, Veterinary Medicine, $11,169.01, Howard University, East Lansing, MI, Osteopathy, June May 1988 Washington, DC, Dentistry, May 1985 1989 Slaughter, John, Baltimore, MD, Cummins, David D., Gaithersburg, MD, Pharmacy $89,529.29, Tuskegee University, $42,310.53, Howard University, Tuskegee, AL, Veterinary Medicine, Washington, DC, Dentistry, May 1985 Clark, Timothy J., Baltimore, MD, May 1985 Delacruz, Maureen, Bethesda, MD, $10,015.37, Ohio State University, $103,123.11, Georgetown University, Columbus, OH, Pharmacy, June 1987 Massachusetts Conerly, Rex A., Greenbelt, MD, Washington, DC, Dentistry, May 1984 Allopathic Medicine Garcia, Anthony, Baltimore, MD, $29,648.83, Howard University, $17,655.25, Univ of Maryland Washington, DC, Pharmacy, May 1986 Bergus, Boris, Dighton, MA, $2,845.91, Baltimore, Baltimore, MD, Dentistry, Onyekwere, Lawrence, Randallstown, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, June 1989 MD, $4,905.37, Creighton University, Allopathic Medicine, June 1988 Gordon, Vernon, Columbia, MD, Omaha, NE, Pharmacy, August 1983 Charles, Jean B., Bedford, MA, $64,929.81, Boston University $46,306.94, Univ of Maryland Podiatry Baltimore, Baltimore, MD, Dentistry, Medical Center, Boston, MA, Boyce, Jesse M., Bowie, MD, May 1985 Allopathic Medicine, May 1985 $143,504.40, New York College of Harris, Michael, Upper Marlboro, MD, Cyrus, Pamela A., Arlington, MA, Podiatric Medicine, New York, NY, $54,101.35, Howard University, $19,319.81, Marshall University, Podiatry, June 1987 Washington, DC, Dentistry, June 1988 Huntington, WV, Allopathic Doyle, Anthony A., Silver Spring, MD, Johnson, Leardrew L., Takoma Park, Medicine, May 1988 $47,904.41, California College of MD, $11,630.74, Howard University, Daley, William L., Boston, MA, Podiatric Medicine, San Francisco, Washington, DC, Dentistry, May 1988 $77,026.05, Boston University CA, Podiatry, May 1989 Medical Center, Boston, MA, Jones, Winifred M., Baltimore, MD, Gatling, Joycelyn J., Largo, MD, $175,370.00, Meharry Medical Allopathic Medicine, June 1983 $117,605.95, Ohio College of Podiatric Davis, Rudy, Boston, MA, $46,204.47, College, Nashville, TN, Dentistry, May Medicine, Cleveland, OH, Podiatry, 1987 Boston University Medical Center, May 1982 Boston, MA, Allopathic Medicine, Leach, Kevin, Landover, MD, Hudyman, Andrew, Baltimore, MD, $33,058.12, Marquette University, May 1990 $9,948.59, Ohio College of Podiatric Gelwan, Eliot M., Brookline, MA, Milwaukee, WI, Dentistry, May 1990 Medicine, Cleveland, OH, Podiatry, Lindsey, Glenda G., Brooklandville, MD, $9,495.79, Yale University, New June 1990 Haven, CT, Allopathic Medicine, May $51,228.98, Howard University, Jacobs, Steven, Baltimore, MD, Washington, DC, Dentistry, May 1986 1983 $12,010.59, Pennsylvania Col of Healey, Christine, Winthrop, MA, McKee, Commelita, Silver Spring, MD, Podiatric Medicine, Philadelphia, PA, $18,901.90, Howard University, $30,742.36, Univ of Rochester, Podiatry, June 1987 Rochester, NY, Allopathic Medicine, Washington, DC, Dentistry, May 1990 Miles Jr, Robert, Wheaton, MD, May 1987 Palou, Ana M., Silver Spring, MD, $124,969.46, Dr William Scholl Col of Holt, Todd N., Provincetown, MA, $49,090.67, Georgetown University, Podiatric Med, Chicago, IL, Podiatry, $65,399.20, Univ of Arkansas Medical Washington, DC, Dentistry, May 1989 May 1988 Press, Zachary D., Randallstown, MD, Rosenberg, Robert, Gaithersburg, MD, Center, Little Rock, AR, Allopathic $66,469.27, Univ of Maryland $141,266.92, Barry University— Medicine, May 1986 Baltimore, Columbia, SC, Dentistry, Podiatric Med, Miami Shores, FL, Joyce, Benjamin, Cataumet, MA, May 1985 Podiatry, May 1989 $16,273.27, Tufts University, Boston, Richardson, Joseph J., Silver Spring, Sachs, Jody, Derwood, MD, $149,292.76, MA, Allopathic Medicine, May 1985 MD, $180,389.24, Howard University, Ohio College of Podiatric Medicine, Ling, Judith, Springfield, MA, Washington, DC, Dentistry, May 1987 Cleveland, OH, Podiatry, May 1987 $32,265.78, Stanford University, Saffold, Michael D., Hyattsville, MD, Young, Pamela, Bowie, MD, $76,879.20, Stanford, CA, Allopathic Medicine, $12,859.83, Univ of Maryland Ohio College of Podiatric Medicine, June 1981 Baltimore, Baltimore, MD, Dentistry, Cleveland, OH, Podiatry, May 1988 Mendes, Antonio C., Dorchester, MA, May 1987 $13,361.75, Univ of Massachusetts Smith, Dezrie, Clinton, MD, $19,201.91, Public Health Worcester, Worcester, MA, Allopathic Georgetown University, Washington, Henderson, Melford J., Rockville, MD, Medicine, May 1990 DC, Dentistry, May 1989 $4,487.78, Yale University, New Murphy, Michael P., Brookline, MA, Thomas, Lindwall, Silver Spring, MD, Haven, CT, Public Health, May 1984 $11,902.61, Suny Stony Brook, Stony $13,385.34, Howard University, Mathews, Elizabeth A., Baltimore, MD, Brook, NY, Allopathic Medicine, June Washington, DC, Dentistry, May 1991 $14,535.47, Johns Hopkins University, 1989 14096 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices O’Connor, Brian, Boston, MA, Doherty, Edward (chip) E., Westwood, Medical Center, Boston, MA, $41,576.15, Georgetown University, MA, $17,049.75, Palmer College of Dentistry, May 1987 Washington, DC, Allopathic Chiropractic, Davenport, IA, Cohen, Ronald, Rockland, MA, Medicine, May 1985 Chiropractic, June 1984 $177,541.19, Tufts University, Boston, Obi Tabot, Eliot T., Framingham, MA, Doonan, Greg, Peabody, MA, MA, Dentistry, February 1987 $8,188.96, Univ of Missouri $22,359.21, Palmer College of Culbertson, William, Wollaston, MA, Columbia, Columbia, MO, Allopathic Chiropractic, Davenport, IA, $25,273.64, Boston University Medicine, May 1989 Chiropractic, March 1984 Medical Center, Boston, MA, Rivers, Samuel, Randolph, MA, Falkinburg, Rory, Williamsburg, MA, Dentistry, May 1982 $14,096.35, Brown University, $49,566.42, Los Angeles College of Dooley, Paul J., Hyde Park, MA, Providence, RI, Allopathic Medicine, Chiropractic, Whittier, CA, $25,031.70, Boston University June 1984 Chiropractic, April 1989 Medical Center, Boston, MA, Rucks, Andrew A., Springfield, MA, Garcia, Frank J., Boston, MA, $1,694.10, Dentistry, May 1990 $175,915.66, Meharry Medical Life College, Marietta, GA, Down, Majorie E., Wrentham, MA, College, Nashville, TN, Allopathic Chiropractic, October 1986 $4,109.16, Boston University Medical Medicine, May 1985 Hughes, Allen D., Worchester, MA, Center, Boston, MA, Dentistry, June Saintlouis, Josephus, West Roxbury, $92,550.78, Palmer College of 1984 MA, $97,155.19, Univ of Minnesota, Chiropractic, Davenport, IA, Gabriel, Tony D., Watertown, MA, Minneapolis, MN, Allopathic Chiropractic, March 1989 $62,101.17, Marquette University, Medicine, June 1987 Leconte, Isabelle I., Cambridge, MA, Milwaukee, WI, Dentistry, May 1984 Simpson, Ashley, Allston, MA, $36,645.55, Los Angeles College of Gallery, Melissa, Nahant, MA, $27,570.60, Tufts University, Boston, Chiropractic, Whittier, CA, $129,070.22, Tufts University, Boston, MA, Allopathic Medicine, May 1989 Chiropractic, August 1986 MA, Dentistry, May 1987 Swinford, Rita, Boston, MA, $15,613.85, Miller, Harry, Sandwich, MA, Gearin, Timothy, Chicope, MA, SUNY Stony Brook, Stony Brook, NY, $10,247.66, Life College, Marietta, $114,945.44, Tufts University, Boston, Allopathic Medicine, June 1990 GA, Chiropractic, September 1990 MA, Dentistry, February 1988 Thompson, John, East Bridgewater, MA, Morman, Diane, Jamaica Plain, MA, George, Gail G., Quincy, MA, $23,523.84, Medical College of $48,727.12, Life College, Marietta, $120,233.28, Boston University Wisconsin, Milwaukee, WI, GA, Chiropractic, March 1983 Medical Center, Boston, MA, Allopathic Medicine, May 1989 Powell, Michael, Somerset, MA, Dentistry, May 1987 Tucker, Lori B., Nahant, MA, $73,413.85, Palmer College of Hardy, Mary, Lowell, MA, $145,046.31, $20,605.93, Tufts University, Boston, Chiropractic, Davenport, IA, Tufts University, Boston, MA, MA, Allopathic Medicine, June 1983 Chiropractic, June 1986 Dentistry, June 1990 Urkevic, Jan, Brookline, MA, Rines, Susan B., Westwood, MA, Jones, Margaret K., Pembroke, MA, $63,761.18, Georgetown University, $3,922.48, Life College, Marietta, GA, $173,621.56, Boston University Washington, DC, Allopathic Chiropractic, December 1990 Medical Center, Boston, MA, Medicine, May 1988 Dentistry, May 1986 Weaver, Rebecca, Boston, MA, Clinical Psychology Lawrence, Herbert, Roxbury, MA, $168,973.42, Tufts University, Boston, Webster, Thomas, North Hampton, MA, $20,216.90, Boston University MA, Allopathic Medicine, May 1987 $75,912.21, New School For Social Whitt, Beverly S., Brockton, MA, Research, New York, NY, Clinical Medical Center, Boston, MA, $118,513.19, Univ of California Irvine, Psychology, May 1989 Dentistry, May 1985 Irvine, CA, Allopathic Medicine, June Lebourdais, Stephen, Pittsfield, MA, Dentistry 1988 $395.71, Univ of Pennsylvania, Bissanti, Michael A., Braintree, MA, Philadelphia, PA, Dentistry, May 1981 Chiropractic $36,505.58, Boston University Lynch, William, Milford, MA, Angelo, Kathie L., Hull, MA, Medical Center, Boston, MA, $43,184.98, Boston University $59,797.42, Life College, Marietta, Dentistry, June 1983 Medical Center, Boston, MA, GA, Chiropractic, December 1984 Brown, David, Belchertown, MA, Dentistry, May 1990 Boyden, David, South Deerfield, MA, $113,324.01, Univ of Southern Martinez, Hannah A., Medford, MA, $2,564.00, Palmer College of California, Los Angeles, CA, $38,741.67, Tufts University, Boston, Chiropractic, Davenport, IA, Dentistry, May 1990 MA, Dentistry, June 1989 Chiropractic, October 1992 Butler, Hubert, Boston, MA, Matkoski, Jane L., Dorchester, MA, Brault, Peter, Westminster, MA, $103,208.24, Temple University, $103,226.49, Boston University $31,420.40, New York Chiropractic Philadelphia, PA, Dentistry, June Medical Center, Boston, MA, College, Seneca Falls, NY, 1987 Dentistry, May 1988 Chiropractic, April 1983 Cale, Scott, Watertown, MA, Nosack, John E., Watertown, MA, Bruce, Ronald, Peabody, MA, $114,096.45, Tufts University, Boston, $163,310.12, Tufts University, Boston, $10,014.40, Los Angeles College of MA, Dentistry, June 1990 MA, Dentistry, June 1986 Chiropractic, Whittier, CA, Calhoun, Mary, West Bridgewater, MA, Savas, Christy W., Worchester, MA, Chiropractic, August 1987 $32,736.40, Case Western Reserve $1,566.15, Georgetown University, Cotter, Paul, Newton, MA, $33,418.61, University, Cleveland, OH, Dentistry, Washington, DC, Dentistry, May 1982 Palmer College of Chiropractic, December 1985 Sedovsky, Jeffrey, Framingham, MA, Davenport, IA, Chiropractic, June Capua, Joseph, Dorchester, MA, $172,430.12, Boston University 1988 $87,558.88, Boston University Medical Center, Boston, MA, Dehamer-Howard, Heleen H., South Medical Center, Boston, MA, Dentistry, May 1989 Hamilton, MA, $65,437.32, Life Dentistry, May 1990 Smith, Rickey, Mattapan, MA, College, Marietta, GA, Chiropractic, Christopoulos, George, Saugus, MA, $152,901.35, Marquette University, June 1983 $123,902.65, Boston University Milwaukee, WI, Dentistry, May 1988 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices 14097 Snow, Brian B., Harwich, MA, Podiatry Michigan $40,095.96, Georgetown University, Coby, Michael, Amherst, MA, Allopathic Medicine Washington, DC, Dentistry, May 1985 $21,131.98, Pennsylvania Col of Solimini Jr, Anthony G., Boston, MA, Anderson, Denise, Detroit, MI, Podiatric Medicine, Philadelphia, PA, $40,101.59, Boston University $120,337.40, Meharry Medical Podiatry, June 1987 Medical Center, Boston, MA, College, Nashville, TN, Allopathic Dentistry, June 1988 Tachibana, James, Stockbridge, MA, Medicine, May 1988 Thompson, Florian, Boston, MA, $104,791.48, New York College of Arrington, Dexter E., Detroit, MI, $199,852.28, Boston University Podiatric Medicine, New York, NY, $1,547.88, Washington University, St Medical Center, Boston, MA, Podiatry, June 1982 Louis, MO, Allopathic Medicine, May Dentistry, May 1988 Public Health 1990 Weake, Jeffrey R., North Weymouth, Berry, Aphonso, Troy, MI, $5,067.88, Burnside, Susan, Marblehead, MA, MA, $214,973.31, Tufts University, Howard University, Washington, DC, $13,891.83, Boston University Boston, MA, Dentistry, June 1985 Allopathic Medicine, May 1988 Medical Center, Boston, MA, Public Woodrick, William R., Waltham, MA, Burton, Ann Y., Detroit, MI, Health, May 1985 $39,354.25, Univ of Pittsburgh, $144,433.06, Medical College of Ohio, Pittsburgh, PA, Dentistry, June 1989 Caraballo-Wesley, Elizabeth, Mattapan, Toledo, OH, Allopathic Medicine, MA, $13,914.83, Boston University June 1986 Optometry Medical Center, Boston, MA, Public Coalman, Perry G., Kalamazoo, MI, Garcia, Miguel A., Danvers, MA, Health, May 1985 $25,453.97, Medical College of $27,908.76, New England College of Cronin, Denis, Medford, MA, Wisconsin, Milwaukee, WI, Optometry, Boston, MA, Optometry, $21,136.94, Columbia University Allopathic Medicine, May 1984 May 1988 Health Sciences, New York, NY, Criss, David, Southfield, MI, $7,794.19, Michigan State University, East Soque, James, Falmouth, MA, $4,244.00, Public Health, May 1986 Lansing, MI, Allopathic Medicine, New England College of Optometry, Dorsinville, Mona M., Boston, MA, June 1990 Boston, MA, Optometry, May 1991 $22,574.60, Harvard University, Boston, MA, Public Health, June 1987 Crittenden Jr, William, Detroit, MI, Osteopathy $86,214.91, Meharry Medical College, Dumser, James B., Malden, MA, Nashville, TN, Allopathic Medicine, Berry, Linda, Seekonk, MA, $26,370.74, Harvard University, $179,026.77, Univ of New England, May 1986 Boston, MA, Public Health, June 1987 Daniel, Felton J., Farmington, MI, Biddeford, ME, Osteopathy, June 1986 Kattan, Yehuda Y., Springfield, MA, $24,462.39, Medical College of Leaver, Janet M., Stoughton, MA, $17,599.99, Tulane University, New Georgia, Augusta, GA, Allopathic $209,267.49, Univ of New England, Orleans, LA, Public Health, December Medicine, June 1983 Biddeford, ME, Osteopathy, December 1985 Eichler, John A., Ypsilanti, MI, 1986 Mercier-Pierre, Hermide, Brockton, MA, $106,052.29, Univ of Pittsburgh, Parks, Norman G., Brookline, MA, $18,440.62, Boston University Pittsburgh, PA, Allopathic Medicine, $17,169.16, Michigan State Medical Center, Boston, MA, Public June 1987 University, East Lansing, MI, Health, May 1987 Eiland, Gazandra J., East Lansing, MI, Osteopathy, June 1987 Michaud, Unique, Needham, MA, $4,720.38, Univ of Michigan, Ann Pharmacy $8,711.25, Harvard University, Arbor, MI, Allopathic Medicine, May Boston, MA, Public Health, June 1987 1991 Amah, Ezem, Boston, MA, $7,410.56, Ennis, Michael C., Lansing, MI, Massachusetts College of Pharmacy, Mikols, Ann M., Boston, MA, $31,892.78, Boston University $25,126.76, Michigan State Boston, MA, Pharmacy, June 1988 University, East Lansing, MI, Culba, Frantisek, Quincy, MA, Medical Center, Boston, MA, Public Health, May 1985 Allopathic Medicine, June 1989 $4,646.27, Massachusetts College of George, Eric R., Grand Rapids, MI, Pharmacy, Boston, MA, Pharmacy, Munroe, Alelia, Boston, MA, $15,231.73, Boston University $7,106.28, Marshall University, June 1992 Huntington, WV, Allopathic Gibbs, David P., Boston, MA, Medical Center, Boston, MA, Public Health, January 1983 Medicine, May 1989 $27,134.93, Massachusetts College of Hatter, Marcus, Lansing, MI, $84,352.00, Pharmacy, Boston, MA, Pharmacy, Veterinary Medicine Michigan State University, East June 1984 Canavan, Robert T., Wayland, MA, Lansing, MI, Allopathic Medicine, Johnson, Benjamin B., North Hampton, June 1989 MA, $11,378.43, Massachusetts $54,167.02, Tufts University, Boston, MA, Veterinary Medicine, May 1989 Johnson, Anthony, Detroit, MI, College of Pharmacy, Boston, MA, $31,658.04, Meharry Medical College, Pharmacy, June 1987 Ernst, Harry B., Falmouth, MA, Nashville, TN, Allopathic Medicine, Karbalaei, Esfandiar, Cambridge, MA, $106,645.40, Tufts University, Boston, May 1989 $7,751.32, Massachusetts College of MA, Veterinary Medicine, May 1987 Lucas, Joann, Detroit, MI, $135,929.11, Pharmacy, Boston, MA, Pharmacy, Hepburn, Bradley J., Somerville, MA, Meharry Medical College, Nashville, June 1992 $28,317.98, Tufts University, Boston, TN, Allopathic Medicine, May 1987 Tkejiani, Azubeze A C, Mattapan, MA, MA, Veterinary Medicine, May 1985 Marang, Boitshoko P., Detroit, MI, $58,185.48, Massachusetts College of Thompson, Ashiaa, Canton, MA, $103,787.13, Southern Illinois Univ Pharmacy, Boston, MA, Pharmacy, $60,011.24, Tuskegee University, Springfield, IL, Allopathic Medicine, June 1988 Tuskegee, AL, Veterinary Medicine, November 1984 Watt, Sharyn, Brockton, MA, May 1984 McAllister, William, Detroit, MI, $58,988.79, Massachusetts College of Weber, Merle H., Andover, MA, $32,927.98, Michigan State Pharmacy, Boston, MA, Pharmacy, $84,847.96, Tufts University, Boston, University, East Lansing, MI, June 1986 MA, Veterinary Medicine, May 1987 Allopathic Medicine, June 1982 14098 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices Mial, Richard, Ann Arbor, MI, Chiropractic, Lombard, IL, Lavengood, Daniel J, Wyoming, MI, $3,727.52, Creighton University, Chiropractic, December 1985 $124,518.18, Life College, Marietta, Omaha, NE, Allopathic Medicine, Beller, Bryan, Wyandotte, MI, GA, Chiropractic, March 1987 May 1985 $118,057.79, Life College, Marietta, Lavengood, Todd D, Marshall, MI, Moore, Charzetta, West Bloomfield, MI, GA, Chiropractic, March 1987 $50,588.00, Palmer College of $129,991.72, Meharry Medical Calzetta, Gregory A., St. Clair Shores, Chiropractic, Davenport, IA, College, Nashville, TN, Allopathic MI, $49,304.46, Life College, Marietta, Chiropractic, December 1986 Medicine, May 1987 GA, Chiropractic, October 1985 McShan, Ophelia O, Kalamazoo, MI, Motley, Rebecca K., Detroit, MI, Chapman, Michelle, Auburn Hills, MI, $55,955.83, Life College, Marietta, $104,269.76, Univ of Michigan, Ann $34,046.57, Palmer College of GA, Chiropractic, December 1984 Arbor, MI, Allopathic Medicine, May Chiropractic, Davenport, IA, Migdalewicz, Alan, Ferndale, MI, 1986 Chiropractic, October 1987 $29,484.74, Palmer College of Neitzel, Shelly, Ann Arbor, MI, Clark, Daniel S., Rochester Hills, MI, Chiropractic, Davenport, IA, $12,759.30, Univ of Michigan, Ann $34,236.42, Palmer College of Chiropractic, December 1987 Arbor, MI, Allopathic Medicine, May Chiropractic, Davenport, IA, Monterosso, Karen, Allen Park, MI, 1988 Chiropractic, June 1985 $18,766.75, Life College, Marietta, Pavlou, Bill, West Bloomfield, MI, Clark, Gary C., Inkster, MI, $13,722.20, GA, Chiropractic, March 1983 $119,004.90, Hahnemann University, Palmer College of Chiropractic, Nelson, Roger, Waterford, MI, Philadelphia, PA, Allopathic Davenport, IA, Chiropractic, March $31,775.60, Palmer College of Medicine, June 1982 1989 Chiropractic, Davenport, IA, Polak, Timothy, Ann Arbor, MI, Cordes, John, West Bloomfield, MI, Chiropractic, December 1986 $12,853.27, Wayne State University, $48,169.55, Logan College of O’Dell, Craig, Lake, MI, $149,037.89, Detroit, MI, Allopathic Medicine, June Chiropractic, Chesterfield, MO, Life College, Marietta, GA, 1991 Chiropractic, August 1985 Chiropractic, June 1984 Polk, Norris, Detroit, MI, $1,682.88, Dunn, Karen K, Dearborn, MI, Pierce, Douglas E, Grand Rapids, MI, Meharry Medical College, Nashville, $30,326.81, Palmer College of $10,699.84, Parker College of TN, Allopathic Medicine, May 1982 Chiropractic, Davenport, IA, Chiropractic, Dallas, TX, Chiropractic, Rizzo, Michael J., Southfield, MI, Chiropractic, June 1985 April 1986 $26,106.24, St. Louis University, St. Flateau, Jacqueline, Taylor, MI, Richardson, Neil N, Cedar Springs, MI, Louis, MO, Allopathic Medicine, May $27,431.82, Life College, Marietta, $39,021.83, Palmer College of 1985 GA, Chiropractic, June 1989 Chiropractic, Davenport, IA, Segesta, Michael, East Detroit, MI, Forte-Thottakath, Sandra L, Detroit, MI, Chiropractic, March 1987 $23,547.46, Mayo Medical School, $17,698.14, National College of Rosemond, Luther, Detroit, MI, Rochester, MN, Allopathic Medicine, Chiropractic, Lombard, IL, $89,841.36, Life College, Marietta, May 1988 Chiropractic, August 1985 GA, Chiropractic, December 1985 Sigismund, Gordon, Farmington Hills, Graham Jr, Robert L, Byron Center, MI, Roshy, Gary, Ludington, MI, MI, $95,868.81, Meharry Medical $12,784.31, Life College, Marietta, $133,887.58, Palmer College of College, Nashville, TN, Allopathic GA, Chiropractic, December 1985 Chiropractic, Davenport, IA, Medicine, May 1988 Gress, Raymond, Sparta, MI, $9,275.23, Chiropractic, October 1986 Sparrow Jr, Cleveland C., Birmingham, Life College, Marietta, GA, Sanborn, Brian, Mt Pleasant, MI, MI, $76,352.92, Georgetown Chiropractic, September 1983 $132,714.79, Life College, Marietta, University, Washington, DC, Hassinger, Royann, Ortonville, MI, GA, Chiropractic, March 1987 Allopathic Medicine, May 1988 $35,353.23, National College of Scafidi, Scott J, Pontiac, MI, $23,653.89, Tanwi, Lyndon, Southfield, MI, Chiropractic, Lombard, IL, Life College, Marietta, GA, $61,190.34, Univ of Texas Hlth Sci Chiropractic, December 1985 Chiropractic, March 1986 Cntr San Antonio, San Antonio, TX, Humphrey, Terry J, Lansing, MI, Schwarz, Bernard B, Center Line, MI, Allopathic Medicine, June 1986 $15,834.59, Life College, Marietta, $19,051.95, Palmer College of Walker, Yvette R., Harper Woods, MI, GA, Chiropractic, September 1983 Chiropractic, Davenport, IA, $34,557.26, Meharry Medical College, Hunsberger, Mark, Lake Orion, MI, Chiropractic, December 1983 Nashville, TN, Allopathic Medicine, $13,741.48, Palmer College of Smith, Dale, Battle Creek, MI, May 1990 Chiropractic, Davenport, IA, $88,322.81, Life Chiropractic College- Ware, Cynthia R., Detroit, MI, Chiropractic, December 1982 West, San Lorenzo, CA, Chiropractic, $20,593.70, Wright State University, Jackson, William, Lakeville, MI, June 1987 Dayton, OH, Allopathic Medicine, $27,691.13, Cleveland Chiropractic Truax, Christopher J, Algonac, MI, June 1990 College, Kansas City, MO, $2,796.87, National College of West, Woodrow W., Southfield, MI, Chiropractic, September 1983 Chiropractic, Lombard, IL, $8,591.50, Univ of Michigan, Ann Kay, John, Westland, MI, $73,790.02, Chiropractic, August 1984 Arbor, MI, Allopathic Medicine, May Life College, Marietta, GA, Vergote, Steven S, Warren, MI, 1984 Chiropractic, June 1986 $32,715.46, Palmer College of Knol, Jennifer JS, Holland, MI, Chiropractic, Davenport, IA, Chiropractic $46,844.71, Life College, Marietta, Chiropractic, September 1985 Aamodt, Wayne G., Grand Rapids, MI, GA, Chiropractic, June 1986 Vernon, David W, Clarkston, MI, $6,780.74, Palmer College of Koffeman, John N, Ann Arbor, MI, $7,287.15, Cleveland Chiropractic Chiropractic, Davenport, IA, $38,951.24, National College of College, Los Angeles, CA, Chiropractic, December 1982 Chiropractic, Lombard, IL, Chiropractic, December 1982 Adray, Allie, Dearborn, MI, $117,294.25, Chiropractic, December 1983 Vettraino, Mark, Orion, MI, $82,083.21, Life College, Marietta, GA, Laing, Jean D, Detroit, MI, $39,941.89, Life College, Marietta, GA, Chiropractic, March 1987 Palmer College of Chiropractic, Chiropractic, June 1984 Allen, David F., Madison Heights, MI, Davenport, IA, Chiropractic, March Williams, Ronald G, Grand Rapids, MI, $45,152.03, National College of 1984 $48,065.89, National College of Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices 14099 Chiropractic, Lombard, IL, Schaefer, Mary L., Flint, MI, $39,372.48, Snyder, Richard R., West Bloomfield, Chiropractic, December 1987 Meharry Medical College, Nashville, MI, $80,794.94, Univ of Health Wilson, Soni, Detroit, MI, $54,458.43, TN, Dentistry, May 1981 Sciences, Kansas City, MO, Logan College of Chiropractic, Senior, Duane A., Detroit, MI, Osteopathy, May 1985 Chesterfield, MO, Chiropractic, $166,391.33, Meharry Medical Swan, Charles, Pontiac, MI, $7,107.12, August 1988 College, Nashville, TN, Dentistry, May Michigan State University, East Wolgat, Gregory J., Southfield, MI, 1985 Lansing, MI, Osteopathy, June 1988 $13,927.87, Life College, Marietta, Snyder, Steven H., Southfield, MI, Torosian, Michael P., Novi, MI, GA, Chiropractic, December 1983 $46,515.75, Univ of Detroit Mercy, $126,378.86, Univ of Health Sciences, Detroit, MI, Dentistry, April 1981 Kansas City, MO, Osteopathy, May Clinical Psychology Taylor, Harold L., Detroit, MI, 1990 Wright, Richard R., Detroit, MI, $179,802.38, Meharry Medical Toth, Robert L., Detroit, MI, $27,404.12, $105,850.24, California Sch of Prof College, Nashville, TN, Dentistry, May Michigan State University, East Psych San Diego, San Diego, CA, 1984 Lansing, MI, Osteopathy, June 1981 Clinical Psychology, June 1987 Optometry Pharmacy Dentistry Wells, Marcy A., Detroit, MI, Lemmons, Yvonne Y., Detroit, MI, Anderson, Mary L., Birmingham, MI, $19,152.33, Illinois College of $32,856.10, Mercer University, $177,252.76, Univ of Detroit Mercy, Optometry, Chicago, IL, Optometry, Atlanta, GA, Pharmacy, June 1983 Detroit, MI, Dentistry, April 1982 May 1989 Baumstark, James M., Livonia, MI, Podiatry $147,998.08, Marquette University, Osteopathy Ball Jr, Thomas, Detroit, MI, $31,217.90, Milwaukee, WI, Dentistry, May 1988 Barnett, Ruth D., Southfield, MI, Ohio College of Podiatric Medicine, Branham, Jerome R., Pontiac, MI, $78,575.65, Michigan State Cleveland, OH, Podiatry, May 1980 $33,379.39, Meharry Medical College, University, East Lansing, MI, Baptist, Mazel, Detroit, MI, $11,652.22, Nashville, TN, Dentistry, May 1981 Osteopathy, June 1985 New York College of Podiatric Burnett, Kevin M., Detroit, MI, Barr, John T., Bay City, MI, $18,984.11, Medicine, New York, NY, Podiatry, $57,843.82, Univ of Detroit Mercy, Univ of Health Sciences, Kansas City, June 1989 Detroit, MI, Dentistry, May 1983 MO, Osteopathy, March 1991 Berk, Richard I., Ann Arbor, MI, Chapman, William, Westland, MI, Benjamin, Roxanne R., Rose City, MI, $135,455.45, Ohio College of Podiatric $150,602.48, Univ of Detroit Mercy, $58,677.88, Michigan State Medicine, Cleveland, OH, Podiatry, Detroit, MI, Dentistry, December 1986 University, East Lansing, MI, May 1981 Dawidowski, Douglas M., Rochester, MI, Osteopathy, June 1985 Cesar, Gary L., Lansing, MI, $57,449.94, Univ of Detroit Mercy, Bilyeu, Stuart, Ann Arbor, MI, $129,846.33, Ohio College of Podiatric Detroit, MI, Dentistry, April 1981 $16,735.02, Michigan State Medicine, Cleveland, OH, Podiatry, George, Achukutty T., Detroit, MI, University, East Lansing, MI, May 1985 $14,631.84, Univ of Michigan, Ann Osteopathy, June 1988 Hofner, Mark L., Dearborn, MI, Arbor, MI, Dentistry, May 1990 Breedlove, David L., Detroit, MI, $158,126.77, Univ of Osteo Medical & Hamlin, Calvin, Detroit, MI, $49,296.91, $9,843.87, Michigan State University, Health Science, Des Moines, IA, Howard University, Washington, DC, East Lansing, MI, Osteopathy, June Podiatry, June 1988 Dentistry, May 1987 1983 Horne-Atkins, Jerilyn, Southfield, MI, Holyway, Craig T., Southfield, MI, Brent, Gloria G J, East Lansing, MI, $35,634.19, Ohio College of Podiatric $92,841.85, Washington University, St $41,188.63, Michigan State Medicine, Cleveland, OH, Podiatry, Louis, MO, Dentistry, May 1991 University, East Lansing, MI, May 1980 Hysni, Eddie K., Orchard Lake, MI, Osteopathy, June 1986 Jackson, Thomas C., Detroit, MI, $23,364.11, Univ of Detroit Mercy, Cohn, Mitchell A., Birmingham, MI, $24,563.69, Ohio College of Podiatric Detroit, MI, Dentistry, May 1987 $183,722.78, Univ of Osteo Medical & Medicine, Cleveland, OH, Podiatry, Khouri, Louie, Ferndale, MI, $7,705.97, Health Science, Des Moines, IA, May 1985 Univ of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, Osteopathy, June 1986 Johnson, Ervin, Grosse Pointe Farms, Dentistry, August 1989 Frei, Julia, Marquette, MI, $8,593.93, MI, $193,156.33, Univ of Osteo Munson, Kevin D., Huntington Woods, Michigan State University, East Medical & Health Science, Des MI, $11,604.02, Univ of Maryland Lansing, MI, Osteopathy, June 1989 Moines, IA, Podiatry, May 1990 Baltimore, Baltimore, MD, Dentistry, Green, Linda, Detroit, MI, $30,284.87, Moore, Jackie, Detroit, MI, $41,895.23, May 1988 Michigan State University, East Univ of Osteo Medical & Health Murphy, Kevin K., Fraser, MI, Lansing, MI, Osteopathy, June 1985 Science, Des Moines, IA, Podiatry, $43,673.38, Univ of Detroit Mercy, Kreuzer, Craig, Grand Rapids, MI, June 1990 Detroit, MI, Dentistry, April 1981 $15,954.01, College of Osteo Med of Thomas, Valerie, Detroit, MI, Rashid, Paul, East Lansing, MI, the Pacific, Pomona, CA, Osteopathy, $77,145.46, Ohio College of Podiatric $120,311.44, Boston University June 1991 Medicine, Cleveland, OH, Podiatry, Medical Center, Boston, MA, Posey, Willie L., Detroit, MI, May 1989 Dentistry, May 1989 $176,628.71, Midwestern University, Wilson, Ronald, Detroit, MI, $98,846.07, Rodgers-McDougall, Shawn E., Ann Downers Grove, IL, Osteopathy, June Ohio College of Podiatric Medicine, Arbor, MI, $35,893.84, Univ of Detroit 1988 Cleveland, OH, Podiatry, May 1985 Mercy, Detroit, MI, Dentistry, May Racicot, Terry A., Troy, MI, $11,079.61, 1989 Oklahoma State University, Tulsa, Public Health Russell, Bobby D., Stevensville, MI, OK, Osteopathy, May 1989 Paveza, Gregory L., Ypsilanti, MI, $60,317.42, Loyola University Ross, Guy, Ferndale, MI, $16,613.81, $154,416.62, Univ of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, IL, Dentistry, May Michigan State University, East Chicago, Chicago, IL, Public Health, 1988 Lansing, MI, Osteopathy, June 1990 June 1985 14100 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices Veterinary Medicine Chiropractic, Bloomington, MN, Smith, Edward, Edina, MN, $13,544.11, Stewart, Kevin R., Utica, MI, $48,040.62, Chiropractic, December 1989 Northwestern College of Chiropractic, Fagan, Barbara, Bloomington, MN, Michigan State University, East Bloomington, MN, Chiropractic, April $73,049.57, Northwestern College of Lansing, MI, Veterinary Medicine, 1992 Chiropractic, Bloomington, MN, June 1987 Sogaard, James E., Maple Lake, MN, Chiropractic, April 1991 $22,422.30, Northwestern College of Minnesota Fairchild, Alima C., Minneapolis, MN, Chiropractic, Bloomington, MN, $39,865.93, Northwestern College of Allopathic Medicine Chiropractic, December 1983 Chiropractic, Bloomington, MN, Steffi, David L., Worthington, MN, Azzarello, James, Minneapolis, MN, Chiropractic, December 1986 $12,582.71, Northwestern College of $91,916.64, Albany Medical College, Hendrickson, Raymond D., Clear Lake, Chiropractic, Bloomington, MN, Albany, NY, Allopathic Medicine, MN, $4,838.75, Northwestern College Chiropractic, April 1989 May 1987 of Chiropractic, Bloomington, MN, Triden, Thomas A., Maple Grove, MN, Baker, Jeffrey, Minneapolis, MN, Chiropractic, April 1984 $37,372.29, Northwestern College of $18,313.91, Univ of Minnesota, Hoklin, Barbara U., Excelsior, MN, Chiropractic, Bloomington, MN, Minneapolis, MN, Allopathic $40,831.38, Northwestern College of Chiropractic, August 1986 Medicine, June 1986 Chiropractic, Bloomington, MN, Wahl, David, Montgomery, MN, Faragounis, Vasilios, Rochester, MN, Chiropractic, December 1987 $71,894.02, Northwestern College of Hoklin, John, Excelsior, MN, $24,805.49, Boston University Chiropractic, Bloomington, MN, $30,061.60, Northwestern College of Medical Center, Boston, MA, Chiropractic, December 1988 Allopathic Medicine, May 1988 Chiropractic, Bloomington, MN, Chiropractic, August 1987 Weigel, Mark, Minneapolis, MN, Hoskins-Akale, Denise, Cottage Grove, $20,772.86, Northwestern College of MN, $225,269.64, Medical College of Juetten, Herbert, Pierz, MN, $102,211.07, Logan College of Chiropractic, Bloomington, MN, Wisconsin, Milwaukee, WI, Chiropractic, April 1989 Allopathic Medicine, February 1985 Chiropractic, Chesterfield, MO, Chiropractic, April 1986 Wibbels, Keith, Eagan, MN, $7,627.52, Johnson, Richard, Minneapolis, MN, Northwestern College of Chiropractic, $32,010.22, Univ of Louisville, Kronbeck, Gary M., Little Falls, MN, $7,844.86, Northwestern College of Bloomington, MN, Chiropractic, April Louisville, KY, Allopathic Medicine, 1984 May 1987 Chiropractic, Bloomington, MN, Osei-Tutu, Ernest O., Minneapolis, MN, Chiropractic, April 1989 Dentistry Lawson, Mary E., Grand Marais, MN, $16,346.62, Thomas Jefferson Doan, Tung T., Minneapolis, MN, University, Philadelphia, PA, $16,342.27, Northwestern College of Chiropractic, Bloomington, MN, $28,036.43, Univ of Alabama Allopathic Medicine, June 1987 Chiropractic, April 1985 Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, Chiropractic Lowe, James J., St Paul, MN, $39,229.16, Dentistry, June 1987 Saran, Richard, Bloomington, MN, Bauwens, David M., St Paul, MN, Northwestern College of Chiropractic, $68,908.56, Loyola University $49,679.39, Palmer College of Bloomington, MN, Chiropractic, April Chicago, Chicago, IL, Dentistry, May Chiropractic, Davenport, IA, 1990 Lyso, Mark, Chaska, MN, $26,822.78, 1987 Chiropractic, December 1986 Northwestern College of Chiropractic, Wilbur, Raymond, Northfield, MN, Blish, Jon J., Mound, MN, $19,531.19, Bloomington, MN, Chiropractic, $133,833.17, Marquette University, Northwestern College of Chiropractic, August 1983 Milwaukee, WI, Dentistry, May 1987 Bloomington, MN, Chiropractic, McRoy, David, St Paul, MN, $21,479.21, December 1988 Northwestern College of Chiropractic, Podiatry Bruns, Faylene, Lakeville, MN, Bloomington, MN, Chiropractic, Wahman, Stephen B., St Paul, MN, $41,813.42, Northwestern College of December 1988 $7,226.05, Dr William Scholl Col of Chiropractic, Bloomington, MN, Miller, Mark, Minnetonka, MN, Podiatric Med, Chicago, IL, Podiatry, Chiropractic, April 1986 $52,840.46, Parker College of May 1982 Carson, Timothy T., Minneapolis, MN, Chiropractic, Dallas, TX, Chiropractic, $4,860.13, Northwestern College of December 1987 Mississippi Chiropractic, Bloomington, MN, Mittet, David, Delworth, MN, Allopathic Medicine Chiropractic, August 1987 $40,060.53, Northwestern College of Chmelik, Gregory J., Rushford, MN, Chiropractic, Bloomington, MN, Chenier, Lawrence L., Vicksburg, MS, $5,135.29, Northwestern College of Chiropractic, December 1988 $15,313.45, Meharry Medical College, Chiropractic, Bloomington, MN, Pena, Francisco, St Cloud, MN, Nashville, TN, Allopathic Medicine, Chiropractic, December 1990 $4,456.32, Northwestern College of May 1980 Clancey, Michael, Fairmont, MN, Chiropractic, Bloomington, MN, Coleman, Larry L., Pinola, MS, $60,603.99, Palmer College of Chiropractic, August 1990 $71,460.61, Meharry Medical College, Chiropractic, Davenport, IA, Post, Margaret, Minneapolis, MN, Nashville, TN, Allopathic Medicine, Chiropractic, October 1986 $5,894.89, Northwestern College of May 1984 Denker, Beth A., Blaine, MN, Chiropractic, Bloomington, MN, Harper, Tracy, Gulfport, MS, $66,433.71, Northwestern College of Chiropractic, April 1984 $27,008.75, Meharry Medical College, Chiropractic, Bloomington, MN, Quast, Sean, White Bear Lake, MN, Nashville, TN, Allopathic Medicine, Chiropractic, April 1989 $31,077.17, Northwestern College of May 1992 Driessen, Todd, Faribault, MN, Chiropractic, Bloomington, MN, Herron, Woodie, Aberdeen, MS, $36,891.23, Palmer College of Chiropractic, April 1988 $37,345.11, Meharry Medical College, Chiropractic, Davenport, IA, Rothman, Jerry, Eagan, MN, $26,662.52, Nashville, TN, Allopathic Medicine, Chiropractic, December 1984 Northwestern College of Chiropractic, May 1983 Dudley, Diann M., Chanhassen, MN, Bloomington, MN, Chiropractic, April Miller, James J., Moss Point, MS, $9,937.81, Northwestern College of 1990 $12,855.25, Howard University, Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices 14101 Washington, DC, Allopathic Ocampo, Buddy, Soso, MS, $40,282.05, Chiropractic Medicine, May 1987 Univ of Mississippi Medical Center, Barr, Timothy G., St Joseph, MO, Smith, Deborah Anne, Jackson, MS, Jackson, MS, Dentistry, June 1985 $91,164.86, Cleveland Chiropractic $9,599.85, Univ of Mississippi Osteopathy College, Kansas City, MO, Medical Center, Jackson, MS, Chiropractic, September 1989 Allopathic Medicine, May 1983 Mitchell, Jerry, Pascagoula, MS, Bartholomew, Brian K., St. Peters, MO, Taylor, Brenda G., Vicksburg, MS, $38,432.27, Univ of North Texas $2,926.76, Cleveland Chiropractic $24,721.95, Univ of Mississippi Health Science Ctr., Fort Worth, TX, College, Kansas City, MO, Medical Center, Jackson, MS, Osteopathy, May 1986 Chiropractic, December 1990 Allopathic Medicine, May 1984 Pharmacy Bateman, Michael, Imperial, MO, $25,132.97, Logan College of Chiropractic Ratliff II, James H., Hattiesburg, MS, Chiropractic, Chesterfield, MO, Armstrong, Robert J., Jackson, MS, $3,752.65, Xavier University of $109,962.88, Life College, Marietta, Chiropractic, April 1990 Louisiana, New Orleans, LA, Belhouari, Jelloul, Kansas City, MO, GA, Chiropractic, September 1986 Pharmacy, May 1983 Durdin, James M., Tupelo, MS, $35,854.39, Texas Chiropractic $143,940.54, Life College, Marietta, Podiatry College Foundation, Pasadena, TX, GA, Chiropractic, June 1986 Mingo, Robert, Lexington, MS, Chiropractic, May 1991 Bement, Stephen A., Webster Groves, Fontenette, Vernie F., Gulfport, MS, $11,238.84, Ohio College of Podiatric MO, $37,224.11, Logan College of $53,294.20, Life College, Marietta, Medicine, Cleveland, OH, Podiatry, Chiropractic, Chesterfield, MO, GA, Chiropractic, March 1988 May 1986 Foxworth, Raymond A., Jackson, MS, Chiropractic, August 1987 $76,167.64, Cleveland Chiropractic Veterinary Medicine Berger, Keith, Chesterfield, MO, College, Kansas City, MO, Roney, Stephen, Lexington, MS, $17,710.77, Logan College of Chiropractic, January 1985 $25,500.10, Tuskegee University, Chiropractic, Chesterfield, MO, Gratta, James J., Hattiesburg, MS, Tuskegee, AL, Veterinary Medicine, Chiropractic, April 1983 Bezzic, Aleta M., Kansas City, MO, $11,005.97, Cleveland Chiropractic May 1989 College, Kansas City, MO, $69,652.65, Cleveland Chiropractic Chiropractic, May 1988 Missouri College, Kansas City, MO, Chiropractic, May 1989 Matthews, Paul E., Natchez, MS, Allopathic Medicine $64,367.62, Cleveland Chiropractic Borst, Mitchell, Ballwin, MO, College, Kansas City, MO, Barnes, Mark R., Kansas City, MO, $11,725.15, Logan College of Chiropractic, August 1983 $21,809.09, Univ of Missouri Kansas Chiropractic, Chesterfield, MO, McNair, Lawrence L., Gulfport, MS, City, Kansas City, MO, Allopathic Chiropractic, December 1988 $80,882.06, Life College, Marietta, Medicine, December 1986 Bottorff, Douglas, Kansas City, MO, GA, Chiropractic, June 1986 Bond, Kelvin, Florissant, MO, $111,479.71, Cleveland Chiropractic Stone, John L., Bay Springs, MS, $18,474.89, Washington University, St College, Kansas City, MO, $36,409.45, Life College, Marietta, Louis, MO, Allopathic Medicine, May Chiropractic, May 1987 GA, Chiropractic, March 1984 1989 Boyer, Arthur G., Festus, MO, Taylor, Gregory P., Corinth, MS, Chapman, Astra, Kansas City, MO, $44,726.29, Logan College of $74,646.36, Logan College of $16,597.23, Univ of Missouri Kansas Chiropractic, Chesterfield, MO, Chiropractic, Chesterfield, MO, City, Kansas City, MO, Allopathic Chiropractic, April 1983 Chiropractic, December 1988 Medicine, May 1986 Bright, Gale, Kansas City, MO, Veal, Paul E., Sledge, MS, $13,167.86, Chavis, Dion, Columbia, MO, $5,482.49, $64,356.53, Cleveland Chiropractic Life College, Marietta, GA, Univ of Missouri Columbia, College, Kansas City, MO, Chiropractic, June 1986 Columbia, MO, Allopathic Medicine, Chiropractic, January 1989 Winborn, David D., Moss Point, MS, May 1988 Brown, Harry, Kansas City, MO, $30,203.82, National College of Jones, Larry, Kansas City, MO, $49,188.33, Cleveland Chiropractic Chiropractic, Lombard, IL, $3,313.99, Howard University, College, Kansas City, MO, Chiropractic, May 1985 Washington, DC, Allopathic Chiropractic, September 1985 Medicine, May 1987 Caplan, Richard A., Kansas City, MO, Dentistry King Jr., Edgar E., Hayti, MO, $21,545.51, Cleveland Chiropractic Burks, Osborne D., Lorman, MS, $104,120.28, Univ of Missouri College, Kansas City, MO, $36,580.79, Meharry Medical College, Columbia, Columbia, MO, Allopathic Chiropractic, May 1989 Nashville, TN, Dentistry, May 1983 Medicine, November 1986 Carr, Elizabeth A., Kansas City, MO, Chatham, Charles B., Jackson, MS, Martin, Kurt, St. Louis, MO, $1,564.79, $74,905.63, Cleveland Chiropractic $33,867.19, Univ of Mississippi Southern Illinois Univ, Springfield, College, Kansas City, MO, Medical Center, Jackson, MS, IL, Allopathic Medicine, May 1991 Chiropractic, May 1990 Dentistry, May 1985 McCullough, Eddie, Kansas City, MO, Cheatwood, Richard, Affton, MO, Coleman, James T., Pearl, MS, $35,509.99, Univ of Missouri Kansas $27,965.17, Logan College of $27,067.98, Univ of Mississippi City, Kansas City, MO, Allopathic Chiropractic, Chesterfield, MO, Medical Center, Jackson, MS, Medicine, May 1991 Chiropractic, April 1987 Dentistry, May 1984 Reed, Arlington, Louisburg, MO, Colley, Rodney E., Kansas City, MO, Long, Robert E., Clarksdale, MS, $185,013.78, Georgetown University, $59,828.69, Cleveland Chiropractic $3,221.65, Meharry Medical College, Washington, DC, Allopathic College, Kansas City, MO, Nashville, TN, Dentistry, August 1979 Medicine, May 1984 Chiropractic, January 1987 Magro, Steven V., Madison, MS, Sanders, Thomas, Kansas City, MO, Dailey, Charles, St Joseph, MO, $45,117.45, Univ of Mississippi $97,805.71, Meharry Medical College, $77,417.88, Cleveland Chiropractic Medical Center, Jackson, MS, Nashville, TN, Allopathic Medicine, College, Kansas City, MO, Dentistry, May 1987 May 1989 Chiropractic, May 1985 14102 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices Dareing, Mark, Houston, MO, College, Kansas City, MO, College, Kansas City, MO, $23,904.64, Cleveland Chiropractic Chiropractic, January 1989 Chiropractic, May 1983 College, Kansas City, MO, McCoy, Michael T., St Louis, MO, Taylor, David G., Blue Springs, MO, Chiropractic, April 1982 $17,972.53, Cleveland Chiropractic $18,786.18, Cleveland Chiropractic Davis, Floyd Jerome, Kansas City, MO, College, Kansas City, MO, College, Kansas City, MO, $51,869.26, Cleveland Chiropractic Chiropractic, January 1984 Chiropractic, September 1987 College, Kansas City, MO, Miller, Mimi, St Louis, MO, $46,982.00, Taylor, Linda L., Kansas City, MO, Chiropractic, September 1987 Logan College of Chiropractic, $75,476.95, Cleveland Chiropractic Deiter, Cary T., Gladstone, MO, Chesterfield, MO, Chiropractic, College, Kansas City, MO, $85,201.69, Cleveland Chiropractic December 1989 Chiropractic, September 1986 College, Kansas City, MO, Peters, Ronald S., Chesterfield, MO, Thompson, Gary L., St Louis, MO, Chiropractic, January 1984 $1,323.16, Logan College of $28,127.39, Palmer College of Elliott, Joseph E., Macon, MO, Chiropractic, Chesterfield, MO, Chiropractic, Davenport, IA, $75,248.22, Logan College of Chiropractic, December 1990 Chiropractic, June 1983 Chiropractic, Chesterfield, MO, Peterson, Michael S., Kansas City, MO, Tibbetts, Mila A., Independence, MO, Chiropractic, April 1984 $5,988.32, Logan College of $42,752.09, Cleveland Chiropractic Erwin, Herbert F., St Louis, MO, Chiropractic, Chesterfield, MO, College, Kansas City, MO, $85,944.77, Logan College of Chiropractic, April 1986 Chiropractic, September 1989 Chiropractic, Chesterfield, MO, Pinkham, Scott B., Lake St Louis, MO, Towers, Timothy, St Louis, MO, Chiropractic, April 1986 $114,738.88, Logan College of $12,880.13, Logan College of Fulkerson, Marc A., Liberty, MO, Chiropractic, Chesterfield, MO, Chiropractic, Chesterfield, MO, $75,635.61, Life College, Marietta, Chiropractic, April 1987 Chiropractic, September 1985 GA, Chiropractic, December 1986 Porter, Robert A., Des Peres, MO, Vannucci, Milo, Kansas City, MO, Giarranto, David, Jefferson City, MO, $37,812.04, Logan College of $56,276.77, Cleveland Chiropractic $64,399.05, Cleveland Chiropractic Chiropractic, Chesterfield, MO, College, Kansas City, MO, College, Kansas City, MO, Chiropractic, April 1986 Chiropractic, December 1983 Price, Arthur, Kansas City, MO, Chiropractic, January 1986 Warner, Nathan G., Houston, MO, $132,720.79, Cleveland Chiropractic Gibson, Stephen S., Cape Girardeau, $40,443.03, Cleveland Chiropractic College, Kansas City, MO, MO, $27,163.61, Logan College of College, Kansas City, MO, Chiropractic, Chesterfield, MO, Chiropractic, December 1985 Rice, Sterling S., Kansas City, MO, Chiropractic, January 1990 Chiropractic, September 1984 Washington, Joseph D., St Louis, MO, $87,388.83, Cleveland Chiropractic Gulla, Kevin M., Lees Summit, MO, $35,442.62, Cleveland Chiropractic College, Kansas City, MO, $10,806.35, Cleveland Chiropractic College, Kansas City, MO, Chiropractic, May 1985 College, Kansas City, MO, Robertson, Dana D., Columbia, MO, Chiropractic, September 1988 Chiropractic, May 1989 $3,489.19, Logan College of Weed, Jimmy, St Louis, MO, $7,147.34, Hartley, Michael A., Kansas City, MO, Chiropractic, Chesterfield, MO, Logan College of Chiropractic, $76,970.31, Cleveland Chiropractic Chiropractic, January 1983 Chesterfield, MO, Chiropractic, College, Kansas City, MO, Samvat, Mohammad R., St Louis, MO, January 1984 Chiropractic, August 1983 $5,409.63, Logan College of Wene, Gregory L., Joplin, MO, Herbst, Stephen H., Winona, MO, Chiropractic, Chesterfield, MO, $53,786.93, Life College, Marietta, $74,438.97, Logan College of Chiropractic, April 1991 GA, Chiropractic, June 1983 Chiropractic, Chesterfield, MO, Sheraden, Timothy H., Ballwin, MO, White, Michael M., Kansas City, MO, Chiropractic, April 1986 $16,974.71, Life College, Marietta, $22,399.64, Cleveland Chiropractic Hollimon, Tracy, Fair Grove, MO, GA, Chiropractic, June 1985 College, Kansas City, MO, $25,411.61, Cleveland Chiropractic Simmons, Thomas T., Kansas City, MO, Chiropractic, April 1982 College, Kansas City, MO, $71,215.17, Cleveland Chiropractic Wills, Lawrence J., Kansas City, MO, Chiropractic, September 1989 College, Kansas City, MO, $116,452.05, Cleveland Chiropractic Hotz, Michael K., Kansas City, MO, Chiropractic, January 1987 College, Kansas City, MO, $121,116.76, Cleveland Chiropractic Sirois Jr, Bernard, St Peters, MO, Chiropractic, May 1987 College, Kansas City, MO, $16,584.54, Logan College of Wright, Lynnea L., Kansas City, MO, Chiropractic, September 1985 Chiropractic, Chesterfield, MO, $50,666.87, Cleveland Chiropractic Johnston, John D., Grandview, MO, Chiropractic, April 1988 College, Kansas City, MO, $81,457.27, Cleveland Chiropractic Smith, Charles A., Kansas City, MO, Chiropractic, September 1986 College, Kansas City, MO, $56,853.80, Cleveland Chiropractic Zorad, Christine, Independence, MO, Chiropractic, May 1988 College, Kansas City, MO, $51,129.32, Cleveland Chiropractic Jordan, Jeffrey E., Kearney, MO, Chiropractic, January 1987 College, Kansas City, MO, $44,579.34, Cleveland Chiropractic Smith, Rhonda, Kansas City, MO, Chiropractic, January 1986 College, Kansas City, MO, $94,745.04, Cleveland Chiropractic Dentistry Chiropractic, January 1990 College, Kansas City, MO, Kessinger, Andrew J., Seymour, MO, Chiropractic, January 1987 Baker, Charles F., St Louis, MO, $55,559.97, Logan College of Steuber, Virgil V., Springfield, MO, $17,699.62, Washington University, St Chiropractic, Chesterfield, MO, $76,575.84, Cleveland Chiropractic Louis, MO, Dentistry, May 1982 Chiropractic, July 1986 College, Kansas City, MO, Brockington, Phillip M., Kansas City, Krasowsky, George G., Columbia, MO, Chiropractic, May 1986 MO, $61,410.66, Howard University, $15,783.93, Logan College of Swope, Karl A., Rolla, MO, $102,325.74, Washington, DC, Dentistry, May 1985 Chiropractic, Chesterfield, MO, Los Angeles College of Chiropractic, Cannon, Fred C., Columbia, MO, Chiropractic, April 1986 Whittier, CA, Chiropractic, April 1985 $112,740.29, Univ of Missouri Kansas Marvin, Allen, Kansas City, MO, Talley, Michael S., Belton, MO, City, Kansas City, MO, Dentistry, May $36,494.63, Cleveland Chiropractic $36,643.50, Cleveland Chiropractic 1988 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices 14103 Clark, Evelyn B., Kansas City, MO, Joyner, Walter F., Jefferson City, MO, Medicine, Cleveland, OH, Podiatry, $78,540.47, Univ of Missouri Kansas $35,751.46, Southern Calif College of May 1983 City, Kansas City, MO, Dentistry, May Optometry, Fullerton, CA, Optometry, Moore, Robert M., St Louis, MO, 1988 June 1981 $53,084.15, Dr William Scholl Col of Crawford, Oran L., Kansas City, MO, Podiatric Med, Chicago, IL, Podiatry, Osteopathy $62,032.54, Univ of Missouri Kansas May 1982 City, Kansas City, MO, Dentistry, Bell, Barbara, Joplin, MO, $79,297.80, Public Health April 1985 Kirksville Col of Osteopathic Eimers, Jerry, Maryville, MO, Medicine, Kirksville, MO, Greenwood, Michael M., Kirksville, MO, $43,294.01, Univ of Missouri Kansas Osteopathy, June 1983 $5,576.84, Univ of Oklahoma Health City, Kansas City, MO, Dentistry, May Catron, Mark, Carthage, MO, Sciences Center, Oklahoma City, OK, 1983 $133,858.45, Univ of Health Sciences, Public Health, August 1988 Engel, Gene G., Kansas City, MO, Kansas City, MO, Osteopathy, June $53,415.50, Univ of Missouri Kansas 1984 Montana City, Kansas City, MO, Dentistry, May Early, Gary M., Kirksville, MO, Chiropractic $13,675.23, Kirksville Col of 1984 Kaiser, Robert, Thompson Falls, MT, French, Robert, St Louis, MO, $7,670.11, Osteopathic Medicine, Kirksville, $56,261.13, Cleveland Chiropractic Washington University, St Louis, MO, MO, Osteopathy, June 1980 College, Kansas City, MO, Dentistry, May 1989 Glynn, Paul, Miller, MO, $9,647.06, Chiropractic, April 1984 Fuller, Marilyn M., St Louis, MO, Univ of Health Sciences, Kansas City, Landes, David A., Deer Lodge, MT, $26,221.04, Howard University, MO, Osteopathy, May 1983 $68,843.69, Life Chiropractic College- Washington, DC, Dentistry, May 1985 McCrary-Smith, Gina M., St Louis, MO, West, San Lorenzo, CA, Chiropractic, Fulton, Alma, Ballwin, MO, $83,823.68, $149,949.31, Univ of Health Sciences, September 1987 Washington University, St Louis, MO, Kansas City, MO, Osteopathy, May Lavender, Anthony G., Joliet, MT, Dentistry, May 1989 1985 $99,010.78, Logan College of Furlong, Dennis, Kansas City, MO, Seedorff, Linda, Lawson, MO, Chiropractic, Chesterfield, MO, $62,357.49, Univ of Illinois Medical $72,389.83, Univ of Health Sciences, Chiropractic, August 1986 Center, Chicago, IL, Dentistry, June Kansas City, MO, Osteopathy, May Marschall, Skye K., Big Fork, MT, 1987 1988 $92,932.55, Texas Chiropractic Nelson, Howard D., Kansas City, MO, Seitz, Joyce, Kansas City, MO, College Foundation, Pasadena, TX, $80,394.21, Univ of Missouri Kansas $30,507.20, Univ of Health Sciences, Chiropractic, December 1983 City, Kansas City, MO, Dentistry, Kansas City, MO, Osteopathy, May Owczarek, Keith V., Missoula, MT, April 1986 1990 $44,185.68, Northwestern College of Nickell, Scott, Fenton, MO, $154,360.90, Sengstacken, Mark A., Marshall, MO, Chiropractic, Bloomington, MN, Washington University, St Louis, MO, $246,268.78, Univ of Health Sciences, Chiropractic, April 1985 Dentistry, May 1989 Kansas City, MO, Osteopathy, May Peterson, Alan A., St Louis, MO, 1987 Podiatry Turner, Garry L., Independence, MO, $103,323.92, Washington University, Daniels, Jerry G., Butte, MT, $97,393.32, Univ of Health Sciences, St Louis, MO, Dentistry, May 1984 $167,854.14, California College of Scialfa, August, St Louis, MO, $737.51, Kansas City, MO, Osteopathy, May Podiatric Medicine, San Francisco, Univ of Missouri Kansas City, Kansas 1985 Whinery, Ramona, Kansas City, MO, CA, Podiatry, June 1986 City, MO, Dentistry, April 1982 Huppert, Gregory, Billings, MT, Sladek, Martin J., Farmington, MO, $191,399.94, Univ of Health Sciences, $15,857.02, California College of $198,084.38, Washington University, Kansas City, MO, Osteopathy, May Podiatric Medicine, San Francisco, St Louis, MO, Dentistry, May 1987 1986 Somlar, Steven, Florissant, MO, CA, Podiatry, May 1986 Pharmacy $48,616.36, Loyola University Veterinary Medicine Dudley, Raynold R., Columbia, MO, Chicago, Chicago, IL, Dentistry, April Dierking, Douglas C., Alberton, MT, $29,000.16, Creighton University, 1990 $26,310.52, Univ of Minnesota, Vorbeck, Teresa, Florissant, MO, Omaha, NE, Pharmacy, August 1984 Minneapolis, MN, Veterinary $134,588.83, Washington University, Griffin, Terrill T., St Louis, MO, Medicine, June 1984 St Louis, MO, Dentistry, May 1988 $15,922.33, Drake University, Des Zinke, Alan G., Nixa, MO, $34,231.23, Moines, IA, Pharmacy, December Nebraska Marquette University, Milwaukee, WI, 1987 Allopathic Medicine Dentistry, May 1985 Oris, Gregory R., Sedalia, MO, $10,600.00, St Louis College of Jackson, Robyn A., Omaha, NE, Health Administration Pharmacy, St Louis, MO, Pharmacy, $4,876.63, Creighton University, Cipriano, Anthony A., St Louis, MO, May 1987 Omaha, NE, Allopathic Medicine, $40,066.94, St Louis University, St Ratliff, Wayne, University City, MO, May 1990 Louis, MO, Health Administration, $12,981.57, St Louis College of May 1985 Pharmacy, St Louis, MO, Pharmacy, Chiropractic May 1988 Hinds, Thomas, South Sioux City, NE, Optometry $61,180.61, Logan College of Allen, Faye F., St Louis, MO, Podiatry Chiropractic, Chesterfield, MO, $113,342.25, Univ of Missouri St Dailey, John M., Rolla, MO, Chiropractic, December 1986 Louis, St Louis, MO, Optometry, May $145,290.61, Ohio College of Podiatric McCabe, Laura, Lincoln, NE, 1986 Medicine, Cleveland, OH, Podiatry, $84,777.26, Life College, Marietta, Harris, Alexander, Florissant, MO, May 1983 GA, Chiropractic, January 1988 $61,920.81, Univ of Missouri St Louis, Jackson, Howard, St Louis, MO, O’Mara, William I., Arthur, NE, St Louis, MO, Optometry, May 1986 $174,421.20, Ohio College of Podiatric $19,118.65, Texas Chiropractic 14104 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices College Foundation, Pasadena, TX, Hults, Ivagene P., Las Vegas, NV, Dentistry Chiropractic, April 1984 $68,191.32, Los Angeles College of Barrows, Joni, Newmarket, NH, Theobald, Patrick, Nebraska City, NE, Chiropractic, Whittier, CA, $219,116.49, Marquette University, $32,980.66, Texas Chiropractic Chiropractic, December 1986 Milwaukee, WI, Dentistry, May 1987 College Foundation, Pasadena, TX, Lamb, Michael W., Henderson, NV, Chiropractic, December 1987 $7,740.95, Palmer College of Pharmacy Dentistry Chiropractic, Davenport, IA, Brunelle, Louise L., Manchester, NH, Chiropractic, February 1991 $26,687.48, Massachusetts College of Carson, Brad W., Papillion, NE, Murphy, Richard T., Henderson, NV, Pharmacy, Boston, MA, Pharmacy, $18,318.95, Creighton University, $55,696.99, Palmer College of May 1982 Omaha, NE, Dentistry, May 1989 Chiropractic, Davenport, IA, Rensch, Michael A., Omaha, NE, New Jersey Chiropractic, October 1987 $22,584.22, Creighton University, Allopathic Medicine Omaha, NE, Dentistry, May 1987 Nugent, Richard E., Las Vegas, NV, Schobert, Scott A., Omaha, NE, $113,562.06, Cleveland Chiropractic Blum, Karl, Roseland, NJ, $12,250.50, $112,278.75, Marquette University, College, Kansas City, MO, Univ of Med & Dent of New Jersey, Milwaukee, WI, Dentistry, May 1989 Chiropractic, August 1985 Newark, NJ, Allopathic Medicine, May 1990 Optometry Clinical Psychology Bocage, Jean P., Piscataway, NJ, Weeks, Brad A., Omaha, NE, $62,932.19, Weir, Dianna, Las Vegas, NV, $11,238.48, Univ of Med & Dent of Univ of Missouri St Louis, St Louis, $70,826.45, California Sch of Prof New Jersey, Newark, NJ, Allopathic MO, Optometry, May 1987 Psych Fresno, Fresno, CA, Clinical Medicine, May 1984 Psychology, June 1987 Brown, James E., East Orange, NJ, Podiatry $35,202.16, Univ of Med & Dent of Dentistry Dyer, William D., Lincoln, NE, New Jersey, Newark, NJ, Allopathic $111,238.01, Dr William Scholl Col of Frier, James W., Stateline, NV, Medicine, May 1989 Podiatric Med, Chicago, IL, Podiatry, $21,024.84, Georgetown University, Chusid, Eugene, Fair Lawn, NJ, May 1985 Washington, DC, Dentistry, May 1983 $117,620.03, Albany Medical College, Meinhold, Steven, Omaha, NE, Goodrich, Allyn P., Ely, NV, $7,395.31, Albany, NY, Allopathic Medicine, $44,373.08, Dr William Scholl Col of Baylor College of Dentistry, Dallas, May 1987 Podiatric Med, Chicago, IL, Podiatry, TX, Dentistry, June 1984 Davis, Kuyann, Manalapan, NJ, $21,931.63, Meharry Medical College, May 1984 Osley, Robert C., Las Vegas, NV, Nashville, TN, Allopathic Medicine, Thornton, Martha F., Lincoln, NE, $4,095.93, Univ of Colorado Health $125,843.37, Univ of Osteo Medical & May 1984 Science Center, Denver, CO, Devastey, Gerard, East Orange, NJ, Health Science, Des Moines, IA, Dentistry, August 1990 Podiatry, June 1987 $9,830.58, Univ of Med & Dent of Osteopathy New Jersey, Newark, NJ, Allopathic Nevada Medicine, May 1987 Oksenholt, Lorrie M., Sparks, NV, Allopathic Medicine Frazier, Judith A., Montclair, NJ, $28,621.08, Univ of Health Sciences, $7,242.32, Univ of Med & Dent of Bradley, Bruce, Las Vegas, NV, Kansas City, MO, Osteopathy, May New Jersey, Newark, NJ, Allopathic $20,101.62, Wright State University, 1983 Medicine, May 1989 Dayton, OH, Allopathic Medicine, Podiatry Glenn, John, South Plainfield, NJ, June 1987 $105,283.55, Univ of Med & Dent of Degernes, Daniel J., Sparks, NV, Borgia, Anthony, Boulder City, NV, New Jersey, Newark, NJ, Allopathic $17,504.27, Univ of Nevada Reno, $9,079.22, Pennsylvania Col of Medicine, May 1986 Reno, NV, Allopathic Medicine, June Podiatric Medicine, Philadelphia, PA, Goodman, Ira, Summit, NJ, $2,744.56, 1989 Podiatry, June 1985 Rush University, Chicago, IL, Rucker, Elleston C., Las Vegas, NV, Shields, Thomas, Las Vegas, NV, Allopathic Medicine, June 1983 $21,894.39, Vanderbilt University, $125,574.16, Ohio College of Podiatric Halls, Lydia, Jersey City, NJ, $9,617.36, Nashville, TN, Allopathic Medicine, Medicine, Cleveland, OH, Podiatry, Wake Forest University, Winston- May 1982 May 1986 Salem, NC, Allopathic Medicine, May Chiropractic Thurston, Glen D., Carson City, NV, 1985 $5,350.14, California College of Harris, Hazel, Irvington, NJ, $4,960.53, Akin, Kathy L., Las Vegas, NV, Podiatric Medicine, San Francisco, Univ of Med & Dent of New Jersey, $24,712.53, National College of CA, Podiatry, May 1991 Newark, NJ, Allopathic Medicine, Chiropractic, Lombard, IL, June 1981 Chiropractic, August 1986 New Hampshire Hasselman, Martin, Sewell, NJ, Foster, Misha, Reno, NV, $73,375.14, Allopathic Medicine $12,367.88, Hahnemann University, Cleveland Chiropractic College, Philadelphia, PA, Allopathic Kansas City, MO, Chiropractic, Percival, Marjorie C., Concord, NH, Medicine, June 1984 January 1989 $4,013.84, Dartmouth Medical School, Laflore, John E., Randolph, NJ, Hawkins, Budweiser, Las Vegas, NV, Hanover, NH, Allopathic Medicine, $87,492.29, Rush University, Chicago, $87,199.75, Los Angeles College of June 1986 IL, Allopathic Medicine, June 1981 Chiropractic, Whittier, CA, Chiropractic Lerner, David, Highland Park, NJ, Chiropractic, May 1987 $193,965.90, George Washington Henderson, Donald L., Mesquite, NV, Pratt, Edward P., Bristol, NH, University, Washington, DC, $27,975.74, Palmer College of $52,739.14, Palmer College of Allopathic Medicine, May 1988 Chiropractic, Davenport, IA, Chiropractic, Davenport, IA, Lucombe, Linda P., Plainsboro, NJ, Chiropractic, March 1986 Chiropractic, June 1986 $2,532.94, Univ of Med & Dent of Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices 14105 New Jersey, Newark, NJ, Allopathic Iacobino, Matthew J., Highland Lake, NJ, Tumas, Mary D., Brielle, NJ, $69,489.97, Medicine, May 1991 $97,047.88, Palmer College of Life College, Marietta, GA, Schimandle, Jeff J., Kendall Park, NJ, Chiropractic, Davenport, IA, Chiropractic, June 1986 $3,727.73, Univ of Med & Dent of Chiropractic, December 1985 Verbaro, Dennis, Chester, NJ, New Jersey, Newark, NJ, Allopathic Ittner, William, Seaside Park, NJ, $85,108.07, New York Chiropractic Medicine, May 1984 $42,819.21, Life College, Marietta, College, Seneca Falls, NY, Smalls, Linda Y., East Orange, NJ, GA, Chiropractic, June 1986 Chiropractic, April 1987 $10,716.55, Univ of Med & Dent of Jacob, Elizabeth, Newton, NJ, Viggiano, Christopher, Long Valley, NJ, New Jersey, Newark, NJ, Allopathic $26,077.90, Cleveland Chiropractic $67,561.31, Palmer College of Medicine, June 1983 College, Los Angeles, CA, Chiropractic, Davenport, IA, Chiropractic, December 1988 Chiropractic, September 1988 Chiropractic Jones, Scott, Mt Laurel, NJ, $30,848.46, Weimmer, Federick F., Lakehurst, NJ, Allen, Richard L., Morristown, NJ, New York Chiropractic College, $23,391.30, Palmer College of $96,394.74, Life College, Marietta, Seneca Falls, NY, Chiropractic, Chiropractic, Davenport, IA, GA, Chiropractic, March 1986 December 1988 Chiropractic, March 1985 Bernstein, David T., Colonia, NJ, Kane, Richard R., Somerset, NJ, Werrell, Sandra M., Mt Laurel, NJ, $14,034.04, Life College, Marietta, $121,900.91, New York Chiropractic $33,316.53, National College of GA, Chiropractic, September 1985 College, Seneca Falls, NY, Chiropractic, Lombard, IL, Bolinger, Mark A., Westmont, NJ, Chiropractic, April 1985 Chiropractic, August 1985 $83,079.24, National College of Luongo, Mary Ann, Bayonne, NJ, Woods, Dolores, Orange, NJ, $14,473.05, Chiropractic, Lombard, IL, $13,913.82, New York Chiropractic Life College, Marietta, GA, Chiropractic, April 1986 College, Seneca Falls, NY, Chiropractic, June 1991 Bornstein, Mark L., Edison, NJ, Chiropractic, December 1984 Zimmel, Douglas, Colts Neck, NJ, $97,510.82, Life College, Marietta, Lynch, Mark, Forked River, NJ, $81,230.84, Life College, Marietta, GA, Chiropractic, September 1983 $39,069.75, New York Chiropractic GA, Chiropractic, June 1986 Conley, John, Middletown, NJ, College, Seneca Falls, NY, Zulovitz-Cunninghan, Lori, Towaco, NJ, $28,535.11, Palmer College of Chiropractic, April 1987 $78,831.88, Life College, Marietta, Manzoni, Janet M., Morganville, NJ, Chiropractic, Davenport, IA, GA, Chiropractic, December 1986 Chiropractic, March 1984 $37,065.10, New York Chiropractic Cornely, Michael P., Merchantville, NJ, College, Seneca Falls, NY, Clinical Psychology $63,037.16, Palmer College of Chiropractic, December 1986 Helm, Susan D., Westfield, NJ, Maskell, Gary G., Whiting, NJ, Chiropractic, Davenport, IA, $7,873.66, New School for Social $103,172.99, Life College, Marietta, Chiropractic, December 1987 Research, New York, NY, Clinical Edmunds, John D., Manahawkin, NJ, GA, Chiropractic, December 1986 Morrow, Lu A., Marlton, NJ, $42,489.87, Psychology, December 1986 $127,277.03, Life College, Marietta, Jones, Patricia T., Teaneck, NJ, New York Chiropractic College, GA, Chiropractic, March 1986 Seneca Falls, NY, Chiropractic, April $20,925.05, Yeshiva University, New Escamilla, Kerry, Bergenfield, NJ, 1988 York, NY, Clinical Psychology, June $18,047.80, Palmer College of O’Brien, Robert, Maple Shade, NJ, 1988 Chiropractic, Davenport, IA, $16,469.15, Life College, Marietta, Dentistry Chiropractic, March 1986 GA, Chiropractic, June 1991 Feathers, Kathryn D., Maplewood, NJ, Romanski, Michael M., Wall, NJ, Adams, Rick, Glen Rock, NJ, $29,864.40, $32,224.37, Southern Calif Clg of $27,412.62, Life College, Marietta, New York University, New York, NY, Chiropractic, Pico Rivera, CA, GA, Chiropractic, March 1989 Dentistry, June 1989 Chiropractic, December 1989 Ruane, Joseph J., West Long Branch, NJ, Caruso, Edmund, Branchville, NJ, Gearity, Katherine A., North Bergen, NJ, $30,498.17, Life College, Marietta, $41,193.08, Univ of Med & Dent of $59,718.80, New York Chiropractic GA, Chiropractic, December 1982 New Jersey, Newark, NJ, Dentistry, College, Seneca Falls, NY, Rushing, Gary, Red Bank, NJ, May 1986 Chiropractic, April 1987 $69,458.45, Life College, Marietta, Castillo, Steven, Union City, NJ, Gloshinski, Laura L., High Bridge, NJ, GA, Chiropractic, June 1986 $148,652.79, New York University, $51,048.74, Life College, Marietta, Russell, Robert, Blackwood, NJ, New York, NY, Dentistry, June 1987 GA, Chiropractic, March 1986 $6,561.32, Life College, Marietta, GA, Correa, Louisa F., Paramus, NJ, Harrigan, David, Absecon, NJ, Chiropractic, March 1989 $5,899.74, Georgetown University, $27,973.77, Life College, Marietta, Ruta, Eugenio, Livingston, NJ, Washington, DC, Dentistry, May 1990 GA, Chiropractic, March 1987 $29,206.40, Life College, Marietta, Creecy, Ronald R., Moorestown, NJ, Hassiotti, Leone L., East Orange, NJ, GA, Chiropractic, June 1988 $16,203.86, Howard University, $59,073.10, New York Chiropractic Siegel, Roy F., Somerville, NJ, Washington, DC, Dentistry, May 1983 College, Seneca Falls, NY, $72,274.32, Logan College of Dull, John N., Bloomfield, NJ, Chiropractic, December 1986 Chiropractic, Chesterfield, MO, $18,990.12, Georgetown University, Hermida, Mario D., Bergenfield, NJ, Chiropractic, August 1986 Washington, DC, Dentistry, May 1984 $28,576.54, Palmer College of Signore, Joseph, Forked River, NJ, Ernst, David, East Brunswick, NJ, Chiropractic, Davenport, IA, $96,618.04, Life College, Marietta, $16,085.59, New York University, Chiropractic, March 1990 GA, Chiropractic, April 1989 New York, NY, Dentistry, June 1983 Hoffman, Wayne A., East Rutherford, Stafford, Orie V., Hackensack, NJ, Johnson, Kevin D., Hackensack, NJ, NJ, $28,080.96, Life College, Marietta, $63,335.76, Los Angeles College of $40,576.01, Howard University, GA, Chiropractic, March 1988 Chiropractic, Whittier, CA, Washington, DC, Dentistry, May 1989 Howe, John B., Pompton Lakes, NJ, Chiropractic, December 1984 Kulikowski, Karen, Bayonne, NJ, $20,169.45, New York Chiropractic Tumas, John J., Brick, NJ, $42,305.04, $4,424.15, Univ of Med & Dent of College, Seneca Falls, NY, Life College, Marietta, GA, New Jersey, Newark, NJ, Dentistry, Chiropractic, April 1987 Chiropractic, December 1985 May 1992 14106 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices Mayers-Ellison, June L., Laurel, NJ, Wassef, Michael, Tinton Falls, NJ, Onyekaba, Ebere E., Newark, NJ, $47,861.97, Meharry Medical College, $3,321.31, Georgetown University, $23,703.34, Long Island University, Nashville, TN, Dentistry, May 1980 Washington, DC, Dentistry, May 1990 Brookville, NY, Pharmacy, June 1986 McDonough, Lawrence L., Rumson, NJ, Wilson, Orin M., Orange, NJ, Podiatry $101,468.06, New York University, $13,773.90, Univ of Med & Dent of New York, NY, Dentistry, June 1986 New Jersey, Newark, NJ, Dentistry, Benson, David M., Edison, NJ, McTernan, Roy J., Clifton, NJ, June 1984 $63,175.49, California College of $63,618.11, Fairleigh Dickinson Zouak, Larbi, Tenafly, NJ, $90,753.98, Podiatric Medicine, San Francisco, University, Teaneck, NJ, Dentistry, Fairleigh Dickinson University, CA, Podiatry, May 1988 May 1985 Teaneck, NJ, Dentistry, May 1987 Chapel, Charles, Bricktown, NJ, Mirrone, John, Sewell, NJ, $105,006.57, Optometry $90,553.94, Pennsylvania College of Fairleigh Dickinson University, Moosavi, Syed M., Toms River, NJ, Podiatric Medicine, Philadelphia, PA, Teaneck, NJ, Dentistry, May 1988 Podiatry, June 1984 Monaco, Joan, Nutley, NJ, $35,635.40, $16,912.74, Northeastern State Forman, Steven, Clementon, NJ, Univ of Med & Dent of New Jersey, University, Tahlequah, OK, $157,032.73, Ohio College of Podiatric Newark, NJ, Dentistry, May 1991 Optometry, August 1988 Medicine, Cleveland, OH, Podiatry, Newman, Michael, Sayreville, NJ, Osteopathy May 1984 $16,165.78, Fairleigh Dickinson University, Teaneck, NJ, Dentistry, Claire, James F., Voorhees, NJ, Geary, Robert J., Bayonne, NJ, May 1983 $183,428.69, Univ of Med & Dent of $95,929.50, New York College of Newsome, Dorita, Orange, NJ, New Jersey, Newark, NJ, Osteopathy, Podiatric Medicine, New York, NY, $34,448.18, Univ of Med & Dent of May 1986 Podiatry, June 1984 New Jersey, Newark, NJ, Dentistry, Crecca, Joseph F., Tuckertown, NJ, Hegarty, James E., Cliffside Park, NJ, June 1983 $121,943.71, Univ of Osteo Medical & $94,769.06, Dr William Scholl College Health Science, Des Moines, IA, Oakes, Craig, Budd Lake, NJ, of Podiatric Medicine, Chicago, IL, Osteopathy, June 1984 $48,639.86, Tufts University, Boston, Podiatry, May 1980 Goldstein, Bruce, Voorhees, NJ, MA, Dentistry, May 1990 $25,973.14, Univ of Med & Dent of Khaladj, Morteza, Iselin, NJ, Ramirez, Nydia, New Milford, NJ, New Jersey, Newark, NJ, Osteopathy, $148,555.02, New York College of $124,370.33, Fairleigh Dickinson July 1987 Podiatric Medicine, New York, NY, University, Teaneck, NJ, Dentistry, Goldstein, David W., Cherry Hill, NJ, Podiatry, June 1986 May 1987 $149,557.36, Univ of Health Sciences, McAllister, Joseph F., Hoboken, NJ, Rojowski, Ravenna, Teaneck, NJ, Kansas City, MO, Osteopathy, May $173,319.37, New York College of $66,521.56, Fairleigh Dickinson 1989 Podiatric Medicine, New York, NY, University, Teaneck, NJ, Dentistry, Kelly, Robert B., Old Bridge, NJ, Podiatry, June 1988 May 1984 $56,501.44, Univ of Med & Dent of Sarno, Mark M., Brick, NJ, $39,243.19, Oliver, John A., Linden, NJ, New Jersey, Newark, NJ, Osteopathy, $157,144.41, New York College of Fairleigh Dickinson University, May 1986 Teaneck, NJ, Dentistry, May 1985 Podiatric Medicine, New York, NY, Neff, Ronald J., Turnersville, NJ, Podiatry, June 1988 Scarpa Jr, Peter P., Stanhope, NJ, $143,215.25, Philadelphia Col of Tortoriello, Michael J., Montclair, NJ, $7,342.45, Georgetown University, Osteopathic Medicine, Philadelphia, $26,135.16, New York College of Washington, DC, Dentistry, May 1988 PA, Osteopathy, June 1985 Podiatric Medicine, New York, NY, Seides, Richard R., Montclair, NJ, Rogers, James J., Cherry Hill, NJ, Podiatry, June 1983 $25,101.25, Univ of Maryland $9,805.63, Univ of Med & Dent of Baltimore, Baltimore, MD, Dentistry, New Jersey, Newark, NJ, Osteopathy, Turner, Demi M., Newark, NJ, June 1985 May 1988 $145,948.26, New York College of Sherzai, Roshana, Lodi, NJ, $2,857.61, Podiatric Medicine, New York, NY, Georgetown University, Washington, Pharmacy Podiatry, June 1985 DC, Dentistry, May 1989 Ahmed, Azza F., Bloomfield, NJ, Urbanek, Michelle, Flemington, NJ, Stern, Jeffrey L., Marlton, NJ, $13,246.28, Long Island University, $54,970.23, Pennsylvania College of $157,806.23, Boston University Brookville, NY, Pharmacy, October Podiatric Medicine, Philadelphia, PA, Medical Center, Boston, MA, 1988 Podiatry, June 1984 Dentistry, June 1986 Aly, Nevein, Bloomfield, NJ, $12,107.39, Stradford, Terry, Old Bridge, NJ, Long Island University, Brookville, Veterinary Medicine $55,878.01, Howard University, NY, Pharmacy, February 1987 Hassey, Marianne, Clifton, NJ, Washington, DC, Dentistry, May 1987 Bennett, Elizabeth C., Teaneck, NJ, $24,022.34, Univ of Pennsylvania, Stuart, William J., New Milford, NJ, $15,036.22, Mercer University, Philadelphia, PA, Veterinary $36,158.58, Univ of Med & Dent of Atlanta, GA, Pharmacy, June 1986 Medicine, May 1989 New Jersey, Newark, NJ, Dentistry, Eruchie, Anthonia O., East Orange, NJ, Meadows, Quentin O., Pleasantville, NJ, May 1986 $24,891.00, Long Island University, $36,341.65, Tuskegee University, Turpen, Marina, Margate City, NJ, Brookville, NY, Pharmacy, June 1986 Tuskegee, AL, Veterinary Medicine, $55,906.94, Tufts University, Boston, Jacob, Robert S., Bayonne, NJ, May 1985 MA, Dentistry, May 1988 $14,852.51, Long Island University, Ugwuneri, Zephaniah N., Somerset, NJ, Brookville, NY, Pharmacy, February Porter, Gina M., Orange, NJ, $60,470.65, $5,943.31, Baylor College of Dentistry, 1985 Tuskegee University, Tuskegee, AL, Dallas, TX, Dentistry, June 1990 Milligan, Patricia, Forked River, NJ, Veterinary Medicine, May 1985 Velu, Gita, Jersey City, NJ, $73,581.48, $12,148.59, Drake University, Des Smith, Marsha, Rumson, NJ, $27,107.00, Univ of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Moines, IA, Pharmacy, December Tufts University, Boston, MA, PA, Dentistry, May 1992 1982 Veterinary Medicine, May 1987 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices 14107 New Mexico Osteopathy Edelman, Martha, Manhasset, NY, $74,615.83, Albert Einstein Med Col Allopathic Medicine Connelly, Chris F., Albuquerque, NM, of Yeshiva Univ, Bronx, NY, Sanchez, Ishmael B., La Luz, NM, $2,750.41, Philadelphia Col of Osteopathic Medicine, Philadelphia, Allopathic Medicine, June 1988 $39,359.30, University of New Edgar, John, New York, NY, $41,257.64, Mexico, Albuquerque, NM, Allopathic PA, Osteopathy, June 1981 Rico, David, Socorro, NM, $93,553.74, Texas Tech University Health Sci Medicine, May 1984 Center, Lubbock, TX, Allopathic Oklahoma State University, Tulsa, Medicine, May 1990 Chiropractic OK, Osteopathy, May 1986 Elzey, Leonard D., Mt Vernon, NY, Blow, James R., Silver City, NM, Podiatry $145,262.28, Meharry Medical $19,423.61, Parker College of College, Nashville, TN, Allopathic Chiropractic, Dallas, TX, Chiropractic, Hughes, Marilyn G., Albuquerque, NM, $74,977.40, Ohio College of Podiatric Medicine, May 1986 March 1986 Finney, Deirdre, New York, NY, Medicine, Cleveland, OH, Podiatry, Elkins, Kelly, Dona Ana, NM, $147,576.16, East Tennessee State May 1982 $20,139.03, Parker College of University, Johnson City, TN, Roth, Jeffrey, Alamogordo, NM, Chiropractic, Dallas, TX, Chiropractic, Allopathic Medicine, May 1985 April 1986 $192,791.17, Univ of Osteo Medical & Flores, Cathryn, Bronx, NY, $20,507.88, McNeil, Diane J., Las Cruces, NM, Health Science, Des Moines, IA, Albert Einstein Med Col of Yeshiva $4,892.30, Palmer College of Podiatry, June 1987 Univ, Bronx, NY, Allopathic Chiropractic, Davenport, IA, New York Medicine, June 1987 Chiropractic, December 1989 Fogarty, Janine, Rochester, NY, Mitchell, Donald R., Alamogordo, NM, Allopathic Medicine $6,196.78, SUNY Health Science $98,906.15, Life College, Marietta, Abbott, Brian, Nyack, NY, $103,842.30, Center Brooklyn, Syracuse, NY, GA, Chiropractic, September 1986 New York Medical College, Valhalla, Allopathic Medicine, May 1989 Neira, Alejandro, Albuquerque, NM, NY, Allopathic Medicine, June 1989 Fucigna, Robert, New York, NY, $52,845.17, Palmer College of Allen, Mark D., New York, NY, $9,445.37, Univ of Med & Dent of Chiropractic, Davenport, IA, $135,222.88, Meharry Medical New Jersey, Newark, NJ, Allopathic Chiropractic, October 1986 College, Nashville, TN, Allopathic Medicine, May 1991 Nelson, Christopher G., Albuquerque, Medicine, May 1986 Gallagher, James, Hicksville, NY, NM, $120,773.10, Life College, Austin, Scott M., Freeport, NY, $1,067.21, SUNY Health Science Marietta, GA, Chiropractic, March $11,642.78, Creighton University, Center Brooklyn, Syracuse, NY, 1987 Omaha, NE, Allopathic Medicine, Allopathic Medicine, May 1992 Sacristan, Juan, Santa Fe, NM, May 1990 Gamble, Oliver W., Bronx, NY, $18,425.28, Palmer College of Brooks, Delroy C., Brooklyn, NY, $26,043.12, Hahnemann University, Chiropractic West, San Jose, CA, $88,950.17, Meharry Medical College, Philadelphia, PA, Allopathic Chiropractic, June 1985 Nashville, TN, Allopathic Medicine, Medicine, June 1987 Schoos, Robert J., Belen, NM, May 1984 Gordon, Marcus, New York, NY, $24,658.02, Texas Chiropractic Burrowes, Wayne R., Brooklyn, NY, $11,971.09, Albert Einstein Med Col College Foundation, Pasadena, TX, $7,825.03, SUNY Health Science of Yeshiva Univ, Bronx, NY, Chiropractic, May 1982 Center Brooklyn, Syracuse, NY, Allopathic Medicine, June 1985 Halbert, Cyril F., Bronx, NY, $87,032.06, Sturgeon, Jeffrey, Albuquerque, NM, Allopathic Medicine, May 1988 Georgetown University, Washington, $36,499.98, Cleveland Chiropractic Cama, Cristoforo, Flushing, NY, DC, Allopathic Medicine, May 1984 College, Kansas City, MO, $82,594.57, Finch University of Chiropractic, May 1990 Hunt, Leonard A., St Albans, NY, Health Sciences, North Chicago, IL, $56,951.75, Meharry Medical College, Dentistry Allopathic Medicine, June 1991 Nashville, TN, Allopathic Medicine, Kunz, Frederick W., Ruidoso, NM, Cohen, Steven, Belle Harbor, NY, May 1987 $9,225.75, Louisiana St Univ Med Ctr, $119,492.00, New York Medical Jacoby, Avi, Rego Park, NY, New Orleans, LA, Dentistry, May College, Valhalla, NY, Allopathic $163,885.06, Hahnemann University, 1985 Medicine, June 1990 Philadelphia, PA, Allopathic Moye, David M., Socorro, NM, Condiotti, Jay, Bronx, NY, $2,611.43, Medicine, June 1984 $6,739.50, Univ of Missouri Kansas SUNY Health Science Center Johnson, Christopher L., New York, NY, City, Kansas City, MO, Dentistry, May Brooklyn, Brooklyn, NY, Allopathic $5,603.33, Harvard Medical School, 1991 Medicine, May 1991 Boston, MA, Allopathic Medicine, Neumann, Barry A., Albuquerque, NM, Czegledy, Ferenc, Long Island City, NY, June 1989 $15,989.51, Marquette University, $55,341.34, Brown University, Kellman, Raphael, New York, NY, Milwaukee, WI, Dentistry, December Providence, RI, Allopathic Medicine, $21,269.86, Albert Einstein Med Col 1982 May 1988 of Yeshiva Univ, Bronx, NY, D’Amico, James M., Hicksville, NY, Allopathic Medicine, June 1987 Health Administration $106,763.56, Washington University, Kindler, Hedy L., New York, NY, Jones, Terence T., Albuquerque, NM, St Louis, MO, Allopathic Medicine, $3,578.15, Suny Buffalo, Buffalo, NY, $52,954.81, Univ of Southern May 1988 Allopathic Medicine, June 1989 California, Los Angeles, CA, Health Dean, Gregory E., New York, NY, Lentol, Lawrence A., Elmont, NY, Administration, May 1986 $59,101.05, Columbia University, $174,468.17, Ponce School of New York, NY, Allopathic Medicine, Medicine, Ponce, PR, Allopathic Optometry May 1988 Medicine, June 1986 Wogksch, David C., Santa Fe, NM, Diaz, Fred F., Bronx, NY, $41,374.26, Levy-Jones, Maureen, Rockaway, NY, $19,053.56, Pennsylvania College of Albert Einstein Med Col of Yeshiva $61,865.05, Univ of Med & Dent of Optometry, Philadelphia, PA, Univ, Bronx, NY, Allopathic New Jersey, Newark, NJ, Allopathic Optometry, May 1980 Medicine, June 1982 Medicine, May 1985 14108 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices Long, Kimlyn, Manhasset, NY, $662.27, Reynolds, Barbara, Bronx, NY, Pittsburgh, PA, Allopathic Medicine, Howard University, Washington, DC, $29,302.73, Hahnemann University, June 1986 Allopathic Medicine, May 1990 Philadelphia, PA, Allopathic Villeta, Javier J., South Richmond Hill, Lopez, Raymond, Nanuet, NY, Medicine, June 1988 NY, $91,674.43, Ponce School of $56,177.05, Ponce School of Reynolds, Howard P., New York, NY, Medicine, Ponce, PR, Allopathic Medicine, Ponce, PR, Allopathic $9,633.54, Cornell University Medical Medicine, June 1984 Medicine, May 1982 College, New York, NY, Allopathic Vivot-Welber, Norma C., New York, NY, Martinez, Jose, Brooklyn, NY, Medicine, May 1987 $108,173.88, Wayne State University, $162,790.85, Universidad Central Del Rivera, Pedro P., New York, NY, Detroit, MI, Allopathic Medicine, June Caribe, Bayamon, PR, Allopathic $80,016.33, Universidad Central Del 1987 Medicine, May 1986 Caribe, Bayamon, PR, Allopathic Walker, Claude A., Wyandanch, NY, McDaniel, Ronnie L., New York, NY, Medicine, May 1988 $2,133.11, Suny Health Science $87,978.80, Univ of Pennsylvania, Robinson, Edward E., Bronx, NY, Center Brooklyn, Brooklyn, NY, Philadelphia, PA, Allopathic $71,838.08, Meharry Medical College, Allopathic Medicine, June 1989 Medicine, June 1987 Nashville, TN, Allopathic Medicine, Walters, Joseph, Bronx, NY, $47,887.07, McGilvery, James W., New York, NY, May 1983 Hahnemann University, Philadelphia, $43,637.03, Univ of Cincinnati, Sablon, Dimitri, Brooklyn, NY, PA, Allopathic Medicine, June 1981 Cincinnati, OH, Allopathic Medicine, $5,961.09, Suny Health Science Weinberger, Andre, Brooklyn, NY, June 1987 Center Brooklyn, Syracuse, NY, $141,682.49, Hahnemann University, Mcnulty, John, Middletown, NY, Allopathic Medicine, May 1990 Philadelphia, PA, Allopathic $81,195.56, Albany Medical College, Sanders, Shirley C., Apo—New York, Medicine, June 1983 Albany, NY, Allopathic Medicine, NY, $28,754.15, Mayo Medical Whyte, Brian W., Flushing, NY, May 1991 School, Rochester, MN, Allopathic $7,915.35, Temple University, Monk, Melcher, New York, NY, Medicine, May 1985 Philadelphia, PA, Allopathic $5,846.47, Univ of Illinois Medical Santiago, Jose J A, New York, NY, Medicine, June 1987 Center, Chicago, IL, Allopathic $95,682.83, Temple University, Williams III, Rolland R., North Medicine, June 1989 Philadelphia, PA, Allopathic Tonawanda, NY, $253,944.09, Nicholson, Charolette M., Bronx, NY, Medicine, June 1986 Meharry Medical College, Nashville, $29,600.03, Univ of Med & Dent of Saunders, Maurice, Port Washington, TN, Allopathic Medicine, May 1986 New Jersey, Newark, NJ, Allopathic NY, $120,004.73, Albany Medical Wimbley, Timothy T., New York, NY, Medicine, August 1986 College, Albany, NY, Allopathic $38,034.33, Wright State University, Normann, Peter, New Windsor, NY, Medicine, May 1986 Dayton, OH, Allopathic Medicine, $21,481.30, Univ of Vermont, Scaccia, Marcella, Brooklyn, NY, June 1985 Burlington, VT, Allopathic Medicine, $4,601.41, New York Medical College, June 1989 Valhalla, NY, Allopathic Medicine, Chiropractic Orellana, Jose J., Bronx, NY, $3,865.95, June 1989 Alston, Patricia, New York, NY, Suny Health Science Center Brooklyn, Scarfo, Dan J., New York, NY, $67,485.89, New York Chiropractic Syracuse, NY, Allopathic Medicine, $23,461.30, Suny Health Science College, Seneca Falls, NY, May 1986 Center Brooklyn, Brooklyn, NY, Chiropractic, April 1988 Petit, Felix R., Jamaica, NY, $4,546.12, Allopathic Medicine, June 1987 Amato, Vincent, Brooklyn, NY, Suny Buffalo, Buffalo, NY, Allopathic Shaw, Gary, New York, NY, $21,023.77, $35,555.33, National College of Medicine, June 1990 Cornell University Medical College, Chiropractic, Lombard, IL, Pikoris, Bernadette, Brooklyn, NY, New York, NY, Allopathic Medicine, Chiropractic, August 1988 $45,506.38, New York Medical May 1985 Ambrosio, Joseph A., Great Neck, NY, College, Valhalla, NY, Allopathic Shell, Valerie A., Pomona, NY, $6,492.91, New York Chiropractic Medicine, June 1990 $51,875.04, Hahnemann University, College, Seneca Falls, NY, Powell, Craig, Delmar, NY, $81,091.31, Philadelphia, PA, Allopathic Chiropractic, April 1984 Wright State University, Dayton, OH, Medicine, June 1984 Bee, Christopher R., Holbrook, NY, Allopathic Medicine, November 1985 Soto, Lucy, Throggs Neck, NY, $32,385.53, New York Chiropractic Prescod, Glenn, Jamaica, NY, $114,494.90, Medical College of College, Seneca Falls, NY, $41,178.49, Dartmouth Medical Wisconsin, Milwaukee, WI, Chiropractic, April 1987 School, Hanover, NH, Allopathic Allopathic Medicine, May 1986 Bitet, Scott, Jamaica, NY, $22,124.95, Medicine, June 1988 Sparman, Alfred, Brooklyn, NY, Life College, Marietta, GA, Ramos, Carmen, East Meadow, NY, $110,493.06, New York Medical Chiropractic, June 1986 $19,304.46, Ponce School of College, Valhalla, NY, Allopathic Brea, Anthony, Little Neck, NY, Medicine, Ponce, PR, Allopathic Medicine, June 1990 $30,841.95, New York Chiropractic Medicine, May 1991 Stone, Brian A., Bronx, NY, $62,587.05, College, Seneca Falls, NY, Ramos-Ayala, Joel, Flushing, NY, Univ of Alabama Birmingham, Chiropractic, December 1982 $141,138.04, Universidad Central Del Birmingham, AL, Allopathic Bucher, Gilles, Bayville, NY, Caribe, Bayamon, PR, Allopathic Medicine, June 1985 $40,137.77, New York Chiropractic Medicine, May 1987 Sweeny, Mark A., Buffalo, NY, College, Seneca Falls, NY, Rashduni, David H., Clifton, NY, $3,001.36, Suny Buffalo, Buffalo, NY, Chiropractic, August 1988 $4,657.70, Univ of Med & Dent of Allopathic Medicine, July 1987 Capovilla, Craig, Highland Falls, NY, New Jersey, Newark, NJ, Allopathic Thornton, Kenneth, Brooklyn, NY, $5,229.77, Life College, Marietta, GA, Medicine, June 1984 $9,305.14, Howard University, Chiropractic, September 1985 Rector, Joel M., New York, NY, Washington, DC, Allopathic Cascone, Michelle M., Huntington, NY, $7,794.97, Cuny Mount Sinai School Medicine, May 1990 $24,918.16, New York Chiropractic of Medicine, New York, NY, Valentine, David, Mt Vernon, NY, College, Seneca Falls, NY, Allopathic Medicine, April 1989 $58,697.18, Univ of Pittsburgh, Chiropractic, April 1984 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices 14109 Casella, Angela, Bronx, NY, $16,497.82, Joergens, Donald, Staten Island, NY, College, Seneca Falls, NY, New York Chiropractic College, $14,826.55, New York Chiropractic Chiropractic, April 1989 Seneca Falls, NY, Chiropractic, College, Seneca Falls, NY, Musso, Deborah G., New York, NY, December 1989 Chiropractic, December 1989 $2,038.22, New York Chiropractic Chavez, Patricia, New York, NY, Johnson, Timothy H., Buffalo, NY, College, Seneca Falls, NY, $15,406.77, Cleveland Chiropractic $18,287.07, Life College, Marietta, Chiropractic, April 1987 College, Los Angeles, CA, GA, Chiropractic, September 1983 Nestler, Kenneth, New Paltz, NY, Chiropractic, December 1983 Johnston, Mary, Baldwin, NY, $31,440.88, Life College, Marietta, Emerson, Edwin, Selden, NY, $75,642.63, New York Chiropractic GA, Chiropractic, June 1987 $96,568.40, New York Chiropractic College, Seneca Falls, NY, Obadia, Eric, Greenlawn, NY, College, Seneca Falls, NY, Chiropractic, April 1988 $50,775.18, New York Chiropractic Chiropractic, April 1988 Keller, William D., Tivoli, NY, College, Seneca Falls, NY, Farewell, Howard, Garnerville, NY, $91,485.11, Northwestern College of Chiropractic, April 1986 $12,560.15, New York Chiropractic Chiropractic, Bloomington, MN, Patterson, Arthur, Staten Island, NY, College, Seneca Falls, NY, Chiropractic, December 1988 $11,826.68, Life College, Marietta, Chiropractic, April 1984 Kern, Arnold E., Livingston Manor, NY, GA, Chiropractic, March 1983 Farkas, Carl, Brooklyn, NY, $28,724.69, $13,488.12, New York Chiropractic Pehush, Marie, Pelham, NY, $43,736.71, New York Chiropractic College, College, Seneca Falls, NY, New York Chiropractic College, Seneca Falls, NY, Chiropractic, Chiropractic, April 1984 Seneca Falls, NY, Chiropractic, April December 1991 Kiss, Kathleen M., Shirley, NY, 1985 Ferguson, Christopher D., Brooklyn, NY, $71,733.57, New York Chiropractic Penke, Christopher P., Tonawanda, NY, $9,647.62, Life College, Marietta, GA, College, Seneca Falls, NY, $35,629.99, National College of Chiropractic, March 1987 Chiropractic, April 1987 Chiropractic, Lombard, IL, Fiore, Dominick, Waterloo, NY, Kle, James P., Glen Head, NY, Chiropractic, December 1982 $90,058.16, New York Chiropractic $56,910.10, Life College, Marietta, Pepe-Kerr, Celeste C., Port Washington, College, Seneca Falls, NY, GA, Chiropractic, December 1984 NY, $58,189.20, Los Angeles College Chiropractic, December 1986 Konigsberg, Paul, Cross River, NY, of Chiropractic, Whittier, CA, Flood, Lori A., Buffalo, NY, $17,330.10, $9,370.81, Logan College of Chiropractic, December 1983 Perez, Dayse, New York, NY, National College of Chiropractic, Chiropractic, Chesterfield, MO, $96,189.59, Life College, Marietta, Lombard, IL, Chiropractic, December Chiropractic, September 1983 GA, Chiropractic, March 1988 Koultukis, Chris, New York, NY, 1986 Petrillo, James A., Rochester, NY, Frankel, Tali R., Far Rockaway, NY, $3,088.08, New York Chiropractic $45,771.89, New York Chiropractic $11,364.45, New York Chiropractic College, Seneca Falls, NY, College, Seneca Falls, NY, College, Seneca Falls, NY, Chiropractic, April 1985 Chiropractic, December 1984 Chiropractic, April 1987 Lentini, Salvatore, Brooklyn, NY, Pukancik, Susan S., Vestal, NY, Ghigna, Mary L., Bayshore, NY, $7,065.09, Palmer College of $6,603.93, Life College, Marietta, GA, $53,394.87, New York Chiropractic Chiropractic West, San Jose, CA, Chiropractic, July 1984 College, Seneca Falls, NY, Chiropractic, September 1984 Renz, Howard W., Brooklyn, NY, Chiropractic, April 1984 Leung, Leo S., Flushing, NY, $20,757.69, Cleveland Chiropractic Gray, A L., Woodmere, NY, $9,194.65, $41,513.46, New York Chiropractic College, Kansas City, MO, New York Chiropractic College, College, Seneca Falls, NY, Chiropractic, January 1983 Seneca Falls, NY, Chiropractic, Chiropractic, April 1990 Renzulli, Diane, Massapequa Park, NY, December 1990 Lisjak, Craig F., Eden, NY, $24,092.71, $2,253.35, New York Chiropractic Greenwald, Lewis A., Staten Island, NY, Life College, Marietta, GA, College, Seneca Falls, NY, $6,897.42, Life College, Marietta, GA, Chiropractic, December 1989 Chiropractic, April 1985 Chiropractic, June 1990 Luca, Robert P., Brooklyn, NY, Rheault, Robert M., Moravia, NY, Gurwitz, Alan, Rochester, NY, $72,644.77, Life College, Marietta, $72,598.21, Western States $62,857.70, New York Chiropractic GA, Chiropractic, December 1986 Chiropractic College, Portland, OR, College, Seneca Falls, NY, Margas, Lillian E., Hicksville, NY, Chiropractic, December 1987 Chiropractic, April 1990 $35,493.30, New York Chiropractic Roesler-Sirlin, Christine, Plainview, NY, Hogan, Dennis, Thiells, NY, $12,279.27, College, Seneca Falls, NY, $71,679.22, New York Chiropractic Logan College of Chiropractic, Chiropractic, December 1990 College, Seneca Falls, NY, Chesterfield, MO, Chiropractic, McCabe, Peter T., Carmel, NY, Chiropractic, April 1988 August 1989 $32,660.54, Life College, Marietta, Rosner, Jeffrey S., East Patchoque, NY, Horn, Carl, Syosset, NY, $25,854.30, GA, Chiropractic, September 1984 $584.84, New York Chiropractic Palmer College of Chiropractic, McCormack, Wayne, Liberty, NY, College, Seneca Falls, NY, Davenport, IA, Chiropractic, March $40,335.10, New York Chiropractic Chiropractic, April 1984 1989 College, Seneca Falls, NY, Ross, Kimberly A., Woodstock, NY, Hughes, Jill, Rocky Point, NY, Chiropractic, April 1985 $86,053.41, New York Chiropractic $10,400.92, Logan College of McGowan, Grace, Blauvelt, NY, College, Seneca Falls, NY, Chiropractic, Chesterfield, MO, $2,596.85, Palmer College of Chiropractic, April 1987 Chiropractic, August 1988 Chiropractic, Davenport, IA, Ryan Burdett, Denis D., Riverdale, NY, Humbert, Marti, Massapequa, NY, Chiropractic, December 1987 $117,334.25, Life College, Marietta, $54,988.02, New York Chiropractic Medori, John, Garden City, NY, GA, Chiropractic, March 1986 College, Seneca Falls, NY, $28,499.61, New York Chiropractic Sandler, Ellen B., Glen Cove, NY, Chiropractic, April 1988 College, Seneca Falls, NY, $54,621.52, Life College, Marietta, Jackson, Jo Ann, Brooklyn, NY, Chiropractic, December 1986 GA, Chiropractic, March 1985 $13,156.67, Life College, Marietta, Moretti, Jeffrey, Poughkeepsie, NY, Schack, Richard N., Jamaica, NY, GA, Chiropractic, December 1983 $94,016.00, New York Chiropractic $100,417.20, New York Chiropractic 14110 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices College, Seneca Falls, NY, Chiropractic West, San Jose, CA, Farkas, Edward, Brooklyn, NY, Chiropractic, December 1987 Chiropractic, September 1987 $63,329.48, New York University, Schecher, Valerie, East Meadow, NY, New York, NY, Dentistry, June 1985 $72,687.88, New York Chiropractic Clinical Psychology Foster, Grady, Cambria Heights, NY, College, Seneca Falls, NY, Bernard, Theresa, Ossining, NY, $32,768.55, Howard University, Chiropractic, April 1990 $75,051.10, Univ of Denver, Denver, Washington, DC, Dentistry, May 1983 Seymour, Gary S., Walden, NY, CO, Clinical Psychology, August 1987 Glassman, Martin J., Briarcliff Manor, $27,102.51, Life College, Marietta, Creelman, Monica L., Brooklyn, NY, NY, $12,000.49, Univ of GA, Chiropractic, June 1983 $4,228.31, Adelphi University, Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, Shaw, Donald H., East Hampton, NY, Garden City, NY, Clinical Psychology, Dentistry, May 1983 $76,766.96, Western States May 1991 Glicksberg, Jerome, Brooklyn, NY, Chiropractic College, Portland, OR, Kaplan, Perry, Mamaroneck, NY, $1,583.93, Univ of Detroit Mercy, Chiropractic, December 1985 $18,651.09, Teachers College Detroit, MI, Dentistry, May 1987 Silverstein, Michael, New York, NY, Columbia University, New York, NY, Han, Sok, Woodside, NY, $93,016.83, $28,159.46, Life Chiropractic College- Clinical Psychology, May 1989 Univ of Southern California, Los West, San Lorenzo, CA, Chiropractic, Knight, Patricia A., Sayville, NY, Angeles, CA, Dentistry, May 1986 September 1986 $41,322.12, Adelphi University, Jacobson, Robert, Ossining, NY, Slator, Mary, Sheds, NY, $21,378.78, Garden City, NY, Clinical Psychology, $133,541.82, Marquette University, Palmer College of Chiropractic, May 1989 Milwaukee, WI, Dentistry, May 1990 Davenport, IA, Chiropractic, October Romeo, Allen, New York, NY, Joseph, Leslie, Queens, NY, 1986 $39,195.57, California Sch. of Prof. $119,330.90, New York University, Smith, Donna, Portville, NY, Psych., Alameda, CA, Clinical New York, NY, Dentistry, June 1987 $26,083.35, Logan College of Psychology, June 1989 Kadoch, David D., Milbasin, NY, Chiropractic, Chesterfield, MO, Talarico, Richard, New York, NY, $39,345.68, New York University, Chiropractic, August 1988 $85,731.65, California Sch. of Prof. New York, NY, Dentistry, June 1987 Smith, Gertrude M., New York, NY, Psych., Alhambra, CA, Clinical Kline, Kurt, Olattsburgh, NY, $79,243.44, Life College, Marietta, Psychology, September 1985 $138,949.19, Boston University GA, Chiropractic, December 1984 Medical Center, Boston, MA, Snipe, Teresa G., Jamaica, NY, Dentistry Dentistry, May 1990 $46,913.04, Life College, Marietta, Agata, Richard C., Brooklyn, NY, Kronengold, Jack, Forest Hills, NY, GA, Chiropractic, March 1984 $111,332.80, Temple University, $151,634.75, New York University, Spanakos, Michael, Greenvale, NY, Philadelphia, PA, Dentistry, May 1984 New York, NY, Dentistry, June 1987 $1,341.15, Life College, Marietta, GA, Alli-Graham, William R., New York, Kupetz, Scott, Hopewell Junction, NY, Chiropractic, March 1985 NY, $1,870.52, Fairleigh Dickinson $122,997.21, Fairleigh Dickinson Staurides, Angela E., Flushing, NY, University, Teaneck, NJ, Dentistry, University, Teaneck, NJ, Dentistry, $27,988.54, New York Chiropractic May 1984 May 1988 College, Seneca Falls, NY, Bentley, David J., Wellsville, NY, Onguner, Yasemin, Brooklyn, NY, Chiropractic, April 1986 $17,355.15, Virginia Commonwealth $34,170.68, New York University, Stein, Richard E., Highland, NY, University, Richmond, VA, Dentistry, New York, NY, Dentistry, May 1992 $25,733.49, New York Chiropractic August 1988 Perez, Hector, Bronx, NY, $63,561.98, College, Seneca Falls, NY, Betelman, Genady, Brooklyn, NY, New York University, New York, NY, Chiropractic, April 1989 $105,062.16, Washington University, Dentistry, October 1991 Streit, Allan, Bronx, NY, $12,324.07, St. Louis, MO, Dentistry, May 1990 Perez, Nelson, Brooklyn, NY, National College of Chiropractic, Boldt, Harrison, Brooklyn, NY, $13,562.10, New York University, Lombard, IL, Chiropractic, April 1984 $182,501.32, New York University, New York, NY, Dentistry, June 1986 Sundin, Doreen A., East Islip, NY, New York, NY, Dentistry, June 1987 Picker, Tad T., Bronx, NY, $90,373.98, $35,993.50, Palmer College of Butler, Marilyn, Suffern, NY, New York University, New York, NY, Chiropractic, Davenport, IA, $106,397.31, New York University, Dentistry, June 1986 Chiropractic, June 1984 New York, NY, Dentistry, June 1986 Pollack, Douglas F., New York, NY, Valvo, Carl L., Yonkers, NY, $99,252.65, Caldwell, Robert J., Jamaica, NY, $7,916.90, New York University, New National College of Chiropractic, $10,676.13, Howard University, York, NY, Dentistry, June 1982 Lombard, IL, Chiropractic, August Washington, DC, Dentistry, May 1986 Popa, Dragos D B, New York, NY, 1985 Carja, Sylvia, Flushing, NY, $7,278.04, $137,485.24, New York University, Viladesau, Raymond L., Massapequa, New York University, New York, NY, New York, NY, Dentistry, June 1985 NY, $13,899.42, Life College, Dentistry, June 1992 Resnansky, Alexander, Melville, NY, Marietta, GA, Chiropractic, October Chen, Ronnie, New York, NY, $13,476.14, SUNY Stony Brook, Stony 1982 $2,971.03, New York University, New Brook, NY, Dentistry, June 1991 Weber, Richard L., Staten Island, NY, York, NY, Dentistry, June 1986 Schroder, Anthony M., Middletown, $18,148.42, Life College, Marietta, Chibambo Smith, Gadi M., Haverstraw, NY, $31,639.57, New York University, GA, Chiropractic, March 1988 NY, $58,778.75, Howard University, New York, NY, Dentistry, June 1984 Wheatley, William J., Highland Mills, Washington, DC, Dentistry, May 1987 Schwartz, Eric, Long Beach, NY, NY, $46,450.01, New York Curtis, Charles R., Flushing, NY, $122,493.36, Boston University Chiropractic College, Seneca Falls, $102,415.92, Georgetown University, Medical Center, Boston, MA, NY, Chiropractic, December 1988 Washington, DC, Dentistry, May 1985 Dentistry, June 1989 Wilson, Anthony, Westbury, NY, Derosa, Alan A., New Paltz, NY, Sherman, Lynn P., Beach Haven, NY, $13,839.27, New York Chiropractic $190,566.80, Emory University, $153,325.51, Univ of The Pacific, San College, Seneca Falls, NY, Atlanta, GA, Dentistry, May 1985 Francisco, CA, Dentistry, September Chiropractic, December 1991 Dibenedetto, Mauro, Massapequa, NY, 1983 Zilker, Wayne, New Rochelle, NY, $110,795.79, Tufts University, Boston, Stone, Grace G., Roosevelt, NY, $56,617.72, Palmer College of MA, Dentistry, May 1991 $189,072.17, Meharry Medical Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices 14111 College, Nashville, TN, Dentistry, May Osteo Med of the Pacific, Pomona, Brookville, NY, Pharmacy, October 1985 CA, Osteopathy, June 1986 1986 Stukes, Susan D., New Rochelle, NY, Driscoll, William, Mineola, NY, Terp, Marie A., New York, NY, $2,194.64, Howard University, $76,758.25, New York College of $17,469.25, Long Island University, Washington, DC, Dentistry, May 1985 Osteopathic Medicine, Old Westbury, Brookville, NY, Pharmacy, June 1987 Thompson, Fannye F., Brooklyn, NY, NY, Osteopathy, June 1990 Podiatry $27,740.48, Univ of Med & Dent of Durojaye, Ojebode, Bronx, NY, New Jersey, Newark, NJ, Dentistry, $26,580.21, New York College of Aiello, Lisa A., Lake Carmel, NY, May 1983 Osteopathic Medicine, Old Westbury, $62,513.47, New York College of Wiggins, Christopher, New York, NY, NY, Osteopathy, June 1993 Podiatric Medicine, New York, NY, $66,362.94, New York University, Gordon, Barbara, Spring Valley, NY, Podiatry, June 1989 New York, NY, Dentistry, June 1989 $135,068.81, New York College of Barry, Patrick, Flushing, NY, $3,787.31, Williams, Miriam, Bronx, NY, Osteopathic Medicine, Old Westbury, New York College of Podiatric $35,921.34, Howard University, NY, Osteopathy, June 1989 Medicine, New York, NY, Podiatry, Washington, DC, Dentistry, May 1982 Gotlin, Douglas, Brooklyn, NY, June 1983 Wood, Kevin C., Amherst, NY, $114,036.72, Nova Southeastern Becker, Russell P., Queens Village, NY, $49,277.84, Howard University, University, North Miami Beach, FL, $33,661.05, Barry University-Podiatric Washington, DC, Dentistry, May 1983 Osteopathy, June 1990 Med, Miami Shores, FL, Podiatry, Woods, Daemon S., Watertown, NY, Horner, Deborah, Bronx, NY, May 1989 $35,706.71, Fairleigh Dickinson $43,643.63, New York College of Bernstein, Jeffrey S., New York, NY, University, Teaneck, NJ, Dentistry, Osteopathic Medicine, Old Westbury, $47,693.23, New York College of May 1990 NY, Osteopathy, June 1991 Podiatric Medicine, New York, NY, Yeates, Terrance C., Brooklyn, NY, Kelly, James, Port Jefferson, NY, Podiatry, June 1986 $45,575.52, Howard University, $107,795.19, Philadelphia Col of Berquist, Andrew O., Taberg, NY, Washington, DC, Dentistry, May 1985 Osteopathic Medicine, Philadelphia, $116,589.43, California College of PA, Osteopathy, June 1984 Podiatric Medicine, San Francisco, Health Administration Kendrick, Deborah A., Brooklyn, NY, CA, Podiatry, May 1986 Jansson, Susanne E., Westhampton $628.01, New York College of Birnstill, Albert, Wappingers Falls, NY, Beach, NY, $25,949.09, Washington Osteopathic Medicine, Old Westbury, $77,012.14, Univ of Osteo Medical & University, St Louis, MO, Health NY, Osteopathy, June 1988 Health Science, Des Moines, IA, Administration, May 1986 Mihalkis, Georgia, Bronx, NY, Podiatry, May 1992 $97,918.40, Univ of Osteo Medical & Brown, Kenneth L., Brooklyn, NY, Optometry Health Science, Des Moines, IA, $60,169.46, California College of Pasarell, Alan, Washingtonville, NY, Osteopathy, June 1985 Podiatric Medicine, San Francisco, $8,250.46, SUNY State College of Steinke, Charles T., Belle Harbor, NY, CA, Podiatry, May 1987 Optometry, New York, NY, $200,885.56, Univ of Health Sciences, Davidson, Jon J., Plainview, NY, Optometry, July 1982 Kansas City, MO, Osteopathy, May $185,363.10, New York College of Placide, Frantz, Rochester, NY, 1986 Podiatric Medicine, New York, NY, $4,969.98, SUNY State College of Walfield, Brad, Kings Park, NY, Podiatry, June 1986 Optometry, New York, NY, $101,446.21, Univ of Med & Dent of Di Napoli, James J., Lynbrook, NY, Optometry, June 1991 New Jersey, Newark, NJ, Osteopathy, $46,436.91, Dr. William Scholl Col of Richland, Warren A., Brooklyn, NY, August 1988 Podiatric Med, Chicago, IL, Podiatry, $9,176.05, New England College of May 1984 Optometry, Boston, MA, Optometry, Pharmacy Downes, Robert R., Commack, NY, June 1985 Glover, Cheryl M., Brooklyn, NY, $169,330.60, New York College of Rolinski, Douglas, Elmhurst, NY, $44,310.62, Long Island University, Podiatric Medicine, New York, NY, $9,330.81, SUNY State College of Brookville, NY, Pharmacy, June 1987 Podiatry, June 1986 Optometry, New York, NY, Haynes, Robert, Brooklyn, NY, Earle, John, Jamaica, NY, $32,285.70, Optometry, June 1984 $17,044.98, Long Island University, New York College of Podiatric Tran, Nguyen C., New York, NY, Brookville, NY, Pharmacy, June 1987 Medicine, New York, NY, Podiatry, $26,031.45, SUNY State College of Ibeh, Fidelas A., Brooklyn, NY, June 1992 Optometry, New York, NY, $14,378.42, Long Island University, Fanizzi, Thomas, Bayshore, NY, Optometry, June 1986 Brookville, NY, Pharmacy, January $137,594.97, New York College of 1989 Podiatric Medicine, New York, NY, Osteopathy Jusu, Thomas T., Brooklyn, NY, Podiatry, June 1986 Adler, Richard, New York, NY, $12,296.77, Mercer University, Fink, Robert C, New York, NY, $41,708.12, Univ of Osteo Medical & Atlanta, GA, Pharmacy, June 1987 $64,043.88, Ohio College of Podiatric Health Science, Des Moines, IA, Katz-Bierenbaum, Gail B., New York, Medicine, Cleveland, OH, Podiatry, Osteopathy, June 1984 NY, $4,194.08, Long Island May 1982 Anthony, Melvin E., New York, NY, University, Brookville, NY, Pharmacy, Grant, Albert V., New York, NY, $34,526.94, Oklahoma State June 1990 $108,068.13, New York College of University, Tulsa, OK, Osteopathy, Licciardello, Alfred A., Brooklyn, NY, Podiatric Medicine, New York, NY, May 1990 $8,716.01, Long Island University, Podiatry, June 1986 Baltazar, Rodney, Jamaica, NY, Brookville, NY, Pharmacy, June 1986 Griffin, Carlotta, Rochester, NY, $128,071.54, Univ of Osteo Medical & Ngoka, Regina N., Brooklyn, NY, $123,600.66, New York College of Health Science, Des Moines, IA, $3,498.63, Long Island University, Podiatric Medicine, New York, NY, Osteopathy, May 1991 Brookville, NY, Pharmacy, June 1984 Podiatry, June 1988 Bennett-Bennett, Bonnie A., Point Romero, Gerardo, Brooklyn, NY, Hertz, Zeev, Brooklyn, NY, $73,968.12, Lookout, NY, $207,267.63, College of $9,354.17, Long Island University, New York College of Podiatric 14112 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices Medicine, New York, NY, Podiatry, Nelson, Mark, Yonkers, NY, Worcester, Worcester, MA, Allopathic June 1990 $155,697.55, New York College of Medicine, June 1987 Herzlich, Douglas B., Bronx, NY, Podiatric Medicine, New York, NY, Bunch III, John D., Matthews, NC, $91,825.30, New York College of Podiatry, June 1985 $9,635.60, Medical University of Podiatric Medicine, New York, NY, Paul, Fitzpatrick, New York, NY, South Carolina, Charleston, SC, Podiatry, June 1984 $86,967.29, New York College of Allopathic Medicine, May 1982 Kane, Shalva, Forest Hills, NY, Podiatric Medicine, New York, NY, Cutler, Kenneth A., Durham, NC, $42,919.08, New York College of Podiatry, June 1985 $24,933.78, Eastern Virginia Medical Podiatric Medicine, New York, NY, Perkins, Terence M., Bronx, NY, School, Norfolk, VA, Allopathic Podiatry, June 1991 $106,280.16, New York College of Medicine, June 1984 Kantro, Scott R., Forest Hills, NY, Podiatric Medicine, New York, NY, Douthit, Jeffrey K., Winston Salem, NC, $48,833.89, California College of Podiatry, June 1989 $23,676.08, Wake Forest University, Podiatric Medicine, San Francisco, Pinnace, Jeanette, Bronx, NY, Winston-Salem, NC, Allopathic CA, Podiatry, June 1979 $140,207.97, New York College of Medicine, May 1987 Katz, Alan, Pomona, NY, $63,738.13, Podiatric Medicine, New York, NY, Hunter, Lorenzo, Greenville, NC, New York College of Podiatric Podiatry, June 1989 $194,528.84, Meharry Medical Medicine, New York, NY, Podiatry, Rogers, Natalie, Bronx, NY, $24,409.70, College, Nashville, TN, Allopathic June 1986 Ohio College of Podiatric Medicine, Medicine, May 1986 Kelly-Soluri, Laura, Farmingdale, NY, Cleveland, OH, Podiatry, May 1989 Perry, Wade W., Durham, NC, $65,861.57, New York College of Sheahan, Michael D., Staten Island, NY, $19,340.64, Hahnemann University, Podiatric Medicine, New York, NY, $43,041.43, New York College of Philadelphia, PA, Allopathic Podiatry, June 1989 Podiatric Medicine, New York, NY, Medicine, June 1985 Kirk, Marshall, Lake Carmel, NY, Podiatry, June 1982 Stovall, Vicki M., Winston Salem, NC, $80,979.38, New York College of Shelto, Donna, Jamaica, NY, $96,987.21, $62,648.85, Wake Forest University, Podiatric Medicine, New York, NY, New York College of Podiatric Winston-Salem, NC, Allopathic Podiatry, June 1989 Medicine, New York, NY, Podiatry, Medicine, May 1987 Kleinman, Abraham, Far Rockaway, NY, June 1990 Williams, Valjeanne, Durham, NC, $20,550.12, New York College of Soleye, Babatunde, Hartsdale, NY, $12,992.59, Univ of Med & Dent of Podiatric Medicine, New York, NY, $8,175.32, New York College of New Jersey, Newark, NJ, Allopathic Podiatry, June 1990 Podiatric Medicine, New York, NY, Medicine, May 1986 Layton, Stephen, Wantagh, NY, Podiatry, June 1980 $33,726.52, New York College of Teusink, Scott H., Staten Island, NY, Chiropractic Podiatric Medicine, New York, NY, $180,205.10, New York College of Austin Jr, Donald E., Sanford, NC, Podiatry, June 1989 Podiatric Medicine, New York, NY, $10,447.15, Life College, Marietta, Ledino, John, Syracuse, NY, $42,603.89, Podiatry, June 1988 GA, Chiropractic, December 1986 Ohio College of Podiatric Medicine, Zawada, Stanley J., Bayside, NY, Collins, William W., Hendersonville, Cleveland, OH, Podiatry, May 1983 $113,862.91, New York College of NC, $33,646.95, Life College, Marietta, Lieman-Mathews, Theodora S., Staten Podiatric Medicine, New York, NY, GA, Chiropractic, December 1982 Island, NY, $126,273.57, New York Podiatry, June 1984 Coronado, Rudolph, Pembroke, NC, College of Podiatric Medicine, New Public Health $53,159.71, Parker College of York, NY, Podiatry, June 1985 Chiropractic, Dallas, TX, Chiropractic, Llewellyn, Allan, Brooklyn, NY, Altheim, Joy, Nesconset, NY, January 1989 $35,565.87, New York College of $10,366.62, Boston University Cox, Janet L., Tyron, NC, $86,044.23, Podiatric Medicine, New York, NY, Medical Center, Boston, MA, Public Los Angeles College of Chiropractic, Podiatry, June 1984 Health, January 1991 Whittier, CA, Chiropractic, April 1988 Lloyd, Jay, New York, NY, $24,739.87, Amu-Nnadi, Sam, Jamaica, NY, Davies, Bruce, Dunn, NC, $85,782.06, New York College of Podiatric $27,070.34, Univ of Pittsburgh, Cleveland Chiropractic College, Medicine, New York, NY, Podiatry, Pittsburgh, PA, Public Health, August Kansas City, MO, Chiropractic, June 1986 1987 January 1989 Mackey, Oliver G., Flushing, NY, Paskilas, Alexander, New Rochelle, NY, Dawson, Glenda J., Shelby, NC, $165,460.83, New York College of $37,970.89, Yale University, New $119,375.32, Life College, Marietta, Podiatric Medicine, New York, NY, Haven, CT, Public Health, May 1987 GA, Chiropractic, September 1986 Podiatry, June 1988 Veterinary Medicine Hall, Scott W., Winston Salem, NC, Melendez, Angelina, Bronx, NY, $109,441.36, Cleveland Chiropractic $161,533.68, New York College of Lane, Mark J., Monroe, NY, $7,854.93, College, Kansas City, MO, Podiatric Medicine, New York, NY, Univ of Florida, Gainesville, FL, Chiropractic, September 1986 Podiatry, June 1989 Veterinary Medicine, May 1987 Kerr, Thomas, Charlotte, NC, Mitchell, Kenneth, New York, NY, Weiskopf, Joan, Port Chester, NY, $38,456.64, Palmer College of $30,437.27, New York College of $35,726.78, Tufts University, Boston, Chiropractic, Davenport, IA, Podiatric Medicine, New York, NY, MA, Veterinary Medicine, May 1989 Chiropractic, December 1984 Podiatry, June 1982 North Carolina Mercer, Lloyd D., Black Mountain, NC, Moy, John, New York, NY, $90,739.89, $85,744.90, Cleveland Chiropractic New York College of Podiatric Allopathic Medicine College, Kansas City, MO, Medicine, New York, NY, Podiatry, Battle, Gordon J., Greensboro, NC, Chiropractic, January 1989 June 1986 $6,226.50, Michigan State University, Nickels, Steven M., Charlotte, NC, Nash, John J., Albany, NY, $3,376.49, East Lansing, MI, Allopathic $128,882.12, Life College, Marietta, New York College of Podiatric Medicine, June 1990 GA, Chiropractic, March 1986 Medicine, New York, NY, Podiatry, Bourne, Jeanette L., Winterville, NC, Reischman, Grace A., Matthews, NC, June 1985 $2,389.38, Univ of Massachusetts $18,296.78, Logan College of Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices 14113 Chiropractic, Chesterfield, MO, North Dakota College, Nashville, TN, Allopathic Chiropractic, January 1986 Medicine, May 1986 Chiropractic Reischman, Timothy T., Matthews, NC, Jackson, Steven S., Columbus, OH, $8,798.21, Logan College of Trauger, Gary G., Watford City, ND, $12,926.90, Ohio State University, Chiropractic, Chesterfield, MO, $61,418.38, Palmer College of Columbus, OH, Allopathic Medicine, Chiropractic, August 1985 Chiropractic, Davenport, IA, June 1984 Katsaros, Demetrios, Cleveland, OH, Williams, Betty Dale F., Roxboro, NC, Chiropractic, June 1984 $70,579.13, Finch University of $98,528.54, Life College, Marietta, Ohio Health Sciences, North Chicago, IL, GA, Chiropractic, September 1985 Allopathic Medicine Allopathic Medicine, June 1990 Williams, James, Andrews, NC, Mays, Dewey O., Dayton, OH, $110,790.59, Palmer College of Anyaji, George, Toledo, OH, $16,602.28, Meharry Medical College, Chiropractic, Davenport, IA, $144,659.63, Medical College of Ohio, Nashville, TN, Allopathic Medicine, Chiropractic, December 1985 Toledo, OH, Allopathic Medicine, May 1981 June 1987 Dentistry McAnallen, Curtis, Gahanna, OH, Bartnett, Bruce B., Twinsburg, OH, $26,453.81, Marshall University, Cates, Sanford M., Randleman, NC, $49,189.76, Case Western Reserve Huntington, WV, Allopathic $69,924.97, Creighton University, University, Cleveland, OH, Allopathic Medicine, May 1990 Omaha, NE, Dentistry, May 1984 Medicine, August 1985 McKnight, Timothy J., Akron, OH, Berry, Rush, Westervillle, OH, $6,256.54, Tufts University, Boston, Optometry $21,533.07, Univ of Illinois Medical MA, Allopathic Medicine, June 1989 Oxendine, Tony, Red Springs, NC, Center, Chicago, IL, Allopathic McSurdy, Bruce J., North Ridgeville, $14,934.41, Pennsylvania College of Medicine, June 1990 OH, $72,432.99, Univ of Cincinnati, Optometry, Philadelphia, PA, Blackshere-Richardson, Eloise C., Cincinnati, OH, Allopathic Medicine, Optometry, May 1988 Cincinnati, OH, $13,795.40, Wright June 1990 Stephens Jr, Ronald, Denver, NC, State University, Dayton, OH, Mundy-Washington, Deidria V., Dayton, $32,984.41, Southern College of Allopathic Medicine, November 1985 OH, $10,598.00, Wright State Optometry, Memphis, TN, Optometry, Blissenbach, David A., Gahanna, OH, University, Dayton, OH, Allopathic June 1988 $8,290.35, Wright State University, Medicine, June 1988 Dayton, OH, Allopathic Medicine, Needham, Brett B., Cincinnati, OH, Pharmacy June 1982 $31,070.89, Ohio State University, Columbus, OH, Allopathic Medicine, Thornton, Douglas E., Lucama, NC, Clark-Cook, Susan, Fairborn, OH, June 1984 $10,960.94, St Louis College of $4,245.14, Wright State University, Dayton, OH, Allopathic Medicine, Nemore Jr, George, Dayton, OH, Pharmacy, St Louis, MO, Pharmacy, $28,511.58, Wright State University, May 1987 August 1990 Ellis, Brenda J., Dayton, OH, Dayton, OH, Allopathic Medicine, Williams, Kenneth M., Durham, NC, $109,891.90, Meharry Medical September 1985 $7,069.68, Long Island University, College, Nashville, TN, Allopathic Parks, Derrick D., Dayton, OH, Brookville, NY, Pharmacy, June 1990 Medicine, May 1985 $6,004.63, Wright State University, Podiatry Evans, Catherine L., Columbus, OH, Dayton, OH, Allopathic Medicine, $42,738.81, Medical College of Ohio, September 1985 Bolovc, David, Greensboro, NC, Toledo, OH, Allopathic Medicine, Passalacqua, Paul, Maumee, OH, $125,114.19, New York College of June 1989 $12,660.78, Medical College of Ohio, Podiatric Medicine, New York, NY, Flood, Wanda, Massillon, OH, Toledo, OH, Allopathic Medicine, Podiatry, June 1988 $35,921.75, Howard University, June 1986 Pate-Glover, Valerie J., Cleveland, OH, Neumunz, Gregory, Hampstead, NC, Washington, DC, Allopathic $80,176.28, Wright State University, $38,359.66, New York College of Medicine, May 1986 Dayton, OH, Allopathic Medicine, Podiatric Medicine, New York, NY, Griffin, Marcus, Cincinnati, OH, June 1984 Podiatry, June 1987 $79,675.17, Wright State University, Quirke, Clement, Charlotte, NC, Perry, Victor, Toledo, OH, $181,579.49, Dayton, OH, Allopathic Medicine, Medical College of Ohio, Toledo, OH, $36,977.09, New York College of June 1990 Podiatric Medicine, New York, NY, Allopathic Medicine, June 1986 Harley, Carolyn, Columbus, OH, Peterson, Frank R., Cleveland Heights, Podiatry, June 1985 $79,864.04, Wright State University, OH, $71,638.08, Wright State Public Health Dayton, OH, Allopathic Medicine, University, Dayton, OH, Allopathic June 1987 Medicine, June 1988 Eloi, Emmanuel E., Charlotte, NC, Heintzelman, Kurt, Columbus, OH, Putzi, Judith L., Cincinnati, OH, $11,353.94, Boston University $81,096.94, Ohio State University, $107,048.11, Wright State University, Medical Center, Boston, MA, Public Columbus, OH, Allopathic Medicine, Dayton, OH, Allopathic Medicine, Health, May 1986 June 1988 June 1984 Veterinary Medicine Heuring, Richard R., Columbus, OH, Rozier, Frederick, Columbus, OH, $16,420.24, Univ of Cincinnati, $47,530.41, Medical College of Hayes, Alphonse, Greensboro, NC, Cincinnati, OH, Allopathic Medicine, Wisconsin, Milwaukee, WI, $19,239.16, Tuskegee University, June 1987 Allopathic Medicine, August 1982 Tuskegee, AL, Veterinary Medicine, Ho-a-Lim, Fredrick, Cleveland, OH, Shook, Scott, Columbus, OH, May 1989 $51,486.94, Meharry Medical College, $64,976.44, Wright State University, Herring, Mollie E., Pittsboro, NC, Nashville, TN, Allopathic Medicine, Dayton, OH, Allopathic Medicine, $24,702.05, Univ of Pennsylvania, May 1983 June 1988 Philadelphia, PA, Veterinary Howard, Anthony, Cuyahoga Falls, OH, Shuman, Ralph W., Toledo, OH, Medicine, December 1983 $181,836.15, Meharry Medical $47,255.85, Medical College of Ohio, 14114 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices Toledo, OH, Allopathic Medicine, College, Kansas City, MO, University, Cleveland, OH, Dentistry, June 1984 Chiropractic, January 1990 May 1990 Silas, Charles G., Dayton, OH, Hunter, Donald E., Fairborn, OH, Allen, Sherman, Cleveland, OH, $137,686.86, Wright State University, $46,171.31, Palmer College of $66,051.78, Howard University, Dayton, OH, Allopathic Medicine, Chiropractic, Davenport, IA, Washington, DC, Dentistry, May 1988 June 1987 Chiropractic, September 1984 Ball, John, Cleveland, OH, $8,588.35, Tonwe, Tutse D., Cleveland, OH, Kinney, Lue B., Dayton, OH, $66,938.73, Case Western Reserve University, $227,047.31, Wright State University, Cleveland Chiropractic College, Cleveland, OH, Dentistry, May 1985 Dayton, OH, Allopathic Medicine, Kansas City, MO, Chiropractic, May Bohonek, Stanislav, Cleveland, OH, May 1985 1985 $69,918.52, Case Western Reserve Torres, Jose A., Cleveland, OH, Lorts, Deanna I., Cincinnati, OH, University, Cleveland, OH, Dentistry, $125,471.38, Universidad Central Del $58,709.59, Cleveland Chiropractic May 1987 Caribe, Bayamon, PR, Allopathic College, Kansas City, MO, Brightman, Brenda, Cleveland, OH, Medicine, May 1986 Chiropractic, September 1986 $70,010.24, Case Western Reserve Uhlinger, Donald, Cincinnati, OH, McClain, Donald W., Cleveland, OH, University, Cleveland, OH, Dentistry, $5,336.65, Wright State University, $30,585.33, Logan College of May 1988 Dayton, OH, Allopathic Medicine, Chiropractic, Chesterfield, MO, Butler, Tracey A., Cincinnati, OH, June 1992 Chiropractic, December 1988 $10,131.50, Univ of Louisville, Venable, Walter, Beavercreek, OH, Monbarren, John W., Lakewood, OH, Louisville, KY, Dentistry, May 1991 $33,751.58, Wright State University, $19,724.56, Life College, Marietta, Costaras, Bill, Westlake, OH, Dayton, OH, Allopathic Medicine, GA, Chiropractic, June 1990 $24,012.89, Case Western Reserve June 1983 Nagode, Dale, Middleburg, OH, University, Cleveland, OH, Dentistry, White, Linda Lee Samso, Marion, OH, $3,179.14, Life Chiropractic College- May 1987 Denham, Audrey, Columbus, OH, $51,102.76, East Tennessee State West, San Lorenzo, CA, Chiropractic, $12,127.09, Ohio State University, University, Johnson City, TN, June 1985 Columbus, OH, Dentistry, June 1984 Oetzel, Stephen L., Wilmington, OH, Allopathic Medicine, May 1984 Easley, Wayland, Shaker Heights, OH, Yates, James E., Jackson, OH, $38,132.03, Palmer College of $86,791.48, Case Western Reserve $106,556.87, Wright State University, Chiropractic, Davenport, IA, University, Cleveland, OH, Dentistry, Dayton, OH, Allopathic Medicine, Chiropractic, June 1986 May 1990 June 1986 Parigros, John, Sylvania, OH, Falkenhain, Scott, Westerville, OH, $61,952.09, Cleveland Chiropractic Chiropractic $3,891.99, Univ of Missouri Kansas College, Kansas City, MO, City, Kansas City, MO, Dentistry, May Adams, Stephen C., Portsmouth, OH, Chiropractic, January 1987 1989 $84,742.67, Palmer College of Scanlon, Mark, Cincinnati, OH, Fellner, Thomas G., Galion, OH, Chiropractic, Davenport, IA, $4,981.51, Palmer College of $2,852.05, Case Western Reserve Chiropractic, June 1989 Chiropractic, Davenport, IA, University, Cleveland, OH, Dentistry, Akinpelu, Enoch A., Mason, OH, Chiropractic, February 1991 May 1989 $12,425.96, Life College, Marietta, Schone, Jerry O., Reynoldsburg, OH, Gross, Bonnie B., Columbus, OH, GA, Chiropractic, September 1984 $3,817.86, Palmer College of $34,330.35, Case Western Reserve Beltakis, David, Cleveland, OH, Chiropractic, Davenport, IA, University, Cleveland, OH, Dentistry, $24,963.85, Palmer College of Chiropractic, October 1986 May 1986 Chiropractic West, San Jose, CA, Schumacher, Douglass E., Dayton, OH, Holiday, Tanya, Columbus, OH, Chiropractic, March 1991 $79,081.21, Life College, Marietta, $126,535.15, Meharry Medical Bowers, Thomas, Toledo, OH, GA, Chiropractic, December 1986 College, Nashville, TN, Dentistry, May $76,728.50, National College of Schwan, Douglas A., Toledo, OH, 1988 Chiropractic, Lombard, IL, $2,208.06, Palmer College of Jeffreys, Carl E., Cincinnati, OH, Chiropractic, December 1986 Chiropractic, Davenport, IA, $95,871.35, Washington University, St Burke-Evanoff, Anne, Westerville, OH, Chiropractic, December 1982 Louis, MO, Dentistry, May 1989 $22,111.54, Northwestern College of Shihadeh, Ahmad, Columbus, OH, Jones, Pedro R., Cleveland, OH, Chiropractic, Bloomington, MN, $8,011.54, Life College, Marietta, GA, $184,282.74, Meharry Medical Chiropractic, August 1985 Chiropractic, March 1991 College, Nashville, TN, Dentistry, May Burke-Evanoff, James M., Westerville, Clinical Psychology 1983 OH, $4,283.95, Northwestern College Jordan, Martin E., Cleveland, OH, of Chiropractic, Bloomington, MN, Daugherty, Paula G., Trotwood, OH, $5,541.42, Howard University, Chiropractic, December 1984 $1,004.46, Wright State University, Washington, DC, Dentistry, May 1990 Campana, Thomas M., Cleveland, OH, Dayton, OH, Clinical Psychology, Kollat, Dana G., Columbus, OH, $57,611.40, Palmer College of August 1989 $40,226.13, Ohio State University, Chiropractic, Davenport, IA, Howard, Kimberly S., Springfield, OH, Columbus, OH, Dentistry, June 1989 Chiropractic, September 1985 $16,172.90, Wright State University, Lancour, Michelle M., Gahanna, OH, Drotar, Christopher J., Toledo, OH, Dayton, OH, Clinical Psychology, $2,389.85, Ohio State University, $75,436.18, Palmer College of August 1989 Columbus, OH, Dentistry, June 1991 Chiropractic, Davenport, IA, Turner, Hugh, Elyria, OH, $20,197.53, Lesinski, Mary C., Cleveland, OH, Chiropractic, March 1985 Florida Institute of Technology, $13,462.71, Case Western Reserve Fenstermaker-Easley, Sarah, West Melbourne, FL, Clinical Psychology, University, Cleveland, OH, Dentistry, Union, OH, $12,876.43, Palmer August 1984 May 1985 College of Chiropractic, Davenport, Mack Jr, William, Brookfield, OH, IA, Chiropractic, September 1983 Dentistry $177,635.02, Case Western Reserve Howard Jr, Daniel L., Milford, OH, Ajandeh, Abba, Cleveland, OH, University, Cleveland, OH, Dentistry, $31,385.76, Cleveland Chiropractic $103,561.68, Case Western Reserve May 1987 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices 14115 Marburger, Garth, Lake Milton, OH, Optometry Glover, Geraldine, Cleveland, OH, $6,651.59, Ohio State University, Delisio, Mario, Willoughby, OH, $116,623.46, Ohio College of Podiatric Columbus, OH, Dentistry, June 1989 $3,509.25, New England College of Medicine, Cleveland, OH, Podiatry, Massengale Jr, Lendell, Cincinnati, OH, Optometry, Boston, MA, Optometry, May 1986 Gorisse, Guy R., Richmond Heights, OH, $76,156.12, Meharry Medical College, June 1987 Nashville, TN, Dentistry, May 1982 $168,037.31, Ohio College of Podiatric Mattson, Kenneth, Bluffton, OH, Osteopathy Medicine, Cleveland, OH, Podiatry, $125,399.65, Loma Linda University, Basedow, William, St Marys, OH, May 1986 Loma Linda, CA, Dentistry, June 1983 $134,800.98, Univ of Osteo Medical & Grad, Bennet, Cincinnati, OH, $34,313.36, Ohio College of Podiatric Mays, Ealy E., Dayton, OH, $95,348.15, Health Science, Des Moines, IA, Medicine, Cleveland, OH, Podiatry, Meharry Medical College, Nashville, Osteopathy, June 1985 Brody, Francee A., Youngstown, OH, May 1983 TN, Dentistry, May 1987 Harris, Lawrence J., Shaker Heights, OH, $121,380.50, Univ of Health Sciences, McCune, Thomas S., Cleveland, OH, $125,127.30, Ohio College of Podiatric Kansas City, MO, Osteopathy, May $115,394.28, Case Western Reserve Medicine, Cleveland, OH, Podiatry, University, Cleveland, OH, Dentistry, 1987 Carter, Larry E., Youngstown, OH, May 1986 May 1988 Minton, Wayne E., Cleveland, OH, $16,827.61, Univ of Osteo Medical & Meade, Madeline, Parma, OH, $194,688.64, Ohio College of Podiatric Health Science, Des Moines, IA, $20,104.76, Case Western Reserve Medicine, Cleveland, OH, Podiatry, Osteopathy, May 1993 University, Cleveland, OH, Dentistry, June 1988 May 1988 Fifer, Shirley S., Mariemont, OH, Otto, David E., Willoughby, OH, $175,873.34, Univ of Osteo Medical & Obester, David A., Columbus, OH, $210,486.25, Ohio College of Podiatric Health Science, Des Moines, IA, $128,950.46, Ohio State University, Medicine, Cleveland, OH, Podiatry, Osteopathy, June 1985 Columbus, OH, Dentistry, June 1986 May 1985 Greene, Larry J., Portsmouth, OH, Riemenschneider, Kurt, Worthington, Perry, Valerie J., Cleveland Heights, OH, $22,100.20, Oklahoma State $12,413.84, Ohio College of Podiatric OH, $28,543.30, Case Western Reserve University, Tulsa, OK, Osteopathy, University, Cleveland, OH, Dentistry, Medicine, Cleveland, OH, Podiatry, May 1993 May 1991 May 1990 Smilek, Martin, Cuyahoga Falls, OH, Slack, Craig, Columbus, OH, $19,309.23, Rodgers, Larry A., Cleveland, OH, $28,086.29, Ohio University, Athens, $190,397.51, Ohio College of Podiatric Ohio State University, Columbus, OH, OH, Osteopathy, June 1991 Dentistry, June 1987 Medicine, Cleveland, OH, Podiatry, Pharmacy May 1986 Stanfar, Anthony, North Royalton, OH, Salem, Atiyeh A., Cleveland, OH, $7,038.86, Case Western Reserve Cognetti, Richard A., Elida, OH, $72,287.57, Ohio College of Podiatric University, Cleveland, OH, Dentistry, $8,557.67, Ohio Northern University, Medicine, Cleveland, OH, Podiatry, May 1988 Ada, OH, Pharmacy, May 1989 May 1981 Stiggers, Donald, Shaker Heights, OH, Gary, Mark, Cincinnati, OH, $12,065.96, Serrano, Nydia, Lorain, OH, $4,474.03, Case Western Reserve Massachusetts College of Pharmacy, $122,412.16, Ohio College of Podiatric University, Cleveland, OH, Dentistry, Boston, MA, Pharmacy, June 1987 Medicine, Cleveland, OH, Podiatry, May 1990 Howard, Willard W., Dayton, OH, May 1988 Taylor, Michael S., Columbus, OH, $30,277.72, Howard University, Shonkwiler, Walter S., Columbus, OH, $48,639.99, Tufts University, Boston, Washington, DC, Pharmacy, May 1985 $10,612.11, Ohio College of Podiatric MA, Dentistry, June 1989 Okunbor, Friday, Cleveland, OH, Medicine, Cleveland, OH, Podiatry, Villaire, Matthew J., Cleveland Heights, $10,593.19, Creighton University, May 1983 OH, $175,452.54, Case Western Omaha, NE, Pharmacy, August 1987 Siggers, Ralph A., Berea, OH, Reserve University, Cleveland, OH, Podiatry $175,085.37, Ohio College of Podiatric Dentistry, May 1986 Medicine, Cleveland, OH, Podiatry, Anda, Peter M., Twinsburg, OH, June 1987 Zaun, Timothy M., Lakewood, OH, $25,331.60, Ohio College of Podiatric $57,182.63, Case Western Reserve Taylor, Elton, Cleveland, OH, Medicine, Cleveland, OH, Podiatry, $71,208.65, Dr William Scholl Col of University, Cleveland, OH, Dentistry, May 1989 December 1986 Podiatric Med, Chicago, IL, Podiatry, Chestang, Leo A., Cleveland, OH, May 1990 Health Administration $155,823.24, Ohio College of Podiatric Villier, Carlton, Cincinnati, OH, Medicine, Cleveland, OH, Podiatry, Chowdhry, Raja R., Cincinnati, OH, $212,021.37, Ohio College of Podiatric May 1984 Medicine, Cleveland, OH, Podiatry, $88,566.11, Xavier University, Coffey, Patrick, Troy, OH, $101,974.16, Cincinnati, OH, Health May 1984 Ohio College of Podiatric Medicine, Vinegar, Barbara, Cleveland, OH, Administration, August 1983 Cleveland, OH, Podiatry, May 1982 $67,710.15, Ohio College of Podiatric Daniels, Quincy C., Cincinnati, OH, Day, Clara Ruth E., Shaker Heights, OH, Medicine, Cleveland, OH, Podiatry, $9,571.15, Xavier University, $125,471.76, Ohio College of Podiatric May 1991 Cincinnati, OH, Health Medicine, Cleveland, OH, Podiatry, Winters, Mark I., University Heights, Administration, December 1988 May 1988 OH, $95,570.58, Ohio College of Dickerson, Gayle, Cincinnati, OH, Erkard Jr, James T., Kent, OH, Podiatric Medicine, Cleveland, OH, $16,146.15, Xavier University, $33,493.97, Ohio College of Podiatric Podiatry, May 1985 Cincinnati, OH, Health Medicine, Cleveland, OH, Podiatry, Administration, May 1986 May 1982 Public Health Jackson, Cynthia E., Cincinnati, OH, Friday, Steve M., Youngstown, OH, Jones, Donald A., Cleveland Heights, $5,852.87, Xavier University, $6,090.20, Ohio College of Podiatric OH, $24,825.59, Loma Linda Cincinnati, OH, Health Medicine, Cleveland, OH, Podiatry, University, Loma Linda, CA, Public Administration, December 1987 June 1987 Health, June 1983 14116 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices Veterinary Medicine College, Kansas City, MO, University, Tulsa, OK, Osteopathy, Emans, Susan M., Columbus, OH, Chiropractic, September 1984 June 1981 $3,718.62, Ohio State University, Owens, Gregory, Claremore, OK, Mackey, Cynthia K., Oklahoma City, Columbus, OH, Veterinary Medicine, $62,270.74, Cleveland Chiropractic OK, $220,564.53, Oklahoma State June 1987 College, Kansas City, MO, University, Tulsa, OK, Osteopathy, Chiropractic, December 1986 June 1984 Oklahoma Shuey, Stephen C., Claremore, OK, Manning, Ralph E., Tulsa, OK, $1,203.61, Palmer College of $24,743.51, Kirksville Col of Allopathic Medicine Chiropractic, Davenport, IA, Osteopathic Medicine, Kirksville, Berney, Joseph P., Oklahoma City, OK, Chiropractic, March 1986 MO, Osteopathy, June 1991 $31,131.42, Univ of Texas Hlth Sci Wynn, Leo H., Henryetta, OK, Miller, Susan M., Tulsa, OK, $50,985.40, Cntr San Antonio, San Antonio, TX, $60,416.98, Cleveland Chiropractic Oklahoma State University, Tulsa, Allopathic Medicine, May 1983 College, Kansas City, MO, OK, Osteopathy, May 1985 Boschee, Pamela, Tulsa, OK, $7,712.46, Chiropractic, September 1984 Ott, Margie, Tulsa, OK, $21,527.74, Univ of North Dakota, Grand Forks, Oklahoma State University, Tulsa, ND, Allopathic Medicine, May 1988 Dentistry OK, Osteopathy, May 1990 Bowlan, Timothy, Edmond, OK, Howell, Richard R., Oklahoma City, OK, Woods, Billy J., Oklahoma City, OK, $18,725.98, Univ of Oklahoma Health $10,568.92, Univ of Oklahoma Health $116,061.51, Oklahoma State Sciences Center, Oklahoma City, OK, Sciences Center, Oklahoma City, OK, University, Tulsa, OK, Osteopathy, Allopathic Medicine, July 1984 Dentistry, December 1983 February 1983 Brown, Douglas, Claremore, OK, Johnson, Todd, Choctaw, OK, Zahasky Jr, James J., Oklahoma City, $23,655.68, Univ of Oklahoma Health $27,006.18, Univ of Oklahoma Health OK, $44,517.82, Oklahoma State Sciences Center, Oklahoma City, OK, Sciences Center, Oklahoma City, OK, University, Tulsa, OK, Osteopathy, Allopathic Medicine, June 1985 Dentistry, June 1986 May 1986 Fincher, Mark L., Duncan, OK, McGee, Arnie A., Gore, OK, $39,175.15, Public Health $21,239.38, Univ of Oklahoma Health Univ of Oklahoma Health Sciences Sciences Center, Oklahoma City, OK, Center, Oklahoma City, OK, Dentistry, Dibie, Cyril N., Oklahoma City, OK, Allopathic Medicine, June 1983 June 1986 $1,441.38, Univ of Oklahoma Health McKeel, Wade, Tulsa, OK, $8,379.78, Sciences Center, Oklahoma City, OK, Chiropractic Univ of Oklahoma Health Sciences Public Health, December 1989 Atwell, Sandra L., Shawnee, OK, Center, Oklahoma City, OK, Dentistry, Ihekona, Augustine E., Oklahoma City, $123,653.87, Life College, Marietta, June 1988 OK, $21,084.61, Univ of Oklahoma GA, Chiropractic, March 1986 Shoeleh, Hossein M., Washington, OK, Health Sciences Center, Oklahoma Billingmeier, Arthur A., Bethany, OK, $38,496.21, Univ of Oklahoma Health City, OK, Public Health, May 1985 $135,937.34, Cleveland Chiropractic Sciences Center, Oklahoma City, OK, Nnokam, Kennedy I., Oklahoma City, College, Kansas City, MO, Dentistry, June 1991 OK, $16,371.68, Univ of Oklahoma Chiropractic, April 1986 Shoeleh, Vicki P., Washington, OK, Health Sciences Center, Oklahoma Bundrick, Doyle, Edmond, OK, $97,870.89, Oral Roberts University, City, OK, Public Health, May 1988 $22,871.47, Cleveland Chiropractic Tulsa, OK, Dentistry, June 1989 Oregon College, Kansas City, MO, Smith, Curtis, Midwest City, OK, Chiropractic, May 1989 $9,411.34, Univ of Oklahoma Health Allopathic Medicine Cooper Jr, Robert C., Tulsa, OK, Sciences Center, Oklahoma City, OK, Alcox, Gordon, Portland, OR, $77,141.81, Cleveland Chiropractic Dentistry, June 1987 $52,920.07, Univ of Oklahoma Health College, Kansas City, MO, Streight, John A., Ponca City, OK, Sciences Center, Oklahoma City, OK, Chiropractic, September 1986 $68,153.12, Univ of Oklahoma Health Allopathic Medicine, June 1987 Cothran, Lonnie A., Poteau, OK, Sciences Center, Oklahoma City, OK, Durham, Maureen M., Milwaukie, OR, $66,687.90, Texas Chiropractic Dentistry, June 1985 $54,461.95, Univ of Connecticut College Foundation, Pasadena, TX, Health Center, Farmington, CT, Optometry Chiropractic, April 1987 Allopathic Medicine, May 1982 Guinn, Michael, Ponca City, OK, Mahoney, Robert, Tulsa, OK, Stirgus, Kent L., Portland, OR, $96,918.32, Cleveland Chiropractic $159,010.68, Illinois College of $36,857.01, Univ of Colorado Health College, Kansas City, MO, Optometry, Chicago, IL, Optometry, Science Center, Denver, CO, Chiropractic, January 1986 May 1987 Allopathic Medicine, May 1988 Harms, Eugene G., Skiatook, OK, Thompson-Venable, Kristie L., Edmond, Zeme, Mark I., Ashland, OR, $6,195.41, $49,835.38, Life College, Marietta, OK, $38,104.11, Northeastern State Univ of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, GA, Chiropractic, October 1982 University, Tahlequah, OK, Allopathic Medicine, May 1987 Henderson, Raymond, Edmond, OK, Optometry, May 1986 $73,410.04, Cleveland Chiropractic Chiropractic College, Kansas City, MO, Osteopathy Boyd, Patrick J., Eugene, OR, Chiropractic, August 1986 Almack, Richard C., Tulsa, OK, $108,271.25, Life College, Marietta, Jones, James, Wynnewood, OK, $32,582.70, Oklahoma State GA, Chiropractic, March 1986 $5,242.15, Texas Chiropractic College University, Tulsa, OK, Osteopathy, Brown, Lorin J., Aloha, OR, $88,320.82, Foundation, Pasadena, TX, May 1986 Los Angeles College of Chiropractic, Chiropractic, August 1991 Auxter, Thomas M., Kelleyville, OK, Whittier, CA, Chiropractic, December Lockhart, Barry, Tulsa, OK, $68,279.68, $206,257.22, Kirksville Col of 1987 Parker College of Chiropractic, Dallas, Osteopathic Medicine, Kirksville, Burns, Charles C., Gresham, OR, TX, Chiropractic, September 1988 MO, Osteopathy, June 1986 $50,097.29, Western States Maker, James A., Oklahoma City, OK, Laughlin, Sidney C., Shawnee, OK, Chiropractic College, Portland, OR, $18,208.59, Cleveland Chiropractic $67,469.64, Oklahoma State Chiropractic, June 1986 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices 14117 Butcher, William C., Forest Grove, OR, Chiropractic, Dallas, TX, Chiropractic, Medicine, Cleveland, OH, Podiatry, $10,395.37, Western States April 1986 May 1986 Chiropractic College, Portland, OR, Muhr, Frank F., Eugene, OR, $3,517.59, Bailey, Brian K., North Bend, OR, Chiropractic, June 1992 Los Angeles College of Chiropractic, $153,857.15, California College of Campbell, Dennis L., Salem, OR, Whittier, CA, Chiropractic, April 1988 Podiatric Medicine, San Francisco, $55,837.97, Western States Murphy, Shelia, Portland, OR, CA, Podiatry, May 1987 Chiropractic College, Portland, OR, $52,947.32, Western States Belknap, John, Sandy, OR, $109,655.34, Chiropractic, June 1986 Chiropractic College, Portland, OR, California College of Podiatric Cather, Robert D., Portland, OR, Chiropractic, December 1987 Medicine, San Francisco, CA, $44,050.48, Western States Palmblad, Michael K., Hermiston, OR, Podiatry, May 1988 Chiropractic College, Portland, OR, $59,036.64, Western States Caproitti, Dale D., West Linn, OR, Chiropractic, June 1984 Chiropractic College, Portland, OR, $157,963.76, Ohio College of Podiatric Clark, Dorothy, Aumsville, OR, Chiropractic, December 1984 Medicine, Cleveland, OH, Podiatry, $29,046.64, Western States Platt, Caroline, Portland, OR, May 1982 Chiropractic College, Portland, OR, $30,547.57, Logan College of Rizzi, Raymond, Portland, OR, Chiropractic, June 1989 Chiropractic, Chesterfield, MO, $87,256.26, California College of Coburn, Sarah H., Portland, OR, Chiropractic, April 1988 Podiatric Medicine, San Francisco, $39,857.32, Western States Reehl, Michelle, Grants Pass, OR, CA, Podiatry, May 1991 Chiropractic College, Portland, OR, $7,599.11, Palmer College of Zook, Gerald P., Eugene, OR, Chiropractic, August 1985 Chiropractic, Davenport, IA, $29,242.48, California College of Cooper, Steven M., Gresham, OR, Chiropractic, June 1982 Podiatric Medicine, San Francisco, $36,239.66, Western States Rolland, Steven B., Corvallis, OR, CA, Podiatry, May 1983 $129,040.75, Western States Chiropractic College, Portland, OR, Pennsylvania Chiropractic, December 1992 Chiropractic College, Portland, OR, Crandell, Robyn G., Portland, OR, Chiropractic, June 1986 Allopathic Medicine $22,826.60, Northwestern College of Scofield, Leslie A., Eugene, OR, $3,471.88, Palmer College of Allison, Toni, Philadelphia, PA, Chiropractic, Bloomington, MN, Chiropractic, Davenport, IA, $13,395.28, Temple University, Chiropractic, June 1991 Philadelphia, PA, Allopathic Drabik, Stephen, Ashland, OR, Chiropractic, June 1986 Sprauer, Vincent C., Milwaukie, OR, Medicine, June 1982 $24,011.42, Palmer College of $6,377.63, Western States Auerbach-Heller, Barbara W., Chiropractic West, San Jose, CA, Chiropractic College, Portland, OR, Philadelphia, PA, $91,391.42, Univ of Chiropractic, March 1988 Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, Edson, Lysanji A., Portland, OR, Chiropractic, June 1986 Stoltz, William D., Grants Pass, OR, Allopathic Medicine, May 1983 $10,889.26, Palmer College of $48,561.95, Western States Baumgarten, Miriam, Bala Cynwyd, PA, Chiropractic West, San Jose, CA, Chiropractic College, Portland, OR, $11,550.96, Suny Stony Brook, Stony Chiropractic, September 1989 Chiropractic, December 1984 Brook, NY, Allopathic Medicine, June Falk, Harold S., Eugene, OR, $94,987.53, Tarnasky, Gideon M., Salem, OR, 1991 Los Angeles College of Chiropractic, $19,757.34, Western States Bearden, Frank L., Pittsburgh, PA, Whittier, CA, Chiropractic, April 1986 Chiropractic College, Portland, OR, $37,157.71, Rush University, Chicago, Hempstead, Kenneth, Portland, OR, Chiropractic, December 1982 IL, Allopathic Medicine, December $72,326.60, Western States Templeton, Joel A., Portland, OR, 1980 Chiropractic College, Portland, OR, $58,660.34, Western States Benson, Glen N., Chester, PA, Chiropractic, June 1987 Chiropractic College, Portland, OR, $23,753.32, Penn State University, Hicks, Brent M., Portland, OR, Chiropractic, June 1985 Hershey, PA, Allopathic Medicine, $16,426.31, Logan College of Warner, Brent B., Portland, OR, May 1985 Chiropractic, Chesterfield, MO, $60,205.23, Western States Davenport, Lorenzo, Philadelphia, PA, Chiropractic, August 1986 Chiropractic College, Portland, OR, $75,942.05, Temple University, Hundagen, Joyce M., Portland, OR, Chiropractic, June 1985 Philadelphia, PA, Allopathic $32,866.64, Western States West, Weldon, Portland, OR, Medicine, May 1985 Chiropractic College, Portland, OR, $74,306.76, Western States Difrancesco, Eileen, Dunmore, PA, Chiropractic, June 1987 Chiropractic College, Portland, OR, $90,728.35, Temple University, Huntley, Norbert E., Portland, OR, Chiropractic, June 1986 Philadelphia, PA, Allopathic $90,686.08, Los Angeles College of Wheeler, Trev, Ontario, OR, Medicine, May 1989 Chiropractic, Whittier, CA, $103,642.69, Western States Fisher, George E., Philadelphia, PA, Chiropractic, December 1987 Chiropractic College, Portland, OR, $146,793.55, Thomas Jefferson Jones, Christine, Beaverton, OR, Chiropractic, December 1988 University, Philadelphia, PA, $51,461.73, Western States Allopathic Medicine, June 1987 Chiropractic College, Portland, OR, Dentistry Garcia, Richard, Philadelphia, PA, Chiropractic, September 1988 Cooney, Carey, Beaverton, OR, $2,221.78, Univ of Med & Dent of King, Douglas R., Corbett, OR, $42,033.04, Oregon Health Science New Jersey, Newark, NJ, Allopathic $37,057.09, Western States University, Portland, OR, Dentistry, Medicine, May 1992 Chiropractic College, Portland, OR, June 1990 Gilroy, Anne F., Ardmore, PA, Chiropractic, June 1989 Tilson, Charles E., Lake Oswego, OR, $128,201.95, Medical College of Martin, Thomas W., Portland, OR, $37,675.07, Washington University, St Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, $35,450.31, Western States Louis, MO, Dentistry, May 1985 Allopathic Medicine, June 1985 Chiropractic College, Portland, OR, Guidotti, Janice L., Philadelphia, PA, Chiropractic, December 1983 Podiatry $49,698.17, Hahnemann University, Matthews, Thalia P., Portland, OR, Alderson, James J., Boring, OR, Philadelphia, PA, Allopathic $22,164.81, Parker College of $215,994.25, Ohio College of Podiatric Medicine, June 1986 14118 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices Harris, John, Philadelphia, PA, Stanford, CA, Allopathic Medicine, Chiropractic, Davenport, IA, $14,407.49, Hahnemann University, June 1989 Chiropractic, December 1988 Philadelphia, PA, Allopathic Smith, Horatio L., Pittsburgh, PA, Norpel Jr, Joseph W., North Wales, PA, Medicine, June 1988 $9,591.91, Morehouse School of $71,471.01, Life College, Marietta, Hawkins, William N., Philadelphia, PA, Medicine, Atlanta, GA, Allopathic GA, Chiropractic, December 1985 $81,344.55, Meharry Medical College, Medicine, May 1990 Ragan, Howard W., Drexel Hill, PA, Nashville, TN, Allopathic Medicine, Smith, Paulette M., Philadelphia, PA, $6,638.60, Logan College of May 1989 $77,196.86, Medical College of Chiropractic, Chesterfield, MO, Hicks, Eric, Philadelphia, PA, Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, Chiropractic, April 1986 $16,196.32, Univ of Pennsylvania, Allopathic Medicine, June 1989 Roebuck, James N., North Wales, PA, Philadelphia, PA, Allopathic Turnberg, Martha A., Stroudsburg, PA, $62,369.63, Logan College of Medicine, May 1987 $15,083.26, Medical College of Chiropractic, Chesterfield, MO, Hill, James, Philadelphia, PA, Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, Chiropractic, August 1985 $127,739.61, Meharry Medical Allopathic Medicine, June 1982 Ross, Roger R., Wallingford, PA, College, Nashville, TN, Allopathic Ward, Stephanie A., Philadelphia, PA, $46,822.37, Logan College of Medicine, May 1988 $5,901.39, Penn State University, Chiropractic, Chesterfield, MO, Howard, Leslie A., Philadelphia, PA, Hershey, PA, Allopathic Medicine, Chiropractic, August 1985 $60,583.01, Temple University, May 1980 Saunders, James P., Wallingford, PA, Philadelphia, PA, Allopathic $69,387.16, National College of Chiropractic Medicine, June 1988 Chiropractic, Lombard, IL, Johnson, Howard D., Bridgeville, PA, Balan, William J., Bensalem, PA, Chiropractic, May 1983 $9,198.85, Penn State University, $82,590.79, Texas Chiropractic Savelli, Christine A., Bethleham, PA, Hershey, PA, Allopathic Medicine, College Foundation, Pasadena, TX, $40,687.25, Life College, Marietta, May 1990 Chiropractic, May 1983 GA, Chiropractic, December 1988 Jones, Ronald M., Philadelphia, PA, Bompiani, Cataldo, Dallastown, PA, Solomon, Joy S., Pittsburgh, PA, $21,468.35, SUNY Buffalo, Buffalo, $941.48, Palmer College of $18,726.56, Life College, Marietta, NY, Allopathic Medicine, June 1988 Chiropractic, Davenport, IA, GA, Chiropractic, March 1992 Stasko, Edward G., Pittsburgh, PA, Kozikowski, Joseph, Media, PA, Chiropractic, June 1984 $30,200.29, Palmer College of $9,473.19, Johns Hopkins University, Dinardo, Anthony A., Philadelphia, PA, Chiropractic, Davenport, IA, Baltimore, MD, Allopathic Medicine, $26,108.44, National College of Chiropractic, June 1984 Chiropractic, Lombard, IL, May 1990 Storer, John J., Camp Hill, PA, Lansky, Philip S., Philadelphia, PA, Chiropractic, April 1984 $45,714.28, Logan College of Failla, Robert R., Hazelton, PA, $43,955.58, Univ of Pennsylvania, Chiropractic, Chesterfield, MO, $22,547.58, New York Chiropractic Philadelphia, PA, Allopathic Chiropractic, April 1986 Medicine, May 1982 College, Seneca Falls, NY, Trodden, Scott, New Castle, PA, Lott, Jacquecola, Philadelphia, PA, Chiropractic, December 1983 $25,195.31, Parker College of $178,267.42, Meharry Medical Goleburn, Joel, Pittsburgh, PA, Chiropractic, Dallas, TX, Chiropractic, College, Nashville, TN, Allopathic $12,974.15, Los Angeles College of September 1991 Medicine, May 1986 Chiropractic, Whittier, CA, Wachter, John P., Pittsburgh, PA, Mamby, Audley, Philadelphia, PA, Chiropractic, December 1983 $64,762.43, Palmer College of $158,381.67, Univ of Wisconsin Hanes, Robert B., King of Prussia, PA, Chiropractic, Davenport, IA, Madison, Madison, WI, Allopathic $10,117.91, Palmer College of Chiropractic, September 1984 Medicine, May 1986 Chiropractic, Davenport, IA, Waite, William C., Mcmurry, PA, McCormick, Timothy P., Pittsburgh, PA, Chiropractic, March 1984 $27,052.95, Texas Chiropractic $168,191.72, Hahnemann University, Horne, Patricia A., Philadelphia, PA, College Foundation, Pasadena, TX, Philadelphia, PA, Allopathic $68,429.54, Cleveland Chiropractic Chiropractic, May 1982 Medicine, June 1985 College, Kansas City, MO, Wakefield, William C., Pittsburgh, PA, Mills, Randell, Cochranville, PA, Chiropractic, May 1987 $3,103.59, Palmer College of $64,142.15, Harvard Medical School, Labarre, Scott D., Bethleham, PA, Chiropractic, Davenport, IA, Boston, MA, Allopathic Medicine, $10,244.91, Palmer College of Chiropractic, June 1985 June 1986 Chiropractic, Davenport, IA, Waldman, Andrew D., Pittsburgh, PA, Mobley, Derrick, Philadelphia, PA, Chiropractic, June 1986 $28,255.10, Palmer College of $100,800.35, Medical College of MacDonald, Frank, Allentown, PA, Chiropractic, Davenport, IA, Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, $84,348.66, Life College, Marietta, Chiropractic, March 1988 Allopathic Medicine, May 1986 GA, Chiropractic, December 1988 Warrick, Dennis, Ligonier, PA, Mumie, Lawrence, Hazelton, PA, Mazero, Robert, Duncannon, PA, $72,108.19, Life College, Marietta, $23,837.94, Hahnemann University, $98,347.96, Logan College of GA, Chiropractic, September 1985 Philadelphia, PA, Allopathic Chiropractic, Chesterfield, MO, Wiegand, Paul J., Danville, PA, Medicine, June 1982 Chiropractic, April 1984 $29,507.74, Los Angeles College of Peterson, Kirby K., Philadelphia, PA, Miller, John, Pittsburgh, PA, $32,281.70, Chiropractic, Whittier, CA, $52,941.29, Univ of Illinois Medical Cleveland Chiropractic College, Chiropractic, April 1984 Center, Chicago, IL, Allopathic Kansas City, MO, Chiropractic, May Medicine, June 1989 1987 Clinical Psychology Poleon, Mercedes L., Philadelphia, PA, Mistretta, John P., Hermitage, PA, Brando, Nora, Feasterville, PA, $95,450.35, Hahnemann University, $45,718.67, Palmer College of $80,417.61, Hahnemann University, Philadelphia, PA, Allopathic Chiropractic, Davenport, IA, Philadelphia, PA, Clinical Medicine, June 1986 Chiropractic, March 1988 Psychology, June 1990 Shepherd, Stuart J., Philadelphia, PA, Noll, Michael D., Chambersburg, PA, Morris, Russell D., Philadelphia, PA, $19,393.82, Stanford University, $50,915.94, Palmer College of $35,511.18, Adelphi University, Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices 14119 Garden City, NY, Clinical Psychology, Koch, Robert E., Mars, PA, $91,810.83, Wasilko, Thomas J., Elizabeth, PA, May 1988 Temple University, Philadelphia, PA, $12,443.65, Georgetown University, Mouzon, Laquetta O., Philadelphia, PA, Dentistry, June 1988 Washington, DC, Dentistry, May 1982 $15,520.19, Hahnemann University, Loughead, Thomas, Pittsburgh, PA, Yudichak, John, Larkoville, PA, Philadelphia, PA, Clinical $88,800.51, Univ of Pittsburgh, $119,111.73, Temple University, Psychology, June 1988 Pittsburgh, PA, Dentistry, July 1989 Philadelphia, PA, Dentistry, Penny, Patricia, Perkasie, PA, McGettigan, Brian, Philadelphia, PA, December 1987 $39,468.16, Yeshiva University, New $29,004.43, Temple University, York, NY, Clinical Psychology, June Philadelphia, PA, Dentistry, June Optometry 1989 1988 Barron, Timothy S., Erie, PA, Meehan, Maureen T., Slatington, PA, $14,686.12, Pennsylvania College of Dentistry $82,115.28, Temple University, Optometry, Philadelphia, PA, Alston-Davis, Diedra D., Pine Forge, PA, Philadelphia, PA, Dentistry, June Optometry, May 1981 $81,553.60, Meharry Medical College, 1989 Osteopathy Nashville, TN, Dentistry, May 1983 Miller, Alan A., Monroeville, PA, Barnhart, Jerome, Pittsburgh, PA, $6,577.68, Temple University, Beitchman, Perry E., Philadelphia, PA, $65,661.96, Univ of Pittsburgh, Philadelphia, PA, Dentistry, May 1982 $26,398.91, Univ of Health Sciences, Pittsburgh, PA, Dentistry, June 1988 Mitchell, Albert B., Philadelphia, PA, Kansas City, MO, Osteopathy, May Baron, Lawrence, Philadelphia, PA, $59,143.75, Howard University, 1988 $71,426.41, Temple University, Washington, DC, Dentistry, May 1987 Brenneis, Gerard, Sharon, PA, Philadelphia, PA, Dentistry, April Mosley, Joan, Philadelphia, PA, $27,347.69, Kirksville Col of 1990 $60,836.71, Howard University, Osteopathic Medicine, Kirksville, Bartolazo, Arvin K., Philadelphia, PA, Washington, DC, Dentistry, May 1988 MO, Osteopathy, June 1987 $118,267.17, Temple University, Nuhfer-Dempsey, Dina L., Erie, PA, Dubiel, Henry J., Feasterville, PA, Philadelphia, PA, Dentistry, January $33,038.19, Univ of Pittsburgh, $28,419.75, Philadelphia Col of 1989 Pittsburgh, PA, Dentistry, July 1986 Osteopathic Medicine, Philadelphia, Berger, David L., Wampum, PA, Pacey, David, Enhaut, PA, $63,576.47, PA, Osteopathy, June 1981 $37,979.79, Univ of Pittsburgh, Univ of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Hadley, Pamela, Philadelphia, PA, Pittsburgh, PA, Dentistry, June 1988 PA, Dentistry, June 1989 $25,108.41, Philadelphia Col of Bigdeli, Javad, Penn Valley, PA, Patterson, Gregory A., Keisterville, PA, Osteopathic Medicine, Philadelphia, $20,366.13, Columbia University, $17,259.55, Temple University, PA, Osteopathy, June 1985 New York, NY, Dentistry, May 1984 Philadelphia, PA, Dentistry, June Johnson, Lucinda, Philadelphia, PA, Browning, Lois E., Peach Bottom, PA, 1987 $13,769.62, Philadelphia Col of $38,779.86, Temple University, Patterson, Grgory A., Kesterville, PA, Osteopathic Medicine, Philadelphia, Philadelphia, PA, Dentistry, June $8,142.18, Temple University, PA, Osteopathy, June 1990 1985 Philadelphia, PA, Dentistry, June Justofin, Chris D., West Hazleton, PA, Burne Jr, James P., Scranton, PA, 1987 $129,664.45, Univ of Health Sciences, $7,219.88, Georgetown University, Pluto, Eugene, Greensburg, PA, Kansas City, MO, Osteopathy, May Washington, DC, Dentistry, May 1989 $61,981.09, Univ of Pittsburgh, 1989 Chacker, Laurence G., Philadelphia, PA, Pittsburgh, PA, Dentistry, August $32,516.82, Univ of Pennsylvania, 1985 Pharmacy Philadelphia, PA, Dentistry, May 1985 Powell, Carlton F., Cheltenham, PA, Abanzukwe, Joy, Philadelphia, PA, Cieslik, Charles R., Millersburg, PA, $39,827.66, Meharry Medical College, $18,248.48, Philadelphia College $17,002.22, Temple University, Nashville, TN, Dentistry, May 1988 Pharmacy & Science, Philadelphia, Philadelphia, PA, Dentistry, June Province, Susan L., Somerset, PA, PA, Pharmacy, September 1987 1981 $8,787.42, Univ of Pittsburgh, Angel, Marilyn W., Greensburg, PA, Gallucci, Don A., Scranton, PA, Pittsburgh, PA, Dentistry, June 1986 $22,292.43, Univ of Pittsburgh, $52,141.03, Tufts University, Boston, Schott, Alan J., Philadelphia, PA, Pittsburgh, PA, Pharmacy, May 1987 MA, Dentistry, June 1986 $45,860.80, Temple University, Daniels, Ronald W, Philadelphia, PA, Gordon, Wanda, Philadelphia, PA, Philadelphia, PA, Dentistry, $10,902.97, Temple University, $41,190.10, Univ of Pennsylvania, December 1987 Philadelphia, PA, Pharmacy, June Philadelphia, PA, Dentistry, May 1986 Semelsberger, Richard J., Philadelphia, 1985 Harrison, Carl, Pittsburgh, PA, PA, $19,584.86, Temple University, Dommermuth, Timothy, Erie, PA, $21,552.78, Howard University, Philadelphia, PA, Dentistry, June $1,290.11, Philadelphia College Washington, DC, Dentistry, May 1988 1983 Pharmacy & Science, Philadelphia, Henry, Randy S., Indiana, PA, Shaw, Linda J., Gladwyne, PA, PA, Pharmacy, May 1981 $131,662.79, Univ of Pittsburgh, $11,520.31, Temple University, Eichinger, Rosemarie R., Ridley Park, Pittsburgh, PA, Dentistry, June 1987 Philadelphia, PA, Dentistry, May 1987 PA, $7,348.40, Philadelphia College Hoppes, Elaine M., Philadelphia, PA, Tanski-Yudichak, Connie, Wilkes Barre, Pharmacy & Science, Philadelphia, $66,676.09, Temple University, PA, $100,675.25, Temple University, PA, Pharmacy, May 1984 Philadelphia, PA, Dentistry, Philadelphia, PA, Dentistry, June Godwin, Lisa, Philadelphia, PA, December 1986 1989 $10,106.00, Philadelphia College Jackson, Pamela, Philadelphia, PA, Terasavage, William, Pittsburgh, PA, Pharmacy & Science, Philadelphia, $8,740.69, Virginia Commonwealth $11,885.43, Univ of Pittsburgh, PA, Pharmacy, May 1987 University, Richmond, VA, Dentistry, Pittsburgh, PA, Dentistry, August Golock, Donna, Pittsburgh, PA, May 1984 1986 $9,019.13, Duquesne University, Jeffries, Christian T., Elizabethtown, PA, Toncini, Mark G., Freeport, PA, Pittsburgh, PA, Pharmacy, May 1986 $89,718.60, Case Western Reserve $41,391.97, Temple University, Mras, Michael M., Northumberland, PA, University, Cleveland, OH, Dentistry, Philadelphia, PA, Dentistry, $9,381.35, Idaho State University, May 1986 December 1981 Pocatello, ID, Pharmacy, May 1988 14120 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices Nock, Thomas R., Philadelphia, PA, Lindley, Frank A., Philadelphia, PA, Milwaukee, WI, Allopathic Medicine, $83,916.70, Temple University, $16,348.72, Pennsylvania Col of September 1984 Philadelphia, PA, Pharmacy, June Podiatric Medicine, Philadelphia, PA, Gutman, Jose E., Ponce, PR, $36,389.61, 1986 Podiatry, June 1987 Universidad Central Del Caribe, Rivers, Constance L., Philadelphia, PA, Ly, Hung Van H., Philadelphia, PA, Bayamon, PR, Allopathic Medicine, $4,144.39, Temple University, $63,693.23, Pennsylvania Col of May 1988 Philadelphia, PA, Pharmacy, May Podiatric Medicine, Philadelphia, PA, Mercado, Brenda, Carolina, PR, 1988 Podiatry, June 1985 $67,373.15, Universidad Central Del Shuda, Michael R., Bala Cynwyd, PA, Rosolowicz, Catherine, Pottstown, PA, Caribe, Bayamon, PR, Allopathic $13,973.44, Temple University, $8,513.39, Ohio College of Podiatric Medicine, December 1988 Philadelphia, PA, Pharmacy, May Medicine, Cleveland, OH, Podiatry, Solivan Reyes, Samuel, Bayamon, PR, 1988 May 1984 $78,268.93, Universidad Central Del Stanley, Carolyn, Philadelphia, PA, Rusnak, JeanMarie, Newtown, PA, Caribe, Bayamon, PR, Allopathic $63,514.02, Temple University, $50,965.11, Pennsylvania Col of Medicine, December 1983 Philadelphia, PA, Pharmacy, June Podiatric Medicine, Philadelphia, PA, Vargas-Bird, Irma M., Bayamon, PR, 1986 Podiatry, June 1986 $72,611.39, Universidad Central Del Vogel, Joseph, Enon Valley, PA, Slome, Mark A., Philadelphia, PA, Caribe, Bayamon, PR, Allopathic $44,832.11, Duquesne University, $7,351.39, New York College of Medicine, May 1988 Pittsburgh, PA, Pharmacy, May 1987 Podiatric Medicine, New York, NY, Zabala, Armando, Rio Piedras, PR, Podiatry Podiatry, June 1986 $77,169.01, Univ of Illinois Medical Ward, William F., Norristown, PA, Center, Chicago, IL, Allopathic Acello, Robert L., Philadelphia, PA, $6,706.60, Pennsylvania Col of Medicine, June 1985 $54,827.02, Ohio College of Podiatric Podiatric Medicine, Philadelphia, PA, Medicine, Cleveland, OH, Podiatry, Podiatry, June 1989 Chiropractic May 1986 Weitzen, Julie, Norristown, PA, $71.30, Nellen, Beatrice B., Ciudad Guatamal, Anderson, Gwendolyn, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania Col of Podiatric PR, $87,910.43, Life College, Marietta, PA, $21,850.28, Pennsylvania Col of Medicine, Philadelphia, PA, Podiatry, GA, Chiropractic, March 1985 Podiatric Medicine, Philadelphia, PA, June 1987 Podiatry, June 1987 Wildes, Ellen K., Dallas, PA, $80,759.61, Dentistry Bailey, Cynthia, Philadelphia, PA, California College of Podiatric Abreu-sirald, Carlos, Isabela, PR, $135,025.53, New York College of Medicine, San Francisco, CA, $135,264.65, Boston University Podiatric Medicine, New York, NY, Podiatry, August 1985 Medical Center, Boston, MA, Podiatry, June 1989 Dentistry, May 1989 Cooperman, Bruce, Philadelphia, PA, Public Health Claudio Vazquez, Jose, Caquao, PR, $131,466.82, Univ of Osteo Medical & Ditommaso, Richard, Pittsburgh, PA, $12,123.81, Univ of Puerto Rico, San Health Science, Des Moines, IA, $4,840.71, Univ of Pittsburgh, Juan, PR, Dentistry, May 1980 Podiatry, June 1989 Pittsburgh, PA, Public Health, April Colon-honda, Rafael E., Caguas, PR, Danczak, Michael, Pottstown, PA, 1986 $32,938.64, Univ of Puerto Rico, San $33,323.29, Ohio College of Podiatric Jeanbaptiste, Henriot, Pittsburgh, PA, Juan, PR, Dentistry, May 1983 Medicine, Cleveland, OH, Podiatry, $4,628.71, Johns Hopkins University, Estrada-Escalona, Valerie R., San Juan, May 1984 Baltimore, MD, Public Health, June Daniels, Patricia A., Philadelphia, PA, PR, $21,472.31, New York University, 1986 $107,230.22, Pennsylvania Col of New York, NY, Dentistry, June 1993 Lamothe, Lissa, Philadelphia, PA, Podiatric Medicine, Philadelphia, PA, Martinez, Gustavo, Guaynabo, PR, $17,422.69, Tulane University, New Podiatry, June 1986 $6,346.43, Georgetown University, Orleans, LA, Public Health, August Frazier, Kathalyn G., Pittsburgh, PA, Washington, DC, Dentistry, May 1990 1989 $168,042.93, Ohio College of Podiatric Martinez, Juan, Santa Isabel, PR, Lee, Margaret, Pittsburgh, PA, Medicine, Cleveland, OH, Podiatry, $27,152.01, Univ of Puerto Rico, San $6,706.17, Yale University, New May 1986 Juan, PR, Dentistry, June 1989 Haven, CT, Public Health, May 1990 Fusco, John, Bellefonte, PA, $55,624.62, Medina-Pellicer, Norberto N., Rio Pennsylvania Col of Podiatric Veterinary Medicine Piedras, PR, $28,342.06, Univ of Medicine, Philadelphia, PA, Podiatry, Puerto Rico, San Juan, PR, Dentistry, Giles, Beverly, Philadelphia, PA, May 1982 June 1987 $8,958.69, Univ of Pennsylvania, Ghaly, Wagih, Philadelphia, PA, Mullen, Francis D., Guaynabo, PR, Philadelphia, PA, Veterinary $40,093.65, Pennsylvania Col of $132,549.07, Univ of Puerto Rico, San Medicine, May 1988 Podiatric Medicine, Philadelphia, PA, Juan, PR, Dentistry, May 1982 Graf Ii, William R., Philadelphia, PA, Podiatry, May 1990 Rogers, Larry B., Rincon, PR, $40,680.83, Univ of Pennsylvania, Goldberg, Sheldon, Philadelphia, PA, $22,093.61, Univ of Mississippi Philadelphia, PA, Veterinary $68,951.49, Pennsylvania Col of Medical Center, Jackson, MS, Medicine, May 1987 Podiatric Medicine, Philadelphia, PA, Dentistry, May 1984 Henderson, Bernard, Philadelphia, PA, Podiatry, June 1981 Rosario, Graciela, Cayey, PR, Johnson, Lucille E., Dingmans Ferry, $6,301.92, Tuskegee University, $10,007.74, Univ of Puerto Rico, San PA, $19,836.19, California College of Tuskegee, AL, Veterinary Medicine, Juan, PR, Dentistry, May 1982 Podiatric Medicine, San Francisco, May 1990 Sanchez, Francisco F. R., Los Lomas, CA, Podiatry, May 1992 Puerto Rico PR, $9,674.24, Univ of Puerto Rico, Lauer, Richard L., York, PA, San Juan, PR, Dentistry, May 1981 $290,322.60, California College of Allopathic Medicine Vega-Godoy, Arlos A., Hato Rey, PR, Podiatric Medicine, San Francisco, Caro, Joseph, Utuado, PR, $60,388.91, $15,105.77, Univ of Puerto Rico, San CA, Podiatry, June 1986 Medical College of Wisconsin, Juan, PR, Dentistry, May 1980 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices 14121 Optometry Iriarte, Celestino M., Canovanas, PR, Shay, Robert J., Prosperity, SC, De Jesus, Jose M., San Juan, PR, $83,563.79, Tuskegee University, $135,052.58, Life College, Marietta, $19,464.25, Inter American Univ of Tuskegee, AL, Veterinary Medicine, GA, Chiropractic, September 1986 PR, San Juan, PR, Optometry, May May 1982 Simon, Larry, Myrtle Beach, SC, $93,366.71, Life College, Marietta, 1987 Rhode Island Latorre, Victor L., Guayama, PR, GA, Chiropractic, December 1986 $30,519.68, Inter American Univ of Allopathic Medicine Taber, Stuart, Columbia, SC, $77,351.11, Life College, Marietta, GA, PR, San Juan, PR, Optometry, May Jones, Wendell, Providence, RI, Chiropractic, December 1984 1987 $39,752.78, Univ of Med & Dent of Lopez-Aleman, Miguel, Truillo Alto, PR, Woodward, Merre, Beaufort, SC, New Jersey, Newark, NJ, Allopathic $22,158.08, Life College, Marietta, $77,952.29, Inter American Univ of Medicine, May 1986 PR, San Juan, PR, Optometry, May GA, Chiropractic, March 1991 1989 Health Administration Dentistry Morales, Oscar, Valle Verde Bay, PR, Tiemo, Vincent D., Providence, RI, Bailey, Angela, Florence, SC, $126,916.96, Inter American Univ of $9,702.11, Xavier University, PR, San Juan, PR, Optometry, May $25,283.16, Univ of Louisville, Cincinnati, OH, Health Administration, Louisville, KY, Dentistry, May 1987 1987 May 1988 Moreno, Fernando O., Catano, PR, Dixson, David R., Columbia, SC, $36,912.81, Inter American Univ of Optometry $212,781.51, Meharry Medical College, Nashville, TN, Dentistry, May PR, San Juan, PR, Optometry, June Estrada, Rolando, Providence, RI, 1986 1985 $13,346.19, New England College of Rivera, Axel E., Rio Piedras, PR, Funderburk Jr, William A., Myrtle Optometry, Boston, MA, Optometry, $62,618.07, Inter American Univ of Beach, SC, $56,937.31, Medical May 1989 PR, San Juan, PR, Optometry, May University of South Carolina, 1989 Pharmacy Charleston, SC, Dentistry, May 1985 Rivera, Luis F., Rio Piedras, PR, Mahon-Samuels, Brenda Y., Columbia, $36,411.97, Inter American Univ of Handren, Michelle S., Bristol, RI, SC, $29,505.71, Howard University, PR, San Juan, PR, Optometry, May $5,810.86, Massachusetts College of Washington, DC, Dentistry, May 1982 1988 Pharmacy, Boston, MA, Pharmacy, Odom, James E., Sharon, SC, Rivera, Olga, Guayama, PR, $47,575.19, June 1988 $39,627.64, Medical University of Inter American Univ of PR, San Juan, Veterinary Medicine South Carolina, Charleston, SC, PR, Optometry, June 1990 Dentistry, May 1981 Rodriguez, Maria J., Mayaguez, PR, Ballou, Sarah, Providence, RI, Pelzer Jr, Lucious, Elloree, SC, $33,946.60, Inter American Univ of $24,930.77, Univ of Pennsylvania, $52,768.03, Meharry Medical College, PR, San Juan, PR, Optometry, May Philadelphia, PA, Veterinary Nashville, TN, Dentistry, May 1983 1989 Medicine, May 1983 Thomas, Robert L., Spartanburg, SC, Soto-Medina, Barry D., Guaynabo, PR, South Carolina $34,169.47, Medical University of $98,711.45, Inter American Univ of South Carolina, Charleston, SC, PR, San Juan, PR, Optometry, May Allopathic Medicine Dentistry, May 1990 1985 Burt, Joseph M., Myrtle Beach, SC, Vanbrackle, Ismael I., Santurce, PR, Osteopathy $36,476.30, Michigan State $28,435.01, Inter American Univ of University, East Lansing, MI, Brown, Kevin T., Fairfax, SC, PR, San Juan, PR, Optometry, June Allopathic Medicine, June 1983 $185,332.75, Univ of Health Sciences, 1985 Caldwell, Judith, Summerville, SC, Kansas City, MO, Osteopathy, May Pharmacy $82,009.97, Meharry Medical College, 1984 Oliver, Sonia, Coto Laurel, PR, Nashville, TN, Allopathic Medicine, Podiatry May 1985 $4,275.41, Long Island University, Bracey, Gale, Columbia, SC, Nobles, Patrick, Spartanburg, SC, Brookville, NY, Pharmacy, June 1990 $156,963.98, Ohio College of Podiatric $11,528.89, East Tennessee State Medicine, Cleveland, OH, Podiatry, Podiatry University, Johnson City, TN, May 1984 Rosado, Hector, Vista Alegre, PR, Allopathic Medicine, May 1983 $36,498.54, Pennsylvania Col of Foster, Martha E., Greenville, SC, Podiatric Medicine, Philadelphia, PA, Chiropractic $229,424.33, Univ of Osteo Medical & Health Science, Des Moines, IA, Podiatry, June 1990 Badia, Raymond, Spartanburg, SC, Podiatry, June 1987 $90,146.45, Life College, Marietta, Public Health Katalinich, Gery B., Myrtle Beach, SC, GA, Chiropractic, June 1984 $118,056.87, California College of Flores, Luis A., Coguaes, PR, Barwick-Barnica, Janet M., Longs, SC, $31,327.67, Univ of Pittsburgh, Podiatric Medicine, San Francisco, $3,124.62, Life College, Marietta, GA, CA, Podiatry, May 1985 Pittsburgh, PA, Public Health, August Chiropractic, March 1991 1983 Salley, Hezekiah, Smoaks, SC, Landron-Colberg, Eva, Rio Piedras, PR, Cuddington, Timothy J., Orangeburg, $127,683.35, Ohio College of Podiatric $13,733.12, Univ of Puerto Rico, San SC, $26,993.66, Life College, Marietta, Medicine, Cleveland, OH, Podiatry, Juan, PR, Public Health, May 1980 GA, Chiropractic, December 1985 May 1983 Garrett, Alex C., Mauldin, SC, Veterinary Medicine $61,507.62, Life College, Marietta, Veterinary Medicine Carbo, Sandra, Canovanas, PR, GA, Chiropractic, March 1987 Higgins, Leonard, Charleston, SC, $24,086.85, Tuskegee University, Heinen, Joseph E., Columbia, SC, $14,146.56, Tuskegee University, Tuskegee, AL, Veterinary Medicine, $67,564.88, Life College, Marietta, Tuskegee, AL, Veterinary Medicine, May 1986 GA, Chiropractic, June 1984 May 1986 14122 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices South Dakota Johnson, James, Nashville, TN, College, Nashville, TN, Allopathic $153,109.93, Meharry Medical Medicine, May 1986 Chiropractic College, Nashville, TN, Allopathic Chiropractic Adams, Nancy, Sioux Falls, SD, Medicine, May 1986 $29,046.61, Northwestern College of Johnson-Jenkins, Yvonne M., Nashville, Carter, Karen L., Nashville, TN, Chiropractic, Bloomington, MN, TN, $130,945.66, Meharry Medical $34,364.40, Logan College of Chiropractic, April 1987 College, Nashville, TN, Allopathic Chiropractic, Chesterfield, MO, Gorsuch, Garry, Rapid City, SD, Medicine, May 1986 Chiropractic, September 1985 $32,041.16, Life Chiropractic College- Jubert, Angela, Nashville, TN, Consiglio, Joseph S., Fairfield, TN, West, San Lorenzo, CA, Chiropractic, $30,829.50, Meharry Medical College, $48,001.22, Life College, Marietta, September 1990 Nashville, TN, Allopathic Medicine, GA, Chiropractic, June 1990 May 1990 Health Administration Crislip, David F., Johnson City, TN, Latimer, Harvey L., Nashville, TN, $102,849.67, Palmer College of Lund, Peggy P., Sioux Falls, SD, $146,854.76, Meharry Medical Chiropractic, Davenport, IA, $13,462.64, St Louis University, St College, Nashville, TN, Allopathic Chiropractic, October 1986 Louis, MO, Health Administration, Medicine, May 1986 Haley, Jane E., Fayetteville, TN, May 1985 Morales, Orlando, Smyrna, TN, $15,647.38, Life College, Marietta, $126,650.88, Meharry Medical Tennessee GA, Chiropractic, March 1988 College, Nashville, TN, Allopathic Hill, Cecil, Knoxville, TN, $3,773.72, Allopathic Medicine Medicine, May 1987 Life College, Marietta, GA, Nicks, Robbin M., Hermitage, TN, Bogus, Britt, Knoxville, TN, Chiropractic, March 1991 $167,202.49, Meharry Medical $103,521.16, Meharry Medical Johnson, Steven R., Eva, TN, $41,984.43, College, Nashville, TN, Allopathic College, Nashville, TN, Allopathic Palmer College of Chiropractic, Medicine, May 1986 Medicine, May 1988 Davenport, IA, Chiropractic, March Pettigrew, Francis, Chattanooga, TN, Braswell, James, Nashville, TN, 1985 $6,442.81, Univ of Tennessee $151,230.68, Meharry Medical Lowe, Joseph L., Cleveland, TN, Memphis, Memphis, TN, Allopathic College, Nashville, TN, Allopathic $44,392.90, Life College, Marietta, Medicine, June 1987 GA, Chiropractic, June 1983 Medicine, May 1988 Pratt, Ninette R., Bolivar, TN, Moore, Charles, Adamsville, TN, Chatman, David D., Antioch, TN, $132,777.00, Meharry Medical $64,925.44, Parker College of $51,175.14, Univ of Med & Dent of College, Nashville, TN, Allopathic Chiropractic, Dallas, TX, Chiropractic, New Jersey, Newark, NJ, Allopathic Medicine, May 1986 December 1987 Medicine, May 1983 Saunders, Robert D., Kingsport, TN, Chevalier, Jovita A., Memphis, TN, $9,160.08, East Tennessee State Nelson, Michael W., Sparta, TN, $23,677.02, Meharry Medical College, University, Johnson City, TN, $61,247.22, Palmer College of Nashville, TN, Allopathic Medicine, Allopathic Medicine, May 1989 Chiropractic, Davenport, IA, May 1992 See, Tahnya D., Antioch, TN, Chiropractic, June 1985 Collins, James E., Nashville, TN, $51,995.68, Case Western Reserve Patterson, Larry D., Oak Ridge, TN, $127,956.34, Meharry Medical University, Cleveland, OH, Allopathic $12,265.61, Logan College of College, Nashville, TN, Allopathic Medicine, June 1982 Chiropractic, Chesterfield, MO, Medicine, May 1987 Shannon, Joan H., Nashville, TN, Chiropractic, September 1985 Conner, Shavetta D., Antioch, TN, $1,952.88, Tufts University, Boston, Reid, Henry, Dayton, TN, $55,470.64, $1,044.01, Meharry Medical College, MA, Allopathic Medicine, May 1983 Life College, Marietta, GA, Nashville, TN, Allopathic Medicine, Smith, Larry W., Antioch, TN, Chiropractic, June 1988 May 1989 $97,192.99, Meharry Medical College, Shafer Jr, Joseph E., Goodlettsville, TN, Davidson, Clifford M., Knoxville, TN, Nashville, TN, Allopathic Medicine, $15,407.15, Life College, Marietta, $47,409.29, Univ of Alabama May 1986 GA, Chiropractic, September 1985 Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, Sparrow, Alj F., Nashville, TN, Williams Jr, Samuel L., Cleveland, TN, Allopathic Medicine, June 1986 $110,184.70, Meharry Medical $108,113.04, Life College, Marietta, Davis, Clarence, Nashville, TN, College, Nashville, TN, Allopathic GA, Chiropractic, September 1984 $30,034.74, Meharry Medical College, Medicine, May 1987 Yates, Jay M., Nashville, TN, Nashville, TN, Allopathic Medicine, Stewart, Barry A., Knoxville, TN, $95,337.29, Palmer College of May 1989 $9,627.05, Univ of Tennessee Chiropractic West, San Jose, CA, Davis, Helen H M, Nashville, TN, Memphis, Memphis, TN, Allopathic Chiropractic, September 1986 $134,858.65, Meharry Medical Medicine, June 1987 Clinical Psychology College, Nashville, TN, Allopathic Walker, Brian E., Nashville, TN, Medicine, May 1986 $3,051.55, Meharry Medical College, Keck, Julie N., Nashville, TN, Duncan, Michael, Nashville, TN, Nashville, TN, Allopathic Medicine, $88,277.68, California Sch of Prof $107,634.58, Meharry Medical May 1990 Psych San Diego, San Diego, CA, College, Nashville, TN, Allopathic Williams, Pamela C., Antioch, TN, Clinical Psychology, May 1989 Medicine, May 1988 $89,303.31, Meharry Medical College, King, Wanda W., Bolivar, TN, Dungee, Steven A., Nashville, TN, Nashville, TN, Allopathic Medicine, $46,688.39, Wright State University, $4,251.59, Meharry Medical College, May 1981 Dayton, OH, Clinical Psychology, Nashville, TN, Allopathic Medicine, Wimbish, Ronald P., Nashville, TN, August 1986 May 1990 $169,163.06, Meharry Medical Dentistry Gaither, Thomas T., Nashville, TN, College, Nashville, TN, Allopathic $172,073.92, Meharry Medical Medicine, May 1987 Black, Jacquese O., Antioch, TN, College, Nashville, TN, Allopathic Woodard, Deborah A., McKenzie, TN, $70,180.61, Meharry Medical College, Medicine, May 1986 $233,709.80, Meharry Medical Nashville, TN, Dentistry, May 1991 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices 14123 Branch, Joerald D., Memphis, TN, Winfrey, Willie, Nashville, TN, Bryant, Edith, Houston, TX, $12,895.06, $2,972.42, Meharry Medical College, $70,982.69, Meharry Medical College, Univ of Texas Southwestern Medical Nashville, TN, Dentistry, May 1989 Nashville, TN, Dentistry, May 1980 Cntr, Dallas, TX, Allopathic Medicine, Coggins, Cheryl, Antioch, TN, May 1991 Optometry $103,348.53, Meharry Medical Byrd, Bruce, Amarillo, TX, $4,502.73, College, Nashville, TN, Dentistry, May Venanzio, David, Memphis, TN, Univ of Texas Southwestern Medical 1987 $65,053.15, Southern College of Cntr, Dallas, TX, Allopathic Medicine, Cowan, Walter O., Antioch, TN, Optometry, Memphis, TN, Optometry, June 1988 $203,127.75, Meharry Medical May 1991 Choi, Yun S., College Station, TX, $9,458.43, Louisiana St Univ Med Ctr College, Nashville, TN, Dentistry, May Pharmacy 1986 New Orleans, New Orleans, LA, Davis, Edward E., Memphis, TN, Hamby, Michael L., Murfreesboro, TN, Allopathic Medicine, May 1990 $6,344.60, Meharry Medical College, $3,417.54, Univ of Tennessee Compass, Sairwaa T., Austin, TX, Nashville, TN, Dentistry, May 1983 Memphis, Memphis, TN, Pharmacy, $9,625.89, Univ of Texas Dickinson-Branch, Phyllis A., Bartlett, June 1988 Southwestern Medical Cntr, Dallas, TX, Allopathic Medicine, June 1989 TN, $68,889.89, Meharry Medical Podiatry College, Nashville, TN, Dentistry, May Davis, Kenneth A., Austin, TX, 1986 Baggett, Larry D., Memphis, TN, $44,597.00, Univ of Texas Hlth Sci Felder, Harry, Hendersonville, TN, $108,505.90, Dr William Scholl Col of Cntr San Antonio, San Antonio, TX, $188,762.29, Meharry Medical Podiatric Med, Chicago, IL, Podiatry, Allopathic Medicine, May 1990 College, Nashville, TN, Dentistry, May May 1983 Douglas Jr, Hermon H., De Soto, TX, 1985 Huff, Gregory E., Nashville, TN, $97,783.67, Meharry Medical College, Flint, Bryan A., Jonesborough, TN, $26,071.40, Dr William Scholl Col of Nashville, TN, Allopathic Medicine, $19,485.01, Univ of Tennessee Podiatric Med, Chicago, IL, Podiatry, May 1982 Memphis, Memphis, TN, Dentistry, May 1990 Edwards, Mary M., Arlington, TX, $35,533.11, Univ of Pittsburgh, June 1984 Veterinary Medicine Franklin, Gilbert L., Memphis, TN, Pittsburgh, PA, Allopathic Medicine, $40,154.14, Meharry Medical College, Edward, James, Millington, TN, June 1986 Nashville, TN, Dentistry, May 1980 $6,389.96, Mississippi State Ellis, Cynthia, Austin, TX, $119,702.07, Meharry Medical College, Nashville, Gilliam III, Ira H., Nashville, TN, University, Mississippi State, MS, TN, Allopathic Medicine, May 1985 $52,606.80, Meharry Medical College, Veterinary Medicine, May 1988 Emerson, Timothy J., San Angelo, TX, Nashville, TN, Dentistry, May 1983 Texas $65,488.39, Univ of Texas Medical Gipson, Samuel D., Memphis, TN, Branch Galveston, Galveston, TX, $34,852.48, Meharry Medical College, Allopathic Medicine Allopathic Medicine, May 1984 Nashville, TN, Dentistry, May 1980 Adams, Gerald F., Houston, TX, Foster, Roderic W., Dallas, TX, Jones, Vincent, Knoxville, TN, $4,976.70, Univ of Texas, Houston, $9,571.99, Univ of Texas $88,048.27, Meharry Medical College, TX, Allopathic Medicine, June 1989 Southwestern Medical Cntr, Dallas, Nashville, TN, Dentistry, May 1982 Allen, David B., Texarkana, TX, TX, Allopathic Medicine, June 1983 Lemorrocco, Belinda, Memphis, TN, $22,816.06, Univ of Texas Hlth Sci Fuller, Michael A., Galveston, TX, $8,217.41, Univ of Tennessee Cntr San Antonio, San Antonio, TX, $84,512.05, Univ of Texas Medical Memphis, Memphis, TN, Dentistry, Allopathic Medicine, May 1984 Branch Galveston, Galveston, TX, June 1987 Baker, Donnie W., League City, TX, Allopathic Medicine, May 1984 Little, Deider Tanner, Nashville, TN, $102,066.41, Meharry Medical Green Jr, Kenneth W., Hurst, TX, $204,410.26, Meharry Medical College, Nashville, TN, Allopathic $54,449.08, Univ of Texas Medical College, Nashville, TN, Dentistry, May Medicine, May 1988 Branch Galveston, Galveston, TX, 1984 Barrera, Adrian, Laredo, TX, $11,495.31, Allopathic Medicine, May 1986 Long, Larry L., Murfreesboro, TN, Univ of Texas Southwestern Medical Gutierrez, Oscar V., Laredo, TX, $16,889.30, Univ of Tennessee Cntr, Dallas, TX, Allopathic Medicine, $12,542.20, Univ of Texas Memphis, Memphis, TN, Dentistry, May 1991 Southwestern Medical Cntr, Dallas, June 1988 Behringer, George M., Houston, TX, TX, Allopathic Medicine, June 1987 Mulhollen, Kelli, Memphis, TN, $8,235.77, Univ of Texas, Houston, Guzman, Johnny E., Burleson, TX, $27,991.50, Univ of Tennessee TX, Allopathic Medicine, May 1991 $69,035.72, Medical College of Memphis, Memphis, TN, Dentistry, Berry, James E., Galveston, TX, Wisconsin, Milwaukee, WI, June 1991 $19,093.08, Univ of Texas Medical Allopathic Medicine, February 1986 Parks, Anita, Nashville, TN, $8,996.77, Branch Galveston, Galveston, TX, Harding, Phyllis D., Wichita Falls, TX, Meharry Medical College, Nashville, Allopathic Medicine, May 1986 $66,182.77, Univ of Cincinnati, TN, Dentistry, December 1991 Brauer, Bodo, Beaumont, TX, Cincinnati, OH, Allopathic Medicine, Ray, Timothy H., Cleveland, TN, $18,188.45, Univ of Texas Medical June 1984 $9,515.20, West Virginia University, Branch Galveston, Galveston, TX, Heindel, Terry J., Houston, TX, Morgantown, WV, Dentistry, August Allopathic Medicine, May 1986 $3,050.49, Univ of Mississippi 1985 Brown, Lisa L., Houston, TX, $7,136.17, Medical Center, Jackson, MS, Rudder, David P., Knoxville, TN, Univ of Illinois Medical Center, Allopathic Medicine, June 1991 $44,868.88, Univ of Tennessee Chicago, IL, Allopathic Medicine, Hicks, Gilbert, Austin, TX, $37,260.32, Memphis, Memphis, TN, Dentistry, June 1991 Univ of Texas Medical Branch June 1985 Brown, William, Houston, TX, Galveston, Galveston, TX, Allopathic Westbrook, Fred, Nashville, TN, $6,723.88, Univ of Texas Medicine, May 1988 $52,749.88, Meharry Medical College, Southwestern Medical Cntr, Dallas, King, Lewis, Dallas, TX, $16,913.90, Nashville, TN, Dentistry, May 1986 TX, Allopathic Medicine, June 1987 Univ of Arkansas Medical Center, 14124 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices Little Rock, AR, Allopathic Medicine, Schulz, Eric, The Woodlands, TX, College Foundation, Pasadena, TX, May 1990 $4,822.54, Univ of Texas, Houston, Chiropractic, December 1989 Lewis, Michael, Houston, TX, TX, Allopathic Medicine, June 1988 Barnett, Brian D., Webster, TX, $69,857.41, Univ of Texas Medical Starnes, Willis L., Irving, TX, $91,469.86, Texas Chiropractic Branch Galveston, Galveston, TX, $22,995.36, Univ of Texas Medical College Foundation, Pasadena, TX, Allopathic Medicine, May 1989 Branch Galveston, Galveston, TX, Chiropractic, April 1987 Liegel, Joyce, Houston, TX, $30,104.39, Allopathic Medicine, June 1982 Benton, Craig R., Lampasas, TX, Univ of Texas, Houston, TX, Tessmer, John, Brownwood, TX, $43,830.51, Texas Chiropractic Allopathic Medicine, June 1985 $68,208.35, Univ of Texas Medical College Foundation, Pasadena, TX, Luu, Kham N., Houston, TX, $6,167.94, Branch Galveston, Galveston, TX, Chiropractic, December 1985 Univ of Texas Medical Branch Allopathic Medicine, May 1983 Beyer, Floyd E., Port Arthur, TX, Galveston, Galveston, TX, Allopathic Tihfon, Pierre M., Houston, TX, $72,515.68, Cleveland Chiropractic Medicine, May 1989 $23,569.06, Univ of Oklahoma Health College, Kansas City, MO, Mannino, Troy, Katy, TX, $9,596.74, Sciences Center, Oklahoma City, OK, Chiropractic, January 1989 Univ of Texas, Houston, TX, Allopathic Medicine, May 1987 Blount, Steve A., De Soto, TX, Allopathic Medicine, May 1988 Tran, Truc V., Houston, TX, $1,893.43, $8,319.16, Palmer College of Marek, Michael, Cedar Park, TX, Univ of Texas Medical Branch Chiropractic, Davenport, IA, $58,155.72, Univ of Texas, Houston, Galveston, Galveston, TX, Allopathic Chiropractic, February 1991 TX, Allopathic Medicine, May 1988 Medicine, May 1989 Bonner, Michael, Houston, TX, Mayorgo, Gilbert, Houston, TX, Uri, John J., Bellaire, TX, $10,532.87, $58,738.33, Texas Chiropractic $128,658.70, Univ of Texas Medical Univ of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, College Foundation, Pasadena, TX, Branch Galveston, Galveston, TX, PA, Allopathic Medicine, May 1987 Chiropractic, April 1991 Allopathic Medicine, June 1987 Victorianne, Albert A., Houston, TX, Borst, Brenda J., Arlington, TX, Metcalf, Edmund, Medina, TX, $43,501.44, Tulane University, New $6,757.31, Parker College of $25,998.19, Univ of Texas Hlth Sci Orleans, LA, Allopathic Medicine, Chiropractic, Dallas, TX, Chiropractic, Cntr San Antonio, San Antonio, TX, June 1983 April 1986 Allopathic Medicine, May 1991 Wilson, Alan K., Houston, TX, Brand, Rodney, Fort Worth, TX, Moseley, Clarence D., Houston, TX, $2,036.06, Univ of Texas Medical $23,173.36, Texas Chiropractic $26,702.85, Univ of Texas Medical Branch Galveston, Galveston, TX, College Foundation, Pasadena, TX, Branch Galveston, Galveston, TX, Chiropractic, May 1983 Allopathic Medicine, May 1987 Allopathic Medicine, May 1989 Brittain, Jeffrey D., Houston, TX, Novetsky, Jerry J., Plano, TX, Wolf, Philip L., San Antonio, TX, $34,710.44, Wayne State University, $21,937.83, Univ of Texas Medical $78,801.96, Texas Chiropractic Detroit, MI, Allopathic Medicine, June Branch Galveston, Galveston, TX, College Foundation, Pasadena, TX, 1985 Allopathic Medicine, June 1985 Chiropractic, December 1987 Ortiz, Tomas, Houston, TX, $38,919.48, Woodhouse, Juanita, De Soto, TX, Broadwell, Teri A., Irving, TX, Universidad Central Del Caribe, $15,146.32, Univ of Oklahoma Health $103,319.39, Parker College of Bayamon, PR, Allopathic Medicine, Sciences Center, Oklahoma City, OK, Chiropractic, Dallas, TX, Chiropractic, December 1987 Allopathic Medicine, June 1990 May 1989 Parkin, Dianne, Houston, TX, Wright, Billy, Tyler, TX, $25,554.02, Brown, Darla, Highlands, TX, $14,304.64, Univ of Texas Hlth Sci Univ of South Dakota, Sioux Falls, $45,653.19, Texas Chiropractic Cntr San Antonio, San Antonio, TX, SD, Allopathic Medicine, July 1980 College Foundation, Pasadena, TX, Allopathic Medicine, May 1993 Zavala, Alfonso G., Houston, TX, Chiropractic, December 1990 Penick, Larry, Houston, TX, $2,401.03, $191,704.14, Meharry Medical Broze, Rory, Austin, TX, $64,027.09, Loyola University Chicago, Maywood, College, Nashville, TN, Allopathic Texas Chiropractic College IL, Allopathic Medicine, June 1983 Medicine, May 1987 Foundation, Pasadena, TX, Chiropractic, May 1984 Petty, Jay, Longview, TX, $10,628.32, Chiropractic Univ of Arkansas Medical Center, Bryant, Clifford, Greenville, TX, Little Rock, AR, Allopathic Medicine, Adams, Stephen, Friendswood, TX, $59,873.60, Life College, Marietta, May 1988 $71,726.56, Texas Chiropractic GA, Chiropractic, March 1987 Pickett, Jan J., Farmers Branch, TX, College Foundation, Pasadena, TX, Calhoun, Lynn, Austin, TX, $19,824.55, $6,177.41, Univ of Texas Chiropractic, April 1989 Palmer College of Chiropractic, Southwestern Medical Cntr, Dallas, Allison, Dwaine M., Fort Worth, TX, Davenport, IA, Chiropractic, TX, Allopathic Medicine, June 1986 $2,566.83, Texas Chiropractic College December 1984 Porras, Jose, El Paso, TX, $169,647.49, Foundation, Pasadena, TX, Calixto, Flavio, Irving, TX, $95,752.59, Medical College of Wisconsin, Chiropractic, December 1985 Cleveland Chiropractic College, Milwaukee, WI, Allopathic Medicine, Alshouse, Luanne, Terrell, TX, Kansas City, MO, Chiropractic, May 1984 $51,828.65, Cleveland Chiropractic January 1988 Reddix-Norman, Irance E., Missouri College, Kansas City, MO, Cannon, Dennis, Lewisville, TX, City, TX, $28,655.42, Howard Chiropractic, January 1986 $42,369.29, Cleveland Chiropractic University, Washington, DC, Amma-Lesrine, Vashti, Crosby, TX, College, Kansas City, MO, Allopathic Medicine, May 1986 $31,050.94, Texas Chiropractic Chiropractic, January 1986 Rollins, John, Amarillo, TX, $13,289.97, College Foundation, Pasadena, TX, Carlin, Susan, San Antonio, TX, Texas Tech University Health Sci Chiropractic, August 1988 $113,918.33, Cleveland Chiropractic Center, Lubbock, TX, Allopathic Augustus, Michael, La Marque, TX, College, Kansas City, MO, Medicine, May 1982 $50,185.73, Texas Chiropractic Chiropractic, May 1986 Rosales, Anna M., Hondo, TX, College Foundation, Pasadena, TX, Cathcart, Richard, Pasadena, TX, $58,382.63, Univ of Texas Medical Chiropractic, March 1986 $31,250.31, Texas Chiropractic Branch Galveston, Galveston, TX, Bailey, John L., Channelview, TX, College Foundation, Pasadena, TX, Allopathic Medicine, May 1988 $68,567.44, Texas Chiropractic Chiropractic, December 1985 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices 14125 Centola, Robert, Richardson, TX, Davenport, IA, Chiropractic, October Mackin, Cheryl L., Austin, TX, $45,982.44, New York Chiropractic 1989 $54,558.54, Texas Chiropractic College, Seneca Falls, NY, Fridman, Olga O., Houston, TX, College Foundation, Pasadena, TX, Chiropractic, April 1989 $16,272.94, Texas Chiropractic Chiropractic, December 1988 Cleere, Carrol E., Red Oak, TX, College Foundation, Pasadena, TX, Manning-Pinotti, Katherine W., $67,990.67, Palmer College of Chiropractic, April 1988 Houston, TX, $112,597.46, Texas Chiropractic, Davenport, IA, German, John V., Houston, TX, Chiropractic College Foundation, Chiropractic, June 1985 $44,903.14, Texas Chiropractic Pasadena, TX, Chiropractic, December Daniell, Larry L., Houston, TX, College Foundation, Pasadena, TX, 1986 $108,014.81, Los Angeles College of Chiropractic, May 1985 Maples II, John L., Fort Worth, TX, Chiropractic, Whittier, CA, Glenn, Michael, Duncanville, TX, $88,934.87, Cleveland Chiropractic Chiropractic, April 1984 $119,246.15, Texas Chiropractic College, Kansas City, MO, Davis, George G., Dallas, TX, College Foundation, Pasadena, TX, Chiropractic, May 1986 $20,234.66, Texas Chiropractic Chiropractic, April 1988 Maples, Thomas J., Mesquite, TX, College Foundation, Pasadena, TX, Goebel, Michale L., Houston, TX, $36,430.55, Logan College of Chiropractic, May 1983 $62,272.05, Texas Chiropractic Chiropractic, Chesterfield, MO, Dean, J C, Dickinson, TX, $60,555.57, College Foundation, Pasadena, TX, Chiropractic, September 1985 Texas Chiropractic College Chiropractic, April 1988 Martin, David, Floydada, TX, Foundation, Pasadena, TX, Gutierrez, Celso, Houston, TX, $95,947.43, Life College, Marietta, Chiropractic, December 1986 $10,085.36, Texas Chiropractic GA, Chiropractic, December 1986 Delay, Patricia A., Houston, TX, College Foundation, Pasadena, TX, McAdams, Glen R., Conroe, TX, $17,061.24, Texas Chiropractic Chiropractic, August 1993 $30,042.10, Texas Chiropractic College Foundation, Pasadena, TX, Haney, Sylvia, Orange, TX, $37,339.35, College Foundation, Pasadena, TX, Chiropractic, December 1989 Cleveland Chiropractic College, Chiropractic, April 1990 Dickey, Jerry, Richardson, TX, Kansas City, MO, Chiropractic, McCuan, Kathy A, Austin, TX, $910.62, $80,426.55, Parker College of January 1985 Logan College of Chiropractic, Chiropractic, Dallas, TX, Chiropractic, Harding, James, Dripping Springs, TX, Chesterfield, MO, Chiropractic, April September 1988 $20,101.22, Western States 1983 Dodd, Daniel J., Missouri City, TX, Chiropractic College, Portland, OR, McLain, Burton B., Hempstead, TX, $17,974.88, Texas Chiropractic Chiropractic, March 1989 $27,678.14, Texas Chiropractic College Foundation, Pasadena, TX, Harris, Scott, Dallas, TX, $40,500.74, College Foundation, Pasadena, TX, Chiropractic, May 1982 Parker College of Chiropractic, Dallas, Chiropractic, May 1985 Dodson, Mason, Tyler, TX, $106,003.70, McLain, Marilyn, Hempstead, TX, TX, Chiropractic, May 1989 Texas Chiropractic College Harvey, Robert L., Bridgeport, TX, $33,929.20, Texas Chiropractic Foundation, Pasadena, TX, College Foundation, Pasadena, TX, $80,339.95, Parker College of Chiropractic, April 1989 Chiropractic, May 1985 Chiropractic, Dallas, TX, Chiropractic, Durham, Ricky R., Houston, TX, Metcalf, Roy L., Fort Worth, TX, $123,548.00, Texas Chiropractic April 1988 $115,684.62, Life College, Marietta, Hendricks, Craig C., Dallas, TX, College Foundation, Pasadena, TX, GA, Chiropractic, December 1987 $30,212.13, Palmer College of Chiropractic, August 1986 Montanari, Arthur M., La Porte, TX, Duvall, Dalace, Houston, TX, Chiropractic, Davenport, IA, $102,563.70, Texas Chiropractic $31,250.94, Parker College of Chiropractic, March 1985 College Foundation, Pasadena, TX, Chiropractic, Dallas, TX, Chiropractic, Herrington, Tommy L., Pasadena, TX, Chiropractic, April 1988 January 1992 $36,825.14, Texas Chiropractic Morgan, Glenn R., Arlington, TX, Dyess, Stephen J., Deer Park, TX, College Foundation, Pasadena, TX, $66,529.18, Parker College of $113,487.29, Texas Chiropractic Chiropractic, April 1988 Chiropractic, Dallas, TX, Chiropractic, College Foundation, Pasadena, TX, Hetzel, Williams A., Itasca, TX, September 1989 Chiropractic, April 1987 $136,353.57, Cleveland Chiropractic Morgan, Shirley, Houston, TX, Eastman, Donald W., Mesquite, TX, College, Kansas City, MO, $3,911.16, Texas Chiropractic College $61,422.48, Texas Chiropractic Chiropractic, January 1986 Foundation, Pasadena, TX, College Foundation, Pasadena, TX, Hill, Michael J., Pasadena, TX, Chiropractic, December 1988 Chiropractic, April 1988 $23,429.87, Texas Chiropractic Moses, Michael J., Kingwood, TX, Eaves, Donald G., Houston, TX, College Foundation, Pasadena, TX, $50,019.26, Texas Chiropractic $99,705.97, Texas Chiropractic Chiropractic, April 1984 College Foundation, Pasadena, TX, College Foundation, Pasadena, TX, Kennedy, Michael, Conroe, TX, Chiropractic, December 1985 Chiropractic, December 1987 $104,157.65, Texas Chiropractic Munson, Herbert, Houston, TX, Ellis, Robert, Terrell, TX, $52,296.34, College Foundation, Pasadena, TX, $45,034.37, Texas Chiropractic Cleveland Chiropractic College, Chiropractic, December 1987 College Foundation, Pasadena, TX, Kansas City, MO, Chiropractic, Kirk Sr, Jack H., Dickinson, TX, Chiropractic, December 1986 January 1986 $42,718.89, Texas Chiropractic Nguyen, Ho H., Houston, TX, Fagan, Darrell, Seabrook, TX, College Foundation, Pasadena, TX, $35,615.38, Texas Chiropractic $60,614.09, Texas Chiropractic Chiropractic, May 1984 College Foundation, Pasadena, TX, College Foundation, Pasadena, TX, Lall, Len L., Rockwall, TX, $52,201.46, Chiropractic, December 1990 Chiropractic, December 1987 Texas Chiropractic College Oliver, Monte, Lindale, TX, $41,005.47, Ferguson, James D., Cedar Park, TX, Foundation, Pasadena, TX, Parker College of Chiropractic, Dallas, $94,787.78, Palmer College of Chiropractic, May 1984 TX, Chiropractic, August 1987 Chiropractic, Davenport, IA, Landsiedel, Randy J., Irving, TX, Owen, Gary, Lubbock, TX, $39,563.63, Chiropractic, March 1984 $100,264.70, Western States Logan College of Chiropractic, Font, David, Lubbock, TX, $70,199.10, Chiropractic College, Portland, OR, Chesterfield, MO, Chiropractic, Palmer College of Chiropractic, Chiropractic, May 1988 December 1986 14126 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices Parry, William A., Houston, TX, College Foundation, Pasadena, TX, Chiropractic College, Portland, OR, $17,127.67, Texas Chiropractic Chiropractic, May 1984 Chiropractic, June 1990 College Foundation, Pasadena, TX, Sanchez, Gerald G., Houston, TX, Truong, Thao, Houston, TX, $11,929.67, Chiropractic, June 1984 $45,001.88, Texas Chiropractic Texas Chiropractic College Pinotti, Jeffrey, Houston, TX, College Foundation, Pasadena, TX, Foundation, Pasadena, TX, $82,916.58, Texas Chiropractic Chiropractic, April 1988 Chiropractic, December 1988 College Foundation, Pasadena, TX, Schade, Cynthia J., Austin, TX, Tucker, James, Arlington, TX, Chiropractic, August 1986 $40,434.25, Palmer College of $10,232.91, Cleveland Chiropractic Plaster, Michael, Fort Worth, TX, Chiropractic, Davenport, IA, College, Kansas City, MO, $37,633.63, Parker College of Chiropractic, September 1985 Chiropractic, September 1983 Chiropractic, Dallas, TX, Chiropractic, Schalk, Ronald R., San Antonio, TX, Twigg, Jonathan, Alpine, TX, December 1987 $20,676.09, Texas Chiropractic $102,776.21, Cleveland Chiropractic Pouralis, Behzad M., Pasadena, TX, College Foundation, Pasadena, TX, College, Kansas City, MO, $47,936.40, Texas Chiropractic Chiropractic, May 1982 Chiropractic, May 1988 College Foundation, Pasadena, TX, Sedlacek, Jay, Irving, TX, $21,767.48, Unruh, Steve L., Baytown, TX, Chiropractic, December 1989 Parker College of Chiropractic, Dallas, $86,852.91, Life College, Marietta, Primeaux, Chrstopher, Texarkana, TX, TX, Chiropractic, September 1993 GA, Chiropractic, December 1987 $86,701.28, Texas Chiropractic Shaver, Dennis D., Kerrville, TX, Van Nice, Dennis, Midland, TX, College Foundation, Pasadena, TX, $27,560.72, Texas Chiropractic $53,606.86, Cleveland Chiropractic Chiropractic, December 1988 College Foundation, Pasadena, TX, College, Kansas City, MO, Quadlander, Michael E., Houston, TX, Chiropractic, December 1985 Chiropractic, January 1987 $63,143.44, Texas Chiropractic Shukri, Shafiq, Wichita Falls, TX, Van Parys, Leslie R., Waco, TX, College Foundation, Pasadena, TX, $13,366.25, Parker College of $9,428.84, Northwestern College of Chiropractic, April 1988 Chiropractic, Dallas, TX, Chiropractic, Chiropractic, Bloomington, MN, Real, Vernon D., Pasadena, TX, September 1986 Chiropractic, April 1987 $107,159.72, Texas Chiropractic Skidmore, Clyde E., Stafford, TX, Walter, Jonathan J., Austin, TX, College Foundation, Pasadena, TX, $57,630.53, Life College, Marietta, $19,100.97, Life Chiropractic College- Chiropractic, December 1988 GA, Chiropractic, December 1983 West, San Lorenzo, CA, Chiropractic, Reaume, David G., Odessa, TX, Smith, Cecil P., Garland, TX, September 1988 $92,068.07, Texas Chiropractic $21,434.91, Parker College of Wardle, Jenice, Port Arthur, TX, College Foundation, Pasadena, TX, Chiropractic, Dallas, TX, Chiropractic, $95,385.96, Life Chiropractic College- Chiropractic, April 1986 April 1986 West, San Lorenzo, CA, Chiropractic, Reece, Deward F., Corpus Christi, TX, Smith, Timothy, San Antonio, TX, $22,608.30, Texas Chiropractic June 1987 $99,566.13, Texas Chiropractic Wellington, James G., Pasadena, TX, College Foundation, Pasadena, TX, College Foundation, Pasadena, TX, $30,943.02, Texas Chiropractic Chiropractic, May 1982 Reynolds, Charlotte M., Houston, TX, Chiropractic, April 1986 College Foundation, Pasadena, TX, Snell, Day Lee, Houston, TX, $94,241.50, Texas Chiropractic Chiropractic, May 1982 $32,670.44, Texas Chiropractic College Foundation, Pasadena, TX, Wheeler, Wesley D., Houston, TX, College Foundation, Pasadena, TX, Chiropractic, April 1986 $67,383.48, Texas Chiropractic Rhine, Cecil T., Cleveland, TX, Chiropractic, May 1984 College Foundation, Pasadena, TX, $75,791.74, Texas Chiropractic Sprecher, Kyle O., Webster, TX, Chiropractic, December 1988 College Foundation, Pasadena, TX, $73,985.74, Texas Chiropractic Whigham, Gwendolyn E., Houston, TX, Chiropractic, April 1988 College Foundation, Pasadena, TX, $34,540.89, Parker College of Riley, Rock, Canton, TX, $29,422.45, Chiropractic, December 1986 Chiropractic, Dallas, TX, Chiropractic, Texas Chiropractic College Stalker, James, Round Rock, TX, April 1987 Foundation, Pasadena, TX, $18,534.02, Logan College of Whitaker, Gary W., San Antonio, TX, Chiropractic, May 1982 Chiropractic, Chesterfield, MO, $21,536.47, Texas Chiropractic Roberson, Harvey L., Houston, TX, Chiropractic, May 1983 College Foundation, Pasadena, TX, $35,761.82, Texas Chiropractic Sykes, Steven G., Killeen, TX, Chiropractic, May 1982 College Foundation, Pasadena, TX, $37,529.90, Texas Chiropractic Williams, Dewayne, Brownsville, TX, Chiropractic, December 1989 College Foundation, Pasadena, TX, $88,232.15, Cleveland Chiropractic Robinson, Glenn R., Garland, TX, Chiropractic, June 1987 College, Kansas City, MO, $77,916.94, Cleveland Chiropractic Taparauskas, Anne M., Houston, TX, Chiropractic, December 1988 College, Kansas City, MO, $47,546.30, Texas Chiropractic Wirt-Sealy, Rita J., Groveton, TX, Chiropractic, September 1988 College Foundation, Pasadena, TX, $12,431.33, Texas Chiropractic Rodriquez, Jesus A., El Paso, TX, Chiropractic, April 1986 College Foundation, Pasadena, TX, $120,512.32, Texas Chiropractic Taylor, Danny, Irving, TX, $35,797.18, Chiropractic, May 1985 College Foundation, Pasadena, TX, Parker College of Chiropractic, Dallas, Woywood, Roger, Dallas, TX, Chiropractic, April 1986 TX, Chiropractic, December 1987 $39,194.08, Parker College of Romeieh-romay, Barbara C., Bedford, Thompson, Roy E., Austin, TX, Chiropractic, Dallas, TX, Chiropractic, TX, $87,289.28, Cleveland $34,460.59, Texas Chiropractic September 1989 Chiropractic College, Kansas City, College Foundation, Pasadena, TX, Dentistry MO, Chiropractic, May 1985 Chiropractic, May 1983 Rosenbaum, Allan J., Lubbock, TX, Todd-Ferguson, Linda K., Cedar Park, Anderson, Madeline J., Austin, TX, $82,774.37, Texas Chiropractic TX, $52,911.02, Palmer College of $2,012.14, Univ of Texas Hlth Sci College Foundation, Pasadena, TX, Chiropractic, Davenport, IA, Cntr San Antonio, San Antonio, TX, Chiropractic, December 1985 Chiropractic, June 1985 Dentistry, May 1989 Rublee, William, Nacogdoches, TX, Tretheway-Koenig, Joan L., Pearland, Baird, John, Richardson, TX, $50,118.15, Texas Chiropractic TX, $16,435.47, Western States $28,284.30, Baylor College of Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices 14127 Dentistry, Dallas, TX, Dentistry, June Antonio, San Antonio, TX, Dentistry, Trice, Robert, Grand Prairie, TX, 1992 May 1982 $39,287.33, Baylor College of Bartley, Emily, Houston, TX, Hicks, Philip, Houston, TX, $44,360.40, Dentistry, Dallas, TX, Dentistry, May $29,165.88, Meharry Medical College, Univ of Texas, Houston, TX, 1989 Nashville, TN, Dentistry, May 1991 Dentistry, June 1985 Underhill, Luke, Corpus Christi, TX, Beckett, Timothy W., Dallas, TX, Hooda, Farid K., Arlington, TX, $52,661.71, Univ of Missouri Kansas $67,093.66, Meharry Medical College, $8,662.04, Baylor College of Dentistry, City, Kansas City, MO, Dentistry, Nashville, TN, Dentistry, May 1981 Dallas, TX, Dentistry, June 1991 April 1985 Beers, Wayne D., San Antonio, TX, Hurd, Michael, Houston, TX, $5,310.36, Venable, James R., Fort Worth, TX, $21,596.07, Univ of Texas Hlth Sci Univ of Texas, Houston, TX, $7,858.24, Univ of Oklahoma Health Cntr San Antonio, San Antonio, TX, Dentistry, May 1991 Sciences Center, Oklahoma City, OK, Dentistry, May 1989 Jacome Jr, Robert R A, Plano, TX, Dentistry, June 1990 Bonin, Mark, Spring, TX, $10,989.21, $193,150.68, Univ of Oklahoma Wade, Eric, Tyler, TX, $28,348.13, Univ Univ of Texas, Houston, TX, Health Sciences Center, Oklahoma of Texas Hlth Sci Cntr San Antonio, Dentistry, May 1987 City, OK, Dentistry, June 1988 San Antonio, TX, Dentistry, May 1984 Broadus, Reginald H., Fort Worth, TX, Johnson, Cleverick D., Houston, TX, West, Paul, Fort Worth, TX, $21,326.14, $60,247.40, Meharry Medical College, $2,959.65, Univ of Texas, Houston, Baylor College of Dentistry, Dallas, Nashville, TN, Dentistry, May 1985 TX, Dentistry, June 1986 TX, Dentistry, June 1991 Burke, Andrea A., Houston, TX, Kariem, James J., Amarillo, TX, Wood, Cecil C., Duncanville, TX, $121,870.47, Meharry Medical $160,881.40, Meharry Medical $120,218.01, Univ of Oklahoma College, Nashville, TN, Dentistry, May College, Nashville, TN, Dentistry, May Health Sciences Center, Oklahoma 1985 1984 City, OK, Dentistry, June 1983 Canady, Keith, Lewisville, TX, Maedgen, Alan, Dallas, TX, $12,843.70, Wright-Coleman, Debra D., Bedford, TX, $42,861.88, Baylor College of Univ of Texas Hlth Sci Cntr San $19,329.29, Meharry Medical College, Dentistry, Dallas, TX, Dentistry, June Antonio, San Antonio, TX, Dentistry, Nashville, TN, Dentistry, May 1983 1990 May 1987 Chung, Kwang, Lewisville, TX, Mason, Samuel S., Houston, TX, Health Administration $4,050.39, Univ of Texas Hlth Sci $143,627.42, Meharry Medical Miranda Jr, Leandro, San Antonio, TX, Cntr San Antonio, San Antonio, TX, College, Nashville, TN, Dentistry, May $24,426.39, Trinity University, San Dentistry, May 1992 1984 Antonio, TX, Health Administration, Collier, George R., San Antonio, TX, Morgan, John D., Beeville, TX, $928.97, December 1989 $50,629.25, Georgetown University, Baylor College of Dentistry, Dallas, Simeone, William J., Houston, TX, Washington, DC, Dentistry, May 1983 TX, Dentistry, June 1985 $15,104.20, St. Louis University, St. Cortez, Eddie, San Antonio, TX, Mosely Jr, Lee, Houston, TX, Louis, MO, Health Administration, $105,041.14, Marquette University, $41,511.61, Meharry Medical College, May 1985 Milwaukee, WI, Dentistry, May 1988 Nashville, TN, Dentistry, May 1984 White, Kevin G., Dallas, TX, $7,918.46, Courtney, Barbara, Dallas, TX, Obrien, Francis, Euless, TX, $4,522.54, St. Louis University, St. Louis, MO, $22,588.30, Boston University Univ of Texas, Houston, TX, Health Administration, May 1989 Medical Center, Boston, MA, Dentistry, June 1984 Dentistry, May 1991 Perry, Maurice A., Houston, TX, Optometry Currington, Tony, Houston, TX, $41,266.42, Meharry Medical College, Hall, Anita, Arlington, TX, $26,552.73, $63,534.03, Washington University, St Nashville, TN, Dentistry, May 1987 Southern College of Optometry, Louis, MO, Dentistry, May 1991 Ramos Jr, Rodolfo G., San Antonio, TX, Memphis, TN, Optometry, May 1989 Daniels II, John T., San Antonio, TX, $3,208.46, Univ of Texas, Houston, Harrison-Greenfield, Nancy A., Katy, $63,079.03, Howard University, TX, Dentistry, May 1990 TX, $71,804.43, New England College Washington, DC, Dentistry, May 1983 Ramos, Gisella Y., Austin, TX, of Optometry, Boston, MA, Douglas, Agnes A., De Soto, TX, $3,656.83, Univ of Louisville, Optometry, March 1985 $52,719.20, Meharry Medical College, Louisville, KY, Dentistry, May 1993 McGregor, Scott D., Carrollton, TX, Nashville, TN, Dentistry, May 1985 Rapanotti, Mario C., San Antonio, TX, $103,406.67, Southern College of Dudley, Donald, Arp, TX, $25,161.10, $14,097.13, Univ of Texas Hlth Sci Optometry, Memphis, TN, Optometry, Baylor College of Dentistry, Dallas, Cntr San Antonio, San Antonio, TX, June 1986 TX, Dentistry, June 1988 Dentistry, June 1983 Garcia, Leticia, Beaumont, TX, Rodriguez, Annette, San Antonio, TX, Osteopathy $23,165.72, Univ of Texas Hlth Sci $17,570.45, Univ of Texas Hlth Sci Abdal-Alim, Khalid, Houston, TX, Cntr San Antonio, San Antonio, TX, Cntr San Antonio, San Antonio, TX, $28,678.68, Univ of Osteo Medical & Dentistry, June 1983 Dentistry, May 1993 Health Science, Des Moines, IA, Glosson, Romus, Houston, TX, Steele, David D., Texarkana, TX, Osteopathy, June 1991 $6,320.64, Univ of Texas, Houston, $21,217.19, Univ of Texas, Houston, Alvarado, Leticia D., San Antonio, TX, TX, Dentistry, May 1989 TX, Dentistry, June 1986 $1,644.31, Michigan State University, Green Jr, Henry, San Antonio, TX, Summers, Eddie, League City, TX, East Lansing, MI, Osteopathy, June $153,414.86, Baylor College of $9,475.13, Univ of Texas, Houston, 1984 Dentistry, Dallas, TX, Dentistry, June TX, Dentistry, June 1987 Brooks, Marc E., Austin, TX, $35,061.53, 1984 Tootoonchi, Mohammod, Houston, TX, Univ of North Texas Health Science Hatten II, John H., OdFessa, TX, $2,925.62, Univ of Texas, Houston, Ctr, Fort Worth, TX, Osteopathy, June $27,055.69, Univ of Texas Hlth Sci TX, Dentistry, May 1990 1991 Cntr San Antonio, San Antonio, TX, Trammel, Henry, Tyler, TX, $34,294.24, Burks, Chester L., Dallas, TX, Dentistry, June 1983 Univ of Texas Hlth Sci Cntr San $42,682.24, Univ of North Texas Hickman, Carl, Houston, TX, $9,197.62, Antonio, San Antonio, TX, Dentistry, Health Science Ctr, Fort Worth, TX, Univ of Texas Hlth Sci Cntr San May 1989 Osteopathy, May 1983 14128 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices Gross, George G., Arlington, TX, Gipson, Helen D., Dallas, TX, Chiropractic, Davenport, IA, $20,357.34, Kirksville Col of $64,656.24, Ohio College of Podiatric Chiropractic, September 1983 Osteopathic Medicine, Kirksville, Medicine, Cleveland, OH, Podiatry, Brown, James A., West Jordan, UT, MO, Osteopathy, June 1980 May 1985 $58,745.08, Palmer College of Lee, John H., Port Author, TX, Grocoff, Ronald D., Plano, TX, Chiropractic, Davenport, IA, $10,920.70, Univ of North Texas $40,087.01, Ohio College of Podiatric Chiropractic, October 1986 Health Science Ctr, Fort Worth, TX, Medicine, Cleveland, OH, Podiatry, De Mille, Alan M., Cedar City, UT, Osteopathy, May 1986 May 1980 $118,340.02, Palmer College of Mayberry, Bobby J., Fort Worth, TX, Knutson, Timothy, San Antonio, TX, Chiropractic West, San Jose, CA, $2,963.87, Univ of North Texas Health $82,446.69, California College of Chiropractic, March 1987 Science Ctr, Fort Worth, TX, Podiatric Medicine, San Francisco, Howard, Douglas D., Salt Lake City, UT, Osteopathy, June 1990 CA, Podiatry, May 1981 $27,048.89, Cleveland Chiropractic Morrill, Thomas R., Mesquite, TX, Moss, Stephen, Houston, TX, College, Los Angeles, CA, $61,792.19, Univ of North Texas $92,859.03, Dr. William Scholl Col of Chiropractic, August 1986 Madsen, Richard, Salt Lake City, UT, Health Science Ctr, Fort Worth, TX, Podiatric Med, Chicago, IL, Podiatry, $33,054.87, Palmer College of Osteopathy, May 1986 May 1989 Chiropractic West, San Jose, CA, Overton, Lora, Fort Worth, TX, Negash, Omer O., Houston, TX, $15,283.15, Oklahoma State Chiropractic, December 1985 $17,404.31, Barry University-Podiatric Mangum, Donald L., Panguitch, UT, University, Tulsa, OK, Osteopathy, Med, Miami Shores, FL, Podiatry, May 1988 $75,604.57, Palmer College of May 1989 Chiropractic, Davenport, IA, Poplawsky, James, Boerne, TX, Ramirez, Jesus, El Paso, TX, $70,894.77, $8,189.59, Univ of North Texas Health Chiropractic, December 1988 Ohio College of Podiatric Medicine, Martin, Craig J., Salt Lake City, UT, Science Ctr, Fort Worth, TX, Cleveland, OH, Podiatry, May 1983 Osteopathy, May 1985 $29,315.37, Life Chiropractic College- Rose, Myrtle F., Dallas, TX, $126,464.87, west, San Lorenzo, CA, Chiropractic, Pharmacy Ohio College of Podiatric Medicine, December 1987 Cleveland, OH, Podiatry, June 1987 Boboye, Cyril C., Arlington, TX, Patton, Daniel R., Salt Lake City, UT, Stillwagoner, Lee W., Sulfur Springs, $83,850.01, Palmer College of $12,823.51, Creighton University, TX, $28,231.04, Univ of Osteo Omaha, NE, Pharmacy, August 1985 Chiropractic, Davenport, IA, Medical & Health Science, Des Chiropractic, October 1987 Breedlove, Arthur L., Irving, TX, Moines, IA, Podiatry, June 1989 $1,593.05, Texas Southern University, Robinette, Terry A., Sandy, UT, Tanenbaum, Jeffrey C., Houston, TX, Houston, TX, Pharmacy, December $61,943.00, Logan College of $43,179.46, Pennsylvania Col of 1987 Chiropractic, Chesterfield, MO, Podiatric Medicine, Philadelphia, PA, Jenewari, Elsie N., Houston, TX, Chiropractic, August 1986 Podiatry, June 1980 Taylor, Todd R., Bountiful, UT, $7,877.31, Creighton University, Taylor, Emma, Houston, TX, $2,208.36, Logan College of Omaha, NE, Pharmacy, August 1983 $147,003.96, Univ of Osteo Medical & Powe, Roderick L., Dallas, TX, Chiropractic, Chesterfield, MO, Health Science, Des Moines, IA, $24,637.35, Creighton University, Chiropractic, December 1987 Podiatry, June 1990 Omaha, NE, Pharmacy, August 1985 Dentistry Updyke, John G., Austin, TX, Podiatry $117,010.67, California College of Gifford, Craig P., Salt Lake City, UT, $158,573.27, Case Western Reserve Baxendale, Robert, Dallas, TX, Podiatric Medicine, San Francisco, University, Cleveland, OH, Dentistry, $31,340.88, Pennsylvania Col of CA, Podiatry, May 1981 May 1987 Podiatric Medicine, Philadelphia, PA, Public Health Troili, Dean C., Salt Lake City, UT, Podiatry, June 1982 $184,494.00, Marquette University, Baxter, Bobby C., Houston, TX, Gilbert, Grant D., Houston, TX, Milwaukee, WI, Dentistry, May 1986 $130,612.10, Dr. William Scholl Col $37,258.58, Univ of Illinois At Chicago, Chicago, IL, Public Health, Tucker, Bret J., Salt Lake City, UT, of Podiatric Med, Chicago, IL, $65,509.14, Virginia Commonwealth Podiatry, May 1984 September 1982 Perry, Terry T., Houston, TX, $5,816.20, University, Richmond, VA, Dentistry, Bethea, Carroll Ruth, Irving, TX, May 1988 $61,981.55, Ohio College of Podiatric Tulane University, New Orleans, LA, Public Health, May 1984 Wigg, Kenneth Y., Price, UT, $2,032.49, Medicine, Cleveland, OH, Podiatry, Creighton University, Omaha, NE, May 1985 Veterinary Medicine Dentistry, May 1991 Dang, Dung D., Channelview, TX, $89,361.00, California College of Brinkley, Marty R., Kaufman, TX, Optometry $1,719.33, Oklahoma State University, Podiatric Medicine, San Francisco, Haggard, Joe R., Springville, UT, CA, Podiatry, May 1989 Stillwater, OK, Veterinary Medicine, May 1990 $6,036.79, Illinois College of Edwards, Fanny F., Houston, TX, Optometry, Chicago, IL, Optometry, $24,235.70, New York College of Utah May 1987 Podiatric Medicine, New York, NY, Mitchell, Mike K., Salt Lake City, UT, Allopathic Medicine Podiatry, June 1984 $42,751.31, Southern Calif College of Ellington, James D., Southlake, TX, Manchester, Kevin K., West Valley City, Optometry, Fullerton, CA, Optometry, $27,368.64, Univ of Osteo Medical & UT, $21,331.50, Univ of Nevada Reno, May 1986 Health Science, Des Moines, IA, Reno, NV, Allopathic Medicine, May Podiatry, June 1993 1989 Podiatry Ezzeh, Mary, Duncanville, TX, Haase, George G., Ogden, UT, $144,649.14, Univ of Osteo Medical & Chiropractic $57,141.19, Dr William Scholl Col of Health Science, Des Moines, IA, Bowman, Jeffrey J., Salt Lake City, UT, Podiatric Med, Chicago, IL, Podiatry, Podiatry, June 1989 $12,123.56, Palmer College of May 1984 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices 14129 Rindlisbacher, Mark C., Payson, UT, Scott, Rosemary C., Saluda, VA, Dentistry $151,673.85, Dr William Scholl Col of $135,573.51, Meharry Medical Amouhashem, Parvin, Springfield, VA, Podiatric Med, Chicago, IL, Podiatry, College, Nashville, TN, Allopathic $8,600.84, Georgetown University, May 1988 Medicine, May 1987 Washington, DC, Dentistry, May 1990 Tindall, Michael A., Magna, UT, Thomas, Giovana R., Alexandria, VA, Bukowski, Todd M., Arlington, VA, $77,972.29, California College of $9,688.29, Univ of Rochester, $26,978.62, Suny Buffalo, Buffalo, Podiatric Medicine, San Francisco, Rochester, NY, Allopathic Medicine, NY, Dentistry, June 1989 CA, Podiatry, May 1988 May 1988 Bunn, Steven T., Alexandria, VA, Tolliver, John, Fairfax, VA, $5,536.02, Vermont $108,123.97, Georgetown University, Univ of Med & Dent of New Jersey, Washington, DC, Dentistry, May 1983 Chiropractic Newark, NJ, Allopathic Medicine, Freeman Jr, Lenwood, Ladysmith, VA, Ramirez, Laura A., Burlington, VT, May 1984 $11,181.32, Howard University, $14,353.92, Los Angeles College of Wright, Richard O., Virginia Beach, VA, Washington, DC, Dentistry, May 1988 Gibboney, Dana, Virginia Beach, VA, Chiropractic, Whittier, CA, $69,150.99, Meharry Medical College, $56,713.17, Virginia Commonwealth Chiropractic, April 1990 Nashville, TN, Allopathic Medicine, May 1984 University, Richmond, VA, Dentistry, Swett, Robert, Manchester, VT, May 1992 $31,047.63, Logan College of Chiropractic Holley, Elizabeth, Chesapeake, VA, Chiropractic, Chesterfield, MO, Clayton, Richard E., Richmond, VA, $33,406.36, Meharry Medical College, Chiropractic, August 1988 $75,192.00, Life College, Marietta, Nashville, TN, Dentistry, May 1991 Dentistry GA, Chiropractic, March 1985 Jennings, Kevin K., Chesapeake, VA, Davis, Thomas A., Waynesboro, VA, $163,955.50, Meharry Medical Wiebking, Henry A., Richmond, VT, College, Nashville, TN, Dentistry, May $95,660.96, Univ of Maryland $85,971.28, Logan College of Chiropractic, Chesterfield, MO, 1983 Baltimore, Baltimore, MD, Dentistry, Jones, Gale F., Richmond, VA, January 1985 Chiropractic, August 1986 Dotti, John T., Newport News, VA, $60,375.64, Howard University, Veterinary Medicine $90,996.91, Texas Chiropractic Washington, DC, Dentistry, May 1987 Labrie, Gerald F., Springfield, VA, College Foundation, Pasadena, TX, Ponte, Paula J., Bennington, VT, $20,438.71, Georgetown University, Chiropractic, May 1983 $192,999.43, Tufts University, Boston, Washington, DC, Dentistry, May 1983 MA, Veterinary Medicine, May 1987 Ganther, Timothy, Virginia Beach, VA, Miller, Jay P., Arlington, VA, $9,153.73, $67,187.38, Logan College of Virgin Islands Georgetown University, Washington, Chiropractic, Chesterfield, MO, DC, Dentistry, May 1990 Chiropractic Chiropractic, August 1986 Nicholas, Robert, Richmond, VA, Headley, Patricia, Roseland, VA, $24,568.57, Virginia Commonwealth Slotnick, Robin, Kingshill, VI, $49,574.63, Palmer College of $68,175.18, Los Angeles College of University, Richmond, VA, Dentistry, Chiropractic, Davenport, IA, May 1987 Chiropractic, Whittier, CA, Chiropractic, October 1986 Pearson, Haywood, Richmond, VA, Chiropractic, December 1989 Jackson, Zona G., Freeman, VA, $140,789.11, Meharry Medical Virginia $23,937.66, Logan College of College, Nashville, TN, Dentistry, May Chiropractic, Chesterfield, MO, 1983 Allopathic Medicine Chiropractic, August 1988 Peoples, Douglas B., Petersburg, VA, Asamoah, Nana, Herndon, VA, Kessler, Edward, Virginia Beach, VA, $21,475.95, Georgetown University, $11,640.47, George Washington $46,052.75, Life College, Marietta, Washington, DC, Dentistry, May 1983 University, Washington, DC, GA, Chiropractic, December 1983 Preston, Richard G., Richmond, VA, Allopathic Medicine, May 1990 Khalsa, Gururakha, Arlington, VA, $8,079.82, Georgetown University, Boschulte, Jualenda, Alexandria, VA, $39,429.05, Cleveland Chiropractic Washington, DC, Dentistry, May 1985 $59,290.15, Georgetown University, College, Kansas City, MO, Ruffin, Wyatt M., Virginia Beach, VA, Washington, DC, Allopathic Chiropractic, May 1989 $198,885.17, Meharry Medical Medicine, May 1989 Kilmer, David, Thaxton, VA, College, Nashville, TN, Dentistry, Dempster, Alexandra, Aldie, VA, $43,314.89, Los Angeles College of December 1983 $26,399.13, Univ of Miami, Miami, Chiropractic, Whittier, CA, Scott, Annette, Alexandria, VA, FL, Allopathic Medicine, May 1987 Chiropractic, December 1985 $80,864.70, Howard University, Gomez, Mario, Richmond, VA, Panza, Tony, Williamsburg, VA, Washington, DC, Dentistry, May 1986 Shaffner, Robert, Christiansburg, VA, $29,951.05, Eastern Virginia Medical $15,614.15, Life College, Marietta, $205,986.71, Marquette University, School, Norfolk, VA, Allopathic GA, Chiropractic, March 1990 Milwaukee, WI, Dentistry, May 1988 Medicine, June 1983 Seaman, John J., Hayes, VA, $19,778.55, Solliday, Michael P., Arlington, VA, Gong, Pearl, Charlottesville, VA, Logan College of Chiropractic, $19,295.09, Georgetown University, $9,411.16, Albert Einstein Med Col of Chesterfield, MO, Chiropractic, Washington, DC, Dentistry, May 1987 Yeshiva Univ, Bronx, NY, Allopathic September 1985 Willis, Orion W., Portsmouth, VA, Medicine, June 1983 Streicher, Bruce, Shipman, VA, $31,868.56, Howard University, Harrington, Baxter C., Midlothian, VA, $73,882.35, Life College, Marietta, Washington, DC, Dentistry, May 1983 $47,769.83, Meharry Medical College, GA, Chiropractic, March 1985 Wilson, Sulyn, Vienna, VA, $6,627.94, Nashville, TN, Allopathic Medicine, Vosburgh, Stephen E., Sterling, VA, Georgetown University, Washington, May 1985 $107,022.87, Life College, Marietta, DC, Dentistry, May 1990 Kirk Jr, Vernon H., Portsmouth, VA, GA, Chiropractic, January 1985 $46,283.40, Univ of Utah, Salt Lake Ziegler, Louis, Alexandria, VA, Optometry City, UT, Allopathic Medicine, June $44,076.77, Life College, Marietta, Pfab, Mary C., Petersburg, VA, 1986 GA, Chiropractic, December 1989 $67,336.10, Southern College of 14130 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices Optometry, Memphis, TN, Optometry, Philadelphia, PA, Allopathic Chiropractic, Davenport, IA, June 1985 Medicine, June 1981 Chiropractic, March 1989 Osteopathy Chiropractic Olson, Lee E., Redmond, WA, $8,284.29, Western States Chiropractic College, Hobowsky, Martin, Norfolk, VA, Chinn, Greg, Kirkland, WA, $85,371.47, Portland, OR, Chiropractic, March $122,775.00, Oklahoma State Life College, Marietta, GA, 1984 University, Tulsa, OK, Osteopathy, Chiropractic, December 1989 Phelps, Carl C., Issaquah, WA, May 1986 Collins, Norman E., Renton, WA, $28,272.78, Palmer College of Pharmacy $68,117.32, Palmer College of Chiropractic, Davenport, IA, Chiropractic, Davenport, IA, Chiropractic, June 1985 Habib, Suraia, Alexandria, VA, Chiropractic, March 1988 Pittman, Joanne E., Lake Stevens, WA, $2,941.54, Massachusetts College of Corley, David L., Tacoma, WA, $72,951.40, Life College, Marietta, Pharmacy, Boston, MA, Pharmacy, $43,083.52, Life Chiropractic College- GA, Chiropractic, March 1986 June 1989 West, San Lorenzo, CA, Chiropractic, Wright, James, Clifton, VA, $56,286.18, December 1984 Scheen, Susan, Vashon, WA, $4,439.37, Howard University, Washington, DC, Corley, Lee, Everett, WA, $83,598.13, Western States Chiropractic College, Pharmacy, May 1986 Life Chiropractic College-West, San Portland, OR, Chiropractic, June 1986 Podiatry Lorenzo, CA, Chiropractic, June 1989 Schwartz, Gerald, Silverdale, WA, Craig, Bradley, Vancouver, WA, $70,356.33, Cleveland Chiropractic Anderson III, Jesse N., Norfolk, VA, $99,273.62, Western States College, Los Angeles, CA, $104,301.36, Ohio College of Podiatric Chiropractic College, Portland, OR, Chiropractic, August 1986 Medicine, Cleveland, OH, Podiatry, Chiropractic, June 1988 Scovel, Michael, Everett, WA, May 1984 Diel, Gary R., Gig Harbor, WA, $104,483.70, Palmer College of Dew, John, Norfolk, VA, $76,590.75, $100,167.57, Life College, Marietta, Chiropractic West, San Jose, CA, Ohio College of Podiatric Medicine, Chiropractic, December 1988 Cleveland, OH, Podiatry, June 1990 GA, Chiropractic, September 1984 McMillion, Jerry, Richmond, VA, Diel-Singleton, Betty Knox B., Tacoma, Stanton, Lawrence, Seattle, WA, $42,750.58, Pennsylvania Col of WA, $51,305.65, Life College, $8,346.16, Los Angeles College of Podiatric Medicine, Philadelphia, PA, Marietta, GA, Chiropractic, June 1984 Chiropractic, Whittier, CA, Podiatry, May 1992 Dreyer, Frank J., Spokane, WA, Chiropractic, April 1985 $15,617.22, Palmer College of Taylor, Larry D., Wapato, WA, Public Health Chiropractic, Davenport, IA, $37,970.59, Palmer College of Talley, Mark D., Richmond, VA, Chiropractic, September 1984 Chiropractic West, San Jose, CA, $2,028.36, Univ of North Carolina Eartheart-Grim, Peter A., Mukelteo, WA, Chiropractic, October 1986 Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, Public $51,076.16, Western States Terides, Michael, Bellingham, WA, Health, May 1986 Chiropractic College, Portland, OR, $80,769.76, Palmer College of Chiropractic, December 1983 Veterinary Medicine Chiropractic West, San Jose, CA, Erkel, Thomas R., Bellevue, WA, Chiropractic, March 1991 $28,394.74, Palmer College of Griffith, Deborah, Virginia Beach, VA, Tyrell, Michael, Spokane, WA, Chiropractic, Davenport, IA, $21,731.41, Tuskegee University, $134,235.03, Life College, Marietta, Chiropractic, October 1985 Tuskegee, AL, Veterinary Medicine, GA, Chiropractic, June 1986 May 1983 Grubstein, Alan, Tacoma, WA, Taylor, Christopher, Port Republic, VA, $98,691.93, Cleveland Chiropractic Walters, Jerome P., Olympia, WA, $19,073.29, Michigan State College, Kansas City, MO, $35,510.97, Palmer College of University, East Lansing, MI, Chiropractic, September 1987 Chiropractic, Davenport, IA, Veterinary Medicine, June 1987 Hamilton, Charles A., Seattle, WA, Chiropractic, December 1983 $19,369.37, Life College, Marietta, Washington Clinical Psychology GA, Chiropractic, March 1989 Allopathic Medicine Hartley, William, Seattle, WA, Kinney, Lorrin L., Vancouver, WA, $36,848.24, Western States $31,637.13, California Sch of Prof Haririe, Jim J., Kent, WA, $50,221.24, Psych Fresno, Fresno, CA, Clinical Medical College of Wisconsin, Chiropractic College, Portland, OR, Chiropractic, December 1990 Psychology, August 1987 Milwaukee, WI, Allopathic Medicine, Mattila, William, Bremerton, WA, May 1983 Katz, Gary S., Edmonds, WA, $49,150.43, Fuller Theological Lindsey-Wright, Karen, Seattle, WA, $24,237.31, Northwestern College of Seminary, Pasadena, CA, Clinical $111,005.95, Meharry Medical Chiropractic, Bloomington, MN, College, Nashville, TN, Allopathic Chiropractic, April 1983 Psychology, June 1989 Medicine, May 1989 Kronlund, Douglas G., Puyallup, WA, Dentistry Sahm, Roger, Spokane, WA, $98,927.37, $31,405.41, Life Chiropractic College- Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN, West, San Lorenzo, CA, Chiropractic, Clark, Russell, Everett, WA, Allopathic Medicine, May 1988 March 1990 $136,038.02, Univ of The Pacific, San Smith Naporn, Atania, Gig Harbor, WA, McCord, Allan R., Renton, WA, Francisco, CA, Dentistry, June 1990 $75,496.82, Medical College of $13,914.18, Palmer College of Robinson, Harold L., Tumwater, WA, Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, Chiropractic, Davenport, IA, $37,145.18, Temple University, Allopathic Medicine, June 1985 Chiropractic, June 1983 Philadelphia, PA, Dentistry, January White, Jeffrey, Chattaroy, WA, McKilligan, Terrance, Woodland, WA, 1988 $14,188.44, Palmer College of $62,881.50, Oral Roberts University, Optometry Tulsa, OK, Allopathic Medicine, May Chiropractic, Davenport, IA, 1985 Chiropractic, October 1985 Splinter, Kenneth W., Aberdeen, WA, White, Leroy C., Tacoma, WA, Nicholes, David L., Woodinville, WA, $22,671.81, Pacific University, Forest $27,734.63, Temple University, $18,072.71, Palmer College of Grove, OR, Optometry, May 1984 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices 14131 Osteopathy Wisconsin Chiropractic, Dallas, TX, Chiropractic, Williams, Robert, Seattle, WA, December 1986 Allopathic Medicine Hultine, Lynn R., Wauwatosa, WI, $178,894.30, Univ of New England, Boyd, Olage O., Milwaukee, WI, $50,649.00, Logan College of Biddeford, ME, Osteopathy, June 1987 $184,296.18, Medical College of Chiropractic, Chesterfield, MO, Pharmacy Wisconsin, Milwaukee, WI, Chiropractic, August 1990 Kalienbach, Robert, Marshfield, WI, Day, Harold E., Bremerton, WA, Allopathic Medicine, May 1984 Erickson, Gregg, Elroy, WI, $29,626.59, $90,188.06, Parker College of $2,066.22, Long Island University, Medical College of Wisconsin, Chiropractic, Dallas, TX, Chiropractic, Brookville, NY, Pharmacy, January Milwaukee, WI, Allopathic Medicine, May 1989 1987 May 1980 Kleinjan, Mary B., Racine, WI, Podiatry Harris, Ernest H., Madison, WI, $58,108.28, Northwestern College of Chiropractic, Bloomington, MN, Burgess, Jonathan, Vancouver, WA, $33,490.25, Univ of Illinois Medical Center, Chicago, IL, Allopathic Chiropractic, August 1990 $78,662.23, Ohio College of Podiatric Mayfield, Gordon, Lodi, WI, $12,369.89, Medicine, Cleveland, OH, Podiatry, Medicine, June 1983 Lane, Michael, Shorewood, WI, Northwestern College of Chiropractic, May 1990 Bloomington, MN, Chiropractic, April Morrison, John T., Port Orchard, WA, $13,973.76, Creighton University, Omaha, NE, Allopathic Medicine, 1984 $35,347.95, Ohio College of Podiatric Radandt, Mark, Kenosha, WI, Medicine, Cleveland, OH, Podiatry, May 1989 Leisman, Scott, Madison, WI, $9,071.75, $86,909.54, Palmer College of May 1983 Univ of Wisconsin Madison, Madison, Chiropractic, Davenport, IA, West Virginia WI, Allopathic Medicine, June 1982 Chiropractic, June 1984 Mansur, Sharif S., Menomoee Falls, WI, Slusher, Stephen L., Jamesville, WI, Allopathic Medicine $13,438.41, Medical College of Ohio, $58,956.81, Cleveland Chiropractic Arreola, Rodolfo, Morgantown, WV, Toledo, OH, Allopathic Medicine, College, Los Angeles, CA, $32,250.27, Brown University, June 1989 Chiropractic, June 1987 Providence, RI, Allopathic Medicine, Miller, Julie, Milwaukee, WI, Stick, Alex A., West Bend, WI, May 1990 $49,311.57, Medical College of $7,574.08, Palmer College of James, Tyshaun, Charlestown, WV, Wisconsin, Milwaukee, WI, Chiropractic, Davenport, IA, $27,695.30, Marshall University, Allopathic Medicine, August 1987 Chiropractic, October 1985 Huntington, WV, Allopathic Onyeneke, Chuka D., Kenosha, WI, Ulbrich, George A., Neenah, WI, $12,790.83, Western States Medicine, May 1989 $137,608.96, Medical College of Ohio, Chiropractic College, Portland, OR, Toledo, OH, Allopathic Medicine, Chiropractic Chiropractic, March 1983 June 1989 Vance, Julie E., Racine, WI, $33,463.07, Calandros, George, Huntington, WV, Plater, Daniel H., Madison, WI, Palmer College of Chiropractic, $1,153.89, Cleveland Chiropractic $92,691.50, Univ of Southern Davenport, IA, Chiropractic, College, Kansas City, MO, California, Los Angeles, CA, Chiropractic, May 1991 December 1988 Allopathic Medicine, June 1988 Waschbisch, Sue A., Oconto Falls, WI, Henshaw, Clifford D., Charlestown, WV, Pounds, Lawrence M., Hartford, WI, $12,412.56, Palmer College of $60,654.19, Life College, Marietta, $183,953.00, Medical College of Chiropractic, Davenport, IA, GA, Chiropractic, March 1988 Wisconsin, Milwaukee, WI, Chiropractic, June 1992 Dentistry Allopathic Medicine, May 1988 Werner, Mary, Seymour, WI, Robbins, Lamont C., Milwaukee, WI, $60,319.96, Cleveland Chiropractic Chattin, Donald H., Parkersburg, WV, $50,226.95, Medical College of $1,284.04, West Virginia University, College, Kansas City, MO, Wisconsin, Milwaukee, WI, Chiropractic, September 1983 Morgantown, WV, Dentistry, May Allopathic Medicine, May 1980 1980 Salazar, Marielena, Oshkosh, WI, Dentistry Freeman, Kenneth K., Charlestown, WV, $124,662.00, Tufts University, Boston, Bartelt, Craig, Fond Du Lac, WI, $32,805.08, Case Western Reserve MA, Allopathic Medicine, May 1988 $18,659.96, Marquette University, University, Cleveland, OH, Dentistry, Smalley, Katherine, Holmen, WI, Milwaukee, WI, Dentistry, May 1984 May 1986 $24,832.80, Medical College of Bock, Jerome, Milwaukee, WI, Osteopathy Wisconsin, Milwaukee, WI, $144,572.35, Marquette University, Allopathic Medicine, May 1991 Milwaukee, WI, Dentistry, May 1988 Booth, Christopher R., Alderson, WV, Tesch, Patrick R., Milwaukee, WI, Dove, Edward E., Milwaukee, WI, $21,843.02, West Virginia School of $32,126.32, Medical College of $17,247.58, Marquette University, Osteopathic Med, Lewisburg, WV, Wisconsin, Milwaukee, WI, Milwaukee, WI, Dentistry, May 1989 Osteopathy, May 1992 Allopathic Medicine, September 1986 Jones, Harold A., Milwaukee, WI, Gant, Allan L., Richwood, WV, Williamson, Frederick, Milwaukee, WI, $115,572.54, Marquette University, $14,923.36, West Virginia School of $137,419.17, Medical College of Milwaukee, WI, Dentistry, May 1989 Osteopathic Med, Lewisburg, WV, Wisconsin, Milwaukee, WI, Karr, Robert A., Milwaukee, WI, Osteopathy, June 1981 Allopathic Medicine, May 1990 $169,785.25, Marquette University, Kirkland, Charles K., Elkins, WV, Milwaukee, WI, Dentistry, May 1985 $56,680.87, West Virginia School of Chiropractic Law, Daniel, Milwaukee, WI, Osteopathic Med, Lewisburg, WV, Berres, George W., Colfax, WI, $88,774.00, Marquette University, Osteopathy, May 1984 $68,528.61, Palmer College of Milwaukee, WI, Dentistry, May 1986 Spanos, George K., Huntington, WV, Chiropractic, Davenport, IA, Mallien, Maria M., Milwaukee, WI, $9,594.93, West Virginia School of Chiropractic, October 1985 $145,302.81, Marquette University, Osteopathic Med, Lewisburg, WV, Hansen, Timothy J., Pewaukeee, WI, Milwaukee, WI, Dentistry, December Osteopathy, May 1982 $18,782.37, Parker College of 1985 14132 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices Morrison, Michael B., West Allis, WI, Miami, FL, Allopathic Medicine, May Chiropractic, Whittier, CA, $161,978.00, Marquette University, 1986 Chiropractic, December 1991 Milwaukee, WI, Dentistry, May 1988 Maynez, Miguel A., Nervante, Mexico, Morris, Clifford, Apeldoorn, Pendleton, Darryl D., Glendale, WI, $58,946.12, Hahnemann University, Netherlands, $46,014.34, National $6,833.67, Southern Illinois Univ Philadelphia, PA, Allopathic College of Chiropractic, Lombard, IL, Edwardsville, Edwardsville, IL, Medicine, June 1982 Chiropractic, December 1988 Dentistry, December 1986 Nelson, Richard, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, Nixon, Jeffrey L., Aylmar Quebec, Reed, John F., Madison, WI, $12,105.37, Loma Linda University, Canada, $80,274.26, Cleveland $155,067.14, Marquette University, Loma Linda, CA, Allopathic Chiropractic College, Kansas City, Milwaukee, WI, Dentistry, May 1986 Medicine, June 1991 MO, Chiropractic, May 1987 Sadien, Habib, Milwaukee, WI, Palmer-West, Lori J., Toronto, Canada, Omeara, Daniel, Manila, Philippines, $29,109.03, Loyola University $70,023.55, Tulane University, New $61,129.50, Life Chiropractic College- Chicago, Chicago, IL, Dentistry, May Orleans, LA, Allopathic Medicine, West, San Lorenzo, CA, Chiropractic, 1993 June 1983 April 1989 Sanderson, Scott F., Stoughton, WI, Ponder III, Alvin, City Unknown, West Pierre, Claude P., Tromsoe, Norway, $151,960.37, Marquette University, Indies, $49,676.06, Howard $43,057.92, Logan College of Milwaukee, WI, Dentistry, May 1989 University, Washington, DC, Chiropractic, Chesterfield, MO, Tanski, Thomas A., Grafton, WI, Allopathic Medicine, May 1987 Chiropractic, April 1989 $14,827.53, Marquette University, Roybal-Hazen, Maria E., City Unknown, Pressnall, Lana, Alberta, Canada, Milwaukee, WI, Dentistry, May 1982 Mexico, $28,799.21, Michigan State Volkert, Lawrence, Racine, WI, $7,245.01, Western States University, East Lansing, MI, Chiropractic College, Portland, OR, $85,839.57, Marquette University, Allopathic Medicine, June 1989 Milwaukee, WI, Dentistry, May 1986 Chiropractic, December 1991 Weekes Jr, Noel N., Pecs, Hungary, Ridings, Vicki V T, city unknown, Podiatry $101,285.57, George Washington England, $20,829.88, Texas University, Washington, DC, Chiropractic College Foundation, Perpich, Thomas T J, Milwaukee, WI, Allopathic Medicine, May 1989 $105,740.73, Univ of Osteo Medical & Pasadena, TX, Chiropractic, April Health Science, Des Moines, IA, Chiropractic 1984 Podiatry, June 1987 Abriel, Mark B., Sydney, Australia, Schumacher-Cameron, Tara L., Alberta, Canada, $32,812.47, Palmer College of Public Health $28,906.34, Life College, Marietta, GA, Chiropractic, June 1984 Chiropractic, Davenport, IA, Rodriquez, Victor, Milwaukee, WI, Akins, Jeff, London, England, Chiropractic, December 1988 $3,911.16, Tulane University, New $67,082.70, Cleveland Chiropractic Thomas, Jack R., Gleenwood Alberta, Orleans, LA, Public Health, May 1989 College, Kansas City, MO, Canada, $18,100.02, Logan College of Veterinary Medicine Chiropractic, May 1989 Chiropractic, Chesterfield, MO, Brunstein, Florian, Rome, Italy, Chiropractic, August 1986 Nance, Dara, Madison, WI, $34,806.22, $54,440.56, Los Angeles College of Torkelson, Scott S., city unknown, Univ of Wisconsin Madison, Madison, Chiropractic, Whittier, CA, Denmark, $33,419.82, Palmer College WI, Veterinary Medicine, May 1992 Chiropractic, April 1989 of Chiropractic, Davenport, IA, Patterson, William H., Oregon, WI, Chiropractic, October 1986 $3,943.28, Michigan State University, Campbell, Fredrik, City Unknown, Sweden, $9,620.68, Western States Wren, Russell, Jonkoting, Sweden, East Lansing, MI, Veterinary $69,729.80, Logan College of Medicine, June 1984 Chiropractic College, Portland, OR, Chiropractic, June 1992 Chiropractic, Chesterfield, MO, Wyoming Clubb, David A., Queensland, Australia, Chiropractic, April 1990 $118,252.62, Logan College of Allopathic Medicine Clinical Psychology Chiropractic, Chesterfield, MO, Nelson, Vivian I., Cheyenne, WY, Chiropractic, December 1986 Perris-Myttas, Marina, Barnet Herts, $13,755.81, Univ of North Dakota, Deboer, Gregory, Vordingborg, Denmark, United Kingdom, $6,640.87, Univ of Grand Forks, ND, Allopathic $30,106.51, Palmer College of Denver, Denver, CO, Clinical Medicine, May 1993 Chiropractic, Davenport, IA, Psychology, August 1988 Chiropractic Chiropractic, March 1986 Dentistry Dippie, John M., City Unknown, Kilgore, Charles, Torrington, WY, Australia, $41,041.90, Palmer College Akande-Robinson, Deborah A., city $75,465.44, Cleveland Chiropractic of Chiropractic, Davenport, IA, unknown, West Indies, $137,779.25, College, Kansas City, MO, Chiropractic, March 1990 Meharry Medical College, Nashville, Chiropractic, September 1985 Esser, Clinton, Winnipeg Manitoba, TN, Dentistry, July 1982 Foreign Countries Canada, $18,797.61, Life Chiropractic McWeeney, Vincent, Nassau, Bahamas, College-West, San Lorenzo, CA, $187,887.59, Marquette University, Allopathic Medicine Chiropractic, December 1989 Milwaukee, WI, Dentistry, May 1988 Dotson, Tanya J., Copenhagen, Etminan-Rad, Monica A., Tehran, Iran, Nielsen, David, Yaound, Cameroun, Denmark, $30,172.35, Morehouse $14,510.29, Palmer College of $131,468.23, Loma Linda University, School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA, Chiropractic, Davenport, IA, Loma Linda, CA, Dentistry, June 1989 Allopathic Medicine, June 1986 Chiropractic, March 1985 Shakman, Robert E., Jamaica, West Hawkins, Irene, Florence, Italy, Maddalone, Dawn M., Barbados, West Indies, $138,401.55, Tufts University, $4,905.56, Cornell University Medical Indies, $37,037.11, Palmer College of Boston, MA, Dentistry, June 1985 College, New York, NY, Allopathic Chiropractic, Davenport, IA, Taylor-Hearn, Kathleen, City Unknown, Medicine, May 1985 Chiropractic, June 1987 Canada, $8,984.53, Univ of Kavadellas, Anastasi, City Unknown, McRoberts, Lynn, Ontario, Canada, Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, Greece, $12,515.28, Univ of Miami, $39,316.96, Los Angeles College of Dentistry, May 1985 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices 14133 Optometry Jacobs, Benjamin J., Domingo, Public Health Dominican Republic, $9,401.45, Arenaza, Gilbert, city unknown, Okosun, Ikekekhuamhenn, Bauchi, California College of Podiatric Netherlands Antilles, $16,471.47, Nigeria, $19,912.87, Univ of Medicine, San Francisco, CA, New England College of Optometry, Oklahoma Health Sciences Center, Podiatry, May 1991 Boston, MA, Optometry, May 1991 Oklahoma City, OK, Public Health, Medlock, Melissa M., Abu-Alanda, Lunetto, James V., Karlsruhe, Germany, June 1987 $40,632.39, New York College of Jordon, $18,563.01, Illinois College of Veterinary Medicine Optometry, Chicago, IL, Optometry, Podiatric Medicine, New York, NY, May 1989 Podiatry, June 1984 Crossman-McLauchlan, Dorothy, Mirchoff, William F., Victoria BC, Bulimba Qld, Australia, $45,428.64, Pharmacy Canada, $15,631.65, California Tufts University, Boston, MA, Hoffman, Beverley A., Capetown, South College of Podiatric Medicine, San Veterinary Medicine, May 1985 Africa, $20,732.99, Univ of Southern Francisco, CA, Podiatry, May 1982 Kennedy, Meredith E., Arusha, California, Los Angeles, CA, Turner, Patrick, Penticton BC, Canada, Tanzania, $807.16, Michigan State Pharmacy, May 1984 $78,173.97, Pennsylvania Col of University, East Lansing, MI, Podiatric Medicine, Philadelphia, PA, Veterinary Medicine, June 1990 Podiatry Podiatry, June 1984 Dated: March 6, 1995. Enrico, Julie M., City Unknown, Canada, Wade, Paul W., city unknown, Ciro V. Sumaya, $94,856.64, California College of Australia, $25,316.97, California Administrator Podiatric Medicine, San Francisco, College of Podiatric Medicine, San [FR Doc. 95–5784 Filed 3–14–95; 8:45 am] CA, Podiatry, May 1983 Francisco, CA, Podiatry, May 1983 BILLING CODE 4160±15±P federal register March 15,1995 Wednesday Application Procedures;Notice Work Opportunities;IndianProgram; Job TrainingPartnershipAct:School-To- Office ofVocationalandAdultEducation Department ofEducation Employment andTrainingAdministration Department ofLabor Part III 14135 14136 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices DEPARTMENT OF LABOR this notice. The Departments expect to Table of Contents award approximately 8 development I. Budget and Certifications Employment and Training grants of about $30,000 and up to 5 Administration implementation grants ranging in Part I shall contain the Standard Form amount between $50,000 and $100,000 (SF) 424, ‘‘Application for Federal DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION under this notice. Grants under this Assistance,’’ and SF 424A, ‘‘Budget’’ competition will be financed under (Appendix A). All copies of the 424 Office of Vocational and Adult Title IV of the Job Training Partnership Form must have original signatures of Education Act and will be used to implement the designated fiscal agent and must Job Training Partnership Act: School- activities that are consistent with Title indicate in item 11 whether the To-Work Opportunities; Indian II, Subtitle C of the School-to-Work application is to be considered for Program; Application Procedures Opportunities Act of 1994. development or implementation Local Partnerships may apply for funding. In addition, the budget shall AGENCIES: Employment and Training either a development grant, an include—on a separate page(s)—a Administration, Labor. Office of implementation grant or both. The detailed cost break-out of each line item Vocational and Adult Education, competitions have been structured to on Budget Form 424A. Assurances and Education. allow those partnerships which have Certifications (Appendix B) shall also be ACTION: Notice of availability of funds been engaged in planning and included in this part. and solicitation for grant applications development activities to apply for an II. Abstract (SGA). implementation grant without Part II shall consist of a one page jeopardizing their opportunities for SUMMARY: This Notice contains all of the abstract summarizing the essential receiving a development grant. necessary information and forms needed components and key features of the However, local partnerships which to apply for grant funding. This notice partnership’s plan. announces a competition for Indian intend to apply for consideration under Program Grants to enable local both the development and III. Program Narrative partnerships to begin development or implementation grant competitions Part III shall contain the program implementation of School-to-Work must submit separate applications for narrative that demonstrates the Opportunities initiatives that serve each competition. The amount of any applicant’s plan and capabilities in Indian youth and involve schools award will be based on a number of accordance with the Statement of Work funded by the Bureau of Indian Affairs factors, including the scope, quality, in Section C. The Departments strongly (BIA). The School-to-Work and comprehensiveness of the proposed advise applicants to describe their plan Opportunities initiatives funded under initiative and the size of the population in light of each of the Selection Criteria this competition will offer Indian youth to be served. in Section E of this notice. No cost data access to School-to-Work Opportunities The Departments intend to conduct or reference to price shall be included programs that will prepare them for first subsequent competitions for Indian in this part of the application. The jobs in high-skill, high-wage careers and Program Grants, on an annual basis, Departments strongly request that further postsecondary education and under the recently enacted School-to- applicants limit the program narrative training. Work Opportunities Act of 1994. A local section to no more than 40 double- DATES: Applications for grant awards partnership may receive only one (1) spaced pages, on one side only. development or implementation grant will be accepted commencing March 15, IV. Appendices 1995. The closing date for receipt of under this notice, with grant renewals applications is May 15, 1995, at 2 p.m. for up to five years to be awarded All applicable appendices including (Eastern Time) at the address below. depending upon fund availability and letters of support, resumes and Telefacsimile (FAX) applications will maintaining satisfactory progress. organizational charts should be not be honored. included in this section. The safeguard Section B. Application Process assurance, as required under Part III, ADDRESSES: Applications shall be Section D, ‘‘Safeguards’’, of this notice, mailed to: U.S. Department of Labor, 1. Eligible Applicants should be included in all applications Employment and Training An entity that meets the definition of as Appendix A. The Departments Administration, Division of Acquisition ‘‘eligible partnership,’’ as defined in recommend that all appendix entries be and Assistance, Attention: Ms. Laura section B.7 of this notice, proposes to cross-referenced back to applicable Cesario, Reference: SGA/DAA 95–002, serve Indian youth, and involves sections in the program narrative. 200 Constitution Avenue NW, Room S– Bureau-funded schools is eligible to 4203, Washington, D.C. 20210. apply for an Indian Program Grant for 3. Late Applications FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: either development or implementation Any application received after the Ms. Laura Cesario, Division of of School-to-Work Opportunities exact time specified for receipt at the Acquisition and Assistance, Telephone: initiatives. office designated in this notice will not (202) 219–7300 (this is not a toll-free 2. Submission of Application be considered, unless it is received number). before awards are made and it— SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Applicants must submit an original (a) Was sent by registered or certified and four (4) copies of the application. mail not later than the fifth calendar day Section A. Purpose The application shall consist of four before the date specified for receipt of This competition will award grants to distinct parts: budget and certifications, applications (e.g., an application local partnerships for School-to-Work abstract, program narrative and submitted in response to a solicitation Opportunities initiatives that serve appendices. To ensure a comprehensive requiring receipt of applications by the Indian youth and involve Bureau- and expedient review, the Departments 20th of the month must have been funded schools. Approximately strongly suggest that applicants submit mailed/post marked by the 15th of that $500,000 is available for awards under an application formatted as seen below: month); or Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices 14137 (b) Was sent by the U.S. Postal Service 7. Definitions least one or two years of postsecondary Express Mail Next Day Service to As used in this notice— education; addressee not later than 5:00 P.M. at the ‘‘All aspects of an industry’’ means all (d) Provides the students, to the place of mailing two working days prior aspects of the industry or industry extent practicable, with strong to the date specified for receipt of sector a student is preparing to enter, experience in and understanding of all applications. The term ‘‘working days’’ including planning, management, aspects of the industry the students are excludes weekends and Federal finances, technical and production planning to enter; holidays. skills, underlying principles of (e) Results in the award of— (1) a high school diploma or its The term ‘‘post marked’’ means a technology, labor and community equivalent, such as: printed, stamped, or otherwise placed issues, health and safety issues, and (A) a general equivalency diploma; or impression (exclusive of a postage meter environmental issues, related to that (B) an alternative diploma or machine impression) that is readily industry or industry sector; certificate for students with disabilities identifiable, without further action, as ‘‘Bureau-funded school’’ as defined in for whom such alternative diploma or having been supplied or affixed on the Section 1139 (3) of the ‘‘Education certificate is appropriate; date of mailing by an employee of the Amendments of 1978’’ means: (2) a certificate or diploma U.S. Postal Service. (a) A Bureau school—a Bureau of recognizing successful completion of Indian Affairs-operated elementary or 4. Hand-Delivered Applications one or two years of postsecondary secondary day or boarding school or a education (if appropriate), and It is preferred that applications be BIA-operated dormitory for students (3) a skill certificate; and mailed at least five days prior to the attending a school other than a Bureau (f) May lead to further education and closing date. To be considered for school. training, such as entry into a registered funding, hand-delivered applications (b) A contract school—an elementary apprenticeship program, or may lead to must be received by 2:00 P.M., Eastern or secondary school or a dormitory that admission to a two- or four-year college Time, on the closing date. Telegraphed receives financial assistance for its or university. and/or Faxed applications will not be operation under a contract or agreement ‘‘Elementary school’’ means a day or honored. Failure to adhere to the above with the BIA under Section 102, 103 (a), residential school that provides instructions will be a basis for a or 208 of the Indian Self-Determination elementary education, as determined determination of nonresponsiveness. and Education Assistance Act. under State law. Overnight express mail from carriers (c) A school for which assistance is ‘‘Employer’’ includes both public and other than the U.S. Postal Service will provided under the Tribally Controlled private employers, as well as tribal be considered hand-delivered Schools Act of 1988. businesses and school-based enterprises applications and must be received by ‘‘Career guidance and counseling’’ where appropriate; the above specified date and time. means programs— ‘‘Eligible partnership’’ means an (a) That pertain to the body of subject 5. Period of Performance entity responsible for School-to-Work matter and related techniques and Opportunities programs funded under The period of performance will be methods organized for the development this competition and that— twelve (12) months from the date of in individuals of career awareness, (a) Consists of tribal organizations award by the Department of Labor. career planning, career decisionmaking, responsible for economic development, Since all awards must be made by June placement skills, and knowledge and employment, job training, and 30, 1995 under this competition, the understanding of local, State, and education (such as tribal business Departments recommend that all national occupational, educational, and councils, local chapters of tribal applicants use July 1, 1995–June 30, labor market needs, trends, and business councils, tribal departments of 1996 as both budgetary and project opportunities; education), employers (including tribal (b) That assist individuals in making award periods. businesses or school-based enterprises and implementing informed educational where applicable), representatives of 6. Option to Extend and occupational choices; and Bureau-funded schools and local (c) That aid students to develop career These Indian Program Grants may be postsecondary educational institutions options with attention to surmounting (including representatives of area extended for up to four additional years gender, race, ethnic, disability, at the discretion of the Federal vocational education schools and tribal language, or socioeconomic colleges where applicable), local Government, based upon the availability impediments to career options and of funds and the demonstrated progress educators (such as teachers, counselors, encouraging careers in nontraditional or administrators), representatives of of the grantee in implementing a employment. School-to-Work Opportunities initiative. labor organizations or nonmanagerial ‘‘Career major’’ means a coherent employee representatives, students and Consistent with the School-to-Work sequence of courses or field of study parents; and Opportunities Act, the Departments that prepares a student for a first job and (b) May include other entities, such expect that over time, the amount of that— as— federal funds, if any, that are added to (a) Integrates academic and (1) Employer organizations; this grant, awarded under this notice, occupational learning, integrates school- (2) Community-based organizations; will decrease. Funds awarded under based and work-based learning, and (3) National trade associations this notice are considered ‘‘venture establishes linkages between secondary working at the local level; capital’’ for the establishment of School- schools and postsecondary educational (4) Industrial extension centers; to-Work Opportunities systems serving institutions; (5) Rehabilitation agencies and Indian youth. Likewise, local (b) Prepares the student for organizations; partnerships will eventually assume employment in a broad occupational (6) Registered apprenticeship responsibility for maintaining School- cluster or industry sector; agencies; to-Work Opportunities systems with (c) Typically includes at least two (7) Local vocational education other Federal, State and local resources. years of secondary education and at entities; 14138 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices (8) Proprietary institutions of higher by the National Skill Standards Act of efforts to enhance diverse employer education (as defined in section 481(b) 1994, except that until such skill involvement. of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 standards are developed, the term ‘‘skill 2. Dropout rates of schools in Indian U.S.C. 1088(b)) that meet the eligibility certificate’’ means a credential issued communities are often high, and and certification requirements under under a process described in the intervention to improve student Title IV of such Act (20 U.S.C. 1070 et approved School-to-Work plan; performance needs to begin in the seq.); ‘‘Workplace mentor’’ means an elementary or middle school years. (9) Local government agencies; employee or other individual, approved School-to-Work Opportunities (10) Parent organizations; by the employer at a workplace, who initiatives can offer alternative learning (11) Teacher organizations; possesses the skills and knowledge to be environments, creative approaches to (12) Vocational student organizations; mastered by a student, and who academic and technical subjects and (13) Private industry councils instructs the student, critiques the relevant and engaging school-based and established under section 402 of the Job performance of the student, challenges work-based activities that can encourage Training Partnership Act (29 U.S.C. the student to perform well, and works Indian youth to remain in school until 1512); in consultation with classroom teachers completion. ‘‘Postsecondary education institution’’ and the employer of the student. 3. Economic and geographic factors means an institution of higher education may create uneven educational and (as such term is defined in section 481 Section C. Statement of Work employment opportunities among of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 Part I. Background Indian youth, thus requiring that careful U.S.C. 1088)) which meets the eligibility consideration be given to enhancing and certification requirements under The United States is the only both the access and availability of Title IV of that Act (20 U.S.C. 1070 et industrialized nation that lacks a opportunities. In particular, the seq.); comprehensive and coherent system to ‘‘Registered apprenticeship agency’’ help its youth acquire the knowledge, extremely rural nature of many tribal means the Bureau of Apprenticeship skills, abilities, and information about communities requires innovative efforts and Training in the Department of Labor the labor market necessary to make an in providing high-skill high-wage or a State apprenticeship agency effective transition from school to employment including but not limited recognized and approved by the Bureau career-oriented work. Three-fourths of to opportunities with tribal businesses, of Apprenticeship and Training as the America’s high school students do not school-based enterprises, and appropriate body for State registration attain four-year college degrees. Many of entrepreneurial training. or approval of local apprenticeship them do not possess the basic academic Under this competition, federal funds programs and agreements for Federal and occupational skills necessary for will be used as ‘‘venture capital’’ to purposes; entry into high-skill, high-wage careers establish School-to-Work Opportunities ‘‘Registered apprenticeship program’’ in the changing workplace or to pursue systems serving Indian youth. Local means a program registered by a further education. partnerships applying for development registered apprenticeship agency; The School-to-Work Opportunities grants should be ready to use funds to ‘‘School dropout’’ means a youth who Act of 1994 created a national involve Bureau-funded schools in is no longer attending any school and framework for high-quality, statement establishing cooperative linkages and who has not received a secondary school-to-work transition systems that planning innovative methods of school diploma or a certificate from a enable young Americans to identify and providing School-to-Work services for program of equivalency for such a navigate paths to productive and Indian youth. Local partnerships diploma; progressively more rewarding roles in applying for implementation grants ‘‘School site mentor’’ means a the workplace. The funds used for the should be ready to implement School- professional employed at a school who School-to-Work Indian Program grant to-Work initiatives involving Bureau- is designated as the advocate for a competition were requested and funded schools by building on and particular student, and who works in appropriated prior to enactment of the enriching existing promising programs consultation with classroom teachers, School-to-Work Act. However, the such as tech-prep education, career counselors, related services personnel, Secretaries of Education and Labor have academies, youth apprenticeship, and the employer of the student to modeled the School-to-Work school-based enterprises, job training design and monitor the progress of the Opportunities Indian Grant Program on and previous related efforts funded by School-to-Work Opportunities program the Act. the BIA. However, the purpose of of the student. Partnerships serving Indian youth funding under the School-to-Work ‘‘Secondary school’’ means— face particular challenges in Opportunities initiative is not simply to (a) A nonprofit day or residential implementing School-to-Work augment existing programs, but rather to school that provides secondary Opportunities initiatives: build systems that provide education, as determined under State 1. High unemployment and relatively opportunities for all students to achieve law, except that it does not include any few high-skill, high-wage employment the benefits and outcomes of the School- education provided beyond grade 12; opportunities often characterize the to-Work Opportunities initiative. and areas to be served, making it more Building comprehensive systems will (b) A Job Corps center under part B of difficult to secure employer likely involve a combination of Title IV of the Job Training Partnership participation, work-based learning enhancing existing programs, Act (29 U.S.C. 1691 et seq.); opportunities, and career-track jobs for establishing linkages among them, and ‘‘Skill certificate’’ means a portable, Indian youth who complete a School-to- developing an effective framework that industry-recognized credential issued Work Opportunities program. Therefore, connects both existing and new by a School-to-Work Opportunities creative strategies must be developed to programs in a meaningful way. Through program under an approved plan, that make full use of the capacity of local involvement in the School-to-Work certifies that a student has mastered institutions to include a variety of Indian Program Grants, tribal skills at levels that are at least as alternative work-based learning organizations are expected to build over challenging as skill standards endorsed environments and to support intensive time the kind of School-to-Work Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices 14139 Opportunities Systems that best meet • A program of study designed to • Providing, with respect to each their needs. meet the same academic content student, a school site mentor to act as standards established for all students, a liaison among the student and the Part II. Program Description including, where applicable, standards employer, school, teacher, school a. Objectives established under the Goals 2000: administrator, and parent of the student, The School-to-Work Opportunities Educate America Act, and to meet the and, if appropriate, other community requirements necessary to prepare a partners; initiative provides for a substantial • degree of State and local flexibility and student for postsecondary education Providing technical assistance and experimentation, but all State systems, and the requirements necessary to earn services to employers, including small- individual local initiatives and Indian a skill certificate; and medium-sized businesses, and other • Program initiatives will share several A program of instruction and parties in— common features and basic program curriculum that integrates academic and (A) Designing school-based learning components as required by the School- vocational learning (including applied components as described above, work- to-Work Opportunities Act of 1994. A methodologies and team-teaching based learning components as described School-to-Work Opportunities initiative strategies), and incorporates instruction, above, and counseling and case under this competition must include the to the extent practicable, in all aspects management services; and (B) Training teachers, workplace following common features and basic of an industry, appropriately tied to the mentors, school site mentors, and program components: career of a participant; • Regularly scheduled evaluations counselors; 1. The basis of the School-to-Work • Opportunities system is— involving ongoing consultation and Providing assistance to schools and (a) The integration of school-based problem solving with students and employers to integrate school-based and learning and work-based learning; school dropouts to identify their work-based learning and integrate (b) The integration of academic and academic strengths and weaknesses, academic and occupational learning academic progress, workplace into the program; occupational learning; and • (c) The establishment of effective knowledge, goals, and the need for Encouraging the active participation linkages between secondary and additional learning opportunities to of employers, in cooperation with local postsecondary education. master core academic and vocational education officials, in the 2. School-to-Work Opportunities skills; and implementation of local activities programs will— • Procedures to facilitate the entry of described in this Part as school-based (a) Provide participating students students participating in a School-to- learning, work-based learning, or with the opportunity to complete career Work Opportunities initiative into connecting activities; majors; additional training or postsecondary (A) Providing assistance to (b) Incorporate the program education programs, as well as to participants who have completed the components described below (school- facilitate the transfer of the students program in finding an appropriate job, based learning, work-based learning, between education and training continuing their education, or entering and connecting activities); programs. into an additional training program; or (c) Provide participating students, to (b) Work-based learning, that (B) Linking the participants with the extent practicable, with strong includes— other community services that may be experience in and understanding of all (1) Mandatory activities— necessary to assure a successful aspects of the industry the students are • Work experience; transition from school to work; preparing to enter; and • A planned program of job training • Collecting and analyzing (d) Provide all students with equal and work experiences (including information regarding post-program access to the full range of such program training related to pre-employment and outcomes of participants in the School- components (including both school- employment skills to be mastered at to-Work Opportunities initiative, to the based and work-based learning progressively higher levels) that are extent practicable and appropriate for components) and related activities, such coordinated with learning in the school- Indian programs, on the basis of as recruitment, enrollment, and based learning component described socioeconomic status, gender, and placement activities, except that nothing above and are relevant to the career disability, and on the basis of whether in this notice shall be construed to majors of students and lead to the award the participants are students with provide any individual with an of skill certificates; limited-English proficiency, school entitlement to services. • Workplace mentoring; dropouts, disadvantaged students, or 3. School-to-Work Opportunities • Instruction in general workplace academically talented students; and initiatives must incorporate three basic competencies, including instruction and • Linking youth development program components: activities related to developing positive activities under the School-to-Work (a) School-Based Learning, that work attitudes, and employability and Opportunities initiative with employer includes— participative skills; and and industry strategies for upgrading the • Career awareness and career • Broad instruction, to the extent skills of their workers. exploration and counseling (beginning practicable, in all aspects of the b. Examples of Allowable Activities at the earliest possible age, but not later industry. than the 7th grade) in order to help (2) Permissible activities—Such Funds awarded under this students who may be interested to component may include such activities competition to a partnership serving identify, and select or reconsider, their as paid work experience, job shadowing, Indian youth and involving Bureau- interests, goals, and career majors, school-sponsored enterprises, or on-the- funded schools may be used only for including those options that may not be job training. activities undertaken to develop or traditional for their gender, race, or (c) Connecting Activities, that implement the local partnership’s plan ethnicity; include— that will provide opportunities for • Initial selection by interested • Matching students with the work- Indian youth to participate successfully students of a career major not later than based learning opportunities of in a School-to-Work Opportunities the beginning of the 11th grade; employers; initiative. 14140 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices Development Grants: Eligible School-to-Work Opportunities initiative of employers to identify high-demand, partnerships that have not fully may apply for implementation grants. high-wage careers to target; developed a plan for the These funds may be used to support a 10. Integrating school-based and implementation of a School-to-Work wide range of activities providing work-based learning into existing job Opportunities system may apply for School-to-Work Opportunities for training programs for school dropouts; development grants. These funds may Indian youth. Examples of 11. Establishing or expanding school- support a wide range of planning and implementation activities that may be to-apprenticeship programs in development activities. These grants are conducted with funds awarded under cooperation with registered designed for situations in which an an Indian Program Grant are: apprenticeship agencies and eligible partnership may not be ready to 1. Recruiting and providing assistance apprenticeship sponsors; move forward with implementation of a to employers, including small- and 12. Assisting participating employers, School-to-Work Opportunities initiative, medium-sized businesses, tribal including small- and medium-sized but intends to compete for businesses and school-based businesses, tribal businesses and school- implementation grants in future rounds enterprises, to provide the work-based based enterprises, to identify and train of competition. Eligible partnerships learning components in the School-to- workplace mentors and to develop seeking development grants must Work Opportunities initiative; work-based learning components; describe the planning and development 2. Establishing consortia of 13. Promoting the formation of activities for the School-to-Work employers, including tribal businesses partnerships between Bureau-funded Opportunities initiative that the and school-based enterprises, to support schools and other elementary and partnership proposes to undertake the School-to-Work Opportunities secondary schools (including middle during the 12-month grant period. The initiative and provide access to jobs schools) and local businesses as an plan should include activities funded related to the career majors of students; investment in future workplace from this grant as well as from other 3. Supporting or establishing productivity and competitiveness; sources. Examples of development intermediaries (selected from among the 14. Designing local strategies to activities that may be conducted with members of the local partnership) to provide adequate planning time and funds awarded under an Indian Program perform the connecting activities staff development activities for teachers, Grant are— described above in Part II. a., school counselors, related services 1. Initiating a planning process aimed ‘‘Objectives,’’ and to provide assistance personnel, and school site mentors, at building a School-to-Work to Indian youth in obtaining jobs and including opportunities outside the Opportunities initiative; further education and training; classroom that are at the worksite; 4. Designing or adapting innovative 2. Identifying or establishing an 15. Enhancing linkages between after- school curricula that can be used to appropriate structure to administer a school, weekend, and summer jobs, integrate academic, vocational, and School-to-Work Opportunities initiative; career exploration, and school-based occupational learning, school-based and 3. Further expanding eligible learning; partnerships as defined in this notice to work-based learning, and secondary and 16. Obtaining the assistance of participate in the design, development postsecondary education for all students organizations and institutions that have and administration of the School-to- in the area served; a history of success in working with Work Opportunities initiative; 5. Providing training to work-based school dropouts and at-risk and 4. Building consensus among local and school-based staff on new curricula, disadvantaged youths in recruiting such stakeholders and supporting planning student assessments, student guidance, Indian youth who are at-risk or school and development activities to provide and feedback to the school regarding dropouts to participate in a local guidance in creating the School-to-Work student performance in connection with School-to-Work Opportunities initiative; Opportunities plan; the School-to-Work Opportunities 5. Initiating pilot projects to test key Initiative; 17. Conducting outreach to all components of program design such as 6. Establishing, in schools students in a language and manner that designing and testing common intake participating in a School-to-Work most appropriately and effectively systems for students participating in Opportunities initiative, a graduation meets their needs and responds to the School-to-Work Opportunities assistance program to assist at-risk needs of their community; initiatives, and determining methods to students, low-achieving students, and 18. Experimenting with providing integrate program data bases; students with disabilities, in graduating work-based learning opportunities both 6. Analyzing current statutory, from high school, enrolling in inside and outside the Indian regulatory and administrative postsecondary education or training, community; impediments to the creation of a School- and finding or advancing in jobs; 19. Developing, in conjunction with to-Work Opportunities initiative; 7. Providing career exploration and Title I of the Elementary and Secondary 7. Assessing staff training and awareness services, counseling and Schools Act or other funds, development needs for participation in mentoring services, college awareness improvements in the Bureau-funded a School-to-Work Opportunities and preparation services, and other and other elementary and middle initiative; services (beginning at the earliest schools that serve the Indian 8. Preparing the strategic plan possible age, but not later than the 7th community in order to reduce the long- required for submission of a proposal grade) to prepare students for the term dropout rate of Indian youth; for an implementation grant. The plan transition from school to work; 20. Developing and implementing should describe the progress expected to 8. Providing supplementary and techniques that will increase the college be achieved in the planning and support services, including child care enrollment of Indian youth in the development process by the end of the and transportation, when such services targeted area; 12-month grant period. This should are necessary for participation in a local 21. Utilizing complementary include expected ‘‘next steps.’’ School-to-Work Opportunities initiative; initiatives within the targeted area such Implementation grants: Eligible 9. Conducting or obtaining an in- as comprehensive sports and recreation partnerships that have developed and depth analysis of the local labor market programs, after-school programs, and are ready to implement a plan for a and the generic and specific skill needs community development activities; Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices 14141 22. Encouraging Indian youth to goals for developing or implementing a 1. No student in a School-to-Work design and initiate innovative work- system. In addition to goals related Opportunities program shall displace based learning activities operated directly to School-to-Work any currently employed worker within a school setting; and Opportunities outcomes, such goals for (including a partial displacement, such 23. Developing and implementing Indian Program initiatives might as a reduction in the hours of non- school-based and work-based learning include decreased dropout rates, overtime work, wages, or employment and connecting activities that are related decreased truancy rates, and increased benefits.) to the tribal organization’s economic college entry and entered employment 2. No School-to-Work Opportunities development plan. rates. In addition to describing its own program shall impair exiting contracts Part III. Application Contents goals and outcomes, each local for services or collective bargaining partnership awarded a grant under this agreements, and no program under this All eligible applicants for notice must commit to assisting the competition that would be inconsistent development or implementation grants Federal Government in carrying out a with the terms of a collective bargaining must submit an application which national evaluation that will track and agreement shall be undertaken without provides evidence of key descriptive assess the progress and effectiveness of the written concurrence of the labor components. Since applicants have been the School-to-Work Opportunities organization and employer concerned. recommended to submit applications initiative. 3. No student participating in School- which describe their plan in light of the d. A description of the current and to-Work Opportunities program shall be Selection Criteria defined in Section E, planned coordination between the local employed or fill a job— the Departments suggest that applicants partnership’s School-to-Work a. When any other individual is on provide evidence of the following as Opportunities initiative in the Indian temporary layoff, with the clear part of the applicable Selection Criteria community and the tribal organization’s possibility of recall, from the same or addressed in the Program Narrative economic development, workforce any substantially equivalent job with section of application. Applications development and education reform the participating employer; or must include the following: plans. Areas to be addressed include: b. When the employer has terminated a. A description of the composition of the development of skill standards and the employment of any regular the eligible partnership as previously processes for awarding skill certificates; employee or otherwise reduced its defined in Section B.7 of this the establishment of a system-wide workforce with the intention of filling announcement. Partnerships applying evaluation process; the identification of the vacancy so created with a student. for either development or emerging occupations appropriate for 4. Students shall be provided with implementation grants must identify career majors; the development of new adequate and safe equipment and safe and provide evidence of the curricula; strategies for recruiting and healthful workplaces in conformity involvement of the members of the local employers and providing paid work- with all health and safety requirements partnership required to make the based learning experiences; and of Federal, State, and local law. application eligible for consideration in providing professional staff 5. Nothing in this notice shall be the Indian Program. Partnerships development. Should the tribal construed so as to modify or affect any applying for implementation grants organization and the Bureau-funded Federal or State law prohibiting must clearly outline the respective roles school not have a plan for developing discrimination on the basis of religion, of each member of the partnership and skill standards and awarding skill gender, age, or disability. how the partnership is organized to certificates, the application should 6. Funds awarded under this successfully implement the planned describe the local partnership’s competition shall not be expended for local School-to-Work Opportunities proposed activities concerning the wages of students or workplace mentors initiative. Given the particular needs in investigation and adaptation of existing participating in School-to-Work Indian communities, special efforts industry-recognized standards or Opportunities programs. should be made to coordinate existing processes for awarding 7. The grantee shall implement and community services to successfully industry-recognized certificates to maintain such other safeguards as the identify and address the special needs incorporate the criteria established in Departments may deem appropriate in of the Indian youth. the Goals 2000: Educate America Act. order to ensure that School-to-Work b. A description of the targeted area States and neighboring partnerships Opportunities participants are afforded to be covered, and its relationship to the located near the area may serve as a adequate supervision by skilled adult surrounding labor market. Included in source of information regarding skill workers, or to otherwise further the the description should be information standards and skill certificates purposes of this program. on specific employer needs (including recognized in the local labor market and An applicant must provide an those of tribal businesses or school- in other parts of the State. assurance, in the application based enterprises where applicable); e. A timeline outlining the specific appendices, that the foregoing industry and occupational growth tasks to be undertaken related to safeguards will be implemented and projections; high-demand, high-wage development or to implementation of a maintained throughout all program careers to be targeted and the School-to-Work Opportunities plan, activities. relationship of these factors to the tribal with expected completion dates and Section E. Selection Criteria organization’s economic plan (where stated outcomes to be achieved. applicable). The description should f. A designation of a fiscal agent to Under the School-to-Work include information for the entire labor receive and be accountable for funds Opportunities Indian Program Grants market area in which the Indian awarded under this notice. competition announced in this notice, a community is located. careful evaluation of applications will c. A description of the short- and Section D. Safeguards be made by a panel constructed of (a) long-term goals and performance The Departments apply the following peer reviewers and (b) specialists within outcomes that the partnership has safeguards to School-to-Work the Departments of Labor and established an how the partnership will Opportunities programs funded under Education. Each panelist will evaluate measure its progress in meeting these this competition: the applications against the criteria 14142 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices listed below, with emphasis on the * To what extent will employers and Work Opportunities initiative serving scope and quality of the proposed plan representatives of workers participate in Indian youth and involving Bureau- and with careful consideration of the the development of the plan? funded schools that integrates school- effectiveness, rather than the presence, * Are the roles and responsibilities of based learning and work-based learning, of each program component. The panel each partner well articulated and integrates academic and occupational results are advisory in nature and not substantive? learning, and establishes effective binding on the Grants Officer. Final * Is the plan likely to lead to a broad linkages between secondary and funding decisions will be made based consensus about the design of the postsecondary education? on the results of the panel review School-to-Work Opportunities system? * Does the application demonstrate process and such other factors as: * Is the proposal clear on who will an effective strategy for targeting high- geographic balance, diversity of have the day to day responsibilities for demand, high-wage jobs and relate that programmatic approaches, replicability, the grant and how major decisions will strategy to the partnership’s goals? sustainability, and innovation. The be made? * What steps will the local Government will use the following Selection Criterion 3: Feasibility and partnership take to generate paid high- selection criteria in evaluating soundness of the development plan. qualify, work-based learning applications for development grants: Points: 25. experiences? Considerations: In applying this * How effectively are the common Selection Criteria criterion, reviewers will consider: features and basic program components Selection Criterion 1: Vision of a local * Are the planned activities likely to described in Part II., a., of the Statement School to Work Opportunities initiative prepare the eligible partnership to of Work included in the local School-to- incorporating the elements described in implement a School-to-Work Work Opportunities initiative? Part II of this notice. Opportunities initiative? * Have promising existing programs Points: 30. * To what extent has progress already been considered for adaptation? Considerations: In applying this been made? * Have new directions and criterion, reviewers will consider: * Are staff development and training approaches been planned to ensure that * How well does the vision of an needs fully considered? these programs include the common integrated delivery system for School-to- * Does the development process fully features and basic program components? Work Opportunities incorporate the take advantage of technology? * As the proposed School-to-Work common features and basic program * Whether the approach to Opportunities initiative becomes components described in Part II of this identifying and overcoming anticipated established within the targeted area, is notice? barriers to the development of the there an effective long-range plan for * How clearly are the problems and/ partnership’s School-to-Work plan is integrating other existing school-to-work or inefficiencies of current programs feasible? programs with the initiative? * Is the proposed local initiative and approaches understood and * Whether the management plan and effectively tied to a plan for educational articulated? related timeline of activities included in reform? * How clearly does the partnership the application are appropriate to the goals and outcomes to be achieved? Selection Criterion 2: Scope and articulate how it envisions integrating Effectiveness of Indian Program Local promising existing programs into a * Are key personnel to be used on the project qualified to undertake proposed Partnerships. comprehensive School-to-Work Points: 25. Opportunities system? activities? Selection Criterion 4: Commitment to Considerations: In applying this * How well does this vision the planning and development effort. criterion, reviewers will consider: incorporate realistic strategies to ensure Points: 15. * Does the application demonstrate that ‘‘all students’’ have opportunities to Considerations: In applying this the strong commitment and support of participate in School-to-Work criterion, reviewers will consider: tribal organizations (such as tribal initiatives? * To what extent are Federal or other business councils or local chapters of * How well does the vision address local resources being utilized to finance tribal business councils, tribal the needs of the labor market within planning and development activities departments of education), employers which the targeted area is located, towards the development of a (both within and surrounding the including the tribal economic plan? comprehensive School-to-Work system? targeted area where applicable and * How well does the vision convey * To what extent has the partnership including tribal businesses and school- the partnership’s connection between provided in-kind support and resources based enterprises), representatives of the proposed School-to-Work towards the development of the system? local educational agencies and local Opportunities system and overall * Whether resources available are postsecondary educational institutions education reform? adequate to support the activities (including representatives of area Selection Criterion 2: Approach to proposed? vocational education schools and tribal collaboration, planning and The Government will use the colleges, where applicable), local development. following selection criteria in evaluating educators (such as teachers, counselors, Points: 30. applications for implementation grants. or administrators), representatives of Considerations: In applying this labor organizations or nonmanagerial criterion, reviewers will consider: Selection Criteria employee representatives, parents and * Whether the eligible partnership Selection Criterion 1: Scope and students and provide for their sustained includes all of the required Quality of the School-to-Work and specific involvement? representatives as defined in section E.7 Opportunities Initiative. * Given the scope of the proposed of this notice? Points: 25. School-to-Work Opportunities initiative, * Whether other appropriate officials Considerations: In applying this does the local partnership include other and organizations necessary to achieve criterion, reviewers will consider: members appropriate to effective the objectives of the application are also * Is there an innovative and effective implementation, particularly represented? strategy for implementing a School-to- community-based organizations and Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices 14143 others experienced in dealing with the Selection Criterion 4: maximize the amounts spent on distinctive needs of Indian youth? Comprehensiveness. delivery of services to students enrolled * Are the rolls and responsibilities of Points: 15. in its School-to-Work Opportunities the members of the local partnership Consideration: In applying this programs? clearly described, appropriate and likely criterion, reviewers will consider: • • Does the plan include methods for to produce the desired changes in the To what extent has the local sustaining and expanding the way students are prepared for the partnership considered the current and partnership as the initiative expands in future? future occupational needs of the labor scope and size? * Does the local partnership’s plan market areas within which the targeted • Is there an effective strategy for include an effective and convincing area is located, including the tribal identifying and utilizing other strategy for obtaining the active and organization’s economic plan? resources, including private sector • Does the membership representing continued involvement of employers resources, to maintain and expand employers in the local partnership and other interested parties such as School-to-Work Opportunities reflect such current and future locally elected officials, secondary and occupational needs? initiatives? postsecondary educational institutions • • How is the strategy for Does the management plan reflect (or related agencies), business implementing the School-to-Work continuous improvement methodologies associations, industrial extension Opportunities initiative likely to by building in specific, outcome-based, centers, employees, labor organizations produce systemic change, rather than evaluative checkpoints and the or nonmanagerial employees, teachers, stand-alone program implementation? mechanisms necessary to carry out related services personnel, students, • What evidence is provided that improvements, redesigns, or mid-course parents, community-based such systemic change will have corrections along the way? organizations, rehabilitation agencies substantial impact on the preparation of • Are key personnel under the plan and organizations, registered Indian youth for a first job in a high- qualified to perform the required apprenticeship agencies, local skill, high-wage career and activities, including maintaining the vocational educational agencies, postsecondary education and training? essential partnership? vocational student organizations, State • Where appropriate, is there existing Section F. Reporting Requirements/ or regional cooperative education or planned collaboration among other Deliverables associations, and human service school districts, States, employers, labor agencies in the implementation of local organizations, and community groups The local partnership will be required program(s)? that will lead to an increasingly to provide the following: Selection Criterion 3: Student comprehensive local School-to-Work Participation. Opportunities system? 1. Quarterly and Final Reports Points: 20. • Are related human services • Quarterly financial reports as Considerations: In applying this programs available within the required by the grant award documents; criterion, reviewers will consider: community included in the • Quarterly narrative reports on * Applying the definitions contained partnership’s plan for coordination? progress made and problems • in Section B (7) of this notice as Are strategies in place to coordinate encountered in implementing the appropriate for programs serving Indian related Federal funding available to the proposed plan and that indicate, where youth, does the plan propose realistic Indian community? • relevant, the corrective action(s) strategies to ensure that ‘‘all students’’ Does the local partnership’s plan proposed to address implementation have opportunities to participate in exhibit strong potential for maintaining problems; and School-to-Work Opportunities School-to-Work Opportunities • Annual reports at year-end on the initiatives after Federal funding ceases? initiatives? activities and accomplishments of the * Does the strategy recognize barriers Selection Criterion 5: Management plan. local partnership’s School-to-Work to their participations and propose Opportunities initiative. effective ways of overcoming them so Points: 15. Considerations: In applying this that these students are prepared for 2. Deliverables criterion, reviewers will consider: high-skill, high-wage jobs, including— • What evidence exists to • At a minimum, preparing an for young women—nontraditional demonstrate the effectiveness of the assessment of accomplishments and employment? local partnership and/or its key results at each program year-end * Does the plan provide for the direct members in the delivery of suitable for dissemination to other delivery of services to significant comprehensive vocational programs Indian communities and partnerships. numbers of Indian youth or propose an with successful job placement rates • Acting as a host to outside visitors effective model for service provision to through cooperative activities among from other Indian communities or local Indian youth in remote areas? local educational agencies, Local partnerships interested in developing * Is there an effective strategy for businesses, labor organizations, and and implementing School-to-Work assessing the academic and human others? Opportunities initiatives in settings service needs of students and dropouts • Does the entity submitting the with similar characteristics. and making improvements or application on the part of the local Signed at Washington, DC, this 9th day of adjustments as necessary to ensure their partnership have the capacity to manage March 1995. successful participation in and the implementation of the local School- Doug Ross, completion of School-to-Work to-Work Opportunities initiative? Opportunities programs? • Assistant Secretary for Employment and Does the management plan Training, Department of Labor. • What, if any, provisions are made anticipate barriers to implementation Augusta Souza Kappner, for the participation of elementary and and include a system for addressing middle school Indian youth in school- them as they arise? Assistant Secretary for Vocational and Adult to-work activities, such as career • Does the applicant limit Education, Department of Education. exploration and awareness? administrative costs in order to BILLING CODE 4510±30±M 14144 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices BILLING CODE 4510±30±C Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices 14145 Instructions for the SF 424 8. Check appropriate box and enter each contributor. Value of in-kind This is a standard form used by applicants appropriate letter(s) in the space(s) provided: contributions should be included on as a required facesheet for preapplications —‘‘New’’ means a new assistance award. appropriate lines as applicable. If the action and applications submitted for Federal —‘‘Continuation’’ means an extension for an will result in a dollar change to an existing assistance. It will be used by Federal agencies additional funding/budget period for a awards, indicate only the amount of the to obtain applicant certification that States project with a projected completion date. change. For decreases, enclose the amounts which have established a review and —‘‘Revision’’ means any change in the in parentheses. If both basic and comment procedure in response to Executive Federal Government’s financial obligation supplemental amounts are included, show Order 12372 and have selected the program or contingent liability from an existing breakdown on an attached sheet. For to be included in their process, have been obligation. multiple program funding, use totals and given a opportunity to review the applicant’s 9. Name of Federal agency from which submission. show breakdown using same categories as assistance is being requested with this item 15. application. Item and Entry 16. Applicants should contact the State 10. Use the Catalog of Federal Domestic 1. Self-explanatory. Single Point of Contact (SPOC) for Federal Assistance number and title of the program 2. Date application submitted to Federal Executive Order 12372 to determine whether agency for State if applicable) & applicant’s under which assistance is requested. 11. Enter a brief descriptive title of the the application is subject to the State control number (if applicable). intergovernmental review process. 3. State use only (if applicable). project, if more than one program is 17. This question applies to the applicant 4. If this application is to continue or involved, you should append an explanation revise an existing award, enter present on a separate sheet. If appropriate (e.g., organization, not the person who signs as the Federal identifier number. If for a new construction or real property projects), attach authorized representative. Categories of debt project, leave blank. a map showing project location. For include delinquent audit disallowances, 5. Legal name of applicant, name of preapplications, use a separate sheet to loans and taxes. primary organizational unit which will provide a summary description of this 18. To be signed by the authorized undertake the assistance activity, complete project. representative of the applicant. A copy of the address of the applicant, and name and 12. List only the largest political entities governing body’s authorization for you to telephone number of the person to contact on affected (e.g., State, counties, cities). sign this application as official representative matters related to this application. 13. Self-explanatory. must be on file in the applicant’s office. 6. Enter Employer Identification Number 14. List the applicant’s Congressional (Certain Federal agencies may require that District and any District(s) affected by the (EIN) as assigned by the Internal Revenue this authorization be submitted as part of the Service. program or project. application.) 7. Enter the appropriate letter in the space 15. Amount requested or to be contributed provided. during the first funding/budget period by BILLING CODE 4510±30±M 14146 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices BILLING CODE 4510±30±C Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices 14147 Instructions for Part II—Budget Information (including funds sufficient to pay the non- regardless of Federal participation in Federal share of project costs) to ensure purchases. Section A—Budget Summary by Categories proper planning, management and (8) Will comply with the provisions of the 1. Personnel: Show salaries to be paid for completion of the project described in this Hatch Act (U.S.C. 1501–1508 and 7324–7328) project personnel. application. which limit the political activities of 2. Fringe Benefits: Indicate the rate and (2) Will give the awarding agency, the employees whose principal employment amount of fringe benefits. Comptroller General of the United States, and activities are funded in whole or in part with 3. Travel: Indicate the amount requested if appropriate, the State, through any Federal funds. for staff travel. Include funds to cover at least authorized representative, access to and the (9) Will comply, as applicable, with the one trip to Washington, DC for project right to examine all records, books, papers, provisions of the Davis-Bacon Act (40 U.S.C. director or designee. or documents related to the award; and will 276a to 276a 7), the Copeland Act (40 U.S.C. 4. Equipment: Indicate the cost of non- establish a proper accounting system in 276c and 18 U.S.C. 874, and the Contract expendable personal property that has a accordance with generally accepted Work Hours and Safety Standards Act useful life of more than one year with a per accounting standards or agency directives. (40.327–333), regarding labor standards for unit cost of $5,000 or more. (3) Will establish safeguards to prohibit federally assisted construction 5. Supplies: Include the cost of consumable employees from using their positions for a subagreements. supplies and materials to be used during the purpose that constitutes or presents the (10) Will comply, if applicable, with Flood project period. appearance of personal or organizational Insurance Purchase Requirements of Section 6. Contractual: Show the amount to be conflict of interest, or personal gain. 102(A) of the Flood Disaster Protection Act used for (1) procurement contracts (except (4) Will initiate and complete the work of 1973 (P.L. 93.234) which requires those which belong on other lines such as within the applicable time frame after receipt recipients in a special flood hazard area to supplies and equipment); and (2) sub- of approval of the awarding agency. participate in the program and to purchase contracts/grants. (5) Will comply with the flood insurance if the total cost of insurable 7. Other: Indicate all direct costs not Intergovernmental Personnel Act of 1970 (42 construction and acquisition is $10,000 or clearly covered by lines 1 through 6 above, U.S.C. 4728–4763) relating to prescribed more. including consultants. standards for merit systems for programs (11) Will comply with environmental 8. Total, Direct Costs: Add lines 1 through funded under one of the nineteen statutes or standards which may be prescribed pursuant 7. regulations specified in Appendix A of to the following: (a) institution of 9. Indirect Costs: Indicate the rate and OPM’s Standards for a Merit System of environmental quality control measures amount of indirect costs. Please include a Personnel Administration (5 CFR 900, under the National Environmental Policy Act copy of your negotiated Indirect Cost Subpart F). of 1969 (P.L. 91.190) and Executive Order Agreement. (6) Will comply with all Federal statutes (EO) 11514; (b) notification of violating 10. Training/Stipend Cost: (If allowable) relating to nondiscrimination. These include facilities pursuant to EO 11738; (c) protection 11. Total Federal Funds Requested: Show but are not limited to: (a) Title VI of the Civil of wetlands pursuant to EO 11990; (d) total of lines 8 through 10. Rights Act of 1964 (P.L. 88.352) which evaluation of flood hazards in flood plains in Section B—Cost Sharing/Matching Summary prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, accordance with EO 11988; (e) assurance of color or national origin; (b) Title IX of the project consistency with the approved State Indicate the actual rate and amount of cost Education Amendments of 1972, as amended management program developed under the sharing/matching when there is a cost (20 U.S.C. 1681–1683, and 1685–1686), Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972 (16 sharing/matching requirement. Also include which prohibits discrimination on the basis U.S.C. 1451 et seq.); (f) conformity of Federal percentage of total project cost and indicate of handicaps; (d) the Age Discrimination Act actions to State (Clear Air) Implementation source of cost sharing/matching funds, i.e. of 1975, as amended (42 U.S.C. 6101–6107), Plans under Section 176(c) of the Clear Air other Federal source or other Non-Federal which prohibits discrimination on the basis Act of 1955, as amended (42 U.S.C. 7401 et source. of age; (e) the Drug Abuse Office and seq.); (g) protection of underground sources Note: Please include a detailed cost Treatment Act of 1972 (P.L. 92.255) as of drinking water under the Safe Drinking analysis of each line item. amended, relating to nondiscrimination on Water Act of 1974, as amended, (P.L. 93.523); Appendix B—Assurances and Certifications the basis of drug abuse; (f) the and (h) protection of endangered species Comprehensive Alcohol Abuse and under the Endangered Species Act of 1973, The Department of Labor will not award a Alcoholism Prevention, Treatment and as amended, (P.L. 93.205). grant or agreement where the awardee has Rehabilitation Act of 1970 (P.L. 91.616) as (12) Will comply with the Wide and Scenic failed to accept the Assurances and amended, relating to nondiscrimination on Rivers Act of 1988 (16 U.S.C. 1271 et seq.) Certifications contained in this section. By the basis of alcohol abuse or alcoholism; (g) related to protecting components or potential signing the face sheet of this grant or 523 and 527 of the Public Health Service Act components of the national wide and scenic agreement, the awardee is providing the of 1912 (42 U.S.C. 290 dd.3 and 290 ee.3), as rivers system. certifications set forth below: amended, relating to confidentiality of (13) Will assist the awarding agency in Assurances—Non-Construction Programs alcohol and drug abuse patient records; (h) assuring compliance with Section 106 of the Debarment and Suspension Certification Title VIII of the Civil Rights Act of 1968 (42 National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as Certification Regarding Lobbying U.S.C. 3601 et seq.) as amended, relating to amended (16 U.S.C. 470), EO 11593 Drug Free Workplace Certification nondiscrimination in the sale, rental or (identification and protection of historic Certification of Non-Delinquency financing of housing; (i) any other properties), and the Archaeological and Non-discrimination and Equal Employment nondiscrimination provisions in the specific Historic Preservation Act of 1974 (16 U.S.C. Requirements Under JTPA statute(s) under which application for 469a.1 et seq.). 1. Assurances—Non-Construction Programs Federal assistance is being made; and (j) the (14) Will comply with P.L. 93.348 requirements of any other nondiscrimination regarding the protection of human subjects Note: Certain of these assurances may not statute(s) which may apply to the involved in research, development, and be applicable to your project or program. If application. related activities supported by this award of you have questions, please contact the (7) Will comply, or has already complied, assistance. awarding agency. Further, certain Federal with the requirements of Titles II and III of (15) Will comply with the Laboratory awarding agencies may require applicants to the Uniformly Relocation Assistance and Animal Welfare Act of 1966 (P.L.) 89.544, as certify to additional assurances. If such is the Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of amended, 7 U.S.C. 2131 et seq.) pertaining to case, you will be notified. 1970 (P.L. 91.646) which provides for fair the care, handling, and treatment of warm As the duly authorized representative of and equitable treatment of persons displaced blooded animals held for research, teaching, the applicant, I certify that the applicant: or whose property is acquired as a result of or other activities supported by this award of (1) Has the legal authority to apply for Federal or federally assisted programs. These assistance. Federal Assistance, and the institutional requirements apply to all interests in real (16) Will comply with the Lead-Based managerial and financial capability property acquired for project purposes Paint Poisoning Prevention Act (42 U.S.C. 14148 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices 4801 et seq.) which prohibits the use of lead paid to any person for influencing or (item 1). If known, enter the full Catalog of based paint in construction or rehabilitation attempting to influence an officer or Federal Domestic Assistance (CFDA) number of residence structures. employee of any agency, a Member of for grants, cooperative agreements, loans, and (17) Will cause to be performed the Congress, an officer or employee of Congress, loan commitments. required financial and compliance audits in or an employee of a Member of Congress in 8. Enter the most appropriate Federal accordance with the Single Audit Act of Connection with this Federal contract, grant, identifying number available for the Federal 1984. loan or cooperative agreement, the action identified in item 1 (e.g., Request for (18) Will comply with all applicable undersigned shall complete and submit Proposal (RFP) number; Invitation for Bid requirements of all other Federal laws, Standard Form—LLL, ‘‘Disclosure Form to (IFB) number, grant announcement number, executive orders, regulations and policies Report Lobbying,’’ in accordance with its the contract, grant, or loan award number, governing this program. instructions. the application/proposal control number 2. Certification Regarding Debarment, Instructions for Completion of SF–LLL, assigned by the Federal agency). Include Suspension, and Other Responsibility Disclosure of Lobbying Activities prefixes, e.g., ‘‘RFP–DE–90–001.’’ Matters—Primary Covered Transactions 9. For a covered Federal action where there This disclosure form shall be completed by has been an award or loan commitment by (1) The prospective primary participant the reporting entity, whether subawardee or the Federal agency, enter the Federal amount certifies to the best of its knowledge and prime Federal recipient, at the initiation or of the award/loan commitment for the prime belief, that it and its principals: receipt of a covered Federal Action, or a entity identified in item 4 or 5. (a) Are not presently debarred, suspended, material change to a previous filing, pursuant 10. (a) Enter the full name, address, city, proposed for debarment, declared ineligible, to title 31 U.S.C. section 1352. The filing of state and zip code of the lobbying entity or voluntarily excluded from covered a form is required for each payment or engaged by the reporting entity identified in transactions by any Federal department or agreement to make payment to any lobbying agency; item 4 to influence the covered Federal entity for influencing or attempting to action. (b) Have not within a three-year period influence an officer or employee of any (b) Enter the full names of the individual(s) preceding this proposal been convicted or agency, a Member of Congress, an officer or performing services, and include full address had a civil judgment rendered against them employee of Congress, or an employee of a if different from 10 (a). Enter Last Name, First for commission of fraud or a criminal offense Member of Congress in connection with a Name, and Middle Initial (MI). in connection with obtaining attempting to covered Federal action. Use the SF–LLL–A 11. Enter the amount of compensation paid obtain, or performing a public (Federal, State, Continuation Sheet for additional or reasonably expected to be paid by the or local) transaction or contract under a information if the space on the form is reporting entity (item 4) to the lobbying public transaction; violation of Federal or inadequate. Complete all items that apply for entity (item 10). Indicate whether the State antitrust statutes or commission of both the initial filing and material change payment has been made (actual) or will be embezzlement, theft, forgery, bribery, report. Refer to the implementing guidance made (planned). Check all boxes that apply. falsification or destruction of records, making published by the Office of Management and false statements, or receiving stolen property; Budget for additional information. If this is a material change report, enter the (c) Are not presently indicated or 1. Identify the type of covered Federal cumulative amount of payment made or otherwise criminally or civilly charged by a action for which lobbying activity is and/or planned to be made. government entity (Federal, State or local) has been secured to influence the outcome of 12. Check the appropriate box(es). Check with commission of any of the offenses a covered Federal action. all boxes that apply. If payment is made enumerated in paragraph (1)(b) of this 2. Identify the status of the covered Federal through an in-kind contribution, specify the certification; and; action. nature and value of the in-kind payment. (d) Have not a three-year period preceding 3. Identify the appropriate classification of 13. Check the appropriate box(es). Check this application/proposal had one or more this report. If this is a followup report caused all boxes that apply. If other, specify nature. public transactions (Federal, State, or local) by a material change to the information 14. Provide a specific and detailed terminated for cause or default. previously reported, enter the year and description of the services that the lobbyist (2) Where the prospective primary quarter in which the change occurred. Enter has performed, or will be expected to participant is unable to certify to any of the the date of the last previously submitted perform, and the date(s) of any services statements in this certification, such report by this reporting entity for this rendered. Include all preparatory and related prospective participant shall attach an covered Federal action. activity, not just time spent in actual contact explanation of this proposal. 4. Enter the full name, address, city, state with Federal officials. Identify the Federal official(s) or employee(s) contacted or the 3. Certification Regarding Lobbying and zip code of the reporting entity. Include Congressional District, if known. Check the officer(s), employee(s), or Member(s) of Certification for Contracts, Grants, Loans, and appropriate classification of the reporting Congress that were contacted. Cooperative Agreements entity that designates if it is, or expects to be, 15. Check whether or not a SF–LLL–A By accepting this grant/agreement, the a prime or subaward recipient. Identify the Continuation Sheet(s) is attached. signee hereby certifies, to the best of his or tier of the subawardee, e.g., the first 16. The certifying official shall sign and her knowledge and belief, that: subawardee of the prime is the 1st tier. date the form, print his/her name, title, and 1. No Federal appropriated funds have Subawards include but are not limited to telephone number. been paid or will be paid, by or on behalf of subcontracts, subgrants and contract awards Public reporting burden for this collection the undersigned, to any person for under grants. of information is estimated to average 30 influencing or attempting to influence an 5. If the organization filing the report in minutes per response, including time for officer or employee of Congress, or an item 4 checks ‘‘Subawardee’’, then enter the reviewing instructions, searching existing employee of a Member of Congress in full name, address, city, state and zip code data sources, gathering and maintaining the connection with the awarding of any Federal of the prime Federal recipient. Include data needed, and completing and reviewing contract, the making of any Federal grant, the Congressional District, if known. the collection of information. Send making of any Federal loan, the entering into 6. Enter the name of the Federal agency comments regarding the burden estimate or of any cooperative agreement, and the making the award or loan commitment. any other aspect of this collection of extension, continuation, renewal, Include at least one organizational level information, including suggestions for amendment or modification of any Federal below agency name, if known. For example, reducing this burden, to the Office of contract, grant, loan or cooperative Department of Transportation, United States Management and Budget, Paperwork agreement. Coast Guard. Reduction Project (0348–0046), Washington, 2. If any funds other than Federal 7. Enter the Federal program name or DC 20503. appropriated funds have been paid or will be description for the covered Federal action BILLING CODE 4510±30±M Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices 14149 14150 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices 14151 BILLING CODE 4510±30±C 14152 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices Nondiscrimination and Equal Opportunity • Funding will be formula-based. For first- helping students reach challenging academic Requirements of JTPA—29 CFR Part 34— year funding, states have been asked to and occupational standards. Assurances submit an application that will describe how • Section 318 of the Act specifically (1) As a condition to the award of financial a broad-based citizen panel will develop an prohibits federal mandates, direction and assistance under JTPA from the Department action plan to improve their schools. The control of education. application will also describe how subgrants of Labor, the grant applicant assures, with Broad-Based Citizen Involvement in State will be made for local education respect to operation of the JTPA-funded Improvement Efforts program or activity and all agreements or improvement and better teacher preservice • The Governor and the Chief State School arrangements to carry out the JTPA-funded and professional development programs. • program or activity, that it will comply fully During the first year, states will use at Officer will each appoint half the members with the nondiscrimination and equal least 60 percent of their allotted funds to of a broad-based panel. This panel will be opportunity provisions of the Job Training award subgrants to local school districts for comprised of teachers, principals, Partnership Act of 1982, as amended (JTPA), the development or implementation of local administrators, parents, representatives of including the Nontraditional Employment for and individual school improvement efforts, business, labor, and higher education, and Women Act of 1991 (where applicable); Title and for better teacher education programs members of the public, as well as the chair IV of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as and professional development activities. of the state board of education and the chairs amended; Section 504 of the Rehabilitation • In succeeding years, at least 90 percent of the appropriate authorizing committees of Act of 1973, as amended; the Age of each state’s funds will be used to make the state legislature. Discrimination Act of 1975, as amended, and subgrants for the implementation of the state, • States that already have a broad-based with all applicable requirements imposed by local and individual school improvement panel in place that has made substantial or pursuant to regulations implementing plans and to support teacher education and progress in developing a reform plan may those laws, including but not limited to 29 professional development. request that the Secretary of Education CFR Part 34. The United States has the right • During the first year, local districts will recognize the existing panel. use at least 75 percent of the funds they to seek judicial enforcement of this Comprehensive Improvement Plan Geared to receive to support individual school assurance. High Standards of Achievement (2) The grant applicant certifies that it has improvement initiatives. After the first year, • developed and will maintain a ‘‘Method of districts will pass through at least 85 percent The State Planning Panel is responsible Administration’’ pursuant to 29 CFR 34.33. of the funds to schools. for developing a comprehensive reform plan. • States with reform plan already in place This system must be in place by August 14, Components of the Goals 2000: Educate 1993. that meet the Act’s requirements will not America Act (3) The grant applicant is attaching have to develop new plans for Goals 2000. information pursuant to 29 CFR Title I: Setting High Expectations for Our The U.S. Secretary of Education may approve 34.24(a)(3)(ii) where applicable, including Nation: the National Education Goals plans, or portions of plans, already adopted the name of any Federal agency other than • by the state. Formalizes in law the original six • the Department of Labor’s Directorate of Civil National Education Goals. These goals In order to receive Goals 2000 funds after Rights that conducted a civil rights concern: readiness for school; increased the first year, a state has to have an approved compliance review or complaint school graduation rates; student academic plan or have made substantial progress in investigation during the two preceding years developing it. achievement and citizenship; mathematics • in which the grant applicant was found to be and science performance; adult literacy; and A peer review process will be used to in noncompliance; and shall identify the safe, disciplined, and drug-free schools. The review the state plans and offer guidance to parties to, the forum of and case numbers Act adds two new goals that encourage the State Planning Panel. The U.S. pertaining to, any administrative parental participation and better professional Department of Education also will offer other enforcement actions or lawsuits filed against development for teachers and principals. technical assistance and support by drawing it during the two years prior to its application on the expertise of successful educators and which allege discrimination on the ground of Title II: Public Accountability for Progress leaders from around the nation. race, color, religion, sex, national origin, age, Toward the Goals and Development of In general, the plans are to address: disability, political affiliation or belief, Challenging Voluntary, Academic Standards • Strategies for the development or citizenship or participation in JTPA. • Establishes in law the bipartisan adoption of content standards, student Note: lll No findings of noncompliance National Education Goals Panel, which will; performance standards, student assessments, in the last two years. lll See attached report on the nation’s progress toward and plans for improving teacher training. information. meeting the goals; build public support for • Strategies to involve parents and the community in helping all students meet Appendix C—Goals 2000: Educate America taking actions to meet the goals; and review challenging state standards and to promote Act—Legislative Summary the voluntarily-submitted national standards and the criteria for certification of these grass-roots, bottom-up involvement in Overview standards developed by the National reform. • • The Goals 2000 Act provides resources Education Standards and Improvement Strategies for ensuring that all local to states and communities to develop and Council. educational agencies and schools in the state • implement comprehensive education reforms Creates the National Education are involved in developing and Standards and Improvement Council, made implementing needed improvements. aimed at helping students reach challenging • academic and occupational skill standards. of a bipartisan, broad base of citizens and Strategies for improved management and educators, to examine and certify voluntary governance, and for promoting accountability Legislative Review national and state standards submitted on a for results, flexibility, site-based • On March 23, the House of voluntary basis by states and by management, and other principles of high- Representatives approved the final Goals organizations working on particular performance management. • 2000 bill by a bipartisan vote of 306–121. On academic subjects. Strategies for providing all students an March 26, the Senate approved Goals 2000 by • Authorizes grants to support the opportunity to learn at high academic levels. a bipartisan vote of 63–22. development of voluntary assessment • Strategies for assisting local education • The President signed the bill into law systems aligned to state standards, and for agencies and schools to meet the needs of March 31, 1994. (Public Law 103–227) the development of model opportunity-to- school-age students who have dropped out of learn standards. school. Timetable and Funding • Strategies for bringing technology into • In 1994, $105 million was appropriated Title III: Supporting Community and State the classroom to increase learning. for Goals 2000. First-year funds became Efforts to Improve Education Funds are also available to states to available to the states on July 1, 1994. • The central purpose of the Goals 2000 support the development of a state Congress has appropriated $403 million in Act is to support, accelerate, and sustain state technology plan, to be integrated with the 1995. and local improvement efforts aimed at overall reform plan. Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices 14153 Broad-Based Involvement in Local Education community-based improvements in workplace. School-to-Work Opportunities Improvement Efforts education. initiatives funded under this competition • • Each local school district that applies for Other new and existing education and will offer Indian youth access to School-too- Goals 2000 funds will be asked to develop a training programs will fit within the Goals Work Opportunity programs that will prepare broad consensus regarding a local 2000 framework of challenging academic and them for first jobs in high-skill, high-wage improvement plan. occupations standards, comprehensive careers and further post-secondary education • Local districts will encourage and assist reform, and flexibility at the state and local and training. school in developing and implementing levels. The aim is to give schools; When are applications due? reforms that best meet the particular needs of communities and states the option of Applications are due 60 days after the the schools. The local plan would include coordinating, promoting, and building greater publication of the SGA. When will awards be made? strategies for ensuring that students meet coherence among Federal programs and All awards must be made by June 30, 1995. higher academic standards. between Federal programs and state and local education reforms. How should I format my application? Waivers and Flexibility • For example, the School-to-Work The Departments recommend that • State educational agencies may apply to Opportunities Act will support state and applications be formatted as suggested in the U.S. Secretary of Education for waivers local efforts to build a school-to-work Section B.2 of the SGA. Applications should of certain requirements of Department of transition system that will help youth acquire include: an abstract, budget, program Education programs that impede the the knowledge, skills, abilities, and labor- narrative and appendices. Applicants are implementation of the state or local plans. market information they need to make a strongly urged to submit applications that States may also submit waiver requests on smooth transition from school to career- comprehensively address the selection behalf of local school districts and schools. oriented work and to further education and criteria as described in Section E of the SGA. • The Secretary may select up to six states training. Students in these programs could be Who will review my application? for participation in an education flexibility expected to meet the same academic Under this application, a technical review demonstration program, which allows the standards established in states under Goals panel consisting of peer reviewers and Secretary to delegate his waiver authority to 2000 and will earn portable, industry- specialists with the Departments of Labor and Education will review applications for State education agencies. recognized skill certificates that are both development and implementation • The Act specifies certain statutory and benchmarked to high-quality standards. grants. regulatory programmatic requirements that • Similarly, the reauthorization of the What will the review of my application be may not be waived, including parental Elementary and Secondary Education Act involvement and civil rights laws. based on? (ESEA) allows states that have developed a. Inclusion of required elements. Title IV. Support for Increased Parental their own standards and assessments under All applications must include: Involvement Goals 2000 to use them for students 1. Evidence that the applicant meets the participating in ESEA programs, thereby • This title creates parental information definition of an eligible applicant. providing one set of standards and 2. An assurance that the grantee will abide and resource centers to increase parents assessments for states and schools to use for knowledge and confidence in child-rearing by the safeguards as stated in the legislation. their own reform needs and, at the same 3. Evidence of the key descriptive activities and to strengthen partnerships time, to meet Federal requirements. between parents and professionals in meeting components as required in Part III, For more information, contact 1–800– Application Contents, of the SGA. the educational needs of children. Parent USA–Learn. resource centers will be funded by the U.S. b. Quality and comprehensiveness of the Department of Education beginning in fiscal Appendix D—Questions and Answers About program narrative. year 1995. School-to-Work Indian Program Grants Panelists will evaluate all applications against the criteria listed in Section E of the Title V. National Skill Standards Board What is the purpose of the SGA? SGA for the development and • The Solicitation for Grant Award (SGA) implementation grant competitions. This title creates a National Skill announces a competition or Indian Program Standards Board to stimulate the Emphasis will be placed on the scope and Grants to enable eligible partnerships to development and adoption of a voluntary quality of the proposed plan and with careful begin development or implementation of national system of occupational skill consideration of the effectiveness, rather than School-to-Work Opportunities initiatives standards and certification. This Board will the presence, of each program component. serving Indian youth and involving schools serve as a cornerstone of the national strategy Final funding decisions will be made based funded by the Bureau of Indian Affairs. to enhance workforce skills. The Board will on the results of the panel review process Are public comments being sought? be responsible for identifying broad clusters and such other factors as: geographic balance, No. The SGA was developed in concert of major occupations in the U.S. and diversity of programmatic approaches, with key organizations including the Bureau facilitating the establishment of voluntary replicability, sustainability, and innovation. of Indiana Affairs, the National Advisory partnership to develop skill standards for Who may apply for these grants? each cluster. The Board will endorse those Council on Indian Education, and Indian A partnership which proposes to serve skill standards submitted by the partnerships programs within the Departments of Indian youth and involves Bureau of Indian that meet certain statutorily prescribed Education and Labor. This work group Affairs funded schools is qualified under this criteria. provided input into the development of the competition to apply for either a SGA. In accordance with DOL procurement development or implementation grant. To be Relationship of Goals 2000 to Other Federal policy and the desire to get funds to the field eligible to apply, a partnership must include: Education Programs as soon as possible, the SGA was published 1. Tribal organizations responsible for • State participation in all apsects of the in the final format. economic development, employment and job Goals 2000 Act is voluntary, and is not a Why School-to-Work Opportunities? training, and education (such as tribal precondition for participation in other The United States is the only business councils, local chapters of tribal Federal programs. industrialized Nation that lacks a business councils, tribal departments of • The Goals 2000 Act is a step toward comprehensive and coherent system to help education and tribal school boards). making the Federal government a better its youth acquire the knowledge, skills, 2. Employers (including tribal businesses partner and a supportive partner in local and abilities, and information about the labor or school-based enterprises where state comprehensive improvement efforts market necessary to make an effective applicable). aimed at helping all children reach higher transition from school to career-oriented 3. Representatives of Bureau-funded standards. The proliferation of many sets of work. The School-to-Work Opportunities Act schools and local postsecondary educational rules and regulations for different federal of 1994 created a national framework for institutions (including representatives of area education programs has often interfered with high-quality, school-to-work transition vocational education schools and tribal local school, community or state efforts to systems that enable young Americans to colleges where applicable). improve schools. The Goals 2000 Act is identify and navigate paths to productive and 4. Local educators (such as teachers, designed to be flexible and supportive of progressively more rewarding roles in the counselors or administrators). 14154 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices 5. Representatives of labor organizations or scope, quality, and comprehensiveness of the Reporting requirements include quarterly nonmanagerial employee representatives. proposed initiative and the size of the financial and narrative reports and an annual 6. Students and parents, and may include population to be served. report on project accomplishments. other appropriate entities. Examples of these How long is the project period? What other grant programs have been entities are contained in section B.7 of the The award period for this competition will implemented under the STWO Act? SGA. be 12 months. However, grants may be The U.S. Departments of Labor and What funding is available? continued for five years based on satisfactory This SGA offers $500,000 in FY94 funds progress and the availability of federal funds. Education are jointly conducting separate under JTPA Title IV for activities that are Can I apply for both a development and competitions for grants to States that are consistent with Title II, Subtitle C of the implementation grant? prepared to implement statewide School-to- School-to-Work Opportunities Act of 1994. Eligible partnerships may apply for either Work Opportunities systems, to local Future year appropriations are authorized a development grant, an implementation partnerships that are prepared to implement under the School-to-Work Opportunities Act. grant or both. The rationale is to allow those local School-to-Work Opportunities The statute that 1⁄2 of 1% of all future partnerships which have been engaged in initiatives, and to local partnerships that appropriations shall be set aside for STWO planning and development activities to apply serve high poverty areas of Urban and Rural Indian Program Grants. Based on current for an implementation grant without constituencies and that are also prepared to budget levels, $1.25 million in FY95 funds jeopardizing their opportunities for receiving will be available for the next competition. a development grant. However, partnerships develop and implement local School-to-Work How many grants are anticipated? that intend to apply for consideration under Opportunities initiatives. Planning and The Departments anticipate awarding: both the development and implementation development grants have been awarded to all • Approximately 8 development grants of grant competitions must submit separate States and Puerto Rico. Development grants $30,000 each; and applications for each competition. A local will be awarded to the seven U.S. Territories • Up to 5 implementation grants ranging in partnership may receive only one (1) grant by June 1995. amount between $50,000 and $100,000. under this competition, either a development The final amount of each award will be grant or an implementation grant. [FR Doc. 95–6333 Filed 3–14–95; 8:45 am] based on a number of factors, including the What are the reporting requirements? BILLING CODE 4510±30±M federal register March 15,1995 Wednesday Financing; ProposedRuleandNotice Federal AcquisitionRegulation,Contract 48 CFRParts32and52 Space Administration National Aeronauticsand Administration General Services Department ofDefense Part IV 14155 14156 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Proposed Rules DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: by authorizing financing on the basis of A. Background certain classes of measures of GENERAL SERVICES performance. ADMINISTRATION The Federal Acquisition Streamlining To implement these changes, the Act of 1994, Pub. L. 103–355, provides DOD, NASA, and GSA propose to NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND authorities that streamline the amend the FAR by revising Subparts SPACE ADMINISTRATION acquisition process and minimize 32.0, 32.1, and 32.5; by adding new burdensome government-unique Subparts 32.2 and 32.10; and by adding 48 CFR Parts 32 and 52 requirements. Major changes that can be new clauses to 52.232. expected in the acquisition process as a The statutory changes create a result of Federal Acquisition [FAR Case 94±764] fundamental distinction between Streamlining Act implementation financing of purchases of commercial include changes in the areas of RIN 9000±AG36 and non-commercial items. As a result, Commercial Item Acquisition, the subparts of Part 32, Contract Federal Acquisition Regulation; Simplified Acquisition Procedures, the Financing, fall into three logical Contract Financing Truth in Negotiations Act, and categories: Introduction of the Federal Acquisition • Subparts applicable to both AGENCIES: Department of Defense (DOD), Computer Network (FACNET). commercial and non-commercial General Services Administration (GSA), This notice announces FAR revisions financing; and National Aeronautics and Space under FAR case 94–764, Contract • Subparts applicable to only Administration (NASA). Financing. Sections 2001 and 2051 of commercial financing; and • ACTION: Proposed rule. the Federal Acquisition Streamlining Subparts applicable to only non- Act of 1994 (Pub. L. 103–355), commercial financing. SUMMARY: This proposed rule is issued substantially changed the statutory The specific subparts in each category pursuant to the Federal Acquisition authorities for Government financing of are identified at 32.002 (Applicability of Streamlining Act of 1994, Public Law contracts. Subsections 2001(f) and Subparts). 103–355 (the Act). The Federal 2051(e) provide specific authority for Subpart Discussion Acquisition Regulatory Council is Government financing of purchases of considering amending the Federal commercial items, and subsections Subpart 32.0 now contains the general Acquisition Regulation (FAR) pertaining 2001(b) and 2051(b) substantially policy and guidance which is applicable to contract financing as a result of revised the authority for Government to Government contract financing of changes to 10 U.S.C. 2307 and 41 U.S.C. financing of purchases of non- both commercial and non-commercial 255 by Sections 2001 and 2051 of the commercial items. In order to promptly items. Act. This regulatory action was subject achieve the benefits of the provisions of Subpart 32.1 (Non-commercial to Office of Management and Budget the Act, the Government is issuing Purchase Financing) now contains the review under Executive Order 12866, implementing regulations on an general policy and guidance applicable dated September 30, 1993. expedited basis. We believe prompt to non-commercial purchases. The content of this subpart reflects existing DATES: Comment Due Date: Comments publication of proposed rules provides policy and guidance that previously should be submitted on or before May the public the opportunity to participate appeared in other locations in Part 32. 15, 1995 to be considered in the more fully in the process of developing These policies have been moved to formulation of a final rule. regulations. Subpart 32.1 to give them general Public Meeting: A public meeting will Subsections 2001(f) and 2051(e) applicability to all forms of financing of be held on April 3, 1995, at 1 p.m. provide specific authority for non-commercial items. Oral/Written Statements: Views to be Government financing of purchases of commercial items. These sections Subpart 32.2 (Commercial Purchase presented at the public meeting should Financing) contains the policy and be sent, in writing, to the FAR amended 10 U.S.C. 2307 and 41 U.S.C. 255 by adding a new paragraph, guidance applicable to contract Secretariat, at the address given below, financing of commercial purchases. This not later than March 29, 1995. Conditions for Payments for Commercial Items, to each. These subpart is wholly new. Current contract ADDRESSES: Interested parties should financing policy discourages the use of submit written comments to: General paragraphs authorize the Government to provide contract financing with certain Government contract financing for Services Administration, FAR commercial items (see current FAR Secretariat (VRS), 18th & F Streets NW., limitations: • The financing must be in the best 32.502–1(c)), and if financing is Room 4037, Washington, DC 20405, interest of the Government; provided, it is commonly Progress Telephone: (202) 501–4755. • The financing cannot exceed 15 Payments Based on Cost. The new The public meeting will be held at: percent until some performance of work statute places Government financing of General Services Administration under the contract; commercial purchases on a different Auditorium, 18th & F Streets NW., First • The terms and conditions must be statutory basis than that for non- Floor, Washington, DC 20405. appropriate or customary in the commercial purchases. As a result, the Please cite FAR case 94–764 in all commercial marketplace. new subpart provides policy concerning correspondence related to this case. The above statutory provisions also market research about financing, FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. remove from financing of commercial security for the taxpayer’s money, and John Galbraith, Contract Financing/ purchases certain restrictions applicable determining the best interest of the Payment Team Leader, at (703) 697– to financing of non-commercial United States. The new subpart 6710 in reference to this FAR case. For purchases by other provisions of 10 provides several alternative procedures general information, contact the FAR U.S.C. 2307 and 41 U.S.C. 255. for establishing contract financing terms Secretariat, Room 4037, GS Building, Subsections 2001(b) and 2051(b) for commercial items. The new subpart Washington, DC 20405 (202) 501–4755. amend the authority for Government also provides standard terms for use of Please cite FAR case 94–764. financing of non-commercial purchases contracting officers in establishing Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Proposed Rules 14157 financing in contracts. To assist in officers to incorporate financing into The table below shows how the considering installment payment contracts for commercial items without Installment Payments for Commercial financing issues, public comments are any administrative effort beyond Items clause arithmetic would work for sought as to whether or not installment incorporation of the clause. It is a contract which is awarded in January payment financing at 32.206(f) and intended to be an alternative that may with various deliveries starting in April 52.232–AB should be incorporated into be used when the contracting officer and ending in September (bolded the FAR. determines that the administrative cost numbers indicate delivery payments The proposed installment payment of contract financing for a commercial after liquidation of installment clause is intended to permit contracting item would otherwise prohibit its use. payments). INSTALLMENT PAYMENTS FOR COMMERCIAL ITEMS (EXAMPLE) [Amounts shown in thousands of dollars ($)] Qty $/Unit $Total Jan Feb Mar Apr May June July Aug Sept Total Item 0001 ...... 20 20 400 70 70 70 70 120 ...... 400 Do ...... 20 20 400 ...... 70 70 70 70 120 ...... 400 Do ...... 20 20 400 ...... 70 70 70 70 120 ...... 400 Do ...... 20 20 400 ...... 70 70 70 70 120 ...... 400 Do ...... 20 20 400 ...... 70 70 70 70 120 400 Item 0002 ...... 2 15 30 7 7 7 9 ...... 30 Do ...... 2 15 30 ...... 7 7 7 9 ...... 30 Do ...... 2 15 30 ...... 7 7 7 9 ...... 30 Do ...... 2 15 30 ...... 7 7 7 9 ...... 30 Do ...... 2 15 30 ...... 7 7 7 9 ...... 30 Iteam 0003 ...... 10 40 400 56 56 56 56 56 120 ...... 400 Do ...... 10 40 400 ...... 56 56 56 56 56 120 ...... 400 Do ...... 10 40 400 ...... 56 56 56 56 56 120 ...... 400 Do ...... 10 40 400 ...... 56 56 56 56 56 120 400 Finance payment ...... 133 266 399 525 525 392 259 126 o 2,625 Delivery payment ...... o o o 9 129 249 249 249 240 1,125 Total payment ...... 3,750 133 266 399 534 654 641 508 375 240 3,750 Subpart 32.5 (Progress Payments performance-based financing and common spokesman for presentation of Based on Costs) has been slightly commercial financing (except for their views. This meeting, in modified to reflect the separation of installment payments), contracting conjunction with the Federal Register commercial from non-commercial items officers will have to determine the form notice soliciting public comments on and to reflect the general policy in 32.1 of contract financing and write the rule, will be the only opportunity for for availability of financing for non- individualized contract terms the public to present its views. commercial purchases. establishing the computation of B. Regulatory Flexibility Act Subpart 32.10 (Performance-Based amounts and certain other contract Payments) contains the policy and financing terms. This proposed rule is expected to guidance applicable to contract have a significant economic impact on Public Meeting financing through performance-based a substantial number of small entities payments. This is a wholly new subpart. The FAR Council is interested in an within the meaning of the Regulatory Under the current FAR, contract exchange of ideas and opinions with Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601, et seq., financing for non-commercial items is respect to the regulatory because the proposed implementation of primarily through progress payments implementation of the Act. For that subsection 2001(f) and subsection based on cost and through other reason, the FAR Council is conducting 2051(e) of the Federal Acquisition specialized contract financing a series of public meetings. The public Streamlining Act of 1994 (Public Law mechanisms for specific types of is encouraged to furnish its views; the 103–355) will substantially increase the procurements (for example percentage- FAR Council anticipates that public availability of Government contract of-completion progress payments for comments will be very helpful in financing for purchases of commercial shipbuilding or construction). This new formulating final rules. items, thereby benefiting many small subpart provides the policy and The public meeting on this rule (FAR entities making commercial sales in procedures for establishing and case 94–764) will be held on April 3, markets where customer financing is a administering performance-based 1995, at 1 p.m., to enable the public to market practice; and because the payments. Performance-based payments present its views on this rule. This implementation of subsection 2001(b) under this subpart are applicable only to meeting will coincide with the meeting and subsection 2051(b) of the Federal non-commercial purchases. on Commercial Items (FAR case 94–790) Acquisition Streamlining Act of 1994 FAR 52.232 is amended to add the which is now also scheduled for April (Public Law 103–355) permits contract additional clauses and solicitation 3, 1995. Persons or organizations financing of purchases of non- provisions required to implement the wishing to make presentations will be commercial items upon the basis of new statutory authorities. Under the allowed 10 minutes each, provided they performance, without requiring current FAR, the contracting officer can notify the FAR Secretariat at (202) 501– contractor cost accounting systems for insert a complete, fully contained 4755 and submit written statements of the contract financing, thereby progress payment clause in a contract the presentation by March 29, 1995. benefiting many small entities who Do and proceed with the procurement with Persons or organizations with similar not use such systems. An Initial minimal administrative cost. For positions are encouraged to select a Regulatory Flexibility Analysis has been 14158 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Proposed Rules performed. Comments from small be usable by contracting officers without 32.004 Contract performance in foreign entities concerning the affected FAR specific reviews or approvals of the countries. subparts will be considered in financing arrangement by higher The enforceability of contract accordance with 5 U.S.C. 610 of the Act. management. It is expected that provisions for security of Government Such comments must be submitted contracting officers will have the financing in a foreign jurisdiction is separately and should cite 5 U.S.C. 601, necessary training and resources to dependent upon local law and et seq. (FAR case 94–764), in routinely arrange and/or administer procedure. Prior to providing contract correspondence. (including paying) any financing terms the agency deems customary for that financing where foreign jurisdictions C. Paperwork Reduction Act agency. may become involved, the contracting officer shall ensure the Government’s The Paperwork Reduction Act (Pub. Unusual contract financing means security is enforceable. This may require L. 96–511) is deemed to apply because any financing not deemed customary the proposed rule contains information contract financing by the agency. the provision of additional or different collection requirements. Accordingly, a Normally, unusual contract financing is security than that normally provided for request for approval of a new that financing that is legal and proper in the standard contract clauses. information collection requirement under applicable laws, but that the concerning Contract Financing is being 32.005 Consideration for contract agency has not authorized contracting financing. submitted to the Office of Management officers to use without specific reviews and Budget under 44 U.S.C. 3501, et or approvals of the financing (a) Requirement. When a contract seq. Public comments concerning this arrangement by higher management. financing clause is included at the request are invited in a Federal Register Arranging and/or administering inception of a contract, there shall be no notice which appears elsewhere in this (including paying) unusual contract separate consideration for the contract issue. financing may require more and/or financing clause. The worth of the List of Subjects in 48 CFR Parts 32 and different training or resources than the contract financing to the contractor is 52 agency routinely makes available for expected to be reflected in one or both such operations, or may have greater or of (1) a bid or negotiated price that will Government procurement. different risks than the financing be lower than such price would have Dated: March 8, 1995. arrangements deemed customary by the been in the absence of the contract Capt. Barry L. Cohen, agency. financing, or (2) contract terms and Project Manager for the Implementation of 4. Sections 32.002 through 32.005 are conditions, other than price, that are the Federal Acquisition Streamlining Act of added to read as follows: more beneficial to the Government than 1994. they would have been in the absence of 32.002 Applicability of subparts. Therefore, it is proposed that 48 CFR the contract financing. Adequate new Parts 32 and 52 be amended as set forth (a) The following subparts of this part consideration is required for changes to, below: are applicable to all purchases subject to or addition of, contract financing after part 32: award. PART 32ÐCONTRACT FINANCING (1) Subpart 32.0, General. (b) Amount of new consideration. The 1. The authority citation for 48 CFR (2) Subpart 32.3, Loan Guarantees for contractor may provide new Parts 32 and 52 continues to read as Defense Production. consideration by monetary or follows: (3) Subpart 32.6, Contract Debts. nonmonetary means, provided the value Authority: 40 U.S.C. 486(c); 10 U.S.C. (4) Subpart 32.7, Contract Funding. is adequate. The fair and reasonable chapter 137; and 42 U.S.C. 2473(c). (5) Subpart 32.8, Assignment of consideration should approximate the 2. Section 32.000 is amended in Claims. amount by which the price would have paragraph (e) by removing the word (6) Subpart 32.9, Prompt Payment. been less had the contract financing ‘‘and’’; in paragraph (f) by removing the (b) Subpart 32.2, Commercial terms been contained in the initial period and inserting a semicolon in its Purchase Financing, is applicable only contract. In the absence of definite place; and by adding paragraphs (g) and to purchases of commercial items under information on this point, the (h) to read as follows: authority of 48 CFR part 12. contracting officer should apply the 32.000 Scope of part. (c) The following subparts of this part following criteria in evaluating whether are applicable to all purchases made the proposed new consideration is * * * * * under any authority other than 48 CFR adequate: (g) Financing of purchases of Part 12: (1) The value to the contractor of the commercial items; and (1) Subpart 32.1, Non-Commercial anticipated amount and duration of the (h) Performance-based payments. Purchase Financing. contract financing at the imputed 3. Section 32.001 is amended by financial costs of the equivalent working revising the section heading and adding, (2) Subpart 32.4, Advance Payments. capital. in alphabetical order, the definitions (3) Subpart 32.5, Progress Payments Customary contract financing and for Supplies or Services. (2) The estimated profit rate to be Unusual contract financing to read as (4) Subpart 32.10, Performance-Based earned through contract performance. follows: Payments. (c) Interest. Except as provided in 32.001 Definitions. 32.003 Simplified acquisition procedures Subpart 32.4 (Advance Payments), the contract shall not provide for any other Customary contract financing means financing. that financing deemed by an agency to Unless agency regulations otherwise type of specific charges, such as interest, be available for routine use by permit, contract financing shall not be on contract financing. contracting officers. Most customary provided for purchases made under the 5. Subpart 32.1 heading and section contract financing arrangements should authority of 48 CFR Part 13. 32.100 are revised to read as follows: Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Proposed Rules 14159 Subpart 32.1ÐNon-Commercial (e) For competitive awards, the (b) Financing of construction or Purchase Financing contracting officer shall include the architect-engineer services purchased intended contract financing terms in the under the authority of 48 CFR part 36, 32.100 Scope of subpart. solicitation, in accordance with this part in accordance with this part; This subpart provides policies and and any agency regulations. Contract (c) For small businesses, financing of procedures applicable generally to financing shall not be a factor in the contracts for supplies or services with a contract financing and payment for any evaluation of resulting proposals, and contract price equal to or greater than purchases other than purchases of proposals which contain alternative the simplified acquisition procedure commercial items in accordance with 48 financing terms shall not be accepted threshold through customary CFR Part 12. (but see subparts 14.2 and 15.6 performance-based payments in accordance with subpart 32.10, or 32.101 [Amended] concerning alternative proposals and amendments of solicitations). customary progress payments in 6. Section 32.101 is amended by (f) When only one source is solicited, accordance with subpart 32.5 (but not removing the period at the end of the the contracting officer shall include the both); section and inserting in its place ‘‘, as intended contract financing terms in the (d) Financing of contracts for supplies amended.’’ solicitation in accordance with this part or services with a contract price of $1 7. Section 32.102 is amended in the and any agency regulations. In million or more, through customary last sentence of paragraph (a) by negotiations of the resulting contract, if performance-based payments in removing the word ‘‘subadvances’’ and the contract financing is to be through accordance with subpart 32.10, or inserting in its place ‘‘advances’’; in performance-based payments in customary progress payments in paragraph (b)(2) by removing the word accordance with subpart 32.10, the accordance with subpart 32.5 (but not ‘‘or’’; in paragraph (b)(3) by removing contracting officer shall ensure that the both); the period and inserting in its place ‘‘; combination of price and financing is (e) Financing of contracts for supplies or’’; and adding paragraphs (b)(4) and (f) fair and reasonable, all factors, or services through Advance Payments to read as follows: including financing cost to the Treasury, in accordance with subpart 32.4; considered. (f) Financing of contracts for supplies 32.102 Description of contract financing or services through Guaranteed Loans in methods. 10. Section 32.106 is amended in the introductory text by inserting after accordance with subpart 32.3; or * * * * * (g) Financing of contracts for supplies ‘‘Government’s’’ the word ‘‘best’’; and (b) * * * or services through any appropriate by revising paragraphs (b) and (d) to (4) Performance-based payments. combination of Advance Payments, read as follows: * * * * * Guaranteed Loans, and either customary (f) Performance-based payments are 32.106 Order of preference. performance-based payments or contract financing payments made on * * * * * customary progress payments (but not the basis of— (b) Customary contract financing (see both) in accordance with their (1) Performance measured by 32.113). respective subparts. objective, quantifiable methods; (2) Accomplishment of defined * * * * * 32.114 Unusual contract financing. events; or (d) Unusual contract financing (see Any contract financing arrangement (3) Other quantifiable measures of 32.114). that deviates from the policy, results. * * * * * procedures, terms, or conditions of this 32.110 [Reserved] part is unusual contract financing. 32.103 Progress payments under Unusual contract financing shall be construction contracts. 11. Section 32.110 is removed and authorized only after approval by the reserved. 8. Section 32.103 is amended by head of the agency or as provided for in revising the section heading to read as 32.111 Contract clauses for non- agency regulations. set forth above; and by removing the commercial purchases. 14. Subpart 32.2, consisting of word ‘‘the’’ in the second sentence. 12. The section heading for 32.111 is sections 32.200 through 32.207, is 9. Section 32.104 is amended by added to read as follows: adding paragraphs (c) through (f) to read revised to read as set forth above. 13. Sections 32.113 and 32.114 are as follows: Subpart 32.2ÐCommercial Purchase added to read as follows: Financing 32.104 Providing contract financing. (Note to Readers: The proposed text of Sec. * * * * * 32.112 is contained in FAR case 94–762, 32.200 Scope of subpart. (c) Subject to specific agency which was published for public comment at 32.201 Statutory authority. regulations, contract financing may be 60 FR 6602, February 2, 1995. Comments 32.202 General. provided when the contracting officer concerning the proposed text for 32.112 32.202–1 Policy. should be submitted separately and reference 32.202–2 Types of payments for determines it is in the best interest of that FAR case 94–762.) commercial purchases. the Government. Unless authorized by 32.202–3 Conducting market research about agency regulation, contract financing 32.113 Customary contract financing. financing terms. shall not be provided for awards The following contract financing 32.202–4 Security for Government expected to be less than the simplified arrangements are customary contract financing. acquisition procedure threshold, and financing when provided in accordance 32.203 Procedures for determining contract unless the provision of financing is with this part 32 and agency financing terms. restricted to small businesses, shall not regulations: 32.204 Procedures for contracting officer- (a) Financing of shipbuilding, or ship specified commercial contract financing. be provided for awards expected to be 32.205 Procedures for offeror-proposed less than $1 million. conversion, alteration, or repair, when commercial contract financing. (d) Whenever practical, contracting agency regulations provide for progress 32.206 Construction of contract clauses. officers should use performance-based payments based on a percentage or stage 32.207 Administration and payment of payments (see subpart 32.10). of completion; commercial financing payments. 14160 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Proposed Rules 32.200 Scope of subpart. purchases under subpart 32.1 and its from agency to agency, and, possibly, This subpart provides policies and related subparts. While the contracting from office to office or time to time. procedures for commercial financing officer may adapt techniques and procedures from the non-commercial 32.202±2 Types of payments for arrangements under commercial commercial purchases. purchases pursuant to 48 CFR part 12. subparts for use in implementing This subpart does not apply to any commercial contract financing These definitions reflect distinctions purchase made under other authority. arrangements, the contracting officer made in the statutory commercial must have a full understanding of financing authority and the 32.201 Statutory authority. effects of the differing contract implementation of the Prompt Payment 10 U.S.C. 2307(f) and 41 U.S.C. 255(f) environments and of what is needed to Act. provide that payment for commercial protect the interests of the Government Commercial advance payment means items may be made under such terms in commercial contract financing. a payment made before any performance and conditions as the head of the agency (d) Unusual contract financing. Any of work under the contract. The determines are appropriate or customary contract financing arrangement not in aggregate of these payments shall not in the commercial marketplace and are accord with the requirements of agency exceed 15 percent of the contract price. in the best interest of the United States. regulations or 48 CFR part 32 is unusual These payments are contract financing payments for prompt payment purposes 32.202 General. contract financing and requires advance approval in accordance with agency (i.e., not subject to the interest penalty 32.202±1 Policy. procedures. If not otherwise specified, provisions of the Prompt Payment Act such unusual contract financing shall be in accordance with subpart 32.9). These (a) Use of financing in contracts. It is payments are not subject to subpart the responsibility of the contractor to approved by the head of the contracting activity. 32.4. provide all resources needed for Commercial interim payment means performance of the contract. Thus, for (e) Best interest of the Government. (1) The statute does not allow contract any payment that is not a commercial Government purchases of commercial advance payment or a delivery payment. items, financing of the contract is financing by the Government where it is not in the best interest of the United These payments are contract financing normally the contractor’s responsibility. payments for prompt payment purposes However, in some markets the provision States. The contracting officer in deciding for individual procurements (i.e., not subject to the interest penalty of financing by the buyer is a provisions of the Prompt Payment Act commercial practice. In these whether to use contract financing and, if so, the methods and techniques in accordance with subpart 32.9). The circumstances, the contracting officer difference between a commercial shall include appropriate financing therefor, shall consider the interests of the United States in accordance with advance and commercial interim terms in contracts for commercial payment for Government contract purchases when doing so will be in the agency regulations. The interests of the United States may include— purposes is whether some performance best interest of the Government. of the work under the contract has been (b) Authorization. Commercial (i) The cost to the Government of providing the financing (e.g., Treasury accomplished. interim payments and commercial Delivery payment means a payment borrowing costs); advance payments may be made under for accepted supplies or services, (ii) The transaction costs to the the following circumstances— including payments for accepted partial Government of establishing and (1) The contract item financed is a deliveries. Commercial financing negotiating the financing terms, and commercial supply item; payments are liquidated by deduction administrative costs of administering (2) The contracting officer determines from these payments. Delivery the financing terms; that it is customary in the commercial payments are invoice payments for (iii) Execution of Executive branch marketplace to make financing prompt payment purposes. payments for the item; and agency policy; (3) Authorizing this form of contract (iv) Compliance with fiscal and 32.202±3 Conducting market research financing is in the best interest of the budgetary requirements; about financing terms. Government (see 32.202–1(e)); (v) Promotion of competition through (a) If contract financing is expected to (4) Adequate security is obtained (see new market entrants; be in the best interest of the Government 32.202–4); (vi) Acquisition of advanced, state-of- (see 32.202–1(e) of this subpart), (5) Prior to any performance of work the-art technology; and contract financing shall be a subject under the contract, the aggregate of (vii) Integration of the industrial bases included in the market research commercial advance payments shall not for defense, commercial, and conducted in accordance with 48 CFR exceed 15 percent of the contract price; Governmental markets. part 10 (Market Research). Contracting and (2) In considering policy to determine officers shall determine for commercial (6) The contract is awarded on the whether financing is in the best interest purchases in the appropriate market— basis of competitive procedures or, if of the Government, the best interests of (1) The extent to which other buyers only one offer is solicited, adequate the Government are usually served by provide contract financing for purchases consideration is obtained (based on the an appropriate trade-off of the in that market; time value of financing to be provided) transaction costs of the procurement, (2) The overall level of financing if the financing is expected to be against the optimizing of the price and normally provided; substantially more advantageous to the financing of the individual purchase. (3) The amount or percentages of any offeror than the offerors normal method Agencies may find that certain types of payments equivalent to commercial of customer financing. procurements, certain types of items, or advance payments (32.202–2); (c) Difference from non-commercial certain dollar levels of procurements do (4) The basis for any payments financing. Government financing of not justify the transaction costs of equivalent to commercial interim commercial purchases under this financing or do not justify high-cost payments (32.202–2), as well as the subpart 32.2 is expected to be different procedures for determining financing. frequency, and amounts or percentages; from that used for non-commercial The specifics of these factors will vary and Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Proposed Rules 14161 (5) Any special or unusual payment by the contractor may be adjusted from (2) A bond from a surety acceptable in terms applicable to the equivalent of time to time during the period of accordance with 48 CFR part 28 (note delivery payments (32.202–2). performance, so long as it is always that the bond must guarantee repayment (b) When adequate and current equal to or greater than the amount of of the unliquidated contract financing); information is already available, unliquidated financing that is paid to (3) A guarantee of repayment from a contract financing market research does the contractor. Paragraphs (b), (c), and person or corporation of demonstrated not have to be repeated. Similarly, (d) of this section list some (but not all) liquid net worth, connected by procuring activities making repetitive forms of security that the contracting significant ownership to the contractor; purchases in specific markets may officer may find acceptable. There is no or provide contracting officers with order of preference in this listing, and (4) Title to identified contractor assets contract financing terms for use in a form not listed is of equal of adequate worth. purchases in those markets. acceptability if the contracting officer (c) Customary standard market terms finds it adequate. 32.203 Procedures for determining contract financing terms. means those contract financing terms (b) Paramount lien. (1) The statutes and conditions that are the usual, cited in 32.201 provide that if the (a) Selection procedure. When the regular terms offered by a substantial Government’s security is in the form of criteria in 32.202–1(b) are met: number of sellers to equivalent buyers a lien, such lien is paramount to all (1) If market research discloses that of the item in that market at that time. other liens and is effective immediately contract financing is not customary in Customary standard market terms are upon the first payment, without filing, the commercial market, the contracting not required to be identical for all notice, or other action by the United officer shall not provide for financing in sellers, but are expected to be similar. States. the solicitation and contract; Terms may reasonably vary in (2) When the Government’s security is (2) If market research discloses percentages, or timing, or other terms in the form of a lien, the contract shall customary standard market terms for and still be considered customary specify what the lien is upon, e.g., the commercial financing in a market, the standard market terms, so long as they work in process, the contractor’s plant, contracting officer shall use the do not significantly differ in the overall the contractor’s inventory. Contracting contracting officer-specified financing impact upon the Government, including officers may be flexible in the choice of procedure at 32.204 and specify the the impact upon the integrity of assets, so long as it is adequate. The customary standard market terms in the competitive procurements. If the extent contract must also give the Government solicitation and contract; or of variation in the terms offered by a right to verify the existence and value (3) If market research discloses that diverse sellers is such that some of the assets. contract financing is customary in the potential offerors would be significantly (3) Provision of Government financing commercial market but there are no advantaged or disadvantaged by a shall be conditioned upon a contractor customary standard market terms, the synthesis of the various terms, the certification that the assets subject to the contracting officer shall, in accordance contracting officer may find there are no lien are free from any prior with agency regulations, use the customary standard market terms. The encumbrances. Prior liens may result contracting officer-specified procedure extent of analysis applied in making from such things as capital equipment at 32.204, the offeror-proposed these determinations should be loans, installment purchases, working procedure at 32.205, or other agency commensurate with the expected size of capital loans, various lines of credit, and specified procedure or technique. If the contract and amount of contract revolving credit arrangements. agency regulations do not provide financing. (c) Other assets as security. (1) otherwise, the contracting officer shall Contracting officers may consider the use the contracting officer-specified 32.202±4 Security for Government guidance at 28.203–2, 28.203–3, and procedure at 32.204 for purchases financing. 28.204 in determining which types of expected to be less than $5 million and (a) Policy. 10 U.S.C. 2307(f) and 41 assets may be acceptable as security. For may use the offeror-proposed procedure U.S.C. 255(f) require the Government to the purpose of applying the guidance in at 32.205 for purchases expected to be obtain adequate security for part 28 to this section, the term surety $5 million or more. Government financing. The contracting and/or individual surety should be (b) Summary of contracting officer- officer shall determine what security the interpreted to mean offeror and/or specified financing procedure. Under Government will accept, which shall be contractor. the contracting officer-specified specified in the solicitation. If the (2) Subject to agency regulations, the procedure at 32.204, the Government Government is willing to accept more contracting officer may also consider the specifies the contract financing terms in than one form of security, the offeror net worth of the offeror in relation to the the solicitation. The contracting officer shall be required to specify the form of maximum amount of Government funds does not evaluate or adjust prices for security it will provide. The value of the at risk. If the contracting officer finds financing terms. Contracting officer- security must be at least equal to the that the unencumbered net worth of the specified contract financing terms are unliquidated amount of contract offeror will be significantly in excess of designed to allow reasonable contract financing payments to be made to the the total unliquidated Government financing of purchases with minimum contractor. If acceptable to the financing (on all Government contracts transaction costs. Under this procedure, contracting officer, the resulting using this form of security), and the the contract financing for any particular contract shall specify the security (see offeror agrees to provide additional procurement is based upon the 32.206(b)(1)(iv) and also paragraph (f), security should that net worth become financing terms commonly used in the Security for Government Financing of encumbered or materially reduced, the particular market, or the terms the the clause at 52.232–AA, Standard contracting officer may determine the Government finds appropriate to the Terms for Government Financing of Government has adequate security. purchase. Purchases of Commercial Items, or (d) Other forms of security. Other (c) Summary of offeror-proposed paragraph (f) of the clause at 52.232–AB, acceptable forms of security include— financing procedure. Under the offeror- Installment Payments for Commercial (1) An irrevocable letter of credit from proposed procedure at 32.205, offerors Items). The amount of security provided a federally insured financial institution; are invited to propose contract financing 14162 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Proposed Rules terms. The contracting officer then to the United States for providing required payments. In order to evaluates all of the financing terms and contract financing. determine the cost to the Government prices to determine the evaluated price. for providing financing, the contracting The evaluated price is based upon the 32.204 Procedures for contracting-officer- officer must compute that imputed cost specified commercial contract financing. net cost to the Government of the of financing and add it to the proposed proposed price and financing terms. (a) Financing terms. Under this price to determine the evaluated price (d) Front-end loading of financing procedure, the solicitation specifies the for each offeror. terms. In establishing contract financing financing terms that will be used in any (3) The imputed cost of a single terms, the contracting officer must be resulting contract. financing payment is the amount of the aware of certain risks. While contract (b) Determination of contract payment multiplied by the annual financing payments may be made at the financing terms. The contracting officer interest rate, multiplied by the number beginning and during the early period of shall determine the contract financing of years between the date of payment of a contract, very high amounts of terms based upon the results of market the financing payment and the date the financing early in the contract may research and prepare a written rationale amount would have been paid as a unduly increase the risk to the for the terms. If the contracting officer delivery payment. The imputed cost of Government. Contracting officers cannot determines there is variation between financing is the sum of the imputed consider various aspects of financing sellers within the customary standard costs of each of the financing payments. separately; the security and the amounts market terms (see 32.202–3(c)), the (4) The time value of offeror-proposed and timing of financing payments must contract financing terms specified by contract financing arrangements shall be be analyzed as a whole to determine the contracting officer shall be within calculated using as the interest rate the whether the arrangement will be in the those variations. The financing terms Nominal Discount Rate specified in best interest of the Government. Under shall be incorporated in the solicitation. Appendix C of OMB Circular A–94, the contracting-officer specified Contract financing shall not be a factor Benefit-Cost Analysis of Federal procedure, large, early, contract in evaluation of resulting proposals, and Programs; Guidelines and Discounts, financing payments are not prohibited if proposals of alternative financing terms appropriate to the period of contract they are the customary standard market shall not be accepted (but see 14.208 financing. This Appendix is updated terms and an appropriate quality of and 15.606 concerning amendments of yearly and is available from the Office security is obtained. Under the offeror- solicitations). Contract financing shall of Economic Policy in the Office of proposed procedure, large, early, not be a basis for adjusting offerors’ Management and Budget (OMB). contract financing payments are not proposed prices because the effect of prohibited if such payments are usual or contract financing is reflected in each 32.206 Construction of contract clauses. common in the offeror’s sales equivalent offeror’s proposed prices. (a) Unless otherwise authorized by to the size and type of the instant agency regulations, the contract shall Government purchase and an 32.205 Procedures for offeror-proposed contain the paragraph entitled Payment commercial contract financing. appropriate quality of security is of the clause at 52.212–4. If the contract obtained. (a) Under this procedure, each offeror will provide for contract financing, the (e) Optional nature of contract may propose financing terms. The contracting officer shall construct a financing terms. (1) A contracting officer contracting officer must then determine solicitation provision and contract determination that contract financing is which offer is in the best interest of the clause for any resulting contract. This customary in a commercial market, United States. solicitation provision shall be while establishing the Government’s (b) Solicitations. The contracting constructed in accordance with 32.204 authority to offer or agree to contract officer shall include in the solicitation or 32.205. If the procedure at 32.205 is financing, does not preclude an offeror the Invitation to Propose Contract used, the solicitation provision from bidding or proposing on the basis Financing Terms at 52.232–AC. The Invitation to Propose Financing Terms of no contract financing. Similarly, the contracting officer shall also— at 52.232–AC shall be included. The presence of a contract financing clause (1) Specify the effective delivery contract clause shall be constructed in in a contract does not preclude payment (invoice) dates that will be accordance with the requirements of contractor forbearance in its exercise used in the evaluation of financing this subpart and any agency regulations. (see 32.207(f)). proposals; and (b) Each contract financing clause (2) For solicitations under contracting (2) Specify the interest rate to be used shall have the following structure: officer-specified procedures, an offer in the evaluation of financing proposals (1) One or more paragraphs describing stating that the contracting officer- (see (c)(4) of this section). the— specified contract financing terms will (c) Evaluation of proposals. (1) When (i) Computation of the financing not be used by the offeror does not alter contract financing terms vary between payment amounts; the evaluation of the offer (see offerors, the contracting officer must (ii) Specific conditions of contractor 32.204(b)) nor does it render the offer adjust each proposed price for entitlement to those financing nonresponsive or otherwise evaluation purposes to reflect the cost to payments; unacceptable. In the event of award to the United States of providing the (iii) Liquidation of those financing an offeror whose offer declined the proposed financing in order to payments by delivery payments; proposed contract financing, the determine the total cost to the United (iv) Specifics of the security under the contract financing provisions shall not States of that particular combination of contract, any terms or conditions be included in the resulting contract. price and financing. specifically applicable thereto; and (3) For solicitations under offeror- (2) Contract financing results in the (v) Frequency, form, and any proposed procedures, a proposal Government making financing payments additional content of the contractor’s containing no contract financing earlier than it otherwise would as request for financing payment (in provisions or stating that contract delivery payments. The cost to the addition to the requirements of the financing is not proposed, shall, in lieu Government of providing contract clause Standard Terms for Government of the computation in 32.205(c), be financing is the Government’s imputed Financing of Purchases of Commercial evaluated as having no additional cost cost of those earlier-than-otherwise- Items at 52.232–AA), which paragraph Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Proposed Rules 14163 shall limit the frequency of requests to (f) Installment payment financing for (1) The contracting officer shall be no more than one per month, unless commercial items. Contracting officers responsible for receiving, approving, otherwise authorized by agency may insert the clause at 52.232–AB, and transmitting all contract financing regulation. Installment Payments for Commercial requests to the appropriate payment (2) Unless agency regulations Items, in contracts and solicitations in office; and authorize alterations, the unaltered text lieu of constructing a specific clause in (2) Each approval shall specify the of the clause at 52.232–AA, Standard accordance with paragraphs (b) through amount to be paid, necessary Terms for Government Financing of (e) of this section when the contracting contractual information, and the Purchases of Commercial Items. officer determines that this clause is account(s) (see 32.206(d)) to be charged (c) Computation of amounts, and appropriate and in the best interest of for the payment. contractor entitlement provisions. the Government. (c) Reviews. Because the basis for Contracts shall provide that delivery (1) Description. Installment payment payments can vary widely, the payments shall be made only for financing is payment by the contracting officer is responsible for completed goods and services accepted Government to a contractor of a fixed determining what reviews, either pre- or by the Government in accordance with number of equal interim financing post- payment, are required for the terms of the contract. Contracts may payments prior to delivery and protection of the Government’s provide for commercial advance and acceptance of a contract item. The interests. The contracting officer, in commercial interim payments based installment payment arrangement is approving financing payments, may rely upon a wide variety of bases, including designed to reduce administrative costs. upon contractor certifications and (but not limited to) achievement or However, if a contract will have a large internal management, accounting, and occurrence of specified events, the number of deliveries, the administrative data practices or systems, provided the passage of time, or specified times prior costs may increase to the point where contracting officer has determined that to the delivery date(s). The basis for installment payments are not in the best those practices or systems are reliable payment must be objectively interest of the Government. and that appropriate reviews are determinable. It is expected that the (2) Authorized types of installment conducted to verify their continued basis for payment for customary financing payments and rates. reliability. standard market terms is one that is Installment financing payments may be (d) Financial surveillance. The documented by the records and controls made using the clause at 52.232–AB, contracting officer is responsible for maintained by a prudent business Installment Payments for Commercial monitoring the contractor’s overall person in the normal course of business Items, either at the 70 percent financing financial condition. The contract in that market. Therefore, in rate cited in the clause or at any other financing provisions, entitled establishing the basis for contract lower rate in accordance with agency Suspension and Reduction of Financing financing payments under the procedures. Payments, and Reports and Government contracting-officer specified procedure, (3) Calculating the amount of Access, of the clauses at 52.232–AA and the contracting officer normally should installment financing payments. The 52.232–AB, specifically give the be guided by the customary standard contracting officer shall identify in the Government rights to information in this market terms. Under the offeror- contract schedule those items for which area. proposed procedure, the offeror is installment financing payments are (e) Management of security. After responsible for proposing terms it can authorized. Monthly installment contract award, the contracting officer implement. financing payment amounts are to be responsible for approving requests for (d) Instructions for multiple calculated by the contractor pursuant to financing payments shall be responsible appropriations. If contract financing is the instructions in the contract clause for determining that the security to be computed for the contract as a only for items authorized to receive continues to be adequate. whole, and if there is more than one installment financing payments. (f) Limits on Government access. (1) appropriation account (or subaccount) (4) Liquidating installment payment Unless the contractor requests contract funding payments under the contract, financing payments. If installment financing under a contract financing the contracting officer shall include in financing payments have been made for clause, the associated Government the contract instructions for distribution an item, the amount paid to the rights granted by the Records, reports of financing payments to the respective contractor upon acceptance of the item and access provisions of the contract funds accounts. by the Government shall be reduced by financing clauses (e.g., access to (e) Prompt payment for commercial the amount of installment financing records) are inoperative. purchase payments. The provisions of payments made for the item in order to (2) The Government rights granted by subpart 32.9, Prompt Payment, apply to liquidate all installment financing the Records, reports, and access contract financing and invoice payments previously made for the item. provisions of contract financing clauses payments for commercial purchases in The contractors request for final are for the purpose of ensuring the the same manner they apply to contract payment for each item is required to accuracy and safety of the Government’s financing and invoice payments for non- show this calculation. financing payments and shall not be commercial purchases. The contracting used for any other purpose. officer, in constructing financing and 32.207 Administration and payment of 15. Section 32.501–1 is amended by payment terms for commercial commercial financing payments. revising paragraph (d) to read as purchases, is responsible for including (a) Responsibility. The contracting follows: in the contract all the information officer responsible for administration of necessary to implement prompt the contract shall be responsible for 32.501±1 Customary progress payment payment. In particular, contracting review and approval of contract rates. officers must be careful to clearly financing requests. * * * * * differentiate in the contract between (b) Approval of financing requests. (d) In accordance with the Defense contract financing and invoice Unless otherwise provided in agency Procurement Improvement Act of 1986 payments and between items having regulations, or by agreement with the (Pub. L. 99–145), as amended, and, for different prompt payment times. appropriate payment official: civilian agencies, in accordance with 41 14164 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Proposed Rules U.S.C. 255, as amended, progress (b) Contracts for architect-engineer 32.1004 Procedure. payments are limited to 80 percent on services or construction or for Performance-based financing work accomplished under undefinitized shipbuilding or ship conversion, payments may be made either on a contract actions. A higher rate is not alteration, or repair, when the contracts whole contract basis or on a deliverable authorized under unusual progress provide for progress payments based item basis, unless otherwise prescribed payments or other customary progress upon a percentage or stage of by agency regulations. payments for the undefinitized actions. completion; (c) Contracts for research or (a) Establishing performance bases. 32.501±4 [Removed] development; or Each event or performance criteria that 16. Section 32.501–4 is removed. (d) Contracts awarded through sealed will trigger payment of a performance- 17. Section 32.502–1 is amended in bid procedures. based finance payment amount shall be paragraph (a) introductory text by an integral and necessary part of removing the phrase ‘‘paragraphs (b) 32.1001 Policy. contract performance and shall be and (c) below,’’ and inserting in its (a) Performance-based payments are identified in the contract, along with a place ‘‘paragraph (b) of this section,’’; by contract financing payments and, when description of what constitutes revising paragraph (b) introductory text authorized by the contract, are to be successful performance of the event or and (b)(1); by removing paragraph (c); used to pay a contractor on bases which attainment of the performance criteria. by redesignating paragraph (d) as do not involve acceptance by the An event need not be a critical event in paragraph (c); and in newly designated Government. order to trigger a payment, but paragraph (c)(1) by removing the phrase (b) Performance-based payments are successful performance of each such ‘‘through (c) above,’’ and inserting in its fully recoverable, in the same manner as event or performance criteria shall be place ‘‘and (b) of this section,’’. The progress payments, in the event of readily verifiable. A contractor shall not revised text reads as follows: default. Except as provided in be paid for an event or performance 32.1003(c), where performance-based criteria until previously scheduled 32.502±1 Use of customary progress payments. payments are used, they shall be the events or prior performance criteria exclusive method of contract financing have been successfully performed. If * * * * * in the contract in accordance with payment of performance-based finance (b) To reduce undue administrative subpart 32.1. amounts is on a deliverable item basis, effort and expense, unless otherwise (c) Contractors shall maintain an each event or performance criteria shall provided in agency regulations, the appropriate investment in their contract be part of the performance necessary for contracting officer shall not provide for at all times. that deliverable item and shall be progress payments on contracts of less (d) For Government accounting identified to a specific contract line item than $1 million unless— purposes, performance-based payments or subline item. (1) The contractor is a small business should be treated like progress concern and the contract will be equal (b) Establishing performance-based payments based on costs under subpart finance payment amounts. The to or greater than the simplified 32.5. acquisition procedure threshold; or contracting officer responsible for (e) Performance-based payments are establishing the price of a contract also * * * * * contract financing payments and, 18. Subpart 32.10, consisting of shall establish a complete, fully defined therefore, are not subject to the interest- schedule of performance-based sections 32.1000 through 32.1011, is penalty provisions of prompt payment. added to read as follows: payments when establishing the price of However, these payments shall be made the contract. If a contract action Subpart 32.10ÐPerformance-Based in accordance with the agency’s policy significantly affects the price, or event Payments for contract financing payments. or performance criteria, the contracting Sec. 32.1002 Bases for performance-based officer responsible for pricing the 32.1000 Scope of subpart. payments. contract modification shall adjust the 32.1001 Policy. performance-based payment schedule 32.1002 Bases for performance-based Performance-based payments may be payments. made on any of the following bases: appropriately. The payment amounts 32.1003 Criteria for use. (a) Performance measured by should be adequate to ensure that the 32.1004 Procedure. objective, quantifiable methods, contractor maintains an appropriate 32.1005 Solicitation provisions and (b) Accomplishment of defined investment in work in process inventory contract clause. events, or and total performance-based finance 32.1006 Agency approvals. (c) Other quantifiable measures of payments shall not exceed 75 percent of 32.1007 Administration of performance- results. the contract price, if on a whole contract based payments. basis, or 75 percent of the delivery item 32.1008 Suspension or reduction of 32.1003 Criteria for use. price if on a delivery item basis. performance-based payments. Performance-based payments shall be 32.1009 Title. Performance-based finance payment 32.1010 Risk of loss. used only if the following conditions are amounts may be established on the basis 32.1011 Performance-based payments for met: of— (a) The contract meets any criteria events. (1) The estimated projected cost of established by agency regulations in performance of the entire contract, or of 32.1000 Scope of subpart. accordance with subpart 32.1, This subpart provides policy and (b) The contract is a definitized fixed- specific line items, as of the date of each procedures, and prescribes contract price type contract, and event; clauses for performance-based payments (c) The contract does not provide for (2) The estimated projected cost of under non-commercial purchases other methods of contract financing, performance of the entire contract, or of pursuant to subpart 32.1. This subpart except that advance payments in specific line items, as of the date of does not apply to— accordance with subpart 32.4, or attainment of each performance criteria; (a) Payments under cost- Guaranteed Loans in accordance with (3) The estimated projected cost of reimbursement contracts; subpart 32.3 may be used. performance of particular events; or Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Proposed Rules 14165 (4) Any other rational basis award will be for less than $1 million, (ii) Evaluating the effect of the action determined by the contracting officer or the contracting officer shall insert the on the contractor’s operations, based on agency procedures. provision at 52.232–BC, Notice of the contractor’s financial condition, (c) Instructions for multiple Availability of Performance-Based projected cash requirements, and the appropriations. If the whole contract Payments Exclusively for Small existing or available credit approach is used and there is more than Business Concerns, in solicitations that arrangements; and one appropriation account (or sub include the Performance-Based Payment (iii) Considering the general equities account) funding payments under the clause. of the particular situation. contract, the contracting officer shall (2) The contracting officer shall take include in the contract instructions for 32.1006 Agency approvals. immediate unilateral action only if distribution of financing payments to The contracting officer shall obtain warranted by circumstances such as the respective funds accounts. such approvals as are required by overpayments or unsatisfactory contract (d) Liquidating performance-based agency regulations. performance. (3) In all cases, the contracting officer finance payments. Performance-based 32.1007 Administration of performance- finance amounts shall be liquidated by based payments. shall (i) act fairly and reasonably, (ii) base decisions on substantial evidence, deducting a percentage or a designated (a) Administration. The extent of dollar amount from the delivery and (iii) document the contract file. supervision of performance-based Findings made under paragraph (e) of payment. payments shall vary inversely with the (1) If the performance-based finance the Performance-Based Payments clause contractor’s experience, performance at 52.232–BD shall be in writing. payments are on a delivery item basis, record, reliability, quality of the liquidation amount for each such (b) Contractor noncompliance. (1) The management, financial strength, and the contractor must comply with all line item shall be the percent of that adequacy of the records, accounts and delivery item price that was previously material requirements of the contract. controls established by the contractor This includes the requirement to paid under performance-based finance for the administration of the clause. payments or the designated dollar maintain efficient and reliable records, Supervision shall be of a kind and accounts, and controls adequate for amount. degree sufficient to provide timely (2) If the performance-based finance proper administration of the clause. If knowledge of the need for, and timely these are deemed inadequate, payments are on a whole contract basis, opportunity for, any actions necessary liquidation shall be by either performance-based payments shall be to protect the Government’s interests. suspended (or payments for events for predesignated liquidation amounts or a (b) Approval of requests. If the which the records, accounts, or controls liquidation percentage. In order to contracting officer has satisfied himself are unacceptable shall be suspended) ensure proper liquidation, performance- that the contractor’s internal records based financing payments made after and controls and management until the necessary changes have been any payment for a deliverable item shall arrangements are accurate and reliable made. (2) If the contractor fails to comply be adjusted to reflect the amount of for all aspects of administration of with the contract without fault or previous delivery payments. (For performance-based payments, the negligence, the contracting officer will example, if $3 million of performance- contracting officer may rely upon those not take action permitted by paragraph based financing payments have been in approving any particular request for (e)(1) of the Performance-Based Payment made under a $10 million contract, the payment. In such event, the contracting clause at 52.232–BD, other than to liquidation percentage would be 30 officer shall determine the degree of risk percent.) to the Government’s interests, and shall correct overpayments and collect (e) Late payment penalties. arrange an appropriate schedule of post- amounts due from the contractor (see Performance-based payments are payment reviews and verifications. also 32.1007(c)). (c) Unsatisfactory financial condition. contract financing payments and, Where the contracting officer is not (1) If the contracting officer finds that therefore, are not subject to the interest- satisfied, the contracting officer shall contract performance (including full penalty provisions of the Prompt require such reviews and verifications liquidation of performance-based Payment Act in accordance with subpart before approval for payment, as the payments) is endangered by the 32.9. However, these payments shall be contracting officer finds appropriate for made in accordance with the agency’s the protection of the Government’s contractor’s financial condition, or by a policy for contract financing payments. interests. failure to make progress, the contracting officer shall require the contractor to 32.1005 Solicitation provisions and 32.1008 Suspension or reduction of make additional operating or financial contract clause. performance-based payments. arrangements adequate for completing (a) If performance-based contract (a) General. The Performance-Based the contract without loss to the financing will be provided, the Payments clause provides the Government. contracting officer shall insert the clause Government the right to reduce or (2) If the contracting officer concludes at 52.232–BD, Performance-Based suspend performance-based payments that further performance-based Payments, with the description of the or to increase the liquidation, under payments would increase the probable basis for payment and liquidation as specified conditions. These conditions loss to the Government, the contracting required in 32.1004 in the solicitation and actions are discussed in paragraphs officer shall suspend performance-based and resulting contract. (b) through (d) of this section. payments and all other payments until (b) The contracting officer shall insert (1) The contracting officer shall take the unliquidated balance of the provision at 52.232–BB, Notice of these actions only in accordance with performance-based payments is Performance-Based Payments, in the contract terms and never eliminated. requests for proposals that include a precipitately or arbitrarily. These (d) Delinquency in payment of costs Performance-Based Payments clause. actions should be taken only after— of performance. If the contracting officer (c) Unless otherwise directed by (i) Notifying the contractor of the determines the contractor is delinquent agency regulations in accordance with intended action and providing an in paying the costs of contract 32.104(c), if it is expected that the opportunity for discussion; performance in the ordinary course of 14166 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Proposed Rules business, the contracting officer shall needed for performance, the contractor contracting officer determines that the evaluate whether the delinquency is is obligated to repay the Government the failure to perform was Government- caused by an unsatisfactory financial performance-based payments related to caused (and it can be established that condition and, if so, shall apply the the property. the contractor would have successfully guidance in paragraph (c) of this (c) The contractor is not obligated to performed the event otherwise), the section. If the contractor’s financial pay for the loss of property for which effect upon the contractor of the delay condition is satisfactory, the contracting the Government has assumed the risk of in performance payment for the event officer shall not deny performance- loss. However, a serious loss may may be considered if contract based payments if the contractor agrees impede the satisfactory progress of adjustment results. to— contract performance, so that the (1) Cure the payment delinquencies; contracting officer may need to act PART 52ÐSOLICITATION PROVISIONS (2) Avoid further delinquencies; and under paragraph (e)(2) of the AND CONTRACT CLAUSES (3) Make additional arrangements Performance-Based Payment clause. In 19. Sections 52.232–AA through adequate for completing the contract addition, while the contractor is not 52.232–BD are added to read as follows: without loss to the Government. required to repay previous performance- based payments in the event of a loss for § 52.232±AA Standard Terms for 32.1009 Title. which the Government has assumed the Government Financing of Purchases of (a) Since the Performance-Based risk, such a loss may prevent the Commercial Items. Payment clause at 52.232–BD gives the contractor from making the certification In accordance with 32.206(b)(2), Government title to all of the property required by the Performance-Based insert the following clause: described in paragraph (f) of the clause, Payments clause. the contracting officer must ensure that Standard Terms for Government Financing of Purchases of Commercial Items (Date) the Government title to this property is 32.1011 Performance-based payments for not compromised by other events. If contract financing will be provided encumbrances. Ordinarily, the The following policy and procedures under this contract, the terms and conditions of this clause shall apply, in addition to any contracting officer, in the absence of apply to the use of performance-based other provisions of this contract. If the reason to believe otherwise, may rely payments based upon specific events contract financing terms of this contract upon the contractor’s certification (milestones): resulted from an Invitation to Propose contained in the payment request. (a) The performance-based payment Financing Terms (FAR 52.232–AC), no (b) If the contracting officer becomes shall be based on a program event, financing payment shall be made in any aware of any arrangement or condition identified to a specific contract line item greater amount or at any earlier date than that would impair the Government’s or subline item, and liquidated by specified in the listing contained in the title to the property affected by the deduction of the performance-based contractor’s proposal as accepted by the Performance-Based Payment clause at payments from the price of the item in contracting officer. (a) Reduction or suspension of payments. 52.232–BD, the contracting officer shall the contract. The Contracting Officer may reduce or require additional protective provisions. (b) Each event for which a suspend financing payments, liquidate (c) The existence of any such performance-based payment is financing payments by deduction from any encumbrance is a violation of the established shall have a description of payment for accepted supplies or services contractor’s obligations under the what constitutes successful under this or any other contract, or take a contract, and the contracting officer performance. combination of these actions, after finding may, if necessary, suspend or reduce (c) Because performance-based upon substantial evidence any of the payments under the terms of payments are liquidated by deduction following conditions— Performance-Based Payments clause from a specific delivery, each event for (1) The Contractor failed to comply with which a performance-based payment is any contract term or condition; covering failure to comply with a (2) Performance of this contract is material requirement of the contract. In established shall be part of the endangered by the Contractor’s unsatisfactory addition, if the contractor fails to performance of a specific deliverable financial condition; or disclose an existing encumbrance in the item under the contract. (3) The Contractor fails to provide the certification, the contracting officer (d) It is not required that the Government, upon request, a satisfactory should consult with legal counsel performance-based payment amount be assurance of future performance. concerning possible violation of 31 based on the cost of performing an (b) Records, reports, and access. The U.S.C. 3729, the False Claims Act. event; however, there must be a rational Contractor shall maintain records and basis for the payment amount controls adequate for administration of this 32.1010 Risk of loss. established. clause. For the sole purpose of administering (a) Under the Performance-Based (e) The contracting officer awarding this clause, the Contractor shall promptly Payments clause at 52.232–BD, and furnish reports, certificates, financial the contract is responsible for statements, and other pertinent information except for normal spoilage, the establishing a complete, fully defined requested by the Contracting Officer, and contractor bears the risk for loss, theft, schedule of performance-based shall give the Government reasonable destruction, or damage to property payments prior to award of the contract. opportunity to examine and verify the affected by the clause, even though title (f) The performance-based payments Contractor’s records and controls required for is vested in the Government, unless the shall be set forth in the contract, be administration of this clause, and to examine Government has expressly assumed this reasonably priced, and be based on and verify the Contractor’s performance of risk. The clauses prescribed in 32.1005 meaningful program events. this contract. related to performance-based payments, (g) The contracting officer shall not (c) Special terms regarding termination for default, and terminations, do not approve a performance-based payment cause. If this contract is terminated for cause, the Contractor shall, on demand, repay to the constitute a Government assumption of until the contractor has successfully Government the amount of unliquidated risk. performed the specified event, performance payments. The Government (b) If a loss occurs in connection with notwithstanding the contractor’s failure shall be liable for no payment except as property for which the contractor bears to perform is without fault or negligence provided by the Termination for Cause term the risk and the property is part of or on the contractor’s part. However, if a of the clause at 52.212–4. Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Proposed Rules 14167 (d) Reservation of rights. (1) No payment provided in paragraph (a), Reduction or installment payments are authorized for each under this clause shall (i) excuse the suspension of payments. separately priced unit of a contract line item, Contractor from performance of obligations (g) Content of Contractor’s request for the first installment payment for any under this contract, or (ii) constitute a waiver financing payment term. The Contractor’s particular unit of that contract line item of any of the rights or remedies of the parties request for financing payment shall contain would be eight (8) months before the under the contract. the following: scheduled delivery date for that unit. The last (2) The Government’s rights and remedies (1) The name and address of the installment payment is due one (1) month under this clause (i) shall not be exclusive, Contractor; before scheduled delivery of a unit. but rather shall be in addition to any other (2) The date of the request for Financing (4) Limitation on Payment. Prior to the rights and remedies provided by law or this Payment; payment for acceptance of a separately priced contract; and (ii) shall not be affected by (3) The contract number and/or other unit of a contract line item, the sum of all delayed, partial, or omitted exercise of any identifier of the contract or order under installment payments for that unit shall not right, remedy, power, or privilege, nor shall which the request is made; exceed 70 percent of the price of that unit. such exercise or any single exercise preclude (4) An appropriately itemized and totaled (b) Contractor request for installment or impair any further exercise under this statement of the financing payments payment. The Contractor may submit clause or the exercise of any other right, requested and such other information as is Requests for Payment of Installment power, or privilege of the Government. necessary for computation of the payment, Payments not more frequently than monthly, (e) Contractor certification and prepared in accordance with the direction of in a form and manner acceptable to the acknowledgment of criminal and civil the Contracting Officer; and Contracting Officer. Unless otherwise penalties. As required in the paragraph (5) A certification by a Contractor official authorized by the Contracting Officer, all concerning the content of the Contractor’s authorized to bind the Contractor, as installments in any month for which request for financing payment, the Contractor specified in paragraph (e), Contractor payment is being requested shall be included shall make the following certification in each certification and acknowledgment of criminal in a single request, appropriately itemized request for financing payment: and civil penalties. and totaled. I certify to the best of my knowledge and (End of clause) (c) Adequate progress and approval for belief that— payment. An installment payment under this (1) This request for financing payment is § 52.232±AB Installment Payments for clause is a contract financing payment under true and correct; Commercial Items. the Prompt Payment clause of this contract, (2) All payments requested are properly As prescribed in 32.206(e), insert the and except as provided below, approved due in accordance with the contract, and that following clause: requests shall be paid within thirty (30) days except as disclosed to the Contracting Officer of submittal of a proper request for payment. by written communication dated lllll, Installment Payments for Commercial Items Payment is not required, and the prompt the deliverable items for which payments are (Date) payment period shall not begin, until the requested will be delivered or performed in Installment financing payments shall be Contracting Officer approves the request, if accordance with the contract; made to the Contractor when requested, as the Contracting Officer— (3) There has been no impairment or work progresses, but not more frequently (1) Requires substantiation of adequate diminution of the Government’s security than monthly, in amounts approved by the progress; under this contract (except as reported in Contracting Officer under the following (2) Inquires into the status of performance; lllll writing on ); conditions: (3) Inquires into any of the conditions (4) There has been no materially adverse (a) Computation of amounts. Installment listed in paragraph (e), Reduction or change in the financial condition of the payment financing shall be paid to the suspension of payments, of this clause; or Contractor since the submission by the Contractor when requested for each (4) Inquires into the Contractor Contractor to the Government of the most separately priced unit of supply (but not for certification. recent written information dated lllll; services) of each contract line item in (d) Liquidation of installment payments. and, amounts approved by the Contracting Officer (1) Installment payments shall be liquidated (5) After the making of this requested pursuant to this clause. by deducting from the invoice payment made Financing Payment, the amount of all such (1) Number of installment payments for upon acceptance of each item the total payments will not exceed any limitation in each contract line item. Each separately unliquidated amount of installment the contract, and the amount of all payments priced unit of each contract line item is payments made for that separately priced under the contract will not exceed any authorized a fixed number of monthly unit of that contract line item. limitation in the contract. installment payments. The number of (2) If at any time the amount of payments (6) I understand that inaccurate installment payments authorized for each under this contract exceeds any limitation in information provided to the Government may unit of a contract line item is equal to the this contract, the Contractor shall repay to subject me and/or others to civil and/or number of months from the date of contract the Government the excess. Unless otherwise criminal penalties for false claims or false award to the date one month before the first determined by the Contracting Officer, such statements pursuant to 31 U.S.C. 3729 and 18 delivery of the first separately priced unit of excess shall be credited as a reduction in the U.S.C. 1001. the contract line item. For example, if the unliquidated installment payment balance(s) (f) Security for Government financing. In first scheduled delivery of any separately for the related deliverable item(s), after the event the Contractor fails to provide priced unit of a contract line item is nine (9) adjustment of delivery payments and adequate security, as required in this months after award of the contract, all balances for any retroactive price contract, no financing payment shall be made separately priced units of that contract line adjustments. under this contract. Upon receipt of the item are authorized eight (8) installment (3) The liquidation amounts for each unit adequate security, financing payments shall payments. of each line item shall be clearly delineated be made, including all previous payments to (2) Amount of each installment payment. in each request for delivery payment which the Contractor is entitled, in The amount of each installment payment for submitted by the Contractor. accordance with the terms of the provisions each separately priced unit of each contract (e) Reduction or suspension of installment for contract financing. If at any time the line item is equal to 70 percent of the unit payments. The Contracting Officer may Contracting Officer determines that the price divided by the number of installment reduce or suspend Installment Payments, security provided by the Contractor is payments authorized for that unit. liquidate Installment Payments by deduction insufficient, the Contractor shall promptly (3) Date of each installment payment. from any payment for accepted supplies or provide such additional security as the Installment payments for any particular services under this or any other contract, or Contracting Officer determines necessary. In separately priced unit of a contract line item take a combination of these actions, after the event the Contractor fails to provide such begin the number of months prior to the finding upon substantial evidence any of the additional security, the Contracting Officer delivery of that unit that are equal to the following conditions: may find the Contractor to have failed to number of installment payments authorized (1) The Contractor failed to comply with comply with a requirement of the contract as for that unit. For example, if eight (8) any contract term or condition; 14168 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Proposed Rules (2) Performance of this contract is (3) The contract number and/or other the offeror and the terms in the clause endangered by the Contractor’s unsatisfactory identifier of the contract or order under Standard Terms for Government Financing of financial condition; or which the request is made; Purchases of Commercial Items at 52.232– (3) The Contractor fails to provide the (4) An itemized and totaled statement of AA, the terms of the clause Standard Terms Government, upon request, a satisfactory the items, related deliverable items, and for Government Financing of Purchases of assurance of future performance. installment payment(s) being requested for Commercial Items at 52.232–AA shall each separately priced unit of each contract (f) Security for installment payment govern. line item; and financing. In the event the Contractor fails to (c) Because of statutory limitations (10 provide adequate security as required in this (5) A certification by a Contractor official U.S.C. 2307(f) and 41 U.S.C. 255(f)), the contract, no financing payment shall be made authorized to bind the Contractor, as offeror’s proposed financing shall not be under this contract. Upon receipt of the specified in paragraph (k). acceptable if it does not conform to the adequate security, financing payments shall (k) Contractor certification. As required in be made, including all previous payments to paragraph (j)(5) of this clause, the Contractor following limitations: which the Contractor is entitled, in shall make the following certification in each (1) Delivery payments shall be made only accordance with the terms of the provisions Request for Installment Payment: for supplies delivered and accepted, or for contract financing. If at any time the I certify to the best of my knowledge and services rendered and accepted in Contracting Officer determines that the belief that— accordance with the Payment term, security provided by the Contractor is (1) This request for installment payment is (2) Contract financing payments shall not insufficient, the Contractor shall promptly true and correct; exceed 15 percent of the contract price in provide such additional security as the (2) All installment payments requested are advance of any performance of work under properly due in accordance with the contract, Contracting Officer determines necessary. In the contract, and that except as disclosed to the the event the Contractor fails to provide such Contracting Officer by written (3) The terms and conditions of the additional security, the Contracting Officer communication dated llll, the contract financing must be appropriate or may find the Contractor to have failed to deliverable items for which Installment customary in the commercial marketplace, comply with a material requirement of the Payments are requested will be delivered or and contract as provided in paragraph (e), performed in accordance with the contract; (4) The terms and conditions of the Reduction or suspension of installment (3) There are no encumbrances (except as contract financing must be in the best interest payments, of this clause. reported in writing on lllll) against the of the United States. (g) Records, reports, and access. The property acquired or produced for, and (d) The offeror’s proposal of financing Contractor shall maintain records and allocated or properly chargeable to the terms shall include the following: controls adequate for administration of this contract which would affect or impair the (1) The proposed contractual language clause. For the sole purpose of administering Government’s security; this clause, the Contractor shall promptly describing the contract financing (see FAR (4) There has been no materially adverse 32.202–3 for appropriate definitions of types furnish reports, certificates, financial change in the financial condition of the of payments), statements, and other pertinent information Contractor since the submission by the requested by the Contracting Officer, and Contractor to the Government of the most (2) A listing of the earliest time and shall give the Government reasonable recent written information dated lllll; greatest amount at which each contract opportunity to examine and verify the and, financing payment may be payable and the Contractor’s records and controls required for (5) After the making of this requested amount of each delivery payment. Any administration of this clause, and to examine Installment Payment, the amount of all resulting contract shall provide that no and verify the Contractor’s performance of payments for each deliverable item for which contract financing payment shall be made at this contract. Installment Payments have been requested any earlier time or in any greater amount (h) Special terms regarding termination for will not exceed any limitation in the than shown in the offeror’s listing. cause. If this contract is terminated for cause, contract, and the amount of all payments (e) The offeror’s proposed prices and the Contractor shall, on demand, repay to the under the contract will not exceed any financing terms shall be evaluated to Government the amount of unliquidated limitation in the contract. determine the cost to the United States of the performance payments. The Government (6) I understand that inaccurate proposal. This evaluation shall be done using information provided to the Government may shall be liable for no payment except as the interest rate and delivery schedule provided by the Termination for Cause term subject me and/or others to civil and/or specified elsewhere in this solicitation. of the clause at 52.212–4. criminal penalties for false claims or false (i) Reservation of rights. (1) No payment or statements pursuant to 31 U.S.C. 3729 and 18 (End of provision) vesting of title under this clause shall (i) U.S.C. 1001. 52.232±BB Notice of Performance-Based excuse the Contractor from performance of (End of clause) obligations under this contract, or (ii) Payments. constitute a waiver of any of the rights or 52.232±AC Invitation to Propose Financing As prescribed in 32.1005(b), insert the Terms. remedies of the parties under the contract. following provision: (2) The Government’s rights and remedies The contracting officer shall include under this clause (i) shall not be exclusive, this provision as specified in 32.205(b) Notice of Performance-Based Payments but rather shall be in addition to any other and 32.206. (Date) rights and remedies provided by law or this The need for customary performance-based Invitation to Propose Financing Terms (Date) contract, and (ii) shall not be affected by payments conforming to the regulations in delayed, partial, or omitted exercise of any (a) The offeror is invited to propose terms Subpart 32.10 of the Federal Acquisition right, remedy, power, or privilege, nor shall under which the Government shall make Regulation (FAR) will not be considered as such exercise or any single exercise preclude contract financing payments to the contractor a handicap or adverse factor in the award of or impair any further exercise under this during performance of this contract. The the contract. The Performance-Based clause or the exercise of any other right, financing terms proposed by the offeror shall Payments clause included in this solicitation, power, or privilege of the Government. be a factor in the evaluation of the (j) Content of Contractor’s request for contractor’s proposal. The financing terms of and the description of the basis for payment installment payment. The Contractor’s the successful offeror and the clause, and liquidation, will be included in any request for installment payment shall contain Standard Terms for Government Financing of resulting contract. Even though the clause is the following: Purchases of Commercial Items, at 52.232– included in the contract, the clause shall be (1) The name and address of the AA, shall be incorporated in any resulting inoperative during any time the Contractor’s Contractor; contract. records, accounts, or controls are determined (2) The date of the request for Installment (b) The offeror agrees that in the event of by the Government to be inadequate for Payment; any conflict between the terms proposed by administration of this clause. Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Proposed Rules 14169 (End of provision) an event or performance criteria, or into any Otherwise, vestiture shall occur when the of the conditions listed in paragraph (e), property is or should have been allocable or 52.232±BC Notice of Availability of Reduction or Suspension of Payments, of this properly chargeable to this contract. Performance-Based Payments Exclusively clause, or into the contractor certification, (2) Property, as used in this clause, for Small Business Concerns. payment is not required, and the prompt includes all of the below-described items As provided in 32.1005(c), insert the payment period shall not begin until the acquired or produced by the Contractor that following provision: Contracting Officer approves the request. are or should be allocable or properly (3) The approval by the Contracting Officer chargeable to this contract under sound and Notice of Availability of Performance-Based of a Request for Performance-Based Payment generally accepted accounting principles and Payments Exclusively for Small Business does not constitute an acceptance by the practices: Concerns (Date) Government and does not excuse the (i) Parts, materials, inventories, and work The Performance-Based Payments clause Contractor from performance of obligations in process, will be available only to small business under this contract. (ii) Special tooling and special test concerns. Any bid conditioned upon (d) Liquidation of performance-based equipment to which the Government is to inclusion of a performance-based payment payments. (1) Performance-based finance acquire title under any other clause of this clause in the resulting contract will be amounts paid prior to payment for delivery contract, rejected as nonresponsive if the bidder is not and acceptance of an item shall be liquidated (iii) Nondurable (i.e., noncapital) tools, a small business concern. by deducting a percentage or the designated jigs, dies, fixtures, molds, patterns, taps, (End of provision) dollar amount from the delivery payment. If gauges, test equipment and other similar the performance-based finance payments are manufacturing aids, title to which would not 52.232±BD Performance-Based Payments. on a delivery item basis, the liquidation be obtained as special tooling under As prescribed in 32.1005(a), insert the amount for each such line item shall be the subparagraph (f)(2)(ii) of this clause, and percent of that delivery item price that was (iv) Drawings and technical data, to the following clause: previously paid under performance-based extent the Contractor or subcontractors are Performance-Based Payments (Date) finance payments or the designated dollar required to deliver them to the Government amount. If the performance-based finance by other clauses of this contract. In accordance with the provisions of this clause, and the contract’s description of the payments are on a whole contract basis, (3) Although title to property is in the basis for payment, the Contractor shall be liquidation shall be by either predesignated Government under this clause, other paid contract financing payments based upon liquidation amounts or a liquidation applicable clauses of this contract, (e.g., the performance under the following conditions: percentage. If a liquidation percentage is termination or special tooling clauses), shall (a) Amount of payments and limitations on used, the liquidation percentage for each line determine the handling and disposition of payments. Subject to such other limitations item shall be the percent of the total contract the property. and conditions as are specified in this price that was previously paid under (4) The Contractor may sell any scrap contract and this clause, the amount of performance-based finance payments. In resulting from production under this payments and limitations on payments shall order to ensure proper liquidation, contract, without requesting the Contracting be specified in the contract’s description of performance-based financing payments made Officer’s approval, provided that any the basis for payment. after any payment for a deliverable item shall significant reduction in the value of the (b) Contractor request for performance- be adjusted to reflect the amount of previous property to which the Government has title based payment. The Contractor may submit delivery payments. under this clause is reported in writing to the Requests for Payment of Performance-Based (2) If at any time the amount of payments Contracting Officer. Payments not more frequently than monthly, under this contract exceeds any limitation in (5) In order to acquire for its own use or in a form and manner acceptable to the this contract, the Contractor shall repay to dispose of property to which title is vested Contracting Officer. Unless otherwise the Government the excess. Unless otherwise in the Government under this clause, the authorized by the Contracting Officer, all determined by the Contracting Officer, such Contractor must obtain the Contracting basis for payment in any period for which excess shall be credited as a reduction in the Officer’s advance approval of the action and payment is being requested shall be included unliquidated performance-based payment the terms. If approved, the basis for payment in a single request, appropriately itemized balance(s), after adjustment of invoice to which the property is related shall be and totaled. The Contractor’s request shall payments and balances for any retroactive deemed to be not in compliance with the contain the information and certification price adjustments. terms of the contract and not payable (if the detailed in paragraphs (l) and (m) of this (e) Reduction or suspension of property is part of or needed for clause. performance-based payments. The performance), and the Contractor shall (c) Approval and payment of requests. (1) Contracting Officer may reduce or suspend refund the related performance-based The Contractor shall not be entitled to performance-based payments, liquidate payments in accordance with paragraph (d) payment of a Request for Performance-Based performance-based payments by deduction of this clause. Payment prior to successful accomplishment from any payment under the contract, or take (g) Risk of loss. Before delivery to and of the event or performance criteria for which a combination of these actions after finding acceptance by the Government, the payment is requested. The Contracting upon substantial evidence any of the Contractor shall bear the risk of loss for Officer shall determine whether the event or following conditions: property, the title to which vests in the performance criteria for which payment is (1) The Contractor failed to comply with Government under this clause, except to the requested has been successfully any material requirement of this contract extent the Government expressly assumes the accomplished in accordance with the terms (which includes paragraphs (h) and (i) of this risk. If any property is damaged, lost, stolen, of the contract. The Contracting Officer may, clause). or destroyed, the basis of payment to which at any time, require the Contractor to (2) Performance of this contract is the property is related shall be deemed to be substantiate the event or performance criteria endangered by the Contractor’s (i) failure to not in compliance with the terms of the which has been or is represented as being make progress, or (ii) unsatisfactory financial contract and not payable (if the property is payable. condition. part of or needed for performance), and the (2) A payment under this Performance- (3) The Contractor is delinquent in Contractor shall refund the related Based Payment clause is a contract financing payment of any subcontractor or supplier performance-based payments in accordance payment under the Prompt Payment clause of under this contract in the ordinary course of with paragraph (d) of this clause. this contract, and approved requests shall be business. (h) Records and controls. The Contractor paid in accordance with the prompt payment (f)(1) Title. Title to the property described shall maintain records and controls adequate period and provisions specified for Contract in this paragraph (f) shall vest in the for administration of this clause. Financing Payments by that clause provided, Government. Vestiture shall be immediately (i) Reports and Government access. The however, if the Contracting Officer requires upon the date of the first performance-based Contractor shall promptly furnish reports, substantiation as provided in paragraph (c)(1) payment under this contract, for property certificates, financial statements, and other of this clause, or inquires into the status of acquired or produced before that date. pertinent information requested by the 14170 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Proposed Rules Contracting Officer for the administration of right, remedy, power, or privilege, nor shall in accordance with the contract, and the this clause and to determine that an event or such exercise or any single exercise preclude instructions of the Contracting Officer; other criteria prompting a financing payment or impair any further exercise under this (2) That (except as reported in writing on has been successfully accomplished. The clause or the exercise of any other right, lllll), all payments to subcontractors Contractor shall give the Government power, or privilege of the Government. and suppliers under this contract have been reasonable opportunity to examine and verify (l) Content of Contractor’s request for paid, or will be paid, currently, when due in the Contractor’s records and to examine and performance-based payment. The the ordinary course of business; verify the Contractor’s performance of this Contractor’s Request for Performance-Based (3) That there are no encumbrances (except contract for administration of this clause. Payment shall contain the following: lllll (j) Special terms regarding default. If this (1) The name and address of the as reported in writing on ) against contract is terminated under the Default Contractor, the property acquired or produced for, and clause, (1) the Contractor shall, on demand, (2) The date of the request for Performance- allocated or properly chargeable to the repay to the Government the amount of Based Payment, contract which would affect or impair the unliquidated performance payments, and (2) (3) The contract number and/or other Government’s title; title shall vest in the Contractor, on full identifier of the contract or order under (4) That there has been no materially liquidation of all performance-based which the request is made, adverse change in the financial condition of payments, for all property for which the (4) Such information and documentation as the Contractor since the submission by the Government elects not to require delivery is required by the contract’s description of Contractor to the Government of the most under the Default clause of this contract. The the basis for payment, and recent written information dated lllll; Government shall be liable for no payment (5) A certification by a Contractor official and except as provided by the Default clause. authorized to bind the Contractor, as (5) That after the making of this requested (k) Reservation of rights. (1) No payment or specified in paragraph (m). vesting of title under this clause shall (i) (m) Content of Contractor’s certification. Performance-Based Payment, the amount of excuse the Contractor from performance of As required in paragraph (l)(5) of this clause, all payments for each deliverable item for obligations under this contract, or (ii) the Contractor shall make the following which Performance-Based Payments have constitute a waiver of any of the rights or certification in each Request for Performance- been requested will not exceed any limitation remedies of the parties under the contract. Based Payment: in the contract, and the amount of all (2) The Government’s rights and remedies I certify to the best of my knowledge and payments under the contract will not exceed under this clause (i) shall not be exclusive, belief— any limitation in the contract. but rather shall be in addition to any other (1) That this Request for Performance- (End of clause) rights and remedies provided by law or this Based Payment is true and correct; that this contract, and (ii) shall not be affected by Request (and attachments) has been prepared [FR Doc. 95–6294 Filed 3–14–95; 8:45 am] delayed, partial, or omitted exercise of any from the books and records of the Contractor, BILLING CODE 6820±34±P Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices 14171 DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE revised the authority for Government B. Annual Reporting Burden financing of purchases of non- GENERAL SERVICES commercial items. Public reporting burden for this ADMINISTRATION Sections 2001(f) and 2051(e) provide collection of information is estimated to specific authority for Government average 1 hour per request for NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND financing of purchases of commercial commercial financing and .5 hours per SPACE ADMINISTRATION items. These paragraphs authorize the request for performance-based Government to provide contract financing, including the time for [FAR Case 94±764] financing with certain limitations: reviewing instructions, searching • existing data sources, gathering and OMB Clearance Request for Contract The financing must be in the best maintaining the data needed, and Financing interest of the Government, • The financing cannot exceed 15 completing and reviewing the collection AGENCIES: Department of Defense (DOD), percent until some performance of work of information. Send comments General Services Administration (GSA), under the contract, regarding this burden estimate or any and National Aeronautics and Space • The terms and conditions must be other aspect of this collection of Administration (NASA). appropriate or customary in the information, including suggestions for ACTION: Notice of new request for OMB commercial marketplace. reducing this burden, to General clearance. The above statutory provisions also Services Administration, FAR remove from financing of commercial Secretariat, 18th & F Streets, NW, Room SUMMARY: Under the provisions of the purchases certain restrictions applicable 4037, Washington, DC 20405, and to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980 (44 to financing of non-commercial FAR Desk Officer, Office of Information U.S.C. 3501), the Federal Acquisition purchases by other provisions of 10 and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Regulation (FAR) Secretariat has U.S.C. 2307 and 41 U.S.C. 255. Management and Budget, Washington, submitted to the Office of Management Sections 2001(b) and 2051(b) also DC 20503. and Budget (OMB) a request to review amend the authority for Government and approve a new information financing of non-commercial purchases The annual reporting burden for collection requirement concerning by authorizing financing on the basis of Commercial Financing is estimated as Contract Financing. certain classes of measures of follows: Respondents, 1,000; responses per respondent, 5; total annual DATES: Comments may be submitted on performance. responses, 5,000; preparation hours per or before May 15, 1995. To implement these changes, DOD, response, 1; and total response burden ADDRESSES: NASA, and GSA propose to amend the Send comments to Mr. Peter hours, 5,000. Weiss, FAR Desk Officer, OMB, Room Federal Acquisition Regulation by 10236, NEOB, Washington, DC 20503. revising Subparts 32.0, 32.1, and 32.5; The annual reporting burden for by adding new Subparts 32.2 and 32.10; FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Performance-Based Financing is and by adding new clauses to 52.232. Beverly Fayson, Office of Federal estimated as follows: Respondents, The statutory changes create a Acquisition Policy, GSA (202) 501– 6,000; responses per respondent, 32; fundamental distinction between 4755. total annual responses, 192,000; financing of purchases of commercial preparation hours per response, .5; and SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: and non-commercial items. As a result, total response burden hours, 96,000. A. Purpose the subparts of Part 32, Contract Financing, fall into three logical OBTAINING COPIES OF PROPOSALS: The Federal Acquisition Streamlining categories: Requester may obtain copies of OMB Act of 1994, Pub. L. 103–355, provides • Subparts applicable to both applications or justifications from the authorities that streamline the commercial and non-commercial General Services Administration, FAR acquisition process and minimize financing, Secretariat (VRS), Room 4037, burdensome government-unique • Subparts applicable to only Washington, DC 20405, telephone (202) requirements. Sections 2001 and 2051 of commercial financing, and 501–4755. Please cite OMB clearance the Federal Acquisition Streamlining • Subparts applicable to only non- request regarding Contract Financing, Act of 1994 substantially changed the commercial financing. FAR case 94–764, in all correspondence. statutory authorities for Government The proposed rule will enable the Dated: March 9, 1995. financing of contracts. Sections 2001(f) Government to provide financing to and 2051(e) provide specific authority assist in the performance of contracts for Beverly Fayson, for Government financing of purchases commercial items and provide financing FAR Secretariat. of commercial items, and sections for non-commercial items based on [FR Doc. 95–6293 Filed 3–14–95; 8:45 am] 2001(b) and 2051(b) substantially contractor performance. BILLING CODE 6820±34±P federal register March 15,1995 Wednesday Rule Interest WaiverforMicro-Purchases;Final Buy AmericaRequirements:Public 49 CFRPart661 Federal TransitAdministration Transportation Department of Part V 14173 14174 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Rules and Regulations DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION added iron (see section 337 of the of a rolling stock procurement.) As a Surface Transportation Assistance and general rule, most grantees have many Federal Transit Administration Uniform Relocation Act of 1987 (Pub. L. more procurements for small items than 100–17, 101 Stat. 32) and section 1048 for large items. Thus, most waivers 49 CFR Part 661 of the Intermodal Surface granted by FTA are based on the [Docket No. 94±A] Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 nonavailability of items such as office (Pub. L. 102–204, 105 Stat. 1914)). supplies (e.g., pens, paperclips) and RIN 2132±AA42 Now codified at 49 U.S.C. 5323(j), the maintenance items (e.g., screws, Buy America Requirements Buy America requirement that applies bearings, small vehicle replacement to purchases made with Federal transit parts, consumables). Many involve AGENCY: Federal Transit Administration and highway funds provides as follows: purchases of less than $20, with unit (FTA), DOT. (j) BUY AMERICA.—(1) The Secretary of prices under one dollar and often less ACTION: Notice of waiver from Buy Transportation may obligate an amount that than one cent. These types of things are America requirements for ‘‘micro- may be appropriated to carry out this chapter generally purchased with Federal and purchases’’ by FTA grantees. for a project only if the steel, iron, and local operating assistance funds. manufactured goods used in the project are The volume of these waiver requests SUMMARY: FTA issues an immediate produced in the United States. (2) The Secretary of Transportation may has resulted in significant delays in public interest waiver from Buy grantees’ procurement processes. They America requirements for ‘‘micro- waive paragraph (1) of this subsection if the Secretary finds that— consume an inordinate amount of purchases’’—those purchases with (A) Applying paragraph (1) would be grantee staff time, since documentation capital and operating assistance where inconsistent with the public interest; for each waiver request must be the cost is $2,500 or less. (B) The steel, iron, and goods produced in developed and submitted to FTA, where DATES: Effective date: March 15, 1995. the United States are not produced in a it is reviewed and acted on. Large Comment date: Comments must be sufficient and reasonably available amount or grantees handle thousands of individual received by May 15, 1995. are not of a satisfactory quality; (C) When procuring rolling stock procurements each year. Several ADDRESSES: Comments should be (including train control, communication, and grantees state that in order to comply addressed to: Federal Transit traction power equipment) under this with the FTA Buy America Administration, Office of Chief Counsel, chapter— requirements, procurement staffs have Docket No. 94–A, Room 9316, 400 (i) The cost of components and been increased. Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC subcomponents produced in the United One mid-sized grantee has written States is more that 60 percent of the cost of 20590. Comments will be available for that it processes more than 1,000 review by the public at this address all components of the rolling stock; and (ii) Final assembly of the rolling stock has purchase orders each month. Such from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m., Monday through occurred in the United States; or procurements, if subjected to Buy Friday. (D) Including domestic material will America scrutiny, could theoretically FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: increase the cost of the overall project by result in the generation of more than Gregory B. McBride, Deputy Chief more than 25 percent. 12,000 internal documents annually and Counsel, Office of Chief Counsel, (202) FTA has issued regulations an estimated 1,500 requests for waivers. 366–4063. implementing this provision at 49 CFR To fully comply with the requirement SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Buy Part 661. These regulations specify that (for procurements of less than $10,000), American Act of 1933, 41 U.S.C. 10 a– ‘‘for a manufactured product to be this grantee estimated that its d, established a preference for considered produced in the United purchasing department staff would have domestically produced goods in direct States: (1) All of the manufacturing to be increased by 2–3 persons, federal procurements. The first Buy processes for the product must take increasing staff costs in excess of America legislation applicable to the place in the United States; and (2) all $100,000; two fax machines with phone expenditure of federal funds by items or material used in the product lines would have to be procured, with recipients under FTA and Federal must be of United States origin.’’ 49 CFR a one-time cost in excess of $2,000 and Highway Administration (FHWA) grant 661.5(d). This definition is different annual telephone costs in excess of programs was enacted in 1978: section from the regulation implementing the $1,200; and its computerized stock 401 of the Surface Transportation 1933 Buy American Act which requires order system would have to be revised Assistance Act of 1978 (Pub. L. 95–599, that manufactured products contain to recognize and track each order to 92 Stat. 2689) established a domestic only a 51 percent domestic content. make sure it meets the requirement, at preference for ‘‘articles, materials, In this global economy, it is nearly a cost in excess of $10,000. Modifying supplies mined, produced, or impossible to find manufactured its purchase procedures to meet the manufactured’’ in the United States and products that are entirely domestic. requirement would require reducing the costing more than $500,000. Consequently, FTA receives Buy number of purchase orders by ordering In January 1983, Congress repealed America waiver requests for thousands larger quantities. However, the grantee section 401 and substituted section 165 of items, the great majority for reasons explained, good business practice of the Surface Transportation Assistance of nonavailability under section dictates that inventories be kept at the Act of 1982, Pub. L. No. 97–424, 96 Stat. (j)(2)(B), with a few based on price lowest level possible for several reasons, 2097. This action, among other things, differential under section (j)(2)(D). (In including loss prevention control, eliminated the $500,000 threshold. Appendix A to 49 CFR 661.7, FTA minimizing cash in inventory, Congress prohibited the expenditure of adopted the waivers granted under the maintaining purchasing flexibility to FTA or FHWA funds on steel, cement, Buy American Act of 1933 (41 U.S.C. 10 take advantage of product changes and and ‘‘manufactured products,’’ but as a–d) and included public interest improvements, space restrictions for discussed below, included four waivers under section (j)(2)(A) for storage, and shelf life. The grantee also exceptions permitting the statute to be microcomputer equipment, certain noted that buying all items in large waived. In 1984, Congress removed Chrysler vehicles assembled in Canada, quantities also can work against good cement from section 165, and in 1991 and spare parts when purchased as part faith attempts to include disadvantaged Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Rules and Regulations 14175 business participation in the bidding for this purpose, some grantees have proposal by the Office of Management process. included a compliance certification on and Budget (OMB) to apply the Grantees have cited other reasons for all purchase orders. If a vendor declines $100,000 Simplified Acquisition their assertion that compliance with to sign the certification, the grantee will Threshold for direct Federal purchases FTA’s current Buy America rule is not do business with that vendor. This to purchases by Federal recipients of unduly difficult and burdensome: approach protects the grantee, but puts financial assistance under the common • Small Purchase Procedures. a vendor at risk. Many vendors refuse to grant rule at 49 CFR Part 18.36 (59 FR Grantees do not routinely accumulate certify compliance with the Buy 53705, October 5, 1994). FTA also notes the documentation necessary to justify a America rule when they do not know that the Federal Highway waiver of the Buy America requirements the content of the products they are Administration (FHWA), in when procuring goods in accordance supplying. Some even refuse to deal administering the same statute as FTA, with their small purchase procedures, as with the FTA grantee, thus reducing already provides a general waiver if the allowed by 49 CFR Part 18, Uniform competition. In any case, if the vendor cost of foreign materials does not exceed Administrative Requirements for Grants does not certify compliance, the grantee $2,500. and Cooperative Agreements to State is obliged to consider the product non- and Local Governments (known as the domestic and to seek a waiver from FTA Public Interest Waiver ‘‘common grant rule’’). These small for its purchase. • In light of these considerations, FTA purchase procedures were meant to Confusion with 1933 Buy American believes that application of its Buy reduce paperwork and facilitate Act. Grantees also report that some America rule to micro-purchases is not grantees’ effective and efficient vendors certify compliance with the consistent with the public interest; procurement of goods. Because Buy America requirement believing it to accordingly, FTA hereby issues a documentation needed to request a be the same as the 1933 Buy American general public interest waiver under 49 waiver is usually not required or Act, which requires manufactured U.S.C. § 5323(j)(2)(A) and 49 CFR compatible with such procedures, the products to be 51 percent domestic in 661.7(b) to exempt from its Buy America requirement to request a waiver is often content. This is contrary to the FTA requirements all purchases made with overlooked. Strict compliance with the regulation, which requires a 100 percent FTA financial assistance, including FTA rule would necessitate creation of domestic content. Indeed, there are capital, planning, and operating documentation not normally needed for instances where grantees themselves do assistance, where the cost of the business reasons, preclude the use of not know that the FTA regulation purchase is $2,500 or less. This oral quotes where normally appropriate, requires 100 percent domestic content exemption covers many of the very and make the use of purchase orders for a manufactured product to be small purchases made by FTA grantees, difficult. Moreover, since the rule domestic. Until or unless there is a including office and janitorial supplies precludes granting a waiver until after complaint, the grantee will not look and furnishings, maintenance supplies receipt of bids, grantees are forced to behind the certification to verify that the and equipment, and other small items. repeat written waiver requests for the person who signed it understood the same item, even when it is evident that requirement. Thus, one is not always The goal of this public interest waiver a domestic product will not be offered. certain that a Buy America certification is to eliminate some of the procurement • State or Local Purchasing is correct or that the bids are being delays, ‘‘red tape,’’ and paperwork from Procedures. Since many small to mid- judged by the same standard. FTA grantees’ procurement processes. size transit properties and most states Today’s action is consistent with and To further serve these purposes, FTA, are required to use a local or state responsive to President Clinton’s elsewhere in today’s Federal Register, purchasing department for purchasing initiative to reinvent government, proposes a waiver for small purchases supplies, they have little control over known as the National Performance as defined in the common grant rule, 49 the procedures used. To comply with Review, and three recent actions CFR 18.36(d), and for purchases with the FTA Buy America requirements, designed to simplify government operating assistance. they must create duplicative local procedures, especially as to small Request for Comments procurement procedures, thereby purchases. The first is Executive Order incurring delays and increasing the cost 12931 of October 13, 1994, Federal FTA welcomes comment on this grant of their procurements. Ironically, one Procurement Reform, which requires of a general public interest waiver. State has reported that it cannot take that Federal agencies review their List of Subjects in 49 CFR Part 661 advantage of the State Highway procurement requirements with a view Department purchasing office since the to streamlining them. The second is the Buy America. State Highway Department complies Federal Acquisition Streamlining Act of For the reasons set out above, FTA with the FHWA rule, 23 CFR 635.410, 1994 (FASA), enacted October 13, 1994, amends 49 CFR Part 661 as follows: which is inconsistent with the FTA rule. which has as two of its major • Vendor Problems. Compliance with streamlining features the creation of a PART 661ÐBUY AMERICA the FTA Buy America requirements has Simplified Acquisition Threshold of REQUIREMENTSÐSURFACE also been a problem for vendors who $100,000 to replace the existing $25,000 TRANSPORTATION ASSISTANCE ACT supply the small items grantees need for small purchase threshold and the OF 1982, AS AMENDED their routine operations. In many exemption of ‘‘micro-purchases’’ instances, such vendors are distributors (purchases valued at $2,500 or less) 1. The authority citation for part 661 and suppliers rather than from the provisions of the 1933 Buy is revised to read as follows: manufacturers; accordingly, they cannot American Act. On December 15, 1994, reasonably be expected to know the Department of Defense, the General Authority: Sec. 165, Pub. L. 97–424, as amended by Sec. 337, Pub. L. 100–17 (49 whether the items being procured are Services Administration and the U.S.C. 5323(j)); 49 CFR 1.51. produced in the United States or not. National Aeronautics and Space However, under the FTA rule, all Administration issued an interim rule 2. Appendix A to § 661.7 is amended vendors must execute a certification of implementing FASA (59 FR 64786, by adding a new paragraph (e) as either compliance or noncompliance; December 15, 1994). The third is a follows: 14176 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Rules and Regulations Appendix A to § 661.7—General Waivers * * * * * (e) Under the provisions of § 661.7(b) of this part, all purchases where the cost is $2,500 or less are exempt from the requirements of this part. Issued on: March 10, 1995. Gordon J. Linton, Administrator. [FR Doc. 95–6387 Filed 3–14–95; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910±57±U federal register March 15,1995 Wednesday Rule Buy AmericaRequirements;Proposed 49 CFRPart661 Federal TransitAdministration Transportation Department of Part VI 14177 14178 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Proposed Rules DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION supplies mined, produced, or In this global economy, it is nearly manufactured’’ in the United States and impossible to find manufactured Federal Transit Administration costing more than $500,000. products that are entirely domestic. In January 1983, Congress repealed Consequently, FTA receives Buy 49 CFR Part 661 section 401 and substituted section 165 America waiver requests for thousands [Docket No. 94±A] of the Surface Transportation Assistance of items, the great majority for reasons Act of 1982, Pub. L. No. 97–424, 96 Stat. of nonavailability under section RIN 2132±AA42 2097. This action, among other things, (j)(2)(B), with a few based on price Buy America Requirements eliminated the $500,000 threshold. differential under section (j)(2)(D). (In Congress prohibited the expenditure of Appendix A to 49 CFR 661.7, FTA AGENCY: Federal Transit Administration FTA or FHWA funds on steel, cement, adopted the waivers granted under the (FTA), DOT. and ‘‘manufactured products,’’ but as Buy American Act of 1933 (41 U.S.C. ACTION: Notice of proposed waiver from discussed below, included four 10a–d) and included public interest Buy America requirements for small exceptions permitting the statute to be waivers under section (j)(2)(A) for purchases and for purchases with waived. In 1984, Congress removed microcomputer equipment, certain operating assistance. cement from section 165, and in 1991 Chrysler vehicles assembled in Canada, added iron (see section 337 of the and spare parts when purchased as part SUMMARY: FTA proposes to issue a Surface Transportation Assistance and of a rolling stock procurement.) As a public interest waiver from the Buy Uniform Relocation Act of 1987 (Pub. L. general rule, most grantees have many America requirements for ‘‘small 100–17, 101 Stat. 32) and section 1048 more procurements for small items than purchases’’ (as defined in the ‘‘common of the Intermodal Surface for large items. Thus, most waivers grant rule’’) by FTA grantees and made Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 granted by FTA are based on the with capital and planning assistance (Pub. L. 102–204, 105 Stat. 1914)). nonavailability of items such as office and for all purchases by FTA grantees Now codified at 49 U.S.C. 5323(j), the supplies (e.g., pens, paperclips) and made with operating assistance. Buy America requirement that applies maintenance items (e.g., screws, DATES: Comments must be received by to purchases made with Federal transit bearings, small vehicle replacement May 15, 1995. and highway funds provides as follows: parts, consumables). Many involve ADDRESSES: Comments should be purchases of less than $20, with unit (j) BUY AMERICA.—(1) The Secretary of prices under one dollar and often less addressed to: Federal Transit Transportation may obligate an amount that Administration, Office of Chief Counsel, than one cent. These types of things are may be appropriated to carry out this chapter generally purchased with Federal and Docket No. 94–A, Room 9316, 400 for a project only if the steel, iron, and Seventh Street, S.W., Washington, D.C. manufactured goods used in the project are local operating assistance funds. 20590. Comments will be available for produced in the United States. The volume of these waiver requests review by the public at this address (2) The Secretary of Transportation may has resulted in significant delays in from 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m., Monday waive paragraph (1) of this subsection if the grantees’ procurement processes. They through Friday. Secretary finds that— consume an inordinate amount of (A) Applying paragraph (1) would be grantee staff time, since documentation FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: inconsistent with the public interest; for each waiver request must be Gregory B. McBride, Deputy Chief (B) The steel, iron, and goods produced in developed and submitted to FTA, where Counsel, Office of Chief Counsel, (202) the United States are not produced in a it is reviewed and acted on. Large 366–4063. sufficient and reasonably available amount or grantees handle thousands of individual SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Elsewhere are not of a satisfactory quality; (C) When procuring rolling stock procurements each year. Several in today’s Federal Register, FTA grantees state that in order to comply provides notice of its issuance of a (including train control, communication, and traction power equipment) under this with the FTA Buy America public interest waiver for micro- chapter— requirements, procurement staffs have purchases (i.e., those purchases where (i) The cost of components and been increased. the cost is $2,500 or less) by FTA subcomponents produced in the United One mid-sized grantee has written grantees. In this notice, to further serve States is more that 60 percent of the cost of that it processes more than 1,000 the same purposes, FTA proposes to all components of the rolling stock; and purchase orders each month. Such issue a public interest waiver from the (ii) Final assembly of the rolling stock has procurements, if subjected to Buy Buy America requirements for ‘‘small occurred in the United States; or America scrutiny, could theoretically purchases’’ (as defined in the ‘‘common (D) Including domestic material will result in the generation of more than grant rule’’) by FTA grantees made with increase the cost of the overall project by more than 25 percent. 12,000 internal documents annually and capital and planning assistance and for an estimated 1,500 requests for waivers. all purchases by FTA grantees made FTA has issued regulations To fully comply with the requirement with operating assistance. implementing this provision at 49 CFR (for procurements of less than $10,000), The Buy American Act of 1933, 41 Part 661. These regulations specify that this grantee estimated that its U.S.C. 10a–d, established a preference ‘‘for a manufactured product to be purchasing department staff would have for domestically produced goods in considered produced in the United to be increased by 2–3 persons, direct federal procurements. The first States: (1) All of the manufacturing increasing staff costs in excess of Buy America legislation applicable to processes for the product must take $100,000; two fax machines with phone the expenditure of federal funds by place in the United States; and (2) all lines would have to be procured, with recipients under FTA and Federal items or material used in the product a one-time cost in excess of $2,000 and Highway Administration (FHWA) grant must be of United States origin.’’ 49 CFR annual telephone costs in excess of programs was enacted in 1978: section 661.5(d). This definition is different $1,200; and its computerized stock 401 of the Surface Transportation from the regulation implementing the order system would have to be revised Assistance Act of 1978 (Pub. L. 95–599, 1933 Buy American Act which requires to recognize and track each order to 92 Stat. 2689) established a domestic that manufactured products contain make sure it meets the requirement, at preference for ‘‘articles, materials, only a 51 percent domestic content. a cost in excess of $10,000. Modifying Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Proposed Rules 14179 its purchase procedures to meet the with the FHWA rule, 23 CFR 635.410, 1994 (FASA), enacted October 13, 1994, requirement would require reducing the which is inconsistent with the FTA rule. which has as two of its major number of purchase orders by ordering • Vendor Problems. Compliance with streamlining features the creation of a larger quantities. However, the grantee the FTA Buy America requirements has Simplified Acquisition Threshold of explained, good business practice also been a problem for vendors who $100,000 to replace the existing $25,000 dictates that inventories be kept at the supply the small items grantees need for small purchase threshold and the lowest level possible for several reasons, their routine operations. In many exemption of ‘‘micro-purchases’’ including loss prevention control, instances, such vendors are distributors (purchases valued at $2,500 or less) minimizing cash in inventory, and suppliers rather than from the provisions of the 1933 Buy maintaining purchasing flexibility to manufacturers; accordingly, they cannot American Act. On December 15, 1994, take advantage of product changes and reasonably be expected to know the Department of Defense, the General improvements, space restrictions for whether the items being procured are Services Administration and the storage, and shelf life. The grantee also produced in the United States or not. National Aeronautics and Space noted that buying all items in large However, under the FTA rule, all Administration issued an interim rule quantities also can work against good vendors must execute a certification of implementing FASA (59 FR 64786, faith attempts to include disadvantaged either compliance or noncompliance; December 15, 1994). The third is a business participation in the bidding for this purpose, some grantees have proposal by the Office of Management process. included a compliance certification on and Budget (OMB) to apply the Grantees have cited other reasons for all purchase orders. If a vendor declines $100,000 Simplified Acquisition their assertion that compliance with to sign the certification, the grantee will Threshold for direct Federal purchases FTA’s current Buy America rule is not do business with that vendor. This to purchases by Federal recipients of unduly difficult and burdensome: approach protects the grantee, but puts financial assistance under the common • Small Purchase Procedures. a vendor at risk. Many vendors refuse to Grantees do not routinely accumulate certify compliance with the Buy grant rule at 49 CFR Part 18.36 (59 FR the documentation necessary to justify a America rule when they do not know 53705, October 5, 1994). FTA also notes waiver of the Buy America requirements the content of the products they are that the Federal Highway when procuring goods in accordance supplying. Some even refuse to deal Administration (FHWA), in with their small purchase procedures, as with the FTA grantee, thus reducing administering the same statute as FTA, allowed by 49 CFR Part 18, Uniform competition. In any case, if the vendor already provides a general waiver if the Administrative Requirements for Grants does not certify compliance, the grantee cost of foreign materials does not exceed and Cooperative Agreements to State is obliged to consider the product non- $2,500. and Local Governments (known as the domestic and to seek a waiver from FTA Public Interest Waiver ‘‘common grant rule’’). These small for its purchase. purchase procedures were meant to • Confusion with 1933 Buy American In light of these considerations, FTA reduce paperwork and facilitate Act. Grantees also report that some believes that application of its Buy grantees’ effective and efficient vendors certify compliance with the America rule to small purchases is not procurement of goods. Because Buy America requirement believing it to consistent with the public interest; documentation needed to request a be the same as the 1933 Buy American accordingly, FTA proposes to issue a waiver is usually not required or Act, which requires manufactured general public interest waiver under 49 compatible with such procedures, the products to be 51 percent domestic in U.S.C. § 5323(j)(2)(A) and 49 CFR requirement to request a waiver is often content. This is contrary to the FTA § 661.7(b) to exempt from its Buy overlooked. Strict compliance with the regulation, which requires a 100 percent America requirements all ‘‘small FTA rule would necessitate creation of domestic content. Indeed, there are purchases’’ (as defined in the common documentation not normally needed for instances where grantees themselves do grant rule, 49 CFR 18.36(d)) made by its business reasons, preclude the use of not know that the FTA regulation grantees with FTA financial assistance, oral quotes where normally appropriate, requires 100 percent domestic content including capital, planning, and and make the use of purchase orders for a manufactured product to be operating assistance and all purchases difficult. Moreover, since the rule domestic. Until or unless there is a by FTA grantees with operating precludes granting a waiver until after complaint, the grantee will not look assistance. This exemption would cover receipt of bids, grantees are forced to behind the certification to verify that the many small purchases made by FTA repeat written waiver requests for the person who signed it understood the grantees. The goal of this public interest same item, even when it is evident that requirement. Thus, one is not always waiver is to eliminate some of the a domestic product will not be offered. certain that a Buy America certification procurement delays, ‘‘red tape,’’ and • State or Local Purchasing is correct or that the bids are being paperwork from FTA grantees’ Procedures. Since many small to mid- judged by the same standard. size transit properties and most states Today’s action is consistent with and procurement processes. are required to use a local or state responsive to President Clinton’s Request for Comments purchasing department for purchasing initiative to reinvent government, supplies, they have little control over known as the National Performance FTA requests comment on this the procedures used. To comply with Review, and three recent actions proposal to grant a general public the FTA Buy America requirements, designed to simplify government interest waiver. After consideration of they must create duplicative local procedures, especially as to small all comments, FTA will publish notice procurement procedures, thereby purchases. The first is Executive Order in the Federal Register of its action. incurring delays and increasing the cost 12931 of October 13, 1994, Federal Issued on: March 10, 1995. of their procurements. Ironically, one Procurement Reform, which requires State has reported that it cannot take that Federal agencies review their Gordon J. Linton, advantage of the State Highway procurement requirements with a view Administrator. Department purchasing office since the to streamlining them. The second is the [FR Doc. 95–6386 Filed 3–14–95; 8:45 am] State Highway Department complies Federal Acquisition Streamlining Act of BILLING CODE 4910±57±U federal register March 15,1995 Wednesday Advisory; Notice Paper ProductsRecoveredMaterials Protection Agency Environmental Part VII 14181 14182 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION The comments should be identified by Similarly, since all electronic AGENCY docket number F–95–PPRN–FFFFF. comments are available to all users, Further information on submitting commenters should not submit [SWH±FRL±5172±9] comments electronically is provided electronically any information which Paper Products Recovered Materials below in the section entitled ‘‘Electronic they believe to be Confidential Business Advisory Notice Filing of Comments.’’ Information (CBI). Such information Public comments and relevant should be submitted only in writing as AGENCY: Environmental Protection documents are available for viewing in described above under ADDRESSES. Agency. the RCRA Information Center (RIC), The official record for this action will ACTION: Notice of availability. located in room M2616, at the EPA be kept in paper form. Accordingly, EPA address listed above. The RIC is open will convert all documents received SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection from 9 am to 4 pm, Monday through electronically into printed paper form as Agency today is providing notice of the Friday, excluding Federal holidays. To they are received and will place the availability of a draft Paper Products review docket materials, the public paper copies in the official record, Recovered Materials Advisory Notice must make an appointment by calling which will also include all comments and ‘‘Draft Paper Products RMAN— (202) 260–9327. Materials may be submitted directly in writing. The Supporting Analyses.’’ This action will copied for $0.15 per page. official record is the paper record promote paper recycling by using maintained in the RCRA docket (see government procurement to expand FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: ADDRESSES above). (Comments markets for recovered paper. Under ‘‘Draft Paper Products RMAN— submitted on paper will not be section 6002 of the Resource Supporting Analyses’’ is the primary transferred to electronic format. These Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976, supporting document for the draft Paper comments may be viewed only in the EPA designates items that are or can be Products Recovered Materials Advisory RCRA docket as described above.) made with recovered materials and Notice (RMAN). Both the Federal Because the electronic comment provides recommendations for Register notice and the supporting process is still experimental, EPA government procurement of these items. document will be available in electronic cannot guarantee that all electronic In 1988, EPA designated the category of format on the Internet System through comments can be accurately converted paper and paper products and the EPA Public Access Server at to printed paper form. If EPA becomes recommended minimum recovered gopher.epa.gov. For a paper copy of the aware of any problems with the receipt materials content levels for items within Federal Register notice or ‘‘Draft Paper of the electronic file or with its transfer this category that are commonly Products RMAN—Supporting to paper, the Agency will attempt to purchased by government agencies. Analyses,’’ please contact the RCRA contact the commenter to request that Today, EPA is issuing draft revisions to Hotline at 800–424–9346, or, in the the comment be resubmitted in the 1988 recommendations. EPA also Washington, DC metropolitan area, electronic or written form. addresses issues raised by paper (703) 412–9810. Paper copies also are Some commenters may choose to manufacturers, merchants, and available in the RCRA Docket at the submit identical comments in both purchasers as they have been address listed in the previous section. electronic and written form to ensure implementing the 1988 For technical information regarding accuracy. In these instances, EPA recommendations. the recommendations in today’s notice, requests that commenters clearly note in contact Dana Arnold of the Recycling both the electronic and written DATES: EPA will accept public submissions that the comments are comments on the recommendations Section in EPA’s Office of Solid Waste at (703) 308–7279. duplicated in the other medium. This contained in the draft Paper Products will assist EPA in processing and filing Recovered Materials Advisory Notice ELECTRONIC FILING OF COMMENTS: As part the comments during the open comment until May 15, 1995. Both written and of an interagency ‘‘streamlining’’ period. electronic comments must be submitted initiative, EPA is experimenting with As with written comments, EPA will on or before this date. electronic submission of public not attempt to verify the identities of ADDRESSES: Commenters must send an comments through the Internet, in electronic commenters or to review the original and two copies of comments, addition to accepting comments in accuracy of electronic comments. EPA referencing docket F–95–PPRN–FFFFF, traditional written form. This notice is will take such commenters and to the RCRA Information Center (5305), one of the actions selected by EPA for comments at face value. Electronic and U.S. EPA, 401 M Street SW., this experiment. From the experiment, written comments will be placed in the Washington, DC 20460. EPA will learn how electronic official record without any editing or Commenters wishing to submit commenting works, and any problems change by EPA except to the extent Confidential Business Information (CBI) that arise can be addressed before EPA changes occur in the process of should submit an original and two adopts electronic commenting more converting electronic comments to copies of the CBI, referencing docket F– broadly in its rulemaking activities. printed paper form. 95–PPRN–FFFFF, under separate cover Electronic comment through the If it chooses to respond officially to to the Document Control Officer (5305), Internet raises some novel issues. electronic comments on this notice, EPA U.S. EPA, 401 M Street SW., Persons who comment on this will do so either in a notice in the Washington, DC 20460. document should be aware that this Federal Register or in a response to Comments may also be submitted experimental electronic commenting is comments document placed in the electronically by sending electronic administered on a completely public official record for this docket. EPA will mail (e-mail) through the Internet system. Therefore, any personal not respond to commenters System to: RCRA- information included in comments and electronically, other than to seek [email protected]. All electronic the electronic mail addresses of those clarification of electronic comments that comments must be submitted as an who make comments electronically are may be garbled in transmission or ASCII file avoiding the use of special automatically available to anyone else conversion to printed paper form. Any characters and any form of encryption. who views these comments. communications from EPA employees Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices 14183 to electronic commenters, other than C. Revisions to Item Listings or are not consistently available those described in this paragraph, either D. Recyclability throughout the U.S. Also, while some through Internet or otherwise are not E. Use of EPA’s Recommendations paper and paper products containing official responses from EPA. III. Request for Comments these high percentages of recovered I. Authority materials are available, they often are ACCESSING INTERNET: not price-competitive with other paper The draft Paper Products Recovered and paper products offered to 1. Through Gopher: Go to: Materials Advisory Notice is published gopher.epa.gov government agencies and private sector under authority of sections 2002(a) and purchasers. As a result, overall use of From the main menu, choose ‘‘EPA 6002 of the Solid Waste Disposal Act, as postconsumer recovered materials may Offices and Regions’’. Next, choose amended by the Resource Conservation not be maximized simply by EPA’s ‘‘Office of Solid Waste and Emergency and Recovery Act of 1976, as amended, recommending high postconsumer Response (OSWER)’’. Next, choose 42 U.S.C. 6912(a) and 6962, and content levels. ‘‘Office of Solid Waste’’. Then, choose Executive Order 12873, ‘‘Federal Since designating paper and paper ‘‘Non-Hazardous Waste—RCRA Subtitle Acquisition, Recycling, and Waste products as procurement items in 1988, D’’. Finally, choose ‘‘Procurement/ Prevention’’ (58 FR 54911, October 22, EPA has found that increasing demand Paper’’. 1993). from both public and private sector 2. Through FTP: Go to: ftp.epa.gov II. Introduction purchasers has resulted in greater recycling of postconsumer recovered Login: anonymous Today, the U.S. Environmental materials than simply increasing Password: Your Internet Address Protection Agency (EPA or the Agency) demand from the public sector. Files are located in directories/pub/ is publishing a draft Recovered Therefore, in establishing today’s draft gopher. All OSW files are in directories Materials Advisory Notice (RMAN), content recommendations, EPA sought beginning with ‘‘OSW’’. which contains recommendations for to increase the availability to both 3. Through MOSAIC: Go to: http:// procuring agencies to use when government and private purchasers of www.epa.gov purchasing paper and paper products in reasonably-priced paper and paper accordance with section 6002 of the Choose the EPA Public Access products containing postconsumer Resource Conservation and Recovery recovered materials. EPA strongly Gopher. From the main (Gopher) menu, Act of 1976 (RCRA). choose ‘‘EPA Offices and Regions’’. believes that this approach will Detailed information supporting maximize the recycling and use of Next, choose ‘‘Office of Solid Waste and EPA’s draft recommendations are found Emergency Response (OSWER).’’ Next, postconsumer recovered materials. in ‘‘Draft Paper Products RMAN— Therefore, to meet its twin objectives, choose ‘‘Office of Solid Waste’’. Then, Supporting Analyses.’’ This document EPA is adopting a different approach choose ‘‘Non-Hazardous Waste—RCRA is available electronically and in paper than was used in 1988 to recommend Subtitle D’’. Finally, choose form. See the section above entitled FOR content levels for paper and paper ‘‘Procurement/Paper’’. FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT for products. As explained in more detail 4. Through dial-up access: instructions for obtaining the supporting below, EPA is recommending two-part analyses document in either format. Dial 919–558–0335. Choose EPA content levels, consisting of a Public Access Gopher. From the main A. Objectives postconsumer fiber component and a recovered fiber component. EPA (Gopher) menu, choose ‘‘EPA Offices In developing the draft and Regions’’. Next, choose ‘‘Office of believes that the two-part recommendations for paper and paper recommendations will assure that there Solid Waste and Emergency Response products, EPA considered two is a demand for all recovered materials, (OSWER)’’. Next, choose ‘‘Office of objectives. As required by RCRA section including postconsumer recovered Solid Waste’’. Then, choose ‘‘Non- 6002, EPA’s first objective is to materials, as well as those generated Hazardous Waste—RCRA Subtitle D’’. recommend content levels that will during paper converting and printing Finally, choose ‘‘Procurement/Paper’’. maximize the use of postconsumer operations. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: recovered materials in paper and paper Further, EPA is recommending products. EPA’s second objective is to content ranges for each component, Preamble Outline promote paper recycling by increasing whenever appropriate, to encourage I. Authority both the usage of postconsumer increased purchasing of paper and II. Introduction recovered materials in paper paper products containing A. Objectives manufacturing and the availability of postconsumer and recovered fiber B. The Procurement Guidelines competitively-priced paper and paper throughout the U.S. EPA believes that Development Process products containing postconsumer and ranges are appropriate for three reasons. C. Approach to Recovered Materials Content Recommendations other recovered materials. First, Executive Order 12873 directs 1. One-part vs. Two-part Content Levels EPA recognizes that while its EPA to recommend ranges. Second, 2. Broad vs. Narrow Definition of recommendations are meant primarily while many agencies will continue to ‘‘Postconsumer Materials’’ for the use of government procuring purchase paper products centrally (or 3. Establishment of Minimum Recovered agencies, EPA’s guidance is widely used from the General Services Materials Content Levels and Ranges by private sector purchasers, who Administration or the Government 4. EPA’s Methodology for Recommending represent 95% or more of paper Printing Office), local purchases will Postconsumer and Recovered Fiber demand. EPA has found that when its increase as a result of recent government Content Levels recommendations for postconsumer procurement reform, which increases III. Other Issues Addressed in the Draft Paper Products RMAN recovered materials content are too the small purchase threshold and allows A. Measurement of Recovered Fiber high, paper and paper products greater local purchasing using credit Content containing these high percentages are cards. Currently, the postconsumer and B. Clarifications and Revisions to often unavailable to government total recovered fiber content of many Definitions agencies and private sector purchasers paper products varies, as does product 14184 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices availability, across the U.S. Procuring purchasers to purchase paper products Register notice. They are arranged in the agencies can use the ranges as an containing the highest levels of RMAN format established by the April information source in establishing postconsumer and recovered fiber 20, 1994 Federal Register notice. As standards for local purchases. practicable. noted above, detailed information Third, although EPA’s Finally, by establishing ranges, EPA is supporting the draft recommendations recommendations are intended for taking into account the diversity that are found in ‘‘Draft Paper Products government purchasing agencies and exists within the paper industry. The RMAN—Supporting Analyses.’’ their contractors, the Agency is aware recommendations recognize that, in that private sector purchasers refer to many grades of paper, larger quantities C. Approach to Recovered Materials EPA’s recommendations when of paper and paper products are Content Recommendations purchasing paper products. EPA wants produced at mills that primarily use 1. One-Part vs. Two-Part Content Levels to encourage the continued broad use of wood-based fiber than at mills that its recommendations to foster greater primarily use recovered and As defined in RCRA section 6002(h), demand for products containing postconsumer fiber. While it is not the term ‘‘recovered materials’’ refers to postconsumer and recovered fiber, currently economically feasible for these materials generated after the end of the which, in turn, will lead to increased mills to substitute high percentages of papermaking process. Recovered usage of these materials. However, EPA postconsumer fiber for the wood-based materials can be generated by many believes that private sector purchasers fiber, it is technically and economically sources, including paper mills, may be able to find paper and paper possible for them to use lower intermediate paper users such as products available only at the lower end percentages of postconsumer and printers and converters, merchants, of the ranges, because the large recovered fiber. EPA believes that retailers, and the intended end user. quantities of paper that these purchasers ranges will provide an incentive for all Recovered materials are sometimes need will be manufactured mainly by paper mills to maximize their usage of divided into ‘‘preconsumer materials,’’ mills that use only lower levels of postconsumer and recovered fiber. This which refers to materials that have not postconsumer and recovered fiber. will lead to greater availability of passed through their intended end There currently are insufficient competitively-priced paper and paper usage, and ‘‘postconsumer materials,’’ quantities of paper and paper products products for both public and private which refers to materials that have containing high percentages of purchasers. In the long run, this passed through their intended end postconsumer and recovered fiber to approach will lead to greater demand usage. Minimum content standards can meet the demand of both public and for postconsumer and recovered fiber. be expressed as a percentage of private sector purchasers. By postconsumer materials content, a recommending ranges, EPA is B. The Procurement Guidelines Development Process percentage of recovered materials (or acknowledging that some purchasers total recovered materials) content, or will be able to buy products that contain EPA’s procurement guidelines are percentages of both. For example, today, high percentages of postconsumer and required by section 6002 of RCRA and a common content standard for printing recovered fiber, while others will find Executive Order 12873. In an April 20, and writing paper is 50% total that products are available that contain 1994 Federal Register notice, EPA recovered materials, including 10% lower percentages of these materials. explained that under Executive Order postconsumer materials. Others, while not being able to buy 12873, the Agency is required to issue In 1988, EPA recommended price-competitive products that contain a regulation, known as a Comprehensive postconsumer content levels for postconsumer and recovered fiber even Procurement Guideline (CPG), which newsprint, tissue products, paperboard, at the low end of the ranges, will will designate items that procuring and packaging; and ‘‘waste paper’’ continue to seek such products, agencies should purchase containing content levels for most printing and increasing overall demand for recycled recovered materials. Executive Order writing papers. As defined in the 1988 paper products. EPA anticipates that 12873 also directed EPA to issue paper procurement guideline, ‘‘waste this increased demand for and purchase guidance documents, known as paper’’ includes postconsumer materials of paper and paper products containing Recovered Materials Advisory Notices, and certain materials generated after the postconsumer and recovered fiber, even which will contain EPA’s at the low end of the recommended recommendations for purchasing the end of the papermaking process (see 53 ranges, will spur pulp and paper mills designated items. In the April 20, 1994 FR 23551, June 22, 1988). to make additional capital investments Federal Register, EPA published the In response to a 1990 EPA request for in the equipment and systems needed to first draft RMAN, which established comment (55 FR 40384, October 3, use greater percentages of these fibers eight product categories corresponding 1990) and an EPA-sponsored 1993 and to produce them at a competitive to the categories used in the CPG. One public forum, a group of commenters price. of these categories, Part A, was reserved suggested that the Agency recommend Therefore, EPA encourages both for recommendations for paper and two-part content levels consisting of a public and private sector purchasers to paper products. See the April 20, 1994 ‘‘total recovered materials’’ component establish their minimum content Federal Register (59 FR 18852) and in addition to a postconsumer recovered standards at the highest levels ‘‘Draft Paper Products RMAN— materials component. Within this group, practicable; if a product is not available Supporting Analyses’’ for more detail some commenters favor a postconsumer at a competitive price and at a content about the requirements of RCRA section materials component that is defined level at the high end of the range, 6002 and the guidelines development consistently with the postconsumer purchasers should set their standards at process. definition contained in RCRA section the highest levels available to them that In today’s notice, EPA is announcing 6002(h). Others favor a broader meet their price and performance that the draft recommendations for component consisting of postconsumer objectives, using the recommended paper and paper products are available materials plus certain preconsumer range as a guide. In this way, EPA’s for public review and comment. EPA’s materials that require deinking or recommended ranges will encourage draft recommendations are found in the cleaning, similar to postconsumer both public and private sector Appendix at the end of this Federal materials, prior to use. Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices 14185 These commenters argue that two-part higher use of postconsumer materials as manufacturers of deinked market pulp content levels can achieve two goals: (1) mills seek sufficient materials to meet and paper products containing Assure markets for all recovered the total recovered materials content postconsumer materials are making materials, regardless of source and (2) levels. market claims about the postconsumer increase demand for postconsumer EPA also believes that a broad, single, content of their products. Therefore, materials. Because there is a limited total recovered materials content level EPA believes that the level of amount of preconsumer recovered will not fulfill the statutory requirement information in the market is adequate, materials, commenters argue that pulp that government agencies procure paper and no additional tracking is necessary and paper mills will need to use greater products containing the ‘‘highest for mills to certify that their products percentages of postconsumer materials percentage of postconsumer recovered meet EPA’s draft recommendations. in order to meet total recovered materials practicable.’’ EPA notes that, while several groups materials requirements in their 2. Broad vs. Narrow Definition of also urged the adoption of a broader products. According to one commenter’s ‘‘Postconsumer Materials’’ postconsumer definition for use in estimate, the paper industry recovered Executive Order 12873, the Executive and used 87% of available preconsumer Several groups recommended that Order contains a postconsumer materials (i.e., materials generated by EPA broaden the postconsumer definition analogous to the statutory sources other than the intended end definition to include certain definition. EPA believes that its user of a finished product) in 1990.1 preconsumer materials that, like recommendations should be consistent According to the American Forest & postconsumer materials, require with Executive Order 12873. deinking or contaminant removal prior Paper Association (AF&PA), an industry As discussed in detail in the to use. These groups state that there is association, almost all preconsumer supporting analyses document, there no reason, from a papermaking materials are recovered and used when have been significant increases in perspective, to separate these materials. exports are taken into account. deinking and processing capacity and They further state that it is difficult to A second group of commenters various technology improvements that distinguish postconsumer and favored a single, strictly postconsumer make it possible to manufacture preconsumer materials and that tracking standard. These commenters argue that virtually all non-food 2 grades of paper most preconsumer material is already of postconsumer materials is not feasible and extremely costly to and paperboard using some percentage recovered, and that the focus for of postconsumer fiber. Thus, EPA government procurement should be on implement. It is not the intent of RCRA that pulp believes that it is not necessary to postconsumer paper because it is the expand the definition of postconsumer single largest component of municipal and paper mills track every piece of recovered paper or that mills using materials used in the 1988 procurement solid waste. They also believe that only guideline. For these reasons, EPA is a strictly postconsumer standard will recovered materials incur unnecessary costs. Under RCRA section 6002, using the statutory definition of stimulate markets for materials collected procuring agencies are required to (1) ‘‘postconsumer’’ in today’s draft RMAN. by municipal recycling programs. obtain certifications that the product EPA also notes that the type of A third group of commenters argue in postconsumer ‘‘material’’ of concern is favor of a single, total recovered offered to them meets the minimum content level specified in their fiber. For most products, the fiber is materials standard encompassing both derived from wood, but it also can be preconsumer and postconsumer specifications or solicitation documents and (2) purchase paper products derived from textiles or agricultural materials. They believe that because products. The availability of such fiber most preconsumer material is already containing the highest levels of postconsumer materials practicable. is limited and has been used primarily recovered, virtually all additional Procuring agencies are not required to by manufacturers of cotton fiber recovered paper will necessarily come obtain certifications regarding the exact printing and writing papers, which from postconsumer sources. represented less than 1% of printing EPA believes that the two-part amount of postconsumer or recovered fiber used. For example, if an agency and writing papers capacity in 1993. approach is preferable to the Recognizing this, EPA will refer to postconsumer-only and total recovered solicits copier paper containing 20% postconsumer fiber, bidders must certify ‘‘postconsumer fiber,’’ rather than to materials-only approaches because the ‘‘postconsumer material.’’ EPA believes two-part approach will result in greater that the product offered contains this minimum percentage. The product may that the statutory definition is broad usage of postconsumer materials. A enough to encompass postconsumer single, postconsumer level fails to occasionally contain higher levels of postconsumer fiber, but the bidders and fiber derived from textiles and other acknowledge the continuing non-wood sources. contribution to solid waste management the mills supplying them are not Thus, the two-part content levels and the investments made by mills that required to conduct a detailed analysis recommended in today’s draft RMAN have been using all recovered materials, in order to determine the exact will consist of a ‘‘recovered fiber’’ regardless of source, that require percentage of postconsumer fiber in the component and a ‘‘postconsumer fiber’’ deinking, cleaning, or processing prior product in excess of the 20% minimum. Some degree of tracking is needed, component. These terms are discussed to use. Additionally, EPA believes that, however, to identify the postconsumer in section III.B below. because most preconsumer materials are materials content of paper and paper now being used, total recovered products offered to government agencies 2 Manufacturers of food-grade paper and materials content levels will lead to in order (1) to satisfy the RCRA paperboard must be able to certify that their products meet Food and Drug Administration 1 See the ‘‘Final Report on Recycled Paper certification requirement and (2) to meet requirements that the items contain no hazardous Definitions, Standards, Measurement, Labeling the RCRA requirement that paper and and deleterious substances that can migrate into the Guidelines, and Buy-Recycled Initiative,’’ paper products contain the highest food. While it is technically possible to produce a Addendum E, Recycling Advisory Council, levels of postconsumer materials food-grade product with recovered and/or February 6, 1992. EPA placed a copy of the report postconsumer fiber, the material must be carefully in the docket for the Paper Products RMAN. The practicable. Although it is difficult, in selected. Limited availability of suitable material report also is available from the National Recycling some instances, to determine whether a precludes wide-spread use of recovered or Coalition. material is pre- or postconsumer, postconsumer fiber in food-grade paper products. 14186 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices As part of this approach, EPA will no use that level in establishing their fiber, EPA would recommend 20% as longer use the term ‘‘waste paper’’ for minimum content standards. the low end of the range. printing and writing papers. EPA prefers In all five major paper and paperboard 4. EPA’s Methodology for the term ‘‘recovered fiber’’ because the grades, there are groups of mills that use Recommending Postconsumer and high levels of postconsumer and name reflects the fact that this material Recovered Fiber Content Levels has value. As discussed in section II.B recovered fiber and groups of mills that of this preamble, EPA is adapting the EPA identified and evaluated primarily use wood-based fiber, 1988 definition of ‘‘waste paper’’ to pertinent data sources and information sometimes in conjunction with low define ‘‘recovered fiber.’’ regarding the percentages of percentages of postconsumer and/or postconsumer and recovered fiber recovered fiber. EPA accounted for this 3. Establishment of Minimum contained in paper and paper products. diversity in establishing the Recovered Materials Content Levels and Sources included EPA research, recommended ranges. As a result, for Ranges responses to the 1990 Federal Register some items, there is a broad range for a. Content recommendations vs. request for comment and the 1993 postconsumer or recovered fiber minimum content standards. RCRA public forum, procuring agency and content. The high end of these ranges section 6002 requires procuring industry data, manufacturers’ generally reflects the percentages of agencies to purchase paper and paper information, and other published data. postconsumer and recovered fiber used products containing the ‘‘highest Based on this information and the by mills that rely on this type of fiber, percentages of postconsumer recovered content levels established in Executive while the low end of the ranges reflects materials practicable.’’ EPA stated in the Order 12873, EPA established the percentages of postconsumer and 1988 paper procurement guideline that recommended levels or ranges of levels recovered fiber used by mills that rely the use of minimum content levels for paper and paper products. primarily on wood-based fiber. For As previously discussed, whenever would satisfy this requirement (see 53 many items, the low end of the feasible, EPA will recommend ranges for FR 23553, June 22, 1988). recovered fiber range is the same both recovered fiber and postconsumer percentage as the low end of the Under RCRA section 6002(i), it is the fiber content. The high end of each procuring agencies’ responsibility to postconsumer fiber range. In these range will be set at the maximum instances, all of the recovered fiber used establish minimum recovered materials content currently used in paper and content standards, while EPA provides by these mills is postconsumer fiber. paper products that are available in This means that the item can contain recommendations regarding the levels of sufficient quantities, and with adequate either all postconsumer fiber (e.g., X% recovered materials in the designated competition, to meet procuring agency recovered fiber, all of which is items. To make it clear that EPA does needs. For many items, this level will be postconsumer) or blends of recovered not establish the specific minimum 100% for the recovered fiber component and postconsumer fiber (e.g., 100% content standards used by other of the two-part content recovered fiber, including Y% agencies, EPA will no longer refer to its recommendations. The high end of each postconsumer fiber) and still fall within recommendations as recovered range will direct procuring agencies EPA’s recommended range. materials content ‘‘standards,’’ as was toward those levels that will meet the It is EPA’s intention to provide done in the 1988 paper procurement statutory requirement to purchase paper procuring agencies with the best and guideline. Instead, EPA will refer to its and paper products containing the most current information available to recommendations as recovered highest levels of postconsumer fiber assist them in fulfilling their statutory materials content ‘‘levels,’’ consistent practicable. Thus, EPA strongly obligations under RCRA section 6002. with RCRA section 6002(e) and encourages procuring agencies to To do this, EPA will monitor changes in Executive Order 12873. specify and seek paper and paper manufacturing capacity and product b. Recommended content ranges. products containing both postconsumer content and the progress made by Executive Order 12873 directs EPA to and recovered fiber at levels at or near procuring agencies in purchasing paper present ‘‘the range of recovered the high end of the recommended materials content levels within which ranges if price and performance meet and paper products with the highest the designated recycled items are the procuring agencies’ objectives. percentages of postconsumer and currently available.’’ In meeting this The low end of each range will be set recovered fiber practicable. EPA will provision, EPA will recommend ranges at levels that can be met by the simple periodically adjust the recommended that (1) reflect the best information majority of mills currently producing content ranges to reflect these changes. available to the Agency about the use of paper and paper products containing As larger quantities of paper become postconsumer and other recovered fiber postconsumer and recovered fiber. available that contain higher levels of in the manufacture of a designated item These levels could also be met by other postconsumer and recovered fiber, EPA and (2) encourage manufacturers to use mills if they decide to purchase or will consider increasing the content the maximum amount of postconsumer produce pulp made from postconsumer levels in its recommendations. and recovered fiber without and recovered fiber. For most items, III. Other Issues Addressed in the Draft compromising competition or product these levels will be higher than the Paper Products RMAN performance and availability. EPA lowest percentage currently in products, recommends that procuring agencies in order to provide an incentive for A. Measurement of Recovered Fiber use these ranges, in conjunction with paper mills that now primarily use Content their own research into the content of wood-based fiber or lower levels of As procuring agencies implemented items available to them, to establish postconsumer or recovered fiber to the 1988 designation of paper and paper their minimum content standards. In increase their use of postconsumer and products, EPA received inquiries about some instances, EPA will recommend recovered fiber in the manufacture of measurement of recovered fiber content. one level, rather than a range, because their products. For example, if the Today, EPA is addressing the two the item is universally available at that majority of mills currently use 20% principal inquiries: (1) Whether recommended level. In such cases, EPA postconsumer fiber in a writing paper, postconsumer and recovered fiber recommends that procuring agencies but a few mills use 10% postconsumer content should be measured as a Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices 14187 percentage of fiber weight or total sheet the mill broke definition to include cartons, industrial paperboard, weight and (2) whether mill broke certain materials that are generated after miscellaneous paperboard products, generated by a papermaking process that the completion of the papermaking carrierboard, and brown papers. uses postconsumer or recovered fiber process, including materials generated These changes are discussed in detail can be included in content calculations. in finishing operations. These materials in ‘‘Draft Paper Products RMAN— In the draft RMAN, EPA recommends are commonly re-pulped, sold to others Supporting Analyses.’’ that postconsumer and recovered fiber for pulping, or otherwise used in or D. Recyclability content be measured as a percentage of converted to paper products. In the weight of the fiber in paper or a addition, in developing the definition of The underlying purpose of RCRA paper product. In addition, EPA wishes ‘‘recovered fiber’’ from the 1988 ‘‘waste section 6002 is to use the stimulus of to clarify that mill broke generated by a paper’’ definition, EPA has made three governmental purchasing to foster papermaking process that uses significant changes. First, the definition markets for recovered materials. postconsumer or recovered fiber can be found in section A–7 of the draft RMAN Therefore, EPA encourages materials included in content calculations, to the clarifies that materials must be recovery to conserve valuable natural extent that the feedstock contains repulped, not just recovered, in order to resources and to provide alternatives to materials which would qualify as count toward recovered fiber content. landfilling and incineration. In order to postconsumer or recovered fiber. These Second, consistent with the revised achieve both of these objectives, EPA issues are discussed in detail in chapter definition of ‘‘mill broke,’’ the definition believes that procuring agencies should VI.A of ‘‘Draft Paper Products RMAN— of ‘‘recovered fiber’’ excludes materials consider the impact of their purchases Supporting Analyses.’’ such as obsolete inventory or off- on their recyclable materials collection specification product generated at mills programs. B. Clarifications and Revisions to Depending on their fiber or other after the end of the papermaking Definitions characteristics, some used paper process. Third, EPA is clarifying that products containing recovered materials Today, EPA also addresses forest residues do not count toward may have a wider variety of potential definitional issues raised by procuring ‘‘recovered fiber’’ content. See chapter markets and, therefore, may be easier to agencies, mills and other interested VI.B of ‘‘Draft Paper Products RMAN— recycle than others. Certain parties since the 1988 paper Supporting Analyses’’ for a detailed characteristics can lower the value of procurement guideline was issued. discussion of the draft definitions of collected used paper or limit its reuse as Specifically, EPA has been asked (1) ‘‘mill broke’’ and ‘‘recovered fiber.’’ whether the definition of a feedstock for new products. Other ‘‘postconsumer’’ includes printers’ over- C. Revisions to Item Listings characteristics might require runs, converters’ scrap, and/or over- The 1988 paper procurement adjustments in an agency’s recyclables issue publications, (2) which definition guideline contained 24 recommended collection program. of ‘‘recovered materials’’ applies to the minimum content levels. Today’s draft For example, ‘‘white office paper’’ is content standards established in RMAN contains 54 recommended a highly valued recovered material. Executive Order 12873, and (3) whether minimum content levels. In addition to Depending on its market, a ‘‘white office a paper product converted from off- revised content recommendations, EPA paper’’ collection program might specification paper or obsolete made the following changes: exclude other office papers that are inventory contains ‘‘recovered • The printing and writing paper colored, coated, or contain groundwood. material.’’ recommendations are no longer limited Thus, if a procuring agency decided to EPA discusses these questions in to ‘‘high grade bleached’’ papers. purchase a colored paper or a paper detail in chapter VI.B of ‘‘Draft Paper • The draft RMAN uses new containing groundwood for use in office Products RMAN—Supporting terminology for uncoated printing and printers and copiers, the agency should Analyses.’’ EPA’s responses to the writing papers to better reflect the expect that these materials would affect inquiries are as follows. (1) The terminology currently used by paper the office paper collection program if definition of ‘‘postconsumer’’ materials merchants and mills. they are mixed with the white paper. in RCRA section 6002(h) does not • The draft RMAN incorporates the The agency could find that the used include printers’ over-runs, converters’ content levels for uncoated printing and paper is recyclable, but that (1) its value scrap, and/or over-issue publications. writing papers established by Executive is reduced because it is now ‘‘mixed (2) Procuring agencies should use the Order 12873. paper’’ rather than ‘‘white office paper,’’ definition of ‘‘recovered fiber’’ in • The draft RMAN includes separate or (2) a separate sort is required in order today’s draft RMAN when purchasing recommendations for wove and kraft to maintain the value of the white office printing and writing papers in envelopes, rather than lumping them paper. Alternatively, the agency could accordance with the content levels into one envelope listing. find that the mixed paper must be established in Executive Order 12873. • The draft RMAN includes disposed of because there is no market (3) Because off-specification paper and recommendations for supercalendered for it in the geographic area in which obsolete inventory that contain no paper, safety paper, coated printing the agency is located. recovered fiber do not meet the statutory papers, and bristols. Yet other characteristics might make a definition of ‘‘recovered materials,’’ • The ‘‘doilies’’ listing under the paper product more recyclable or products made from these materials tissue products subcategory has been generate less material because the cannot be sold as recycled products. replaced with a ‘‘tray liners’’ listing in product is source reduced. For example, Materials must be repulped, not just a new Miscellaneous Paper Products manufacturers may be using less recovered, in order to count toward subcategory. packaging or reusable packaging, recovered fiber content. • The ‘‘Unbleached packaging’’ and resulting in less waste. In addition, several commenters ‘‘Recycled paperboard’’ subcategories EPA believes that procuring agencies suggested that EPA expand the have been reorganized into a Paperboard should consider these impacts prior to definition of ‘‘mill broke’’ and narrow and Packaging subcategory that contains purchasing paper products containing the definition of ‘‘waste paper.’’ In recommendations for corrugated recovered materials. Therefore, in today’s draft RMAN, EPA has expanded containers, solid fiber boxes, folding section A–6 of today’s draft RMAN, EPA 14188 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices is recommending that procuring specialty tissue products and, if so, in • Are percentages of postconsumer agencies consider the effect of their what percentages? fiber greater than 15% used in padded procurement actions on their used paper • Can manufacturers of consumer mailers? What percentages of recovered collection programs by assessing the paper napkins and consumer facial fiber other than postconsumer fiber are impact of their decisions on their tissues that primarily use wood-based used in padded mailers? overall contribution to the solid waste fiber produce these items using a • Are there different performance stream. minimum of 30% and 20% characteristics of the two different types postconsumer fiber, respectively? If not, E. Use of EPA’s Recommendations of carrierboard (solid unbleached sulfate what levels of postconsumer fiber can and recycled paperboard) that would EPA encourages state and local be used in these items? require listing them separately in the agencies and private sector purchasers • Can manufacturers of consumer final RMAN? to use the recommendations in today’s paper napkins and consumer facial • Is postconsumer or other recovered draft RMAN when purchasing paper tissues use a range of recovered fiber fiber used in solid bleached sulfate and paper products. EPA recommends from 30–100% and 20–100%, paperboard products, in general, and in that purchasers establish their minimum respectively? food grade items in particular? • content standards at the highest Are tray liners available containing • Do procuring agencies purchase percentages available to them that percentages of recovered fiber, solid bleached sulfate paperboard achieve their price and performance including postconsumer fiber, other products, either directly or indirectly? If objectives, even if these standards are than 100% recovered fiber, including yes, to what extent? above EPA’s recommended ranges. 75% postconsumer fiber? • Should EPA recommend content EPA has found that some state • Can postconsumer fiber be used in levels for solid bleached sulfate agencies have been using the Agency’s tray liners and meet Food and Drug paperboard products? 1988 content recommendations as a Administration (FDA) restrictions on starting point in establishing product migration of contaminants into food? Recommendations for Printing and labeling requirements. While EPA’s Writing Papers Recommendations for Paperboard and recommendations were not intended for Packaging Products • Do state agency requirements for use as labeling standards, they can be the paper used to print state checks used as an information source for • Is recovered fiber other than differ from federal or commercial check agencies establishing recycled product postconsumer fiber used in the specifications and if so, how? What is labeling programs. manufacture of corrugated containers? the availability of safety paper EPA cautions persons using EPA’s • Are corrugated containers rated at containing recovered and postconsumer recommendations, whether to establish 300 psi or greater available containing fiber that meets state agency purchasing specifications or labeling more than 30% postconsumer fiber? • Will the recent increased demand requirements? standards, to use them only for the • specific items for which they were for OCC affect the ability of What is the performance and intended. It is not appropriate to manufacturers to meet the availability of greeting card stock analogize from one item in a paper recommended content levels for containing higher percentages of grade (e.g., printing and writing paper, corrugated containers? postconsumer fiber? tissue products, paperboard) to another • Will the imminent availability of Dated: March 8, 1995. item that could also fall within that additional capacity to make linerboard Elliott P. Laws, grade, without first researching the use containing 100% recovered fiber allow Assistant Administrator, Office of Solid Waste of postconsumer and recovered fiber in manufacturers to exceed the high end of and Emergency Response. the other item. The two items could the ranges of recommended content Appendix—Draft Paper Products have different performance levels for corrugated containers? Recovered Materials Advisory Notice requirements necessitating different • Are there differences in the Contents levels of postconsumer or recovered postconsumer fiber content currently fiber. In addition, one item could be used in coated and uncoated folding Part A—Paper and Paper Products made primarily by mills that use high cartons? Section A–1—Printing and Writing Papers percentages of postconsumer or • Should recommendations for coated Section A–2—Newsprint recovered fiber, while the other item and uncoated folding cartons be listed Section A–3—Sanitary Tissue Products separately because of the differences in Section A–4—Paperboard and Packaging could be made primarily by mills that Section A–5—Miscellaneous Paper use low or no percentages of this fiber. their ability to incorporate postconsumer fiber content? Products IV. Request for Comments • Section A–6—Other Recommendations for Will the recent increased demand Paper and Paper Products EPA requests comment on the content for OCC affect the availability of folding Section A–7—Definitions levels, definitions, and specifications cartons containing higher percentages of Appendix A–1.—Example Calculation of recommendations found in today’s draft postconsumer fiber? Postconsumer Fiber Content of a RMAN. In addition, EPA requests • Should EPA recommend different Corrugated Container comment or information on the content levels for the various industrial Part A—Paper and Paper Products following issues, which are discussed in paperboard products, based on the Section A–1—Printing and Writing Papers detail in ‘‘Draft Paper Products RMAN— specific application(s) for those Preference Program: EPA recommends that Supporting Analyses:’’ products? procuring agencies establish minimum • Should EPA recommend different content standards expressed as a percentage Recommendations for Tissue Products postconsumer ranges for coated and of recovered fiber, including a percentage of • postconsumer fiber. EPA recommends that Do government agencies or their uncoated miscellaneous paperboard procuring agencies base their minimum contractors purchase specialty tissue products, and should there should be content standards for printing and writing products? different content recommendations papers on the content levels shown in Tables • Is postconsumer or other recovered based on the specific application(s) of A–1a, A–1b, and A–1c. Percentages are based fiber used in the manufacture of the products? on the fiber weight of the product. Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices 14189 TABLE A±1A.ÐRECOMMENDED RECOVERED FIBER CONTENT LEVELS FOR UNCOATED PRINTING AND WRITING PAPERS Recovered Item fiber (per- Postconsumer cent) fiber (percent) Reprographic Paper (e.g., mimeo and duplicator paper, high-speed copier paper, and bond paper*) ...... 20 20 Offset Paper (e.g., offset printing paper*, book paper*, bond paper*) ...... 20 20 Tablet Paper (e.g., office paper such as note pads, stationery* and other writing* papers) ...... 20 20 Forms Bond (e.g., forms, computer printout paper, ledger*) ...... 20 20 Envelope Paper: Wove ...... 20 20 Kraft: White and colored (including manila) ...... 10±20 10±20 Unbleached ...... 10 10 Cotton Fiber Paper (e.g., cotton fiber papers, ledger*, stationery* and matching envelopes, and other writing* pa- pers) ...... 50 20 Text & Cover Paper (e.g., cover stock, book paper*, stationery* and matching envelopes, and other writing* paper) ...... 50 20 Supercalendered ...... 10 10 Check Safety Paper ...... 10 10 *These items can be made from a variety of printing and writing papers, depending on the performance characteristics of the item. Some of the papers are a commodity-type and some are specialty papers. EPA recommends that procuring agencies determine the performance charac- teristics required of the paper prior to establishing minimum content standards. For example, bond, ledger, or stationery made from cotton fiber paper or a text and cover paper have different characteristics than similar items made from commodity papers. TABLE A±1b.ÐRECOMMENDED RECOVERED FIBER CONTENT LEVELS FOR COATED PRINTING AND WRITING PAPERS Recovered Item fiber (per- Postconsumer cent) fiber (percent) Coated Printing Paper ...... 10 10 Carbonless ...... 20 20 TABLE A±1c.ÐRECOMMENDED RECOVERED FIBER CONTENT LEVELS FOR BRISTOLS Recovered Item fiber (per- Postconsumer cent) fiber (percent) File Folders (manila and colored) ...... 20 20 Dyed Filing Products ...... 20±50 20 Cards (index, postal, and other, including index sheets) ...... 50 20 Pressboard Report Covers and Binders ...... 50 20 Tags and Tickets ...... 20±50 20 Section A–2—Newsprint Preference Program: EPA recommends that procuring agencies establish minimum content standards expressed as a percentage of recovered fiber, including a percentage of postconsumer fiber. EPA recommends that procuring agencies base their minimum content standards for newsprint on the content levels shown in Table A–2. Percentages are based on the fiber weight of the product. TABLE A±2.ÐRECOMMENDED RECOVERED FIBER CONTENT LEVELS FOR NEWSPRINT Recovered Item fiber (per- Postconsumer cent) fiber (percent) Newsprint ...... 40±100 40±85 Section A–3—Tissue Products Preference Program: EPA recommends that procuring agencies establish minimum content standards expressed as a percentage of recovered fiber, including a percentage of postconsumer fiber. EPA recommends that procuring agencies base their minimum content standards for tissue products on the content levels shown in Table A–3. Percentages are based on the fiber weight of the product. 14190 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices TABLE A±3.ÐRECOMMENDED RECOVERED FIBER CONTENT LEVELS FOR TISSUE PRODUCTS Recovered Item fiber (per- Postconsumer cent) fiber (percent) Bathroom tissue: Commercial/industrial ...... 100 25±60 Consumer ...... 20±100 20±60 Paper towels: Commercial/industrial ...... 100 40±60 Consumer ...... 20±100 20±60 Paper napkins: Commercial/industrial ...... 100 30±60 Facial tissue: Commercial/industrial ...... 100 30 Industrial wipers ...... 40±100 40 Section A–4—Paperboard and Packaging Products Preference Program: EPA recommends that procuring agencies establish minimum content standards expressed as a percentage of recovered fiber, including a percentage of postconsumer fiber. EPA recommends that procuring agencies base their minimum content standards for paperboard and packaging products on the content levels shown in Table A–4. Percentages are based on the fiber weight of the product. TABLE A±4.ÐRECOMMENDED RECOVERED FIBER CONTENT LEVELS FOR PAPERBOARD AND PACKAGING PRODUCTS Recovered Item fiber (per- Postconsumer cent) fiber (percent) Corrugated containers:* (<300 psi) ...... 40±50 40±50 (300 psi) ...... 30 30 Solid Fiber Boxes ...... 40 40 Folding cartons** ...... 100 40±80 Industrial paperboard (e.g., tubes, cores, drums, and cans) ...... 100 45±100 Miscellaneous (e.g., pad backs, covered binders, book covers, mailing tubes, protective packaging) ...... 90±100 75±100 Padded mailers ...... 5±15 5±15 Carrierboard ...... 25±100 15 Brown papers (e.g., wrapping paper and bags) ...... 5±40 5±20 * The recovered fiber and postconsumer fiber content is calculated from the content of each component relative to the weight each contributes to the total weight of the box. See Appendix I for an example. ** The recommended content ranges are not applicable to all types of paperboard used in folding cartons. Cartons made from solid bleached sulfate or solid unbleached sulfate contain no or small percentages of postconsumer fiber, depending on the paperboard source. Section A–5—Miscellaneous Paper Products Preference Program: EPA recommends that procuring agencies establish minimum content standards expressed as a percentage of recovered fiber, including a percentage of postconsumer fiber. EPA recommends that procuring agencies base their minimum content standards for the listed paper products on the content levels shown in Table A–5. Percentages are based on the fiber weight of the product. TABLE A±5.ÐRECOMMENDED RECOVERED FIBER CONTENT LEVELS FOR MISCELLANEOUS PAPER PRODUCTS Recovered Item fiber (per- Postconsumer cent) fiber (percent) Tray liners ...... 100 75 Section A–6—Other Recommendations procuring agencies should permit mills postconsumer or recovered fiber for Paper and Paper Products to count mill broke generated in a content. papermaking process using Measurement: EPA recommends that Specifications: EPA recommends that postconsumer and/or recovered fiber as procuring agencies review specifications procuring agencies express their feedstock toward ‘‘postconsumer fiber’’ minimum content standards as a provisions pertaining to performance or ‘‘recovered fiber’’ content, to the percentage of the fiber weight of the and aesthetics and revise provisions that extent that the feedstock contained paper or paper product. EPA further can impede use of postconsumer and these materials. In other words, if a mill recommends that procuring agencies recovered fiber, unless such provisions uses less than 100% postconsumer or specify that mill broke cannot be are related to reasonable performance counted toward postconsumer or recovered fiber, only a proportional standards. Agencies should determine recovered fiber content, except that amount of broke can be counted towards whether performance provisions are Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Notices 14191 unnecessarily stringent for a particular Postconsumer fiber does not include Appendix A–1.—Example Calculation end use. Agencies also should revise fiber derived from printers’ over-runs, of Postconsumer Fiber Content of a aesthetics provisions—such as converters’ scrap, and over-issue Corrugated Container brightness, dirt count, or shade publications. matching—if appropriate, consistent ‘‘Recovered fiber’’ ‘‘Recovered fiber’’ C-flute has a take-up factor of with the agencies’ performance means the following materials: approximately 1.44, which means that requirements, in order to allow for a (1) Postconsumer fiber such as: for each one foot of combined higher use of postconsumer and (A) Paper, paperboard, and fibrous corrugated board there is 1.44 feet of recovered fiber. wastes from retail stores, office fluted medium. This factor is used to EPA recommends that procuring buildings, homes, and so forth, after calculate the weight of paperboard in a agencies document determinations that they have passed through their end- given area of combined corrugated paper products containing usage as a consumer item, including: board, from which the basis weight of postconsumer and recovered fiber will used corrugated boxes; old newspapers; the board is derived. Each linerboard not meet the agencies’ reasonable old magazines; mixed waste paper; contributes 35% of the basis weight (42/ performance standards. Any tabulating cards; and used cordage; and 121.4). The medium contributes 30% of determination should be based on (B) All paper, paperboard, and fibrous the total basis weight (37.4/121.4). technical performance information wastes that enter and are collected from related to a specific item, not a grade of municipal solid waste. Board basis paper or type of product. weight (lbs/MSF) (2) Fiber derived from printing and EPA recommends that procuring converting operations, excluding any agencies watch for changes in the use of Linerboard #1 ...... 42×1.00=42.0 paper generated in a paper mill prior to postconsumer and recovered fiber in Medium ...... 26×1.44=37.4 the completion of the paper paper and paper products. When a Linerboard #2 ...... 42×1.00=42.0 manufacturing process. ‘‘Recovered paper or a paper product containing fiber’’ includes repulped fiber from dry Combined Board Weight .. 121.4 lbs/MSF postconsumer and recovered fiber is paper scrap generated after the paper produced in types and grades not machine reel has been rewound and/or previously available, at a competitive If the linerboard used has 20% cut into smaller rolls or rough sheets, price, procuring agencies should either postconsumer fiber and the medium has including but not limited to: revise specifications to allow the use of 80% postconsumer fiber, the resulting such type or grade, or develop new (A) Envelope cuttings, finishing trim, total postconsumer fiber content of the specifications for such type or grade, bindery trimmings, and other paper and containerboard is as follows: paperboard resulting from printing, consistent with the agencies’ × × cutting, forming, and other converting Linerboard: .35 .20=.07 2=.14 (or 14%) performance requirements. × Recyclability: EPA recommends that operations; and bag, box, and carton Medium: .30 .80=.24 (or 24%) procuring agencies consider the effect of manufacturing wastes; and Total postconsumer fiber: .14+.24=.38 a procurement of a paper product (B) Repulped finished paper and (or 38%) paperboard from obsolete inventories of containing recovered and postconsumer [FR Doc. 95–6407 Filed 3–14–95; 8:45 am] fiber on their paper collection programs paper merchants, wholesalers, dealers, by assessing the impact of their decision printers, converters, or consumers. BILLING CODE 6560±50±P on their overall contribution to the solid ‘‘Mill broke’’ means any paper or waste stream. paperboard scrap generated in a mill prior to completion of the papermaking Section A–7—Definitions process and/or specific materials For purposes of the recommendations generated during finishing operations contained in this Part, terms shall have that occur after the end of the the following meanings: papermaking process. It includes the ‘‘Postconsumer fiber’’ means: following materials, whether generated (1) Paper, paperboard, and fibrous prior to or after the completion of the wastes from retail stores, office papermaking process: paper machine buildings, homes, and so forth, after trim, offgrade or off-specification rolls they have passed through their end- (also referred to as rejected, unused usage as a consumer item, including: stock), culls, stub rolls, side rolls, end used corrugated boxes; old newspapers; rolls, and obsolete inventories of paper old magazines; mixed waste paper; and paperboard. Although mill broke is tabulating cards; and used cordage; and occasionally sold from one mill to (2) All paper, paperboard, and fibrous another, such a sale does not alter its wastes that enter and are collected from classification or exclusion from the municipal solid waste. definition of ‘‘recovered fiber.’’ federal register March 15,1995 Wednesday Program; ProposedRule Migratory BirdHarvestInformation 50 CFRPart20 Fish andWildlifeService Interior Department ofthe Part VIII 14193 14194 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Proposed Rules DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Michigan, Oklahoma, and Oregon State’s administrative costs associated beginning in the 1995–96 hunting with conducting this Program. Fish and Wildlife Service season, and to make minor The State/Federal technical group modifications to the Program. continues to evaluate the Program to 50 CFR Part 20 determine the adequacy and timeliness Background RIN 1018±AD08 of the sample frame and the time The purpose of this cooperative burden, cost, and other impacts on Migratory Bird Harvest Information Program is to obtain annually a hunters, State license agents, State Program nationwide sample frame of migratory wildlife agencies, and the Service. bird hunters, from which representative Emphasis is currently on the time AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, samples of hunters will be selected and requirement for the sample frame and Interior. on alternative survey methods for ACTION: Proposed rule. asked to participate in voluntary harvest surveys. State wildlife agencies will special groups of unlicensed hunters SUMMARY: The Fish and Wildlife Service provide the sample frame by annually (e.g., junior and senior hunters). (hereinafter Service) herein proposes to collecting the name, address, and date The Service’s current survey design amend the Migratory Bird Harvest of birth of each licensed migratory bird calls for hunting-record forms to be Information Program (hereinafter hunter in the State. To reduce survey distributed to hunters selected for the Program) regulations. The Service plans costs and to identify hunters who hunt survey before they forget the details of to add Michigan, Oklahoma, and Oregon less commonly-hunted species, States their hunts. Because of this design (beginning with the 1995–96 hunting will also request that each migratory requirement, States have only a short season) to the list of participating States, bird hunter provide a brief summary of time to obtain hunter names and and to implement some additional his or her migratory bird hunting addresses from license vendors and to modifications to the Program. This activity for the previous year. States will provide those names and addresses to regulatory action will continue to send this information to the Service, the Service. Currently, participating require all licensed hunters who hunt and the Service will sample hunters and States must send the required migratory game birds in participating conduct national hunter activity and information to the Service within 5 States to identify themselves as harvest surveys. business days of issuance of the hunting license or permit (10 business days if migratory bird hunters to the State A notice of intent to establish the the information is provided in licensing authority, and to supply their Program was published in the June 24, electronic form). Several States have name, address, and date of birth to the 1991, Federal Register (56 FR 28812). A expressed concern that they can not State. Hunters will be required to have final rule that established the Program meet this time requirement. The Service evidence of current participation in the and initiated a 2-year pilot phase in conducted an experiment during the Program on their person while hunting three volunteer States (California, 1994–95 hunting season to determine migratory game birds in participating Missouri, and South Dakota) was whether extending the time requirement States. The quality and extent of published in the March 19, 1993, would adversely affect the accuracy of information about harvests of migratory Federal Register (58 FR 15093). The survey results. The results and game birds must be improved in order pilot phase was completed following the implications of that experiment will be to better manage these populations. 1993–94 migratory bird hunting seasons discussed at the next meeting of the Hunters’ names and addresses are in California, Missouri, and South State/Federal technical group, prior to necessary to provide a sample frame for Dakota. voluntary hunter surveys to improve publication of a final rule in 1995. A State/Federal technical group was The Service previously stated that harvest estimates for all migratory game formed to evaluate Program birds. States will gather migratory bird additional States will continue to be requirements, the different approaches added until all States participate in hunters’ names and addresses and the used by the pilot States, and the Service will conduct the harvest 1998. The suggested schedule was Service’s survey procedures during the included in a final rule published in the surveys. pilot phase. Changes incorporated into DATES: The written comment period for October 21, 1994, Federal Register (59 the Program as a result of the technical FR 53334). Seven States requested the proposed rule will end on April 1, group’s evaluation were specified in a 1995. changes to the suggested schedule; in final rule, published in the October 21, response to those requests, four States ADDRESSES: Written comments should 1994, Federal Register (59 FR 53334), were moved back in the agenda be sent to the Chief, Office of Migratory that initiated the implementation phase (Louisiana, Minnesota, Pennsylvania, Bird Management, U.S. Fish and of the Program. and Texas) while three States were Wildlife Service, 10815 Loblolly Pine Currently, all licensed hunters who advanced (Idaho, Michigan, and Ohio). Drive, Laurel, Maryland 20708–4028. hunt migratory game birds in Several States have subsequently Comments received will be available for participating States are required to have indicated that they may not be able to public inspection during normal a Program validation, indicating that implement the Program by the year that business hours in Building 158, 10815 they have identified themselves as the current schedule requires them to Loblolly Pine Drive (Gate 4, Patuxent migratory bird hunters and have enter the Program. The States and the Environmental Science Center), Laurel, provided the required information to the Service are presently developing Maryland 20708–4028. State wildlife agency. Hunters must mutually acceptable measures for FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Paul provide the required information to ensuring that the Program will achieve I. Padding, Office of Migratory Bird each State in which they hunt migratory full implementation on schedule. Management, U.S. Fish and Wildlife birds. Validations are printed on or Service, (301) 497–5980, FAX (301) attached to the annual State hunting Proposed Modifications to the Program 497–5981. license or on a State-specific In addition to implementation of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The supplementary permit. The State may Program in Michigan, Oklahoma, and purpose of this rule is to expand the charge hunters a small handling fee to Oregon, the Service is proposing several Program to include the States of compensate agents and to cover the other modifications to the Program. One Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Proposed Rules 14195 such modification would increase the required to have evidence of current license lists are not available in time to time allowed for providing names and participation in the Program on their permit distribution of hunter records addresses to the Service. Results of the person while hunting migratory game early in the hunting season; and (4) Service’s experiment (described above) birds. budget constraints often prevent States will provide the basis for determining The States may require a small from conducting harvest surveys during the extent to which the time handling fee to compensate their certain years or could cause some States requirement should be changed. hunting-license vendors and to cover to eliminate them completely. Another modification being proposed their administrative costs. Many of the These rules do not have a substantial is to require harvest estimates for State hunting-license vendors are small direct effect on fiscal capacity, change hunters who are exempted from a entities, but this rule should not the roles or responsibilities of Federal or permit requirement and those that are economically impact those vendors. State Governments, or intrude on State also exempted from State licensing Only migratory game bird hunters, policy or administration. Therefore, requirements. This would include individuals, would be required to these regulations do not have significant several categories of hunters such as provide this information, so this rule Federalism effects and do not have junior hunters, senior hunters, should not adversely affect small sufficient Federalism implications to landowners, and other special entities. warrant the preparation of a Federalism categories. These exemptions vary on a The collection of information Assessment. In fact, the Service would State-by-State basis. The requirement contained in this rule has been cooperate with States in providing would likewise vary by State and be approved by the Office of Management special surveys to meet mutual incorporated into individual and Budget under 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. management needs, and increased cooperative agreements with the and assigned clearance number 1018– cooperation between Federal and State Service. 0015. The information is required from agencies would reduce duplication of Excluding those hunters who are not licensed hunters to obtain the benefit of survey efforts. required to obtain an annual State hunting migratory game birds. Executive Order 12360 - Taking of hunting license from the Program also The public reporting burden for this Individual Property Rights excludes their harvest from the collection of information is estimated to estimates. The importance of their average 0.015 hours per response, Executive Order 12360 discussed harvest depends on how many hunters including the time for reviewing guidelines for the taking of individual are excluded and on the number of birds instructions, searching existing data property rights. These rules, authorized they bag. Excluding these hunters may sources, gathering and maintaining the by the Migratory Bird Treaty Act, do not result in serious bias. Minimum survey data needed, and completing and affect any constitutionally-protected standards are being developed for reviewing the collection of information. property rights. These rules would not exempted categories. States may require Comments regarding the burden result in the physical occupancy of exempted hunters to obtain permits estimate or any other aspect of these property, the physical invasion of (e.g., Maryland required exempted reporting requirements should be property, or the regulatory taking of any hunters to obtain permits upon entry to directed to the Service Information property. the Program in 1994). Collection Clearance Officer, ms 224— ARLSQ, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Authorship NEPA Consideration 1849 C Street, NW., Washington, DC The primary author of this rule is Paul 20240, or the Office of Management and I. Padding, Office of Migratory Bird The establishment of this Harvest Budget, Paperwork Reduction Project Management. Information Program and options have 1018–0015, Washington, DC 20503. been considered in the ‘‘Environmental List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 20 Executive Order 12866 Assessment: Migratory Bird Harvest Exports, Hunting, Imports, Reporting Information Program.’’ Copies of this This rule was not subject to Office of and recordkeeping requirements, document are available from the Service Management and Budget review under Transportation, Wildlife. at the address indicated under the Executive Order 12866. For the reasons set out in the caption FOR FURTHER INFORMATION Executive Order 12612 - Federalism preamble, 50 CFR part 20 is proposed to CONTACT. be amended as set forth below. The regulations do not have Regulatory Flexibility Act and the significant Federalism effects as PART 20 - MIGRATORY BIRD HUNTING Paperwork Reduction Act provided in Executive Order 12612. Due On June 14, 1991, the Assistant to the migratory nature of certain 1. The authority citation for part 20 Secretary for Fish and Wildlife and species of birds, the Federal continues to read as follows: Parks concluded that the rule would not Government has been given Authority: The Migratory Bird Treaty Act have a significant effect on a substantial responsibility over these species by the (July 3, 1918), as amended, (16 U.S.C. 703– number of small entities under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act. State harvest 711); the Fish and Wildlife Improvement Act of 1978 (November 8, 1978), as amended, (16 Regulatory Flexibility Act 5 USC 601 et surveys presently cannot provide U.S.C. 712); and the Fish and Wildlife Act of seq. This rule will eventually affect adequate national estimates of migratory 1956 (August 8, 1956), as amended, (16 about 3–5 million migratory game bird game bird harvests for the following U.S.C. 742 a—d and e—j). hunters when it is fully implemented. It reasons: (1) some States do not now 2. Section 20.20 is revised to read as will require licensed migratory game conduct annual harvest surveys or follows: bird hunters to identify themselves and maintain accessible lists of hunter to supply their names, addresses, and names and addresses; (2) comparable § 20.20 Migratory Bird Harvest Information birth dates to the State licensing information is not available from all Program. authority. Additional information will States because States have different (a) Information collection be requested in order that they can be licensing laws regulating who must buy requirements. The collections of efficiently sampled for a voluntary a hunting license and different survey information contained in § 20.20 have national harvest survey. Hunters will be procedures; (3) currently, many State been approved by the Office of 14196 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Proposed Rules Management and Budget under 44 (b) General provisions. Each person approximately a half million additional U.S.C. 3501 et seq. and assigned hunting migratory game birds in migratory bird hunters each year. It it clearance number 1018–0015. The California, Maryland, Michigan, proposed that the States participate on information will be used to provide a Missouri, Oklahoma, Oregon, and South or before the following schedule: sampling frame for the national Dakota shall have identified himself or 1996—Alabama, Georgia, Idaho, Migratory Bird Harvest Survey. herself as a migratory bird hunter and Illinois, Louisiana, Maine, Minnesota, Response is required from licensed given his or her name, address, and date Mississippi, North Carolina, hunters to obtain the benefit of hunting of birth to the respective State hunting Pennsylvania, Tennessee, Texas, and migratory game birds. Public reporting licensing authority and shall have on Vermont. burden for this information is estimated his or her person evidence, provided by 1997—Arizona, Arkansas, Colorado, to average 0.015 hours per response, that State, of compliance with this Florida, Kentucky, Ohio, South including the time for reviewing requirement. Carolina, Virginia, and Wisconsin. instructions, searching existing data (c) Tribal exemptions. Nothing in sources, gathering and maintaining the paragraph (b) of this section shall apply 1998—Alaska, Connecticut, Delaware, data needed, and completing and to hunters on Federal Indian Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Massachusetts, reviewing the collection of information. Reservations or to tribal members Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New Send comments regarding this burden hunting on ceded lands. Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, estimate or any other aspect of this (d) State exemptions. Nothing in New York, North Dakota, Rhode Island, collection of information, including paragraph (b) of this section shall apply Utah, Washington, West Virginia, and suggestions for reducing the burden, to to those hunters who are exempted from Wyoming. the Service Information Collection State-licensing requirements in the State Dated: February 27, 1995. Clearance Officer, MS-224 ARLSQ, Fish in which they are hunting. George T. Frampton, Jr., and Wildlife Service, Washington, DC (e) Implementation schedule. The Assistant Secretary for Fish and Wildlife and 20240, or the Office of Management and Service is continuing to implement this Parks. Budget, Paperwork Reduction Project Program over the next 3-year period [FR Doc. 95–6292 Filed 3–14–95; 8:45 am] 1018–0015, Washington, DC 20503. from 1996–1998, which will incorporate BILLING CODE 4310±55±F federal register March 15,1995 Wednesday Development Foundation States BinationalIndustrialResearchand Executive Order12956ÐIsrael-United The President Part IX 14197 14199 Federal Register Presidential Documents Vol. 60, No. 50 Wednesday, March 15, 1995 Title 3— Executive Order 12956 of March 13, 1995 The President Israel-United States Binational Industrial Research and Development Foundation By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, including section 1 of the International Organizations Immunities Act (22 U.S.C. 288), and having found that the Israel-United States Binational Industrial Research and Development Founda- tion is a public international organization in which the United States partici- pates within the meaning of the International Organizations Immunities Act, I hereby designate the Israel-United States Binational Industrial Research and Development Foundation as a public international organization entitled to enjoy the privileges, exemptions, and immunities conferred by the Inter- national Organizations Immunities Act. This designation is not intended to abridge in any respect the privileges, exemptions, or immunities that such organization may have acquired or may acquire by international agree- ments or by congressional action. œ– THE WHITE HOUSE, March 13, 1995. [FR Doc. 95–6588 Filed 3–14–95; 9:18 am] Billing code 3195–01–P i Reader Aids Federal Register Vol. 60, No. 50 Wednesday, March 15, 1995 INFORMATION AND ASSISTANCE CFR PARTS AFFECTED DURING MARCH Federal Register At the end of each month, the Office of the Federal Register Index, finding aids & general information 202±523±5227 publishes separately a List of CFR Sections Affected (LSA), which Public inspection announcement line 523±5215 lists parts and sections affected by documents published since the Corrections to published documents 523±5237 revision date of each title. Document drafting information 523±3187 Machine readable documents 523±4534 3 CFR 91...... 13896 Proclamations: 92...... 13896, 13898 Code of Federal Regulations 6772...... 11609 317...... 12883 Index, finding aids & general information 523±5227 6773...... 12101 381...... 12883 Printing schedules 523±3419 6774...... 12657 Proposed Rules: 6775...... 13887 1...... 12908 Laws 6776...... 13889 3...... 12908 Public Laws Update Service (numbers, dates, etc.) 523±6641 Executive Orders: 92...... 13929 Additional information 523±5230 November 24, 1916 102...... 12159, 12162 (Revoked in part by 104...... 12159 Presidential Documents PLO 7121)...... 12886 105...... 12159 Executive orders and proclamations 523±5230 12903 (Superseded by 114...... 12162 Public Papers of the Presidents 523±5230 EO 12955)...... 13365 116...... 12159 Weekly Compilation of Presidential Documents 523±5230 12954...... 13023 160...... 13084 12955...... 13365 161...... 13084 The United States Government Manual 12956...... 14199 10 CFR General information 523±5230 Administrative Orders: 50...... 13615 Other Services Memorandums: 55...... 13615 March 2, 1995 ...... 12393 Data base and machine readable specifications 523±4534 73...... 13615 Presidential Determinations: Guide to Record Retention Requirements 523±3187 Proposed Rules: No. 95±15 of Feb. 28, Legal staff 523±4534 20...... 13385 523±3187 1995 ...... 12859 Privacy Act Compilation 12 CFR Public Laws Update Service (PLUS) 523±6641 5 CFR TDD for the hearing impaired 523±5229 543...... 12103 Ch. LXXVII...... 12396 552...... 12103 362...... 11017 571...... 12103 ELECTRONIC BULLETIN BOARD 532...... 12395, 12396 708a...... 12759 Free Electronic Bulletin Board service for Public Law 582...... 13027 Proposed Rules: numbers, Federal Register finding aids, and list of 731...... 13613 7...... 11924 documents on public inspection. 202±275±0920 843...... 13034 31...... 11924 1300...... 12396 543...... 13008 FAX-ON-DEMAND 1650...... 13604 552...... 13008 You may access our Fax-On-Demand service. You only need a fax 1653...... 13604 571...... 13008 machine and there is no charge for the service except for long Proposed Rules: 722...... 13388 distance telephone charges the user may incur. The list of Ch. XIV ...... 11057 documents on public inspection and the daily Federal Register’s 13 CFR 7 CFR table of contents are available using this service. The document Proposed Rules: numbers are 7050-Public Inspection list and 7051-Table of 29 ...... 12398, 12399, 12400, 120...... 11941 Contents list. The public inspection list will be updated 13515 122...... 11941 immediately for documents filed on an emergency basis. 51...... 11242 14 CFR NOTE: YOU WILL ONLY GET A LISTING OF DOCUMENTS ON 56...... 12401, 13780 FILE AND NOT THE ACTUAL DOCUMENT. Documents on 58...... 11246 11...... 12034, 12108 public inspection may be viewed and copied in our office located 354...... 11897 25...... 11194 at 800 North Capitol Street, N.W., Suite 700. The Fax-On-Demand 372...... 13212 39 ...... 11020, 11611, 11613, telephone number is: 301±713±6905 906...... 13891 11615, 11617, 11619, 11621, 989...... 12403 11623, 12406, 12407, 12408, 1209...... 13613 12410, 12411, 12413, 12414, FEDERAL REGISTER PAGES AND DATES, MARCH 1210...... 13515 12663, 12666, 13618, 13620, 1942...... 11019 13621, 13623, 13624 11017±11608...... 1 12859±13022...... 9 Proposed Rules: 61...... 11254 11609±11896...... 2 13023±13366...... 10 51...... 11918, 13926 71 ...... 11625, 12108, 12667, 58 ...... 11919, 12154, 12156 13626, 13900 11897±12102...... 3 13367±13612...... 13 319...... 13382 91...... 13627 12103±12394...... 6 13613±13888...... 14 945...... 13080 95...... 13035 12395±12658...... 7 13889±14200...... 15 1099...... 12907 97...... 12109, 12110 1230...... 13384 121...... 11194, 12034 12659±12858...... 8 1940...... 13650, 13928 135...... 11194, 13010 1241...... 11022 9 CFR 1262...... 12668 2...... 13893 Proposed Rules: 77...... 11898 33...... 12360 ii Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Reader Aids 39 ...... 11635, 11637, 11942, 890...... 11836, 13515 75...... 12096, 12648 7120...... 11633 11944, 11945, 12714, 905...... 11626 7121...... 12886 71...... 11057, 13931 908...... 11626 36 CFR 7122...... 12887 121...... 13008, 13862 913...... 11626 7...... 13629 7123...... 12887 125...... 13862 3500...... 11194 1230...... 13908 7124...... 13915 135...... 13862 Proposed Rules: Proposed Rules: 100...... 13840 7...... 13662 44 CFR 15 CFR 888...... 11870 65...... 13049 925...... 12592 38 CFR 67...... 13050 Proposed Rules: 26 CFR 3...... 12886 152...... 11236 905...... 11947 1 ...... 11028, 11906, 12415 Proposed Rules: Proposed Rules: 39 CFR 61...... 13945 16 CFR 1 ...... 11059, 11060, 11195, 3001...... 12113, 12116 67...... 13096 Proposed Rules: 11950, 12034, 13213, 13393 Proposed Rules: 206...... 13945 1700...... 12165 111...... 12490 28 CFR 45 CFR 17 CFR 0...... 11906 40 CFR 2543...... 13055 1...... 13901 31...... 13330 9...... 12670 Proposed Rules: 239...... 11876 40...... 13902 52 ...... 12121, 12123, 12125, 1180...... 12186 270...... 11876, 11887 12438, 12442, 12446, 12451, 29 CFR 274...... 11876 12453, 12459, 12685, 12688, 46 CFR 400...... 11022 1910...... 11194, 13782 12691, 12695, 12700, 13042, 2...... 13550 401...... 11022 1915...... 11194, 13782 13631, 13634, 13908 30...... 13318 402...... 11022, 12825 1917...... 13782 58...... 11907 32...... 13318 403...... 11022 1918...... 13782 61...... 13912 70...... 13318 404...... 11022 1926...... 11194 63 ...... 11029, 12670, 13045 90...... 13318 405...... 11022 1952...... 12416, 12417 70 ...... 12128, 12478, 13046 172...... 13318 450...... 11022 2509...... 12328 81 ...... 12453, 12459, 13368, Proposed Rules: Proposed Rules: 2619...... 13904 13634 10...... 13570 239...... 11890 2676...... 13904 180 ...... 11029, 11032, 12702, 12...... 13570 270...... 11890 Proposed Rules: 12703, 12704, 12705, 12707, 67...... 12188 274...... 11890 1952...... 12488 13914 281...... 12630, 12709 47 CFR 18 CFR 30 CFR 282...... 12630 1...... 13636 Proposed Rules: 914...... 13038 372...... 13047 2...... 13071 154...... 13651 936...... 13040 721...... 11033 5...... 13636 158...... 13651 944...... 13367 Proposed Rules: 15...... 13071 201...... 13651 Proposed Rules: 50...... 13663 24...... 13915 250...... 13651 Ch. VII...... 13858 51...... 12492 32...... 12137 284...... 13651 254...... 13652 52 ...... 12180, 12184, 12185, 36...... 12137 756...... 13086 12519, 12520, 12721, 12722, 61...... 13637 19 CFR 773...... 13087 13937 65...... 12137 12...... 13352 925...... 11640 53...... 13663 73 ...... 11909, 11910, 11911, 926...... 13932 58...... 12492 13918 20 CFR 944...... 13935 60...... 13937 Proposed Rules: Proposed Rules: 61...... 13938 31 CFR Ch. I ...... 13102 200...... 11639 63 ...... 12723, 13088, 13664 1...... 13396 404...... 12166 356...... 13906 68...... 13526 2...... 11644, 13687 416...... 12166 500...... 12885 70 ...... 12521, 13088, 13683 63...... 11644 81...... 12520 64...... 12529 32 CFR 21 CFR 85...... 12185 73 ...... 12530, 12724, 12725, 173...... 11899 199...... 12419 148...... 11702 13947 179...... 12669 1636...... 13907 180 ...... 13938, 13939, 13941 328...... 13590 Proposed Rules: 194...... 11060 48 CFR 450...... 11026 199...... 12717 261...... 12525 Ch. 99 ...... 12711 510...... 11027 209...... 11642 266...... 11702 2 ...... 12366, 12384, 13397 558...... 11027, 11028 311...... 13936 268...... 11702 3...... 12366, 13397 Proposed Rules: 271...... 11702, 12525 4...... 12366, 12384 33 CFR 310...... 13014 300...... 13944 5 ...... 12366, 12384, 13397 314...... 13014 100...... 11629 302...... 12525 6...... 12366, 13397 117...... 13629 761...... 13095 7...... 12384, 13397 24 CFR 143...... 13550 42 CFR 8...... 12366, 12384 15...... 11901 155...... 13318 9 ...... 12366, 12384, 13397 25...... 13834 157...... 13318 485...... 11632 10...... 13397 58...... 13518 165...... 12112 486...... 11632 11...... 13397 92...... 13348 Proposed Rules: Proposed Rules: 12...... 12384, 13397 201...... 13834, 13854 117 ...... 12178, 13393, 13395, 65a...... 12525 13...... 12366, 13397 202...... 13834 13653 14...... 12384, 13397 243...... 11828 320...... 13654 43 CFR 15 ...... 12366, 12384, 13397 290...... 11844 325...... 13654 2720...... 12710 16 ...... 12366, 12384, 13397 760...... 11828 333...... 13654 Public Land Orders: 22...... 12366, 13397 813...... 11626 402...... 11643 7100...... 12592 23...... 12366, 13397 886...... 11844 7117...... 11045 25...... 12366 888...... 12594 34 CFR 7118...... 11046 27...... 12366 889...... 11828 3...... 11907 7119...... 11633 28...... 12366 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 50 / Wednesday, March 15, 1995 / Reader Aids iii 29...... 12366 731...... 11911, 12825 393...... 12146 646...... 12592 32...... 12366, 12384 752...... 11911, 12825 571 ...... 11913, 13216, 13286, 651...... 13078 36...... 12366, 13397 927...... 11812 13297, 13639 654...... 13918 41...... 12366 952...... 11812 575...... 11913 663...... 13377 42...... 12366, 13397 970...... 11812 653...... 12296 675...... 13780 43...... 12366 1517...... 12712 654...... 12296, 12298 44...... 12366, 13397 1837...... 11634 661...... 14174 676...... 13780 681...... 13380 45...... 12366, 12384 Proposed Rules: 1312...... 13077 46...... 12366, 13397 Ch. I ...... 11198 1314...... 13077 672 ...... 11915, 12149, 12152, 47...... 12366, 13397 32...... 14156 Proposed Rules: 13079 49...... 12366, 13397 45...... 12530 234...... 11649 673...... 11054, 12825 52 ...... 12366, 12384, 13397 52...... 12530, 14156 393...... 13306 675 ...... 11915, 12149, 12487 53 ...... 12366, 12384, 13397 933...... 11646 571...... 12192, 13688 676...... 11916, 12152 209...... 13073 970...... 11646 661...... 14178 Proposed Rules: 219...... 13074 9904...... 12725 800...... 13948 17 ...... 11768, 12531, 12728, 223...... 13075 830...... 13948 12730, 13105, 13397, 13950 235...... 13076 49 CFR 831...... 13948 252...... 13073, 13075 1...... 11046, 13639 20...... 14194 701...... 11911, 12825 107...... 12139 50 CFR 222...... 11951 703...... 11911, 12825 218...... 11047 17...... 12483, 12887 663...... 11062 715...... 11911, 12825 382...... 13369 204...... 11050 672...... 13106 724...... 11911 391...... 13369 611...... 13780 675...... 13106